| Author |
Message |
    
Aydenxb9
| | Posted on Sunday, September 12, 2004 - 03:51 am: | 
|
The reason the retro themed cars mentioned above have lack-luster sales is because they all have failed to deliver on "promises" their styling conveyed. The Beetle, well it's still a Volkswagen and all that's associated with that. People thought they were buying the mythical car from the 60's and all they wound up with was a cr@ppy Golf with more head room. The T-bird went after the wrong market, the PT, same problem as the Beetle, only it's a Neon not a Golf. The SSR IS slow and expensive. The 05 Mustang will do well on the other hand because it appeals to a large market with people who want and can afford to buy it. Current Mustangs far exceed the expectations of enthusiasts and now it will have well thought out, cohesive styling. I think it might be 1964 all over again. |
Koz5150
| | Posted on Sunday, September 12, 2004 - 03:59 am: |
|
The lack of retro styling is what eventually killed the Camaro. I saw bring on a Retro Mustang. Even though the new T-bird is the worst selling car Ford makes... |
Darthane
| | Posted on Sunday, September 12, 2004 - 09:17 am: |
|
IRS was not included because the Mustang junkies (read: Draggers) didn't want it. Plain and simple. IRS is considerably more complex than a SRA in every way, and that equals more expensive to boot.
We actually made two prototypes with IRS (Eleanor was one of them). Some dingbat that was testing the car took it out on public roads, where he wasn't supposed to, and ran out of gas. To compound his error, he then left the car sitting there (camoed, but still - two years before it's release, sitting on a public road with no one around).
Someone showed up and took all sorts of pictures of it, then sold them to a car mag (I want to say Car and Driver). That magazine then 'scooped' the brand-spanking new '05 Mustangs that were 'definitely going to have independent rear suspension'.
We all got a good laugh out of that. The guy who ran it out of gas I'm sure got a good tongue lashing.
...wait for the Cobra. Supposedly they'll be pushing 425 at the rear wheels, not at the crank like today's version. ...the suspension will be better, too. LOL
We'll see another Camaro, I'm sure. Give it time. |
Gschuette
| | Posted on Sunday, September 12, 2004 - 12:39 pm: |
|
Darthane to you mean to tell me that all you guys at ford with all the money put in development of these cars couldn't figure out a way to make IRS work at the dragstip and still be useable on the street as a daily driver. |
R1DynaSquid
| | Posted on Sunday, September 12, 2004 - 12:55 pm: |
|
The SSR isn't doing too well but I think that's because it's slow.
Slow & overpriced as mentioned. According to the dealer I bought my truck from the SSR is getting the Vette motor next year because GM finally realized that folks want steak with the sizzle.
I like the new Mustang, I want one. Dont think I would bother with a Cobra version, for 1 thing the insurance costs alone would put it out of my budget. |
Mr_grumpy
| | Posted on Sunday, September 12, 2004 - 03:37 pm: |
|
I'd rather have a Dodge Rumblebee pickup or even just a SRT10,
It'll give the muzzy a good run for it's money & still be a useful hauler.
(damn I must be turning into a redneck! still at least CJ will love me for it.)  |
Darthane
| | Posted on Sunday, September 12, 2004 - 08:29 pm: |
|
Well, first of all, I'm not a Ford employee. -=shudder=-
Quite simply, SRA launches harder at the strip, and Ford listened when the die hard draggers said they didn't want IRS. The Cobra will keep it, but that thing's [a waste of] $40K+. To make IRS comparable at the strip to a SRA setup, you'd probably have to make the setup so stiff that you'd lose most of the benefit of an IRS setup anyways.
Speaking of suspension, I got a good laugh when my roommate came upstairs today and thought the forks off my Firebolt was the suspension from my pickup! LOL
Grumpy, the SRT10 Ram will kick the •••• out of a GT Mustang and be neck and neck with the Cobra. If I were going to spend $45K on a 'muscle vehicle', I'd take the Ram hands down everytime. |
Gschuette
| | Posted on Sunday, September 12, 2004 - 09:45 pm: |
|
I can't wait for the new lightning. I don't care if it has a solid axle and it has modern looks as well. And Darthane sorry to accuse you of being a ford employee but you made it sound like you worked for them in an earlier post. Maybe my complaints about live axles will be heard this way. What is an IRS mustang gonna give up at the strip? one maybe two tenths. Not a big deal that could come down to driver error. I got these numbers from a Motor Trend article from a few months ago. All the cars are rear wheel drive and high horsepower cars and um they have IRS.
Dodge Viper SRT-10
0-60 3.94
1/4 11.77@123.63
Ferrari 575M
0-60 4.16
1/4 12.26@118.58
Chevrolet Corvette Z06
0-60 4.29
1/4 12.44@116.54
and the big one
Ford Mustang SVT Cobra
0-60 4.82
1/4 13.01@110.69
Now as you all can tell these are pathetic numbers and the only reason these cars are so slow is because they have IRS. Just think if these cars had a solid rear axle.
Actually the cars are hauling ••• and I highly doubt that the IRS is really slowing them down all that much. In a previous post I pointed out two cars that are competitors that have IRS the Magnum and the GTO. Ford should have jumped on this bandwagon a long time ago but then again the mustang should have been redesigned 10 years ago. And 300hp for the GT isn't all that impressive. The Z28 and trans-am already had 305 when they died and the SS and WS6 had 320. Ford is now getting beat in the horsepower wars by a station wagon(a badass one at that). I'm not anti ford I just think they really messed this one up. |
Darthane
| | Posted on Monday, September 13, 2004 - 07:07 am: |
|
Heh...well, I AM anti-Ford and I completely agree. 300HP is nothing anymore. The GT should have 350, the Cobra 450 - then I might, MIGHT, consider them in the running.
As to IRS vs SRA times, I can't really argue it one way or another. That's one of the reasons I was given when I asked. I'm damned glad they didn't make them IRS, cause those first two prototypes were a REAL bitch.
Another point to ponder - the 05 Stangs were grossly overweight considering they were supposed to be 'sports cars' (no, I don't have curb figures, but I'm sure a little digging could pull them up - suffice to say every Ford engineer I spoke to was very concerned about it). IRS weighs more than SRA. |
Gschuette
| | Posted on Monday, September 13, 2004 - 03:13 pm: |
|
Yeah that can be true but what I meant was the suspension doesn't have to support the heavy diff that is left on the chassis. This in turn lets the tires stay in contact with the road better. I guess SRA and IRS are real close in weight and if one is heaier that tne other it cna't be enough to make a difference in today's cars. AND since most companies (AAM and Dana) only continue to develop solid axles for trucks and not cars most of today's solid axles are heavy. Darthane how did you know so much insider info on these cars if you don't work for ford or even like them I read all the magazines and your posts were sometimes the first thing I had heard about as issue. I haven't seen any official weight figures either but I have heard it is heavy. So let's recap underpowered, possibly(very likely) overweight, old axle tech (I don't car what anyone says a solid axle with a bunch of links will never compete overall with IRS), retro design will hurt in long run, and in short run dealers will be raping customers with insane mark ups, oh and it sits to high with a wimpy wheel and tire package, but other than that it is perfect right |
Tucsonxb9s
| | Posted on Monday, September 13, 2004 - 04:02 pm: |
|
I think you've missed the point of what Ford is doing with the car. Is the Mustang meant to tangle with the Corvette and Viper? No. Is 300hp too little? I don't think so at that price point. Show me a car that has an MSRP around $26k with a 300hp V-8. Solid axle may be out of date, but it is cheaper and I believe they are saving the IRS for the Cobra to keep the two models different. Retro design may have hurt the Beetle's and PT's longevity (God knows it killed the T-Bird's!) but I think Mustang enthusiasts will eat up the new "old" styling. As far as sits too tall and wimpy tires, I'll wait to see one in person. My '98 could've used a better set so I won't argue with you on that point. Dealer mark up for "limited" availability is something I've never agreed with, but unfortunately it is a part of supply and demand with niche cars. Look at what Mazda dealers did with the original Miatas! If the dealers are able to do it though, it does prove that Ford hit the nail on the head. Should be interesting to see them in person when they become available. |
Wyckedflesh
| | Posted on Monday, September 13, 2004 - 04:17 pm: |
|
The draggers can set up a solid axle much easier and cheaper then they can an IRS. Its also easier to contend with axle wrap under hard launch on a solid axle setup. Ford is answering to the mustang fans that modify their cars for racing if they are taking that line. |
Gschuette
| | Posted on Monday, September 13, 2004 - 04:40 pm: |
|
And in racing some power helps. I highly doubt 300hp is gonna create axle wrap issues. The high hp cobra can handle it but anyway I think everyone is missing my point. Most cars are gonna be used primarily in this order
Commute/scenic drive,roadtrip/agressive backroad driving/and then if your area has one people might take a trip to the dragstrip/and finally they will be built into hardcore dragsters.
And tuscon hate to beat a dead horse but DODGE MAGNUM 345hp<$30,000 The pontiac GTO is more than trirty but it has 350hp. And I have seen one in person and the stance is wimpy. I guess the erason I'm so mad is this. Like Darthane pointed out early reports suggested IRS more than 300hp and a similiar price. The concepts of the stang looked great but now the stance is killing the look and I really don't like the window behind the b-pillar on the coupe it ruins the look. And I can't put my finger on it but the cars just lost something in translation to production cars. I just think ford could have given us alot more for the same price but instead they will rely on the cars looks to sell instead of the performance. And finally from the Buell standpoint I want IRS to have the best handling backroad barnstormer I could care less if it wins a drag race. Just disappointed |
Tucsonxb9s
| | Posted on Monday, September 13, 2004 - 05:22 pm: |
|
No horse beating...please! (just kidding!) I don't think someone who is looking at a Mustang would necessarily cross shop it with a Magnum. I know I wouldn't. Two completely different beasts.
No disputing the Magnum does out HP the 'Stang, 345 to 300, but it's no feather weight either at 4200 lbs. (I've read the 'Stang should still be in the 3300-3600lb range) It's also only available with an auto transmission. I think any HP advantage may get washed away with the extra weight and slushbox. Also the MSRP does start at $29,995 but can quickly rise to over $35k. I don't think you could spec a hard top Mustang that high. The convertible maybe...but then that's apples and oranges.
I do understand your disappointment. Ford could've done a lot different that may have pleased you. Unfortunately there isn't a whole lot to choose from in this niche. Maybe the second coming of the Camaro and Trans Am will tickle your fancy. Until then, I think Ford has a winner on it's hands! |
Darthane
| | Posted on Monday, September 13, 2004 - 07:34 pm: |
|
GSchuette,
I work for Delphi currently - when I worked for a smaller company I designed, installed, and troubleshooted the wiring and electronics in the '05 prototypes. Got to meet and BS with pretty much every Ford engineer involved with it at some point. Had to keep my big mouth shut for two years about the damned things. LOL...I remember one of my friends being all pissed because I 'didn't tell him' about the new Mustang when he saw it at the auto show. A GT complete with sequential turn signals, a complete, removeable glass roof, 400+HP, racing bucket seats, etc. Never, but never believe hype.
Tucson mentioned another biggie (cost!), and Wycked is dead on WRT dragging and modifications. I was told today that the '05 Mustang will accept IRS with little to no chassis modifications, however.
...and the '07 Cobras will indeed keep the IRS, and supposedly the current price point (at least the 'base' ones). I remember one of the SVT guys being seriously pissed at how heavy the new one was going to be (the weight he gave me was very close to the Magnum weight quoted above), and I think 3600 is closer to the actual weight than 3300. |
Gschuette
| | Posted on Monday, September 13, 2004 - 09:30 pm: |
|
I'm gonna shut up now because I don't think anyone likes what I'm saying. I just want high performance for cheap forget about comfort.
Live life in the fast lane. |
Darthane
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 14, 2004 - 07:23 am: |
|
Well, good luck. Your best bet for cheap high-performance is a souped up Civic with one of those ridiculous wings. |
Captainplanet
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 14, 2004 - 10:08 am: |
|
Well, I've been driving a 01 cobra vert for a while now. I love the IRS. The car handles great with it and still rides well. The problem with the IRS at the dragstrip is not that you can't get it to perform, it is that it breaks. When you launch a cobra at 5k rpm with slicks on it, the weak point is the IRS axle near the cv joint. I've seen quite of few broken this way. I use my cobra as a daily driver, and could care less about the dragstrip, so I'm pro IRS for the handling benefit you get. If the cobra was my strip car I would likely change it out to a straight axle, which by the way, is a pretty easy bolt in job. Last word I heard is that the new cobra will be an 06 model. I'm not sure if I will get one yet or not. |
Tucsonxb9s
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 14, 2004 - 11:30 am: |
|
Greg, don't take what I'm saying as a personal attack or that I don't like what your saying. I do understand what you're looking for in a car. Unfortunately the Stang doesn't quite fit the bill. No biggie. I'm just saying that the limited choices in American made-high powered- V8-low cost sport type vehicles are few and far between. You're only other option would be a high-strung-turbo'd-four banger from Japan...kinda like the difference between a Buell and a Suzuki! Ironic isn't it?? |
Gschuette
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 14, 2004 - 01:00 pm: |
|
I wouldn't be caught dead driving a fwd ricer. The only car I would even consider buying from Japan would be a WRX STi. But I still wouldn't buy that. Nothing from korea either. The thought of driving a civic gives me the shivers. AMERICAN for life! |
Gschuette
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 14, 2004 - 01:02 pm: |
|
Thanks for the support I knew you guys weren't attacking me I just didn't want you guys to think I was attacking you. |
|
