Galaxie

Not much I can add to that except I can't wait until the first members on this site get a chance to drive the car and tell us exactly what they think about how the suspension rides and handles.

Dan

Hopefully as soon as possible too. I'm dying with anticipation. Lets here some reviews!! B)

svtdriver

Quite frankly I am AMAZED how correctly you have assessed the failure of Ford/Tang etc deciding to go with the live suspension. The ~$300 cost figure for a IRS WAS THE AMOUNT FORD CLAIMED IT COST FOR THE COBRA'S IRS..............I mean, come on guys, you still think it's anything but penny pinching at OUR expense????? Just like the few bucks saved by a fixed mast antennae, manuall gas flap, fixed rear view mirrors............items found in 90% of cars today costing way under 20K................nuff said, issure closed.

If only everyone on this site was enlighted to reality THEN maybe Ford would have listened. Sadly, they listen to only their accountants, then Tang etc feeds absolute nonsense to the masses..............most will walk away from the test drive disappointed, and this disappoints me as I wanted to buy an 05 so badly. Howver, I think it will be only fair to get some REAL competitive auto tests, so time will tell. The few we all read on this site spoke of the poorest ride/handling vs the Z, gto, and xr8, not a very good start, but lets be patient for further confirmations.

IMPORTANTLY, one can get a g35 6MT for about $31.5k currently, that's only maybe $4k more than a fully equipped GT, so the price argument is really not fair. For that matter one can get a XR 8 for the price of a GT and gobs and gobs of extra's.............but lacks the wonderful roar of a Mustang ie Tang must think we guys are rather gullible to have fed us the line of reasoning (durabiltiy)Ford did it for the 3% of track ring/pinion set switchers!!!!!!!!!!!............lets get real. I have owned about 8 cars with IRS, all with 100K plus, all abused terribly, not ONE problem, never even 'knew it was there' [/b][/quote]
Quite frankly I am amazed at how much you complain about a suspension you haven't even driven. I believe the $300 cost difference was their cost. If that is the case we would then need to figure out what the mark-up would be. To determine the final true cost to consumer. And what is the hang up with a fixed antennae and manual gas flap? Oh my G** could you whine anymore? You have to go to the gas flap to fill it anyway. So open it at the same time. Is it REALLY that hard to open? If it was that hard for me to open. I'd be going to the gym. And the fixed antennae. Is it REALLY that important for it to retract. I live in a nice neighborhood where they don't try to steal my antennae. Actually going outside my apartment and watching traffic. I didn't see very many cars go by that had anything other than a fixed antennae. And those that did. Were the ones one the A-pillar. That sure they retract MANUALLLY. But then you have to pull them back out to get radio reception. And if opening the gas filler is too much...

Dan

The "IRS ****" will soon strike this thread closed.......at least that's what my Mustang crystal ball says .



Anyone want me to ask it about SE's?

Xellow

Its not just you. I also feel that way.

appaloosa

To sum it up in a few words: Bunch of ingrates :notnice:

Dr Iven

What you're leaving out is that the Chrysler 300C with A V6 starts at $23k. Not only that, but it's a sedan, and can be quite hideous in base trim. Put a HEMI in it, and you're talking $30k+.

Rakshas

Quite frankly I am AMAZED how correctly you have assessed the failure of Ford/Tang etc deciding to go with the live suspension. The ~$300 cost figure for a IRS WAS THE AMOUNT FORD CLAIMED IT COST FOR THE COBRA'S IRS..............I mean, come on guys, you still think it's anything but penny pinching at OUR expense????? Just like the few bucks saved by a fixed mast antennae, manuall gas flap, fixed rear view mirrors............items found in 90% of cars today costing way under 20K................nuff said, issure closed.

If only everyone on this site was enlighted to reality THEN maybe Ford would have listened. Sadly, they listen to only their accountants, then Tang etc feeds absolute nonsense to the masses..............most will walk away from the test drive disappointed, and this disappoints me as I wanted to buy an 05 so badly. Howver, I think it will be only fair to get some REAL competitive auto tests, so time will tell. The few we all read on this site spoke of the poorest ride/handling vs the Z, gto, and xr8, not a very good start, but lets be patient for further confirmations.

IMPORTANTLY, one can get a g35 6MT for about $31.5k currently, that's only maybe $4k more than a fully equipped GT, so the price argument is really not fair. For that matter one can get a XR 8 for the price of a GT and gobs and gobs of extra's.............but lacks the wonderful roar of a Mustang ie Tang must think we guys are rather gullible to have fed us the line of reasoning (durabiltiy)Ford did it for the 3% of track ring/pinion set switchers!!!!!!!!!!!............lets get real. I have owned about 8 cars with IRS, all with 100K plus, all abused terribly, not ONE problem, never even 'knew it was there' [/b][/quote]
Maybe $300 for the steel and the shaping. Now lets figure in design, research, durability testing, the machines used to shape the steel, the markup, the dealer markup on top of that. I say were sitting at aroudn $2000 a piece. OMG! a manual gas flap! My 740il has one of those! I'm gonna go trade it for a scion right now! ANd of course everyone will walk away dissapointed. The same reason go out and buy rusted muscle cars, they want the power and the soul of the car goshdarnit! (<-edit)

Also. If you care to recall the TA WS6. Arguably the best performance bargain available. TOns of power, awesome styling. Awesome modability. And the one factor most people overlook. Great handling, most import drivers will say that the WS6 is a match for their precious IRS 4wd Evo, on the strip and the track. And the new mustang uses a setup almost identical to the WS6!

The car will handle, you want it to handle better lower it, add harder bushings, you have a WS6 suspenion now, harsh and great at corners. Or you can leave it stock, decent and cushy.

Purple Hayz

WRONG.

The base 300 setup (dubbed "Independent ride Suspension" which is shared with the Touring and Limited Models) is nowhere near is rigid as the "Touring" variant exclusive to the high output 300C. As I indidcated in my original Lincoln LS/Jag S-type R analogy, simply because two vehicles share the same basic supsension geometry and components does NOT make them identical systems. The Jag's suspension is beefed up to deal with the added power of the blown 4.2 engine. And do you honestly think those enhancement come without additional costs?

My original challenge to you stands. Find a car within 5K of the Mustang's price that offers equal power/performance with or without IRS. If a 23K, 3800 lb 300 with a 190 hp V6 is the best you can do, I would ask once again that you put down the crack pipe! :nono:

Rakshas

WRONG.

The base 300 setup (dubbed "Independent ride Suspension" which is shared with the Touring and Limited Models) is nowhere near is rigid as the "Touring" variant exclusive to the high output 300C. As I indidcated in my original Lincoln LS/Jag S-type R analogy, simply because two vehicles share the same basic supsension geometry and components does NOT make them identical systems. The Jag's suspension is beefed up to deal with the added power of the blown 4.2 engine. And do you honestly think those enhancement come without additional costs?

My original challenge to you stands. Find a car within 5K of the Mustang's price that offers equal power/performance with or without IRS. If a 23K, 3800 lb 300 with a 190 hp V6 is the best you can do, I would ask once again that you put down the crack pipe! :nono: [/b][/quote]
Just to stir the pot.

The 350z has 290 hp and IRS. Base price is 26,000.

Theres your competition.

Purple Hayz

Just to stir the pot.

The 350z has 290 hp and IRS. Base price is 26,000.

Theres your competition.[/b][/quote]
Perhaps I should have been more clear. When I said EQUAL power/performance I meant numerically identical (or superior if you could find a car that was...) . A 287 hp, 274 ft lb 350Z does not equal a 300 hp, 320 ft lb mustang by any form of mathematics with which I'm familiar.

In fairness to you, I realize they are reasonbly close. B) Still, a 46 ft lb torque differential is nothing to blow off. My belief is that the 350Z is much closer to the current GT in straight line performance (most mags put in mid to low 14s). The $26.47K base model is no canyon carver, either. You would have to step up to one of the touring or track coupes for that, and they sticker b/w $31.8 and $34.2.

A noble effort, but you'll have to do better

Rakshas

Perhaps I should have been more clear. When I said EQUAL power/performance I meant numerically identical (or superior if you could find a car that was...) . A 287 hp, 274 ft lb 350Z does not equal a 300 hp, 320 ft lb mustang by any form of mathematics with which I'm familiar.

In fairness to you, I realize they are reasonbly close. B) Still, a 46 ft lb torque differential is nothing to blow off. My belief is that the 350Z is much closer to the current GT in straight line performance (most mags put in mid to low 14s). The $26.47K base model is no canyon carver, either. You would have to step up to one of the touring or track coupes for that, and they sticker b/w $31.8 and $34.2.

A noble effort, but you'll have to do better [/b][/quote]
Contary on the corner carver bit.

The Base is actually the best at cornering.

All 350Z's have the same suspension. Track, Tour, base perf or enthu.

The Base Z weighs the least and has the smallest wheels. THese wheels give it less unsprung weight contributing to better cornering.

I'll concede on the torque though.

svtdriver

However doesn't the track model come with the lighter weight forged Rays engineering wheels? The problem with the Z is the lack of options on the whole line. I can get a touring model but can't get the track model brakes on it (Those brakes are reserved only for the track model, same as the wheels and some of the aero pieces). Or I get the track model and can't get the leather seating and navigation.

André

Before this thread is closed let me say there is nothing quite like the mustang...and the chrysler 300 is no mustang, but the fact that chrysler can produce a RWD car with IRS that can handle 390FT of torque for less than $23k proves that it's nonsense to say that IRS would have been too costly for the Mustang. The 300C uses the same IRS as the base 300 model except for the addition of an antirollbar and different tuning.

Boomer I agree I have no faith in what Mr.Thai-Tang says.

svtdriver

Is that because you don't want to believe him. Or because you know more about the 05 than he does? They were obviously working within a budget. They opted to use real aluminum on the dash instead of cheap plastic (Just one example). We also have an all aluminum engine. And pretty much everything on it has been designed as mustang specific. Last I heard it was not a modified LS chassis. But I could be wrong on that.
Here is the reality of the situation. You can compare it to any number of other cars. I don't care if it is a $14k car or a $35K car. They all have compromises. The $14k car with IRS does not have a 300 hp engine. And generally the smaller 4cylinder engine is cheaper to manufacture (And that is just the start of the compromises). The $35k car is more expensive. It may well have IRS and more than 300hp. But again it is more expensive. And if they were to have put IRS into the mustang and priced it at $35k. You would only complain about how much it cost. And say how you were forced to buy another car since they priced the mustang out of your budget.

Boomer

Yes this thread is getting a little long in the tooth.
While everyone has validity to their claim of 'why can't'....or 'thats BS it should'

-we are NOT part of the process of what happened
-we do NOT know what goes on behind closed doors
-we do NOT know how hard people have worked on this car to bring it to us
-we also do NOT know how hard people had to fight for what we got.

Let's say for arguments sake that Hau was told 'you guys have to use a solid, cause its cheaper....and then you can keep your 300hp new 3v engine and other goodies that will help this baby sell'

Hau and his team have done a job beyond words....and one little thing that people may/may not want (depending on which side your on) leaves a sour taste in your mouth....guess what...its what you have to deal with.
It will sell, people will love it etc
I don't even need a crystal ball for that.
It exceeds the current car...by little, lots or HOLY CRAP YEAH...we won't know until we hear testament of ACTUAL PHYSICAL DRIVING.
The 'it stinks..but I haven't tried it' attitude gets extremly old...VERY quick.

Thinking it stinks, and knowing it stinks....
You all THINK it may stink....but you have no wheel time to prove it.
You can say whatever, but nothing will change that fact.

Even if the car handles beyond the previous models and is commended for it...will you still chastise them for not using an IRS....
I'll admit...I'll say what I mean when I drive it one day...and if it stinks it stinks...but I won't open my yap claiming it stinks...until i KNOW it stinks.
Something tells me I won't be saying those words anytime soon...

Its become a broken record, and its getting tired.

**others may not know but this thread topic has been in the loop for a LONG time...***

We are NOT here to call anyone names because of their views...it is an open forum for discussion, so keep it civilized even if you disagree.

I'm surprised no one has pulled out the 'but the 07 Camaro will have the IRS'

André

Boomer
Do you know something we don't..?

V10

The '05 Mustang was orignally supposed to have IRS. But a high level Ford exec. Phil Martins said NO to the IRS because the manufacturing cost on the Mustang was getting too high.

That's the story, plain and simple. Anything anyone else says, including THT is just making excuses.

André

Thanks, I knew the story but I forgot the beancounters name.

Galaxie

once again,

it can be agreed by everyone that the reason the Mustang does not have an IRS is because bean counters felt the cost was too high.. that is just the way it is, everything has a budget, and you have to make money to stay in business.

I am not going to write off the solid axle unless it disappoints me in a test drive. in the meantime, say what you will about the car, if it can get within a half second of an M3, that is pretty good no matter how you could it. No factory FOX chassis car could come close to that. Not too shabby for an ox-cart rear suspension eh rhumb?