What's a caniadian ? :scratch:

 

Wow, that car went off roading for a bit. Glad you guys made it back. I have no problem with a civil debate, let's not let it degenerate though.

I look forward to seeing and reading what people will say by Monday night.

 

I like the idea of a SRA on any car. IRS is an alignment issue I just don't want to deal with.

Anything I'd be doing where IRS is a requirement I probably would either be at a track or doing something highly illegal or gotten my car sideways and it's going to hurt.

SRA is hardier, and to hear about the new setup they use, pretty darn good.

The only way to close the entire debate is to have an equally prepared set of cars with the lone exception being SRA and IRS. And then test them on the drag strip, a road course, and an oval. Both ways, to be fair. And all drivers drive each car an equal amount of time, so there's no "this guy really knows how to drive!" type issues.

There. Who wants to pay for it?

 

I don't think anyone wants IRS solely for a cushier ride, that's a rather simplistic generalization. Rather, I think most would want it for a BETTER ride, i.e. one that is better able to handle road irregularities and thus maintain a higher level of cornering grip in a far wider range of conditions than a comparable live axle. A more resilient, cushier if you will, ride would be a nice side benefit, but by no means the primary reason. Tenacious, kitty-on-a-curtain road grip over any set of twisties you can throw at me is.

IRS wouldn't be any less a requirement or invitation to illegality than, say, 450+hp. Quite to the contrary, the extra nth degree of road control and adhesion would make it more of a safety feature and more of a prerequisite for responsible performance driving than adding another 100hp.

As for being weaker, only if improperly engineered. There no inherent weakness to IRS configurations that would render them necessarily weaker. Not sure what alignment issues would conspire against an IRS. Rather, the finer control over alignment and handling dynamics would be a plus factor.

 

It is too difficult to answer this without concrete cost and benefit comparisons.

 

this debate will probably go on and on till we now the real status, probably the sla will handel better than the gt and the gt does 0.89g, so i can't be bad on a track

 

Not sure what you are trying to say, the sla will handle better than the GT, do you mean the Shelby will handle better than the GT?

 

How about we reserve judgement until test numbers come out? If the SRA does a farily good job, is more reliable, saves 180 lbs and $5k (HTT estimates), and gets rid of wheel hop then I'm all for it. Personally I would be more upset with a Cobra with IRS that weighs nearly 3800 lbs and a 45k price tag than a Cobra with SRA that weighs 3600 lbs and a 40k price tag.

 

Since the poll has a biased slant through connotation, I won't vote.

But, IRS coupled with 450+ HP for under $40k would be great, albeit a pipe dream. I personally think we're all spoiled by the low price point of the $25k 300 HP GT. We tend to forget what a great deal that car really is, and when compared to a nearly $40k Cobra, we expect more for the extra $13k-$15k than 150 HP and a new look.

 

The poll has no merit on all accounts except one: we got to sample 05GT's command of the English language and his dizzying intellect.

 

Why pay for anything? Ford has already done the analysis for us: Tell me, what kind of suspension will you find on Ford's flagship, the Ford GT?

 

That statement is a bit rediculous.

 

That statement is a bit rediculous.
[/b][/quote]

I don't see it that way.

He put forth the idea of 2 equal cars with differing read suspensions to settle this debate.

My point: Ford already did a 'virtual' analysis of this debate...and we all know which they choose.

 

I'm betting there is more than 150hp stock with the ability to unlock a lot more fairly easily. I think the look is much more aggressive. we also are getting much better brakes, bigger wheels and tires, a 6spd tranny, heavier duty internals, upgraded suspension, nicer leather interior (and more of it - dash, shift boot, arm rest, door panels), probably upgraded seats and the Shelby name to boot. Not to mention that you also get better service at the dealer.

 

Why, because the results aren't going the way you want? Why is it everytime the SRA beats IRS in something, there always has to be an excuse. The Mustang beats an M3 in a Grand-Am Race, oh the Mustang is modded, well so is the M3, but the Mustang still has a SRA and the M3 still has an IRS.

 

I don't see it that way.

He put forth the idea of 2 equal cars with differing read suspensions to settle this debate.

My point: Ford already did a 'virtual' analysis of this debate...and we all know which they choose.
[/b][/quote]
Okay, if they wanted to make a $150k Shelby GT500, I am sure they could.

 

The choice of IRS on the Ford GT IS a statement on Ford's take on the IRS vs SRA debate...whether you like it or not.

 

Why, because the results aren't going the way you want? Why is it everytime the SRA beats IRS in something, there always has to be an excuse. The Mustang beats an M3 in a Grand-Am Race, oh the Mustang is modded, well so is the M3, but the Mustang still has a SRA and the M3 still has an IRS.
[/b][/quote]

Yeah, that poll is soooo scientific...not.

C'mon man, I don't care if an 8 cylinder Mustang (or 2) beat a field of 6 cylinder M3's in a race that you seem to feel is the be all and end all of this debate.

What I care about is *MY* Mustang, which I feel could've been so much better had the bean counters not had their way with the design of the car.

 

Yeah, that poll is soooo scientific...not.

C'mon man, I don't care if an 8 cylinder Mustang (or 2) beat a field of 6 cylinder M3's in a race that you seem to feel is the be all and end all of this debate.

What I care about is *MY* Mustang, which I feel could've been so much better had the bean counters not had their way with the design of the car.
[/b][/quote]

If the bean counters were the ones who kept the price low enough for me to afford it, I'm glad for their input.

 

I'm actually for SRA with the Shelby. I think if Ford wants it, it's good enough. I was merely stating that some people are only analyzing the HP/handling issue, and from that standpoint, they make certain assumptions and start complaining.