While the 2010 hasn't even hit the road yet, Motor Trend is putting some ink (or bytes) down on some news for the 2014 platform.

It basically states that Ford is already working on the next-gen Mustang (derppp of course)
to debut around the 50th Anniversary in 2014.

The quote is about 'surely it'll not have a solid rear axle'
A Ford engineer basically put it as "we see no need to get rid of it. its robust, we understand it and we can keep it competitive from a ride and handling point of view"

Motor trend then states that if this is the case, the GRWD program is probably toast.

With this in mind, I'm wondering... yes they can do a great job (and have so far) with the SRA, are they doing it to separate themselves from the rest? And I don't mean by 'offering some horse buggy ancient piece of crap'...as some people will say. We get it, you don't like it.

We all know that it can be made to handle, and they've done a great job (we've seen it at the track with whats possible) and we know that MOST everyday joes won't and don't know the difference (debate this all you want... they really don't)

The question is, does it really matter if they can make it outperform the competitions IRS equiped vehicles and what does that mean in the long term?

Me personally... I'm not bugged by it.
For those wanting it as an option, well ... that'd cost more to develope the 2 seperate rear ends and test them raising the price considerably, so we're stuck with the one they choose.

 

They should just give it IRS. People will never stop *****ing about it having a solid axle.

 

One week into 2009 and already we're speculating about the 2014? Awesome.

This information can't not be reliable! Thanks, Motor Trend!

 

It doesn't matter and it does not mean a thing. Motor Trend can speculate until the next century and there will not be enough time for them to figure out why the Mustang sells and out sells the competition regardless of what Ford decides to build, whether it includes IRS or not or some other feature.

The SVT guys who had '03 - '04 Cobras were real touchy about the lack of IRS on the proposed ' 07 GT500 mainly because it was perceived as a down grade, sort of a slap in the face, a pride thing, nothing more. In actuality it doesn't make that much of a difference except for a very, very small percentage therefore it has become a mute point specially for those who have experienced both models.

 

Q: How do you sell more 2010 to 2013 cars?
A: Promise that the 2014 will be more of the same.

Got an '06, not in love with the 2010, waiting for the 2014.

Q: What will it take for me to "trade up"?
A: 302 cu in, 400 HP NA, IRS.

If you build it, they will ***.

 

Just as I suspected all along, as the next platform change wouldn't take place until the 50th anniversary edition arrives in 2014

 

Just as I thought Ford was showing signs of future improvement, you had to post this.

Dear Mr. Mulally,
Please find the engineer who said this (if it's true):
"we see no need to get rid of it. its robust, we understand it and we can keep it competitive from a ride and handling point of view"

And FIRE THEM! Also, find the engineers involved in direct injection launch associated with your new 5.0L and fire them.

Best of luck!

Your friend living in 2009 (not 1989),

Max2000jp

 

I'm confused, are you against DI? I thought it was only beneficial. Although admittedly I don't know much about it. But from my understanding it was much more pros than cons.

 

What he means, is that DI won't be available at 2011MY 5.0 launch.

 

For the Record, as I've stated before, I've owned both SRA and IRS equipped cars, and it really doesn't make that big a difference to me. I'd actually prefer an SRA, Keep It Old School! An SRA is more durable and has less Parts and Bushings to worry about wearing out, and replacing.

 

The way Ford dicks around with everything they are really leaving the door open for the Camaro. It could be dangerous as it looks like pricing will not be Fords advantage anymore. This is going to be a tough year for the Mustang besides the interior the Camaro has everything the Mustang should have now.

 

Except a future.

 

If Ford actually could make a live axle work as well as an IRS in ALL regards, then of course, yes, go for it. However, there's the nettlesome aspect of physics that stands in the way, mostly in the form a unsprung weight, the main and major bugaboo for live axles. That tends then to limit them to being able to handle pretty well -- at least on very smooth roads -- or ride very well -- on not-TOO-rough roads.

The main benefit of IRS is the ability to chew gum and walk at the same time. Now whether one considers this important at all really depends on how one uses a Stang. If just for cruising and the occasional smooth road drag-race style performance -- where merely mid-level handling is more than enough -- then a cheap, simple live axle is just fine and an IRS but a needless expense and complication. If a far more world-class, broad-spectrum ride and handling capability, then one is likely to quickly find the live axle's Achille's heels.

I do think there is some level of contrariness to the live axle debate, a kind of parochialism risen to a point of pride regardless of any technical or engineering merits. If that limits itself to having a live axle, then perhaps not so bad lest the Stang end up with leaf springs, drum brakes and bias ply tires, all of which, too, detract little from drag-racing performance and are part of the Mustang "heritage" if one peers back far enough.

More telling, however, might be the more direct competition between the IRS Camaro and Challenger vs the SRA Stang when the inevitable comparison tests happen. And how well each sells and is perceived as a result. That may well determine in the end whether the NextStang retains the buggy axle or goes all 21st century on us.

 

I found the first spy pic of the 2014 Mustang GT already. So much for getting rid of the Black Plastic.

 

Check that pic out! Slicks on all four corners!

Now for the rest of the car... back end looks like from Holden but ....

 

Back to SN95.

 

probably, especially since the pic is flipped

 

I would be perfectly happy with a watts link on the sra. They did it on the crown vics, why not the mustang? More than enough handling potential for me and probably the majority of buyers. I have irs on my audi and it still doesn't feel as buttoned down as the 05. (granted, with coilovers, it might be a different story) Stay true to the concept...that's what I say. Affordable modifiable everyday livable performance with an evolved "mustang" look. Kind of what they're doin right now.

 

It was a quick assessment. And after much research Tampabear67 is having some fun at my expense

Sorry

 

Motor Trend speculates too much. I'd say anything that they speculate on is as valid as the stuff we speculate in this forum. Though Ford is likely readily working on the next Mustang I still feel they will have to play some wait and see.

Will the Camaro SS perform close to or better than the Shelby? I feel if the SS handles better and offers similar performance than Ford must admit defeat and give up on the SRA. Chevy and Dodge (also Ford with the 99-04 Cobra) have proved that they can offer an IRS for a similar price so once again I disagree with cost carrying to the consumer as being a main culprit.

Some here have owned both 03-04 Cobras and GT500s and will assure you that the handling is equal or better and I would agree. My main argument is that the IRS on the Cobra was compromised to fit on a very dated platform. I feel that a modern day IRS built from the ground up along with the next Mustang will be worlds ahead of the current 05-10+ cars. If one properly modifies their IRS setup on a Cobra it will walk away from the GT500 on a road course I have seen it with my own eyes.

I really hope that Ford isn't canceling the GRWD platform. It seems like the upcoming car was a cost cutters dream and now we may see this for the next gen too? It looks like the foxbody years all over again. Do you think some form of the s197 will last 25 years too?