Nooooooooooooooooooooo!
3/23/05, 09:04 AM
#41
Bullitt Member
Join Date: January 30, 2004
Location: Muncy PA
Posts: 285
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My 2 cents...
Like it or not, the "bean counters" will always have a say in the cars Ford builds. Get over it.
It took money to redesign the SRA - and by all reports it is so far ahead of the traditional SRA setup that it's in a class by itself. Does that make it better than a new IRS? No. But to design and build an IRS would cost more money than they could recoup simply by making it an option. They would have to make it standard, and then the engineering costs would have to be distributed across ALL the mustangs models. Not worth it IMHO.
Like it or not, the "bean counters" will always have a say in the cars Ford builds. Get over it.
It took money to redesign the SRA - and by all reports it is so far ahead of the traditional SRA setup that it's in a class by itself. Does that make it better than a new IRS? No. But to design and build an IRS would cost more money than they could recoup simply by making it an option. They would have to make it standard, and then the engineering costs would have to be distributed across ALL the mustangs models. Not worth it IMHO.
3/23/05, 10:30 AM
#42
Bullitt Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: January 3, 2005
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why do you guys keep referring to previous generation Mustangs?
Apples & Oranges...as mentioned previously.
If the IRS didn't work well on previous gen Mustangs...it's probably because the car was designed FOR the SRA, meaning that fitting the IRS on those cars is a kludge as best.
The WHOLE car should've been designed around a proper, superior IRS from the start.
Perhaps they didn't put an IRS in the GT500 cuz it doesn't respond to it as it should because it's basic design is crippled by the SRA thinking.
It is also unfathomable how some keep referring to the perceived 'strength' advantage of the SRA when there are soooo many examples of 400+ hp road going cars with IRS that have no problems with axle reliability whatsoever.
This is 2005 fer crying out loud
Apples & Oranges...as mentioned previously.
If the IRS didn't work well on previous gen Mustangs...it's probably because the car was designed FOR the SRA, meaning that fitting the IRS on those cars is a kludge as best.
The WHOLE car should've been designed around a proper, superior IRS from the start.
Perhaps they didn't put an IRS in the GT500 cuz it doesn't respond to it as it should because it's basic design is crippled by the SRA thinking.
It is also unfathomable how some keep referring to the perceived 'strength' advantage of the SRA when there are soooo many examples of 400+ hp road going cars with IRS that have no problems with axle reliability whatsoever.
This is 2005 fer crying out loud
3/23/05, 10:35 AM
#43
Bullitt Member
Join Date: February 6, 2004
Posts: 327
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by conv_stang@March 23, 2005, 8:49 AM
im sure the irs would be nice. but the handling on the 05 is worlds abolve the 99-04 model. so i would imagine even w/o the irs it will still handle. but who said it wasnt going to have an irs?? or did i miss it?
im sure the irs would be nice. but the handling on the 05 is worlds abolve the 99-04 model. so i would imagine even w/o the irs it will still handle. but who said it wasnt going to have an irs?? or did i miss it?
A lot of you that think you know what you are talking about don't. If you haven't ever driven one, don't make comments that you can't back up with experience fact.
Don't get me wrong ... I love any and all Mustangs, especially the new '05, but my slow '99 is going to leave you butt behind on that long front straightaway that turns into a long sweeping right hander into the twisties every time.
3/23/05, 11:23 AM
#44
Join Date: January 30, 2004
Location: DMV
Posts: 2,980
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think a lot of what goes on here is the two quite distinct Mustang camps: the muscle car drag racers and the pony car road racers.
For the former: off the line straight line performance is pretty much the be-all, end-all of Mustang performance, with things like the brakes, suspension pretty much along for the ride -- the cheaper and more unobtrusive the better. In this realm, a live axle makes perfect sense and an IRS, any IRS, is really just unneccesary expense and complexity with little relavence to their performance world. The SLA is a cheap, simple and rugged piece that serves beautifully at the strip or stoplight. Sure, an IRS can, of course, be made rugged enough to widthstand off the line launches at the drag strip, but why bother and why pay that much, the SLA holds still, holds together and holds straight, ain't that enough for anybody?
For the latter: Performance is a pretty equal interaction between acceleration, handling and braking that require a sophisticated and well balanced interplay between all these aspects without one predominating over the other. In this realm, a well designed IRS is a critical component tying together this well balanced performance envelope over all variety of road and driving situations. The SLA, while working well in fairly ideal, undemanding circumstances, is too easily hobbled by less than creamy roads and exact a disproportionate ride degradation for any level of handling prowess. Sure, a live axle can handle fine on a flat road, as can a go-cart, or in a race car where ride quality is no issue, but they drive in the real world on real roads everyday and a buggy axle just doesn't quite measure up there. Can't we get a state of the art suspension that doesn't ride like a coal cart and do the jitterbug at the first hint of mid-corner bumps?
So I think both camps are, naturally, looking at this IRS/Live Axle thing through their respective prisms.
Can a good IRS hold together and launch off the line well? Certainly. Can a good live axle ride and handle reasonably well? Certainly. And in the ideal world, each would have their choice to best match their needs and wants.
Ford, like the other domestics, are really bleeding at the wallet and are getting real tight with development budgets, thus the economic factor looms ever larger over a purely engineering solution.
While the GT500 may not be quite the overall M3 beater, at least in the corners, as originally trumpeted, it will still go like stink in the straights, satisfying the muscle car mavens and will hopefully handle well enough not to loose to many corner carvers to more adroit chassis purveyors.
Maybe better times and more economic confidence will evenutally lead to an IRS and a Mustang that can dance with the best. In the meantime, lets hope Ford's compromises are good and reasonable ones.
For the former: off the line straight line performance is pretty much the be-all, end-all of Mustang performance, with things like the brakes, suspension pretty much along for the ride -- the cheaper and more unobtrusive the better. In this realm, a live axle makes perfect sense and an IRS, any IRS, is really just unneccesary expense and complexity with little relavence to their performance world. The SLA is a cheap, simple and rugged piece that serves beautifully at the strip or stoplight. Sure, an IRS can, of course, be made rugged enough to widthstand off the line launches at the drag strip, but why bother and why pay that much, the SLA holds still, holds together and holds straight, ain't that enough for anybody?
For the latter: Performance is a pretty equal interaction between acceleration, handling and braking that require a sophisticated and well balanced interplay between all these aspects without one predominating over the other. In this realm, a well designed IRS is a critical component tying together this well balanced performance envelope over all variety of road and driving situations. The SLA, while working well in fairly ideal, undemanding circumstances, is too easily hobbled by less than creamy roads and exact a disproportionate ride degradation for any level of handling prowess. Sure, a live axle can handle fine on a flat road, as can a go-cart, or in a race car where ride quality is no issue, but they drive in the real world on real roads everyday and a buggy axle just doesn't quite measure up there. Can't we get a state of the art suspension that doesn't ride like a coal cart and do the jitterbug at the first hint of mid-corner bumps?
So I think both camps are, naturally, looking at this IRS/Live Axle thing through their respective prisms.
Can a good IRS hold together and launch off the line well? Certainly. Can a good live axle ride and handle reasonably well? Certainly. And in the ideal world, each would have their choice to best match their needs and wants.
Ford, like the other domestics, are really bleeding at the wallet and are getting real tight with development budgets, thus the economic factor looms ever larger over a purely engineering solution.
While the GT500 may not be quite the overall M3 beater, at least in the corners, as originally trumpeted, it will still go like stink in the straights, satisfying the muscle car mavens and will hopefully handle well enough not to loose to many corner carvers to more adroit chassis purveyors.
Maybe better times and more economic confidence will evenutally lead to an IRS and a Mustang that can dance with the best. In the meantime, lets hope Ford's compromises are good and reasonable ones.
3/23/05, 11:39 AM
#47
Tasca Super Boss 429 Member
Originally posted by snkbtn99@March 23, 2005, 11:38 AM
If you are going to start a poll, start one that asks -- how many people that are saying the IRS is a piece of poo have actually driven one, or have actually driven one on a track above 120+
If you are going to start a poll, start one that asks -- how many people that are saying the IRS is a piece of poo have actually driven one, or have actually driven one on a track above 120+
3/23/05, 11:55 AM
#48
Join Date: January 30, 2004
Location: DMV
Posts: 2,980
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by S197Cobra@March 23, 2005, 12:38 PM
I am sick of wheel hop. And if the lack of IRS will make it easier for me to get my hands on a GT500 for MSRP, then I'm overjoyed...
I am sick of wheel hop. And if the lack of IRS will make it easier for me to get my hands on a GT500 for MSRP, then I'm overjoyed...
3/23/05, 12:13 PM
#50
GT Member
Join Date: December 10, 2004
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by rhumb+March 23, 2005, 10:58 AM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(rhumb @ March 23, 2005, 10:58 AM)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-S197Cobra@March 23, 2005, 12:38 PM
I am sick of wheel hop. And if the lack of IRS will make it easier for me to get my hands on a GT500 for MSRP, then I'm overjoyed...
I am sick of wheel hop. And if the lack of IRS will make it easier for me to get my hands on a GT500 for MSRP, then I'm overjoyed...
[/b][/quote] My Cobra still hops sideways on bumpy corners.
And it's not just off the line, anytime I romp on it below 70 mph I get wheel hop. So for me, the ratio of straight-line hopping versus bumpy corner hopping is 99:1. I'd much rather eliminate the straight-line hopping.
3/23/05, 12:21 PM
#51
Bow Chica Bow Wow
TMS Staff
TMS Staff
Welp te bottom line is that No IRS because of the bean counters..if anyone doesn't believe that just check the thread with the words right from shelbys mouth.
I think the best option is to make the IRS an option.
I think the best option is to make the IRS an option.
3/23/05, 02:23 PM
#52
Cobra Member
Join Date: September 10, 2004
Location: Charlotte NC
Posts: 1,302
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by burningman@March 23, 2005, 1:24 PM
Welp te bottom line is that No IRS because of the bean counters..if anyone doesn't believe that just check the thread with the words right from shelbys mouth.
I think the best option is to make the IRS an option.
Welp te bottom line is that No IRS because of the bean counters..if anyone doesn't believe that just check the thread with the words right from shelbys mouth.
I think the best option is to make the IRS an option.
3/23/05, 03:07 PM
#53
GT Member
Join Date: January 30, 2004
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When the Mustang concept came out, I fell in love with it. I followed its production counterpart closely to learn all I could about it. I love everything about it, for the price point. Being financially comfortable, though, I decided I would wait a couple years and plunk down a good bit more money for the car I love so much with a hundred more horsepower and IRS. Well the power came for sure, Ford didn't mess with the looks too much or make it too tacky, and they improved much else overall. The sad fact is, however, that the ommission of IRS alone is enough to get me to look elswhere. In the mid $40,000 range, there is just too much available to settle for less. We can squabble all we want on here, but I am afraid that many of the buyers in the position to purchase a Shelby will feel the same way, and go elsewhere. I just think it's a shame; I would gladly pay more in the form of an option to have my favorite car the way I want it. Oh well, maybe next year, if I am not in something else by then.
I suppose this is goodbye for now. Thanks for all of the great info and relevant conversation.
I suppose this is goodbye for now. Thanks for all of the great info and relevant conversation.
3/23/05, 04:25 PM
#54
Bullitt Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: January 3, 2005
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by MustangFanatic+March 23, 2005, 3:26 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(MustangFanatic @ March 23, 2005, 3:26 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-burningman@March 23, 2005, 1:24 PM
Welp te bottom line is that No IRS because of the bean counters..if anyone doesn't believe that just check the thread with the words right from shelbys mouth.
I think the best option is to make the IRS an option.
Welp te bottom line is that No IRS because of the bean counters..if anyone doesn't believe that just check the thread with the words right from shelbys mouth.
I think the best option is to make the IRS an option.
[/b][/quote]
Making IRS an option is, well, NOT an option.
You can't tack on an IRS as an AFTERTHOUGHT.
It has to be integral to the cars original design from the very start.
3/23/05, 04:26 PM
#55
Bullitt Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: January 3, 2005
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Birdman3@March 23, 2005, 4:10 PM
When the Mustang concept came out, I fell in love with it. I followed its production counterpart closely to learn all I could about it. I love everything about it, for the price point. Being financially comfortable, though, I decided I would wait a couple years and plunk down a good bit more money for the car I love so much with a hundred more horsepower and IRS. Well the power came for sure, Ford didn't mess with the looks too much or make it too tacky, and they improved much else overall. The sad fact is, however, that the ommission of IRS alone is enough to get me to look elswhere. In the mid $40,000 range, there is just too much available to settle for less. We can squabble all we want on here, but I am afraid that many of the buyers in the position to purchase a Shelby will feel the same way, and go elsewhere. I just think it's a shame; I would gladly pay more in the form of an option to have my favorite car the way I want it. Oh well, maybe next year, if I am not in something else by then.
I suppose this is goodbye for now. Thanks for all of the great info and relevant conversation.
When the Mustang concept came out, I fell in love with it. I followed its production counterpart closely to learn all I could about it. I love everything about it, for the price point. Being financially comfortable, though, I decided I would wait a couple years and plunk down a good bit more money for the car I love so much with a hundred more horsepower and IRS. Well the power came for sure, Ford didn't mess with the looks too much or make it too tacky, and they improved much else overall. The sad fact is, however, that the ommission of IRS alone is enough to get me to look elswhere. In the mid $40,000 range, there is just too much available to settle for less. We can squabble all we want on here, but I am afraid that many of the buyers in the position to purchase a Shelby will feel the same way, and go elsewhere. I just think it's a shame; I would gladly pay more in the form of an option to have my favorite car the way I want it. Oh well, maybe next year, if I am not in something else by then.
I suppose this is goodbye for now. Thanks for all of the great info and relevant conversation.
So close...yet so far.
3/23/05, 04:49 PM
#56
Bow Chica Bow Wow
TMS Staff
TMS Staff
Harald. If i'm not mistaken the car was origianlly designed with IRS and the bean counters nixed it. If i'm right then that means the SRA is more of an after thought than the IRS. I could be wrong on this though. Probably am.
Oh well I'm done crying about the car. now i'll ust wait for the mach and then be happy
Oh well I'm done crying about the car. now i'll ust wait for the mach and then be happy
3/23/05, 04:52 PM
#57
GT Member
Join Date: September 6, 2004
Posts: 161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by burningman@March 23, 2005, 7:52 PM
Harald. If i'm not mistaken the car was origianlly designed with IRS and the bean counters nixed it. If i'm right then that means the SRA is more of an after thought than the IRS. I could be wrong on this though. Probably am.
Oh well I'm done crying about the car. now i'll ust wait for the mach and then be happy
Harald. If i'm not mistaken the car was origianlly designed with IRS and the bean counters nixed it. If i'm right then that means the SRA is more of an after thought than the IRS. I could be wrong on this though. Probably am.
Oh well I'm done crying about the car. now i'll ust wait for the mach and then be happy
3/23/05, 04:54 PM
#58
Bullitt Member
Join Date: February 2, 2005
Posts: 299
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Jack Frost+March 23, 2005, 5:28 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Jack Frost @ March 23, 2005, 5:28 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'>
I'll second that, make the IRS an option
Originally posted by MustangFanatic@March 23, 2005, 3:26 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-burningman
<!--QuoteBegin-burningman
@March 23, 2005, 1:24 PM
Welp te bottom line is that No IRS because of the bean counters..if anyone doesn't believe that just check the thread with the words right from shelbys mouth.
I think the best option is to make the IRS an option.
Welp te bottom line is that No IRS because of the bean counters..if anyone doesn't believe that just check the thread with the words right from shelbys mouth.
I think the best option is to make the IRS an option.
I'll second that, make the IRS an option
You can't tack on an IRS as an AFTERTHOUGHT.
It has to be integral to the cars original design from the very start.
[/b][/quote]
Actually - you can tack on an IRS as an afterthought. Just ask SVT about 03-04 Cobras. :shock:
I've read this thread with great interest - I'm a suspension type guy and I believe that if you are paying $35K for a car whose purpose is obviously driving pleasure an independent rear suspension is a MUST. I drive a 97 Thunderbird and brand new in 1997 it cost $22K. Funny how I have an IRS. Funny how even lowly Focuses have an IRS. There's no excuse other than profitability for the omission of it. Would the GT supercar ever have a solid axle? It makes 550 HP - plenty enough to break those halfshafts and yet I guarantee Ford's engineers never considered making it with a solid axle. They took the LS and S-Type chassis and dumbed it down to struts in the front and a live axle in the back to keep the accountants happy. By the way - how much of a premium will the Shelby command over a loaded Mustang GT? Maybe $10K??? And for what - 150 hp and some interior and exterior changes? :notnice:
Another thing unrelated to this thread that has bothered me about Ford lately is it's unwillingness to do away with rear drum brakes on it's products. Just recently it has started putting discs on the rear of most cars and some trucks, but come on Ford! This is the new millenium!
3/23/05, 06:25 PM
#59
GT Member
Join Date: February 14, 2004
Posts: 186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would gladly pay more in the form of an option to have my favorite car the way I want it. Oh well, maybe next year, if I am not in something else by then.
I suppose this is goodbye for now. Thanks for all of the great info and relevant conversation.
All I can say is. Thank you. That means one more GT500 that might be available for me.
I suppose this is goodbye for now. Thanks for all of the great info and relevant conversation.
All I can say is. Thank you. That means one more GT500 that might be available for me.
3/23/05, 09:44 PM
#60
GT Member
Join Date: October 11, 2004
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think some people on here missed some of the key points that have been brought up these past few days-
1. This car is still a 90% CONCEPT! That 10% might just mean that IRS might find its way into (or maybe an option) into the GT500
2. As mentioned before, they are two different setups, both with their own distinct pros/cons.
3. IRS = +180 lbs +$$$$$. Did anyone notice that its going to cost more and make the already heavy (assuming 3600 lbs) GT500 only more lardlike?
4. NOONE HAS DRIVEN IT YET! They won't even start handing out FEUs (field eval. units) until this fall from what I hear, so NOONE has had the chance on this forum to drive it. Until you do, then just wait and take it easy, because it might change your opinion once you do.
Sorry for the rant, I just had to get it off my chest.
1. This car is still a 90% CONCEPT! That 10% might just mean that IRS might find its way into (or maybe an option) into the GT500
2. As mentioned before, they are two different setups, both with their own distinct pros/cons.
3. IRS = +180 lbs +$$$$$. Did anyone notice that its going to cost more and make the already heavy (assuming 3600 lbs) GT500 only more lardlike?
4. NOONE HAS DRIVEN IT YET! They won't even start handing out FEUs (field eval. units) until this fall from what I hear, so NOONE has had the chance on this forum to drive it. Until you do, then just wait and take it easy, because it might change your opinion once you do.
Sorry for the rant, I just had to get it off my chest.