-
We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.
2011 Mustang Engine Information Leaked
Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
VinylxScratches
Golden Member
People who are buying Mustangs should only consider a v8.... And fuel economy and Mustangs never go together. I don't think that market really cares about fuel economy.
thedarkwolf
Diamond Member
The v6 version is what keeps the v8 version cheap so don't bitch about it too much.
It was the price and styling. In the mid 30's, it was out of the price range of the secretaries and daddy's little princess going to college present that the Mustang lives off of. Probably 3/4's of the people I know who own Mustangs are women, and the GTO is simply not a car that would appeal to them. I think it was Forbes that did an article a few years ago about the 10 most male cars in America, and the GTO was on the list with over 90% of owners being men. There was a reason the GTO was 5 thousand more than a base GT, and 10 thousand more than the V6. It was simply a better car. It still is compared to the current Mustang, though it has closed the gap some, years after the GTO ended production.
The new issue of Motor Trend has a test of the best drivers cars. The Mustang GT500 w/o IRS performed better than the ZR1 and Camaro in handling. Actually, the Camaro placed dead last. They said quote "It's not well balanced the way the Mustang is. In the Mustang, I wante to keep going, just clicking off laps because it was such an enjoyable and rewarding car to drive - a driver's car. The Camaro isn't yet".
They said the understeer in the Camaro was frustrating and they didn't like the way it handled.
Mustang without IRS > Camaro with IRS
Don't buy it, no one gives a shit.
EightySix Four
Diamond Member
I call shens.
They sell more V6 than V8, economies of scale... Pretty simple.
DivideBYZero
Lifer
Volume. Volume always wins. Without the V6, the V8 wouldn't exist. Without a C class, there would be no S, without a 3 there would be no 7. The volume sellers always make the bulk of a manufacturers profits. The VW Golf, for example, is absolutely key to the existence of the VW brand.
Likelinus misunderstood the point of the article. It wasn't the best handling car of 2009, it was best driver's car. The ratings weren't based on any quantifiable numbers:
fun to drive
driver confidence
quality of driver controls
cockpit ergonomics
driver seat support
outward vision
He also handpicked his quotes. He conveniently left out this line from the Mustang review:
"and a rear suspension that, despite laying down a Miata-beating 0.92 g, was still less stable over rough patches than the IRS Camaro."
That's sort of the whole point of an IRS, but for those owners that only drive on perfectly paved track, the Mustang is definitely the better choice.
Here's the whole article:
2009 Motor Trend Best Driver's Car
Wrong. I didn't "handpick" my quote. Do you have the magazine? It's about a 12 page spread and the quote about the Camaro is the quote ON the Camaro page that shows it is in 10th place. I typed it word for word. I didn't go through the whole article cause I just got the magazine on Saturday and that is the quote that Motor Trend picked to put on the Camaro page in large print.
Additionally, I didn't misunderstand the article. I put that it was the best drivers car - did you bother noticing that? I didn't say it was the best handling cars. The mustang placed 5th, while the Camaro placed 10th (last). IRS or not, I think it's obvious the Mustang is a better car to drive overall.
You also chose to not include the whole quote that said "that was it".
My point was that IRS is not the huge negative that some idiot GM fanboys think it is.
KentState
Diamond Member
I read the entire article and I agree with Pariah that you are missing the entire point of the article. The IRS is a negative when you have to drive the car on a daily basis. This has been stated in many other reviews comparing the 2010 Mustang against the new Camaro and Challenger. On the flip side, the car is at lower price point which would rise if/when an IRS is added.
Arkaign
Lifer
IRS or no, it doesn't really matter for a road car. There are a *TON* of other factors which affect handling including but not limited to :
Suspension geometry
Sidewall size / strength
Suspension stiffness
Weight distribution front/rear
Total weight of vehicle
Type of steering mechanism
Level of steering assistance
Variability of steering assistance
Strength of chassis in terms of resistance to torsion
etc
etc
It's quite clear that around a track, the Mustang is easily up to par with the IRS-equipped Camaro. It's also clear that it's fine for day to day use. Could the Mustang be even better with IRS? Perhaps, but as a singular argument about a vehicle, it's idiotic, because the concrete test results show that it's a minimal factor in the overall package. This isn't a shitbox Fox-body from the 80s, and it's more than up to the challenge of whatever. It's almost inarguable that the Camaro would have been a LOT better with a 200lb-500lb weight drop. I'm sure we'll see some aftermarket guys strip the Camaro down and make it run like it should.
Would I personally buy a Mustang? Not really my cup of tea, but it's important to keep at least a balanced outlook.
Suspension geometry
Sidewall size / strength
Suspension stiffness
Weight distribution front/rear
Total weight of vehicle
Type of steering mechanism
Level of steering assistance
Variability of steering assistance
Strength of chassis in terms of resistance to torsion
etc
etc
It's quite clear that around a track, the Mustang is easily up to par with the IRS-equipped Camaro. It's also clear that it's fine for day to day use. Could the Mustang be even better with IRS? Perhaps, but as a singular argument about a vehicle, it's idiotic, because the concrete test results show that it's a minimal factor in the overall package. This isn't a shitbox Fox-body from the 80s, and it's more than up to the challenge of whatever. It's almost inarguable that the Camaro would have been a LOT better with a 200lb-500lb weight drop. I'm sure we'll see some aftermarket guys strip the Camaro down and make it run like it should.
Would I personally buy a Mustang? Not really my cup of tea, but it's important to keep at least a balanced outlook.
2010 Ford Mustang: Near Enough is Not Good Enough
"Late in the S197 program, however, product development executive Phil Martens reportedly managed to convince Bill Ford Jr. he could save Ford $100 a car if the Mustang was switched to a live rear axle. The S197 platform was hurriedly torn up and reworked to accommodate the old-tech suspension."
"There are a lot of good reasons why the rest of the world's automakers stopped using the Mustang's rear suspension layout decades ago. No matter how well set up, a live rear axle will never deliver the refinement, ride quality, and all-round traction of a well set up independent rear end. Yeah, yeah, I know drag racers like live rear axles, but let's be honest, how many S197s actually spend their weekends pounding quarter miles?"
So, can we stop getting so defensive about how great the Mustang live-axle is? Not even Ford thinks it's the better solution, it was only chosen because it was the cheaper one.
"Late in the S197 program, however, product development executive Phil Martens reportedly managed to convince Bill Ford Jr. he could save Ford $100 a car if the Mustang was switched to a live rear axle. The S197 platform was hurriedly torn up and reworked to accommodate the old-tech suspension."
"There are a lot of good reasons why the rest of the world's automakers stopped using the Mustang's rear suspension layout decades ago. No matter how well set up, a live rear axle will never deliver the refinement, ride quality, and all-round traction of a well set up independent rear end. Yeah, yeah, I know drag racers like live rear axles, but let's be honest, how many S197s actually spend their weekends pounding quarter miles?"
So, can we stop getting so defensive about how great the Mustang live-axle is? Not even Ford thinks it's the better solution, it was only chosen because it was the cheaper one.
You have a very short term memory. Let me quote you:
Really? The GT500 beat the ZR1 in handling? That's weird, because according to the charts on the ZR1 page, the ZR1 was well above average in all 6 handling measurements, #1 in most of them, and #1 in both figure-eight and lap time by a lot. Yet obviously none of that had any affect on its ranking considering it still finished 6th including behind the Mustang. Which again, is clear evidence you completely missed the point of the article. It wasn't about best handling by the numbers, it was a comparison of some peoples' opinions about how nice the cars were to drive.
CurseTheSky
Diamond Member
A twin turbo V6 is not a muscle car in my book.
As far as I've ever considered them, muscle cars weren't about being the fastest, most economical, lightest, best handling, etc. They were about V8s, torque, the tantalizing exhaust note, and attitude.
Don't get me wrong - I think the Ecoboost V6 is a great engine and Ford would do very well to offer it as an option or release a different sports coupe equipped with it - but I don't think it should ever replace the V8.
thedarkwolf
Diamond Member
The GN is one of the coolest muscle cars of the 80s and it had a turbo v6 and is still bad ass.
DivideBYZero
Lifer
Well, it is in mine. Power > Nostalgia.
postmortemIA
Diamond Member
they don't want competition for their own car - Taurus.
seriously, Ecoboost is expensive engine, it does not pay off to put it in 'cheap' Fusion, it belongs to luxury.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 24K
-
-
