2012 Boss
9/10/09 | 11:15 AM
#22
Mach 1 Member
Joined: March 29, 2007
Posts: 766
Likes: 0
Looks:
Shaker Hood Scoop
Flat black cowl
Hood pins
Painted mutten chops
Flat black pedestal spoiler
Magnum 500 wheels. Stagger them 19" front 20" rear. Deep dish.
'69 style side stripes.
Calypso Coral and Grabber Orange colors optional.
Performance:
420ish HP.
Raise Redline.
GT500 Brembos
Upgraded suspension.
Watts link rear.
Short throw shifter
Shaker Hood Scoop
Flat black cowl
Hood pins
Painted mutten chops
Flat black pedestal spoiler
Magnum 500 wheels. Stagger them 19" front 20" rear. Deep dish.
'69 style side stripes.
Calypso Coral and Grabber Orange colors optional.
Performance:
420ish HP.
Raise Redline.
GT500 Brembos
Upgraded suspension.
Watts link rear.
Short throw shifter
9/10/09 | 06:16 PM
#23
Cobra Member
Joined: September 10, 2004
Posts: 1,302
Likes: 0
From: Charlotte NC
I like your suggestions Rhumb. My wish list:
- 450 HP minimum with 7K redline
- 6 spd close ratio manual trans with optional billet shift
- GT500 style brake package; 14" front disc minimum
- 3.73 rear end ratio
- 18" Wheels Stock; 19"'s optional
- Shaker and Stripe Package optional for those who don't want the "retro" look
- Unique suspension tuning for aggressive handling
- Watts link rear suspension standard, IRS optional
- Unique front fascia w/CDC style front spoiler similar to GT500 but more aggressive
- Rear pedestal or ducktail spoiler
- Recaro style cloth seats
- Reduction in creature comfort options to save weight - no Nav system, etc. Use of lightweight materials where possible
- Price point between GT and GT500
9/10/09 | 07:05 PM
#24
Swamp Donkey Aficionado
Joined: November 23, 2006
Posts: 1,863
Likes: 0
My wish list:
450hp DI 5.0 (with a nice crackling 12:1 CR for a motor that really snaps forward) with a 7.5K redline (make her a screamer like the original)
DCT, or at least the GT500's 6 cogger for a slightly more reality-based option
3.73 rear end
Borla exhaust
Chassis:
Uprated springs, shocks, bushings and geometry.
IRS in the rear, or at least a lot of lightened (AL, CF, MAG) compenents to try to rid the live axle of all that dead (unsprung) weight -- and a Watts linkage.
Lightweight wheels (see aforementioned unsprung weight comment)
Brembos all around.
Body:
Very purposeful and serious, reflecting its grown-up's performance machine character.
GT500'esque bodywork
Keep it purposeful and functional -- no goofy scoops, slats, wings or whatever (make them optional if at all).
Very modern and updated interpretations of identifying badging and stickers -- stay away from being too retro as seems to be the habit of late.
Interior:
Very purposeful and functional -- this is a serious grown-up's performance machine
Recaro seats
Real visible fonts in the instrumentation.
Alloy pedals
Price: $35K max (has to stay competitive with the Camaro, which has a lot of this stuff, specs already at $30K)
450hp DI 5.0 (with a nice crackling 12:1 CR for a motor that really snaps forward) with a 7.5K redline (make her a screamer like the original)
DCT, or at least the GT500's 6 cogger for a slightly more reality-based option
3.73 rear end
Borla exhaust
Chassis:
Uprated springs, shocks, bushings and geometry.
IRS in the rear, or at least a lot of lightened (AL, CF, MAG) compenents to try to rid the live axle of all that dead (unsprung) weight -- and a Watts linkage.
Lightweight wheels (see aforementioned unsprung weight comment)
Brembos all around.
Body:
Very purposeful and serious, reflecting its grown-up's performance machine character.
GT500'esque bodywork
Keep it purposeful and functional -- no goofy scoops, slats, wings or whatever (make them optional if at all).
Very modern and updated interpretations of identifying badging and stickers -- stay away from being too retro as seems to be the habit of late.
Interior:
Very purposeful and functional -- this is a serious grown-up's performance machine
Recaro seats
Real visible fonts in the instrumentation.
Alloy pedals
Price: $35K max (has to stay competitive with the Camaro, which has a lot of this stuff, specs already at $30K)
9/11/09 | 12:41 AM
#25
FR500 Member
Joined: August 15, 2005
Posts: 3,083
Likes: 0
From: Honolulu
#1 - I want it to be built. #2 - Keep it light(er) and simple(r). If drivers want to be coddled with gadgets and convenience options, stick with a Premium GT. Any options available would be concentrated on making the car go faster and stop sooner. #3 - Make it look more like the '69 Boss 302 - 4 lights in front, no shaker hood scoop. In fact no scoops, vents, or louvers unless they help cool the brakes and aid in getting air out from under the hood or body. #4 - Suspension and brakes that are track-worthy because its original namesake was built for that purpose. #5 - Keep prices in check. Price it below the GT500 and perhaps a bit more than a fully-optioned Premium GT coupe. Build as many as people want for 1 or 2 model years, tops.
9/11/09 | 12:42 AM
#26
V6 Member
Joined: September 8, 2009
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
My wish list:
1. Recaro seats w/ manual adjustment
2. Brakes (14"), Castrol SRF (or similar) brake fluid, stainless braided lines
3. 18" or 19" wheels with max performance summer tires
4. Fully defeatable traction control
5. Road course-biased suspension and handling (struts, springs, antiroll bars, etc.)
6. Optional radio equipment delete
7. Battery located in trunk
8. Upgraded radiator
9. Short-throw manual transmission only (and no convertible version!)
10. Curb weight < 3,400 lbs
Is that so much to ask?
1. Recaro seats w/ manual adjustment
2. Brakes (14"), Castrol SRF (or similar) brake fluid, stainless braided lines
3. 18" or 19" wheels with max performance summer tires
4. Fully defeatable traction control
5. Road course-biased suspension and handling (struts, springs, antiroll bars, etc.)
6. Optional radio equipment delete
7. Battery located in trunk
8. Upgraded radiator
9. Short-throw manual transmission only (and no convertible version!)
10. Curb weight < 3,400 lbs
Is that so much to ask?
Last edited by LateralG; 9/11/09 at 12:45 AM.
9/11/09 | 02:27 AM
#27
Member
Joined: September 8, 2009
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
For those asking for watts-link, a good adjustable panhard is much cheaper and just as effective as a watts-link in the hands of your average driver, most do not even reach the limits of that. A watts-link would be over kill and not be cost effective. You also have to consider watt-links have to be built to high standards a cheap on breaks fast.
9/11/09 | 04:40 AM
#28
I Have No Life
Joined: January 30, 2004
Posts: 10,446
Likes: 12
From: Canada
9/11/09 | 06:09 AM
#29
Member
Joined: September 9, 2009
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
From: Newfoundland, Canada
For those asking for watts-link, a good adjustable panhard is much cheaper and just as effective as a watts-link in the hands of your average driver, most do not even reach the limits of that. A watts-link would be over kill and not be cost effective. You also have to consider watt-links have to be built to high standards a cheap on breaks fast.
9/11/09 | 10:33 AM
#30
Bow Chica Bow Wow
TMS Staff
TMS Staff
Joined: January 29, 2004
Posts: 7,445
Likes: 12
From: Proudly in NJ...bite it FL
Seriously??? I think you have to intergrate the old with the new. I would agree that if it had smaller wheels and a higher profile tire it would need RWL's but having the 20" rims to fill our the wells they are not needed. I don't know that RWL tires on a modern car would look right. 
Not a stang but you get the idea
9/11/09 | 10:59 AM
#31
PS Don't forget the efficiency and emissions benefits DI seems to reap.
9/11/09 | 11:03 AM
#32
Bullitt Member
Joined: May 29, 2006
Posts: 450
Likes: 0
From: Victoria, BC
380-400HP
Shaker is a must
I think the FRPP Track & Handling Pack and something akin to the styling above but it's missing the chin spoiler, need that. And as FKA said above better brakes would certainly be necessary.
Shaker is a must
I think the FRPP Track & Handling Pack and something akin to the styling above but it's missing the chin spoiler, need that. And as FKA said above better brakes would certainly be necessary.
9/11/09 | 11:08 AM
#33
Swamp Donkey Man Cans
Joined: August 20, 2007
Posts: 4,352
Likes: 2
From: Massachusetts
The GT is rumored to have 400HP so I think the BOSS will have to be pushing 430+ to be worth it.
9/11/09 | 11:11 AM
#34
Mach 1 Member
Joined: December 16, 2007
Posts: 651
Likes: 0
From: West Chicago
If they could do it without DI, and dialing way back on timing, cams, etc. to keep the motor from grenading. I would say Ford just ought to bite the bullet and do DI, its clearly an inevitable technology, so what better place to develop experience with it than on a Boss Stang.
PS Don't forget the efficiency and emissions benefits DI seems to reap.
PS Don't forget the efficiency and emissions benefits DI seems to reap.
Rumor had it the efficiency/emissions benefits didn't overcome the per unit incremental cost of production increase DI would have brought to the table. Ford probably will pick up DI in the future, just not here and now. If I were to hazard a guess it would be if Ford's successful in bringing the benefits of Bobcat to the smaller displacement engine, you would see your wish there.
Ford didn't seem to have the luxury of long engineering and testing time with the new batch of 2011 engines so they probably went with the KISS methodology.
9/11/09 | 11:19 AM
#35
GT Member
Joined: January 30, 2004
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
From: Flint, MI
9/11/09 | 11:21 AM
#36
Needs to be more Astony
Joined: October 4, 2004
Posts: 8,609
Likes: 5
From: Volo, IL
If you add DI to a N/A engine you have to bump up compression to see gains. The bump in compression is where you really see the efficiency gains. DI primarily helps to cool the cylinder to allow the high compression without pre detonating.
9/11/09 | 05:30 PM
#38
Mach 1 Member
Joined: May 16, 2008
Posts: 571
Likes: 0
From: Vancouver
I thought I remembered hearing at one point that the reason why Ford has never done a Boss Mustang is because of lisencing issues with the name. Doesn't Larry Shinoda own the name, or am I just making that up?
9/11/09 | 05:34 PM
#39
Cobra R Member
Joined: August 9, 2007
Posts: 1,839
Likes: 0
From: Philadelphia
I believe Shinoda owns the name "Boss Shinoda", not "Boss". But his heirs would argue that point; and if you give it enough time, someone from Shinoda will post their opinion...
Last edited by WaltM; 9/11/09 at 05:36 PM.
9/11/09 | 10:51 PM
#40
Swamp Donkey Aficionado
Joined: November 23, 2006
Posts: 1,863
Likes: 0
If they could do it without DI, and dialing way back on timing, cams, etc. to keep the motor from grenading. I would say Ford just ought to bite the bullet and do DI, its clearly an inevitable technology, so what better place to develop experience with it than on a Boss Stang.
PS Don't forget the efficiency and emissions benefits DI seems to reap.
PS Don't forget the efficiency and emissions benefits DI seems to reap.
Personally, I'd be very happy with a 400 hp Mustang GT, with or without DI.