5.0 is Confirmed

[BenSkywalker]

I'd like to see an IRS in the V6 model, lighter weight with reasonable power with a turbo the car would do fairly decently as a counterpart to other perfromance leaning vehicles in the segment. People can say what they will about LA versus IRS, I've put about 20K miles on a new Mustang and the car steps out, badly, on bumpy corners and also has a lot of trouble putting the power down exiting corners on anything but smooth pavement. OTOH, I would also hope that GM would put a LA in the Z28 if they go forward with their plans to produce it. In that segment I see LA as more of a benefit then IRS(the cars are too imbalanced to be decent at handling anyway, so go all out and make the drag friendly).

Supposedly, a Boss Engine is rumored for the 2012 lineup.

It appears that both the new engines are 'Boss'- ie they both are DOHC and hence hemispherical combustion chambers, or is the new use of Boss just a generic marketting moniker?

 

[LTC8K6]

Do you have the Track Pack?

 

[BenSkywalker]

Do you have the Track Pack?

Nope, wasn't an option. Being able to put the power down may be helped by the track pack, how violently the car steps out on bumpy corners when pushed isn't going to be offset too much, there is only so much you can do with the laws of physics. Getting spanked on back roads by Eclipses isn't something I think a decent pony car should have to deal with(sure, on smooth pavement it's like they are standing still, but I'd rather have a bit more balance).

 

[ayabe]

This inevitably ends up in a war of words.

But there are two points that seems to be constantly ignored and are really not debatable.

1. The current LA is MORE expensive than the IRS would have been.

2. The current LA is great, but a lot of engineering work had to be put into to make it perform acceptably. Why not start with a superior platform which you won't have to engineer to the heavens to get it to do what they want?

Every other american muscle car has an IRS and they aren't breaking at stoplights when you light em up, so please let's stop with the FUD.

 

[LTC8K6]

Most reviews don't seem to mention any violent step out, though. The C&D review I have posted here, where the Mustang handled nearly perfectly, was with the Track Pack.

Body control with the Track pack is astounding. It doesn’t pogo, doesn’t shimmy, doesn’t slump to the outside and clop its way through a corner. The ride may be firm, but nothing throws it off the slot-like path you cut through turns. And somehow that live axle deals with pitching and pocked pavement with much of the sure-footed poise of an independent setup. A Track-pack Mustang used only at the drag strip is a Mustang wasted.

Not going to get any better handling than that, imo.

 

[ayabe]

Whatever the rear suspension, I AM excited about this car. Should run mid-high 12's all day long and that is pretty damn fast.

 

[BenSkywalker]

Every other american muscle car has an IRS and they aren't breaking at stoplights when you light em up, so please let's stop with the FUD.

Put out 1K hp and a set of Mickeys on them and see how that IRS holds up. I'm advocating that I'd like to see IRS on the Mustangs, but let's keep reality in play here.

http://demotivationalblog.com/demotivational/2008/09/torque-no-your-honda-cant-do-this.jpg

With IRS that's a wrecked car.

Most reviews don't seem to mention any violent step out, though.

No, they don't. I also don't think most reviewers drive at anything approaching hard on rough back roads, around where I live that's the only kind of backroads we have

 

[Zargon]

And this is why Ford has stuck with it so far


They have made it give good enough handling for them, why add IRS just to up the price?

its because they cant engineer one that is strong enough

same reason the gt was 1000 lbs overweight and they had to supercharge it(they failed on chasis design, 2 gt engineers admitted to it at a talk at UIUC College of Engineering).

 

[LTC8K6]

All 1999-2004 Cobras had an IRS...including the R, so they apparently can engineer one strong enough.

 

[arcenite]

Put out 1K hp and a set of Mickeys on them and see how that IRS holds up. I'm advocating that I'd like to see IRS on the Mustangs, but let's keep reality in play here.

There are plenty of high HP IRS cars out there...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sjzao0exjEI&feature=related

And the GTO weighs more than the mustang.

 

[Pariah]

Put out 1K hp and a set of Mickeys on them and see how that IRS holds up. I'm advocating that I'd like to see IRS on the Mustangs, but let's keep reality in play here.

http://demotivationalblog.com/demotivational/2008/09/torque-no-your-honda-cant-do-this.jpg

With IRS that's a wrecked car.

Are Bugatti Veyrons using a solid rear axle? 1000HP, almost 4500lbs. Can you name any supercar that doesn't use an IRS? Who cares if it can hold up to 1000HP? Ford doesn't have to build a rear end that will hold up to 1000HP, they need to build one that holds up under 412HP which isn't exactly bleeding edge technology. If someone wants 800+HP in their Mustang, let them foot the developing and testing costs, there's no reason Ford should when the car wasn't designed for it.

 

[KentState]

Most reviews don't seem to mention any violent step out, though. The C&D review I have posted here, where the Mustang handled nearly perfectly, was with the Track Pack.



Not going to get any better handling than that, imo.

Shouldn't the non-Track Pack car handle well also? With the track pack, you have to compromise having certain options and has the addition of a harsher ride. That's if there is really an issue. I've only driven the previous generation Mustang (>5 miles on the car) and the car rode like crap.

 

[TehMac]

It appears that both the new engines are 'Boss'- ie they both are DOHC and hence hemispherical combustion chambers, or is the new use of Boss just a generic marketting moniker?

My guess is that it's just a generic marketing moniker. From what I understand, such DOHC and hemisphereical chambers were implemented because of the carburetors these '60's cars used back in the 60's.

 

[LTC8K6]

This is the current track pack. Don't know what it will be for the 2011MY. I have read that the track pack will be available for 2011 V6 models as well.

TrackPack includes dual-piston front calipers with performance brake pads, performance 3.73 axle ratio, recalibrated AdvanceTrac® electronic stability control, GT500 front and rear stabilizer bars, front strut and rear shock tuning, rear GT500 lower control arms, 19" premium painted wheels, summer-only performance tires, and Tire Mobility Kit (available Summer 2009)

 

[foghorn67]

My guess is that it's just a generic marketing moniker. From what I understand, such DOHC and hemisphereical chambers were implemented because of the carburetors these '60's cars used back in the 60's.

Boss was a cool thing to say back then. It was the 60's version of Mustang Ultimate or something. Nothing technical.

 

[BenSkywalker]

There are plenty of high HP IRS cars out there...

Of course there are, they just aren't that fast in the quarter(do I need to post some 4 second cars to prove that point? ).

Are Bugatti Veyrons using a solid rear axle?

Nope, and they get obliterated at a drag strip.

Can you name any supercar that doesn't use an IRS?

Can you name a supercar running 6s in the 1/4?

If someone wants 800+HP in their Mustang, let them foot the developing and testing costs, there's no reason Ford should when the car wasn't designed for it.

They already have done the development for it, we are talking about the potential of them spending a bunch on R&D to take that ability away from the car.

Perhaps I have a bit different perspective. All the no torque/low torque cars at the strip, even the faster ones that run in the 9s, fail to effectively compete with the top LA cars. As of now, the Mustang is the last of the real LA cars being produced. Once it moves over to IRS, the US centric drag racing vehicles cease to be created on new car platforms, and I don't particularly want to see that segment go.

Boss was a cool thing to say back then. It was the 60's version of Mustang Ultimate or something. Nothing technical.

The Boss Mustangs of the 60s were hemis, they did have technical differences with their non Boss counterparts.

 

[TehMac]

Boss was a cool thing to say back then. It was the 60's version of Mustang Ultimate or something. Nothing technical.

As has been explained above, that's not exactly true either. Although it is cool to say, yes.

 

[Pariah]

Can you name a supercar running 6s in the 1/4?

So, to sum up your post in one sentence. In your opinion, the new Ford Mustang GT should not get an IRS because if it did, it wouldn't be able to run 6 second 1/4's. That's brilliant.

 

[ayabe]

Put out 1K hp and a set of Mickeys on them and see how that IRS holds up. I'm advocating that I'd like to see IRS on the Mustangs, but let's keep reality in play here.

http://demotivationalblog.com/demotivational/2008/09/torque-no-your-honda-cant-do-this.jpg

With IRS that's a wrecked car.



No, they don't. I also don't think most reviewers drive at anything approaching hard on rough back roads, around where I live that's the only kind of backroads we have

Err, ok. You put enough force on any component and it will break.

If people want to build a 1000hp drag car then more power to them, they can go ahead and spend the money for whatever rear end they want.

Ford can easily equip the Mustang with something comparable to the Camaro, which seems to have no problems handling 600+hp with the stock drivetrain.

That will satisfy most Mustang buyers I'd say, I mean how ridiculous do you want to get with the stock pieces?

 

[TehMac]

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2034823

check out my thread

 

[Arkaign]

Err, ok. You put enough force on any component and it will break.

If people want to build a 1000hp drag car then more power to them, they can go ahead and spend the money for whatever rear end they want.

Ford can easily equip the Mustang with something comparable to the Camaro, which seems to have no problems handling 600+hp with the stock drivetrain.

That will satisfy most Mustang buyers I'd say, I mean how ridiculous do you want to get with the stock pieces?

Mustang handles as well as the Camaro already Why IRS?

 

[Ronstang]

All 1999-2004 Cobras had an IRS...including the R, so they apparently can engineer one strong enough.

Many 03-04 Cobra owners that are serious about power and getting it to the ground replace the IRS with a live axle. There is way to much wheel hop with the IRS and they break, especially with slicks.

 

[theeedude]

Because live axle = cheap drag racing redneck stuff. Even most of Ford's SUV's have IRS now. Of course Ford is entitled to put live axle, call it a pony car instead of sports car, and just target drag racers with the Mustang. But as much as I like Fords, I would not touch it, and it creates bad PR for Ford to have a high visibility car like the Mustang carry on with cost-cutting cheap and outdated technology like live axle. Ford is a very modern company now, with some of the best drive-trains, yet as far as mainstream sports cars are concerned, they are known for a live axle retro mustang.

 

[exdeath]

Put out 1K hp and a set of Mickeys on them and see how that IRS holds up. I'm advocating that I'd like to see IRS on the Mustangs, but let's keep reality in play here.

http://demotivationalblog.com/demotivational/2008/09/torque-no-your-honda-cant-do-this.jpg

With IRS that's a wrecked car.



No, they don't. I also don't think most reviewers drive at anything approaching hard on rough back roads, around where I live that's the only kind of backroads we have

Stock IRS sure, but you can build up a IRS to do wheel stands just as good as a solid. It just takes more knowledge and more money.

 

[exdeath]

Many 03-04 Cobra owners that are serious about power and getting it to the ground replace the IRS with a live axle. There is way to much wheel hop with the IRS and they break, especially with slicks.

Actually that's backwards. It's the shitty bushings that allow everything to flex (sub frame, control arms, differential, all moving different directions) and street tires lack of traction that cause IRS failures.

Wheel hop is the rapid alternating between traction and no traction, accompanied by the flexing of numerous parts of the IRS system as it's loaded and unloaded repeatedly. No loss of traction = no chance of hop. Slicks or sticky drag radials actually help reduce wheel hop. Once the hop is eliminated, sure, you'll snap axles and grenade differentials in a high horsepower car just as well as a solid axle can.

It was Ford's marketing team that mandated SVT use softer durometer bushings, believing they could get another sell by softening up the Cobra's ride so your grandmother might cross shop a Cobra with Lexus and Cadillac >:

Some Delrin/Aluminum bushings, stiffer shocks and springs, a reinforced differential cover (the rear mount bolts through the cast aluminum cover) and sticky tires, and the IRS is a tank. The stock half shafts are huge, though the inner CV is a known weak point (which there are chromoly aftermarket CVs to replace that too). But again, it takes a lot of knowledge of the system, and a lot of money. Those chromoly CVs alone would run over $900 and are something you don't replace until you break the stock ones. You can build one hell of a solid axle with the money it takes to make the IRS function as intended.

Given the target market for the Mustang, it's a waste of effort for 99% of people. For the other 1% that buy cars based on a list of acronyms on the trunk, why don't you get a trial copy of SolidWorks and make your own IRS if the car is so perfect to you but that one minor detail? I'd suggest selling it and become an aftermarket vendor, but the problem is the people bitching about lack of IRS are people that wouldn't buy the car if it DID have IRS.

PS: running cheap street tires on the built IRS right now and no hop at all, just a whole lot of sliding, rev limiter, and going nowhere in third gear in the cold morning Fortunately winter only lasts a month here.