Motortrend's take on the 2010 Mustang styling

[Mursilis]

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: Cheesehead
A solid axle is very poor at dealing with twisty roads, and is really only suited to carrying huge weights or full-bore launches on a drag strip. There are ways to deal with some of the problems, but these generally are either very expensive, very uncomfortable, or require a very light vehicle.

How many of the current-generation Mustangs have you driven? I had no trouble whatsoever keeping up with a Porsche Boxster through twisty mountain roads in my '06 GT.

I've seen a lot of people who have never driven an '05 or later GT bash it for having a live axle. As for people who have driven one, haven't seen any complaints. The only time you can tell it's a live axle is when you hit a large (and I mean large) bump in the middle of a corner. If that happens there is a very tiny twitch. It's simply not as though you're sliding all over the road and can't go around corners because it's a live axle.

ZV

As an '05+ GT owner, what's your impression of the road feel and weight of the vehicle? I test drove one last night, and the weight of the vehicle (3400 lbs) was obvious, especially compared to my '97 Tacoma (2700 lbs) daily driver. The steering also felt a little number than I would've liked, but that could also be due to the wet roads. Lots of things about the car were great (especially the power!), but I definitely would want to take a longer test drive.

 

[kalrith]

Originally posted by: Cheesehead

Originally posted by: BlackTigers

Originally posted by: Cheesehead
Naah. Cobras are for fat old men. Roush is where it's at.

I'm almost positive that the Cobras had more done to them than the Roush and other versions did....

Both the Roush and the Cobra have superchargers, though the one on the Roush mustang is smaller. However, the Roush mustang has a better suspension, better brakes, and a limited-slip differential. The Cobra does not.

Does Roush add IRS to the Mustangs? If not, then the only Mustangs with IRS are the '99-'04 Cobras, but then again:

Originally posted by: Cheesehead
Cobras are for fat old men.

 

[thedarkwolf]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: Throckmorton
I still don't understand why the Mustang has a solid axle. The platform is the same as the Lincoln LS, IIRC, and they converted it to solid axle...

the front suspension is from a focus, actually.

the chassis tunnel configuration is about all it shares with the lincoln LS, iirc.

Originally posted by: Cheesehead
The thing "limiting the power" is likely the little metal bits that make up your engine. Increasing the boost means that you need much stronger pistons, connecting rods, etc. etc. etc.

I suppose the question is how much cheaper the 340HP Mustang is than the 402HP Camaro. And how much it weighs, too - Ford currently uses iron blocks for all of their forced-induction engines.

i think the biggest factor in ford's 340 hp limit on that engine in the lincoln mks is fuel consumption. i would not be surprised to find it at 390+ for a special edition mustang

The biggest factor in the 340hp limit that I've seen posted is the FWD/AWD trans not being able to handle more then that. I just don't understand why the RWD based cars still usually show 340hp. Some pages do say 340hp-415hp though.

 

[TehMac]

I was looking over some Roush's again, and I have to say, I am pretty impressed. I don't think they're IRS, that would be a big deal, however they do have a lot of good suspension, brakes, and a true limited slip. I have seen footage of them doing incredibly well.

I wonder if they're going to make a 2010 version.

 

[zerocool84]

Originally posted by: PricklyPete

Originally posted by: Cheesehead

While the LSx V8 isn't terribly efficient or modern, it does produce huge power from an engine that is both light and relatively cheap - and it's hard to argue with that.

I couldn't disagree with this statement more. While it may use some technologies that I would label "tried and true", it's really hard to find an engine with so much power, such good packaging, and is anymore efficient.

I do agree with you that as an engine...it is hard to argue with it's abilities.

With regard to efficiency: It easily gets the same gas mileage as most if not all 400+ engines. I realize it has a big bore...but who cares what the displacement is...the actual consumption is ultimately more important.

With regard to moerdnization: While the engine layout is old news, GM has put a lot of technology in those old legs making it quite a modern engine in my opinion. Just because it isn't DOHC doesn't make it obsolete.

Yea I don't get how he says it's not efficient. He's contradicting himself saying that it produces huge power from an engine that is both light and relatively cheap. It even gets good mpg for it's power. That's efficiency to me.

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: Mursilis

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: Cheesehead
A solid axle is very poor at dealing with twisty roads, and is really only suited to carrying huge weights or full-bore launches on a drag strip. There are ways to deal with some of the problems, but these generally are either very expensive, very uncomfortable, or require a very light vehicle.

How many of the current-generation Mustangs have you driven? I had no trouble whatsoever keeping up with a Porsche Boxster through twisty mountain roads in my '06 GT.

I've seen a lot of people who have never driven an '05 or later GT bash it for having a live axle. As for people who have driven one, haven't seen any complaints. The only time you can tell it's a live axle is when you hit a large (and I mean large) bump in the middle of a corner. If that happens there is a very tiny twitch. It's simply not as though you're sliding all over the road and can't go around corners because it's a live axle.

ZV

As an '05+ GT owner, what's your impression of the road feel and weight of the vehicle? I test drove one last night, and the weight of the vehicle (3400 lbs) was obvious, especially compared to my '97 Tacoma (2700 lbs) daily driver. The steering also felt a little number than I would've liked, but that could also be due to the wet roads. Lots of things about the car were great (especially the power!), but I definitely would want to take a longer test drive.

Former owner. I got responsible and replaced the Mustang with an older Volvo.

I had an '06 GT with all options, including the 18" wheels and LSD. The 18" wheels come with grippier tires and a slightly re-calibrated suspension and may account for the difference in handling. I didn't really notice that the car was hugely heavy, though it was definitely nose-heavy and I did spend a few weeks evaluating different tire pressure settings before I found one I liked. Finally settled on 40 PSI front and 35 PSI rear. No unusual wear from that, but it's a significant deviation from the "recommended" 32 PSI all-around.

Steering definitely is not as communicative as some cars. In the end, the Mustang has to be loved for what it is: a straight-line car that can give a surprisingly good account of itself in corners. It needed a very firm hand and did not respond well to finesse; essentially the exact opposite of my 951, but it was still boatloads of fun. I still miss it sometimes and I think that when I eventually sell the 951 (oh, someday it will happen) I might get another Mustang again. Or maybe I'll get stupid again and sell the Volvo.

ZV

 

[Fenixgoon]

Originally posted by: zerocool84

Originally posted by: PricklyPete

Originally posted by: Cheesehead

While the LSx V8 isn't terribly efficient or modern, it does produce huge power from an engine that is both light and relatively cheap - and it's hard to argue with that.

I couldn't disagree with this statement more. While it may use some technologies that I would label "tried and true", it's really hard to find an engine with so much power, such good packaging, and is anymore efficient.

I do agree with you that as an engine...it is hard to argue with it's abilities.

With regard to efficiency: It easily gets the same gas mileage as most if not all 400+ engines. I realize it has a big bore...but who cares what the displacement is...the actual consumption is ultimately more important.

With regard to moerdnization: While the engine layout is old news, GM has put a lot of technology in those old legs making it quite a modern engine in my opinion. Just because it isn't DOHC doesn't make it obsolete.

Yea I don't get how he says it's not efficient. He's contradicting himself saying that it produces huge power from an engine that is both light and relatively cheap. It even gets good mpg for it's power. That's efficiency to me.

he's contradicting himself because he got absolutely owned in the "Jay Leno's ZR1" thread.

cheesehead is full of crap. no it's not a call out. it's just a statement of fact.

 

[TehMac]

I was reading how Roush was doing a survey on performance and what people would want for their 2010 or thereabouts.

I'm excited to see what happens.

 

[cheesehead]

Originally posted by: kalrith

Does Roush add IRS to the Mustangs? If not, then the only Mustangs with IRS are the '99-'04 Cobras, but then again:

Originally posted by: Cheesehead
Cobras are for fat old men.

Nope. As I said earlier, good performance from a solid axle requires a lot of money, a lot of discomfort, massive weight reduction, or some combination of the three. Roush picked the first option.

I'm referring by "Cobra" to the current generation Shelby Cobra, which, though very powerful, is (as far as I know) differentiated from the regular Mustang GT by the additional weight induced by switching from an aluminum block to an iron block.

Originally posted by: zerocool84


Yea I don't get how he says it's not efficient. He's contradicting himself saying that it produces huge power from an engine that is both light and relatively cheap. It even gets good mpg for it's power. That's efficiency to me.

Efficient in terms of fuel economy...and it's really not all that special. The Corvette has a tiny drag coefficient, and at highway speeds the overdrive means the engine is barely turning over. Big V8s of old with similar overdrives could manage nearly 30mpg in cars about as streamlined as Rosie O'Donnel. In terms of power per weight or power per dollar, however, it knocks everything else into a cocked hat.

 

[Fenixgoon]

Originally posted by: Cheesehead
Efficient in terms of fuel economy...and it's really not all that special. The Corvette has a tiny drag coefficient, and at highway speeds the overdrive means the engine is barely turning over. Big V8s of old with similar overdrives could manage nearly 30mpg in cars about as streamlined as Rosie O'Donnel. In terms of power per weight or power per dollar, however, it knocks everything else into a cocked hat.

you still haven't shown how the LS series is inefficient. again, i challenge you to PROVE it. all you say is "OHV is old" which proves nothing.

if something is lighter, cheaper, and offers similar or better performance, that's the very definition of being more efficient.

edit: if you want a closer comparison of OHV vs OHC, consider the following:

pontiac G8 GT: 4000lbs, 361hp, 390 ft-lbs, 24/18
pontiac G8 GXP: 4000lbs, 414hp, 400 ft-lbs, (probably) 20/14

audi RS4: 3800lbs, 414hp, 317 ft-lbs, 20/13

 

[Zenmervolt]

Hey, guys, let's try to keep this thread on its original topic, OK? If you want to discuss the relative merits of the LSx series of engines, start your own thread, OK?

ZV, AnandTech Garage Moderator

 

[Mursilis]

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Steering definitely is not as communicative as some cars. In the end, the Mustang has to be loved for what it is: a straight-line car that can give a surprisingly good account of itself in corners. It needed a very firm hand and did not respond well to finesse; essentially the exact opposite of my 951, but it was still boatloads of fun. I still miss it sometimes and I think that when I eventually sell the 951 (oh, someday it will happen) I might get another Mustang again. Or maybe I'll get stupid again and sell the Volvo.

ZV

That's a bummer to read, as ability in the corners is as important to me as straight-line power. Why can't I have it all?!? :laugh: I'll have to try another one on dry roads, and see if it feels the same. I definitely want something not handicapped in the twistys - that's half the fun!! Surprisingly, one of my favorite cars from my past was an old Dodge Colt RS - one of the first hopped-up from the factory econoboxes. The RS package wasn't just a badge and sticker job, but actually included bigger wheels and tires, a tighter-ratio transaxle, slightly more power (for a Colt!), and some suspension upgrades, making it about as much fun as a poor college student could expect to have in an economy car. It was an easy car to drive at its limits, because the road feel was excellent (no power steering) and steering was quick and light. Fun, fun car.

 

[bananapeel42]

Did I hear someone say Cobra's didn't have an LSD? If you honestly think Roush offers better performance than Shelby, you're smoking crack.

Roush is WIDELY known for looks, then handling, which they do make good parts for. However, they use stock GT's and modify them, a Cobra has a completely different engine and drivetrain.

Roush slaps a subpar supercharger on a stock GT engine to make power, Cobra's have completely forged engines from the factory.

The new GT500 has a live axle because it is a DRAG car, not a track car. With a tune, smaller pulley and a set of tires you can row low 11's in the 1/4 mile.

I hope they don't put a live axle in, TONS of people with 03-04 Cobra's go back to live axle's to save weight and get better launches at the strip.

 

[Mr.IncrediblyBored]

Cool video. Thanks for posting it.

The styling updates on the '10 Mustang are more apparent when parked right next to the '09. It looks good. Evolutionary at best, but good.

 

[TehMac]

Originally posted by: Mursilis


That's a bummer to read, as ability in the corners is as important to me as straight-line power. Why can't I have it all?!?

You can, buy a ZR1.

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: Mursilis

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Steering definitely is not as communicative as some cars. In the end, the Mustang has to be loved for what it is: a straight-line car that can give a surprisingly good account of itself in corners. It needed a very firm hand and did not respond well to finesse; essentially the exact opposite of my 951, but it was still boatloads of fun. I still miss it sometimes and I think that when I eventually sell the 951 (oh, someday it will happen) I might get another Mustang again. Or maybe I'll get stupid again and sell the Volvo.

ZV

That's a bummer to read, as ability in the corners is as important to me as straight-line power. Why can't I have it all?!? :laugh: I'll have to try another one on dry roads, and see if it feels the same. I definitely want something not handicapped in the twistys - that's half the fun!! Surprisingly, one of my favorite cars from my past was an old Dodge Colt RS - one of the first hopped-up from the factory econoboxes. The RS package wasn't just a badge and sticker job, but actually included bigger wheels and tires, a tighter-ratio transaxle, slightly more power (for a Colt!), and some suspension upgrades, making it about as much fun as a poor college student could expect to have in an economy car. It was an easy car to drive at its limits, because the road feel was excellent (no power steering) and steering was quick and light. Fun, fun car.

Tire pressure helps tremendously, but the steering on any car will always suffer when compared to my 914, which feels like you're holding a tie rod in each hand. I love that little go-cart of a car, even if it doesn't have a lot of power.

ZV

 

[Mursilis]

Originally posted by: TehMac

Originally posted by: Mursilis


That's a bummer to read, as ability in the corners is as important to me as straight-line power. Why can't I have it all?!?

You can, buy a ZR1.

I should've added, under 10K. But yes, a ZR1 would be a hoot.

 

[Aikouka]

I'm pretty sure they complained about the live axle on Top Gear when they compared the GT(almost)500 to the Roush Mustang. I can't remember the difference in lap times between the two though.

 

[TehMac]

Originally posted by: Mursilis

Originally posted by: TehMac

Originally posted by: Mursilis


That's a bummer to read, as ability in the corners is as important to me as straight-line power. Why can't I have it all?!?

You can, buy a ZR1.

I should've added, under 10K. But yes, a ZR1 would be a hoot.

I think the market would take a big "WTF" if you could have everything in a car under 10k.

 

[zerocool84]

Originally posted by: TehMac

Originally posted by: Mursilis


That's a bummer to read, as ability in the corners is as important to me as straight-line power. Why can't I have it all?!?

You can, buy a ZR1.

Pshh try putting that power down......shit I bet that car takes some training of your right foot to get launches correctly and when exiting turns.

 

[LordMorpheus]

Originally posted by: Throckmorton
I still don't understand why the Mustang has a solid axle. The platform is the same as the Lincoln LS, IIRC, and they converted it to solid axle...

I thought the Lincoln LS was actually a Jag XJ underneath? It's definately not a mustang - 4 door, unibody, IRS, 4.0 V8, not much at all in common with the mustang.


Wikipedia reveals that it is a Jag S-type, and the V8 option was 3.9 liters.

 

[TehMac]

Originally posted by: zerocool84

Originally posted by: TehMac

Originally posted by: Mursilis


That's a bummer to read, as ability in the corners is as important to me as straight-line power. Why can't I have it all?!?

You can, buy a ZR1.

Pshh try putting that power down......shit I bet that car takes some training of your right foot to get launches correctly and when exiting turns.

I bet it takes a lot of training with your right foot in alot of cars.

I drove the BMW M a while back, and that was extremely sensitive and very hard to drive, because my Steda clutch pedal was very stiff.

 

[MustangSVT]

yum yum 2010 looks amazing.