jlmounce

None of that changes crap if the car has a sloppy chassis and a horribly designed suspension.

The amount of drive wheels has little impact on a car's handling abilities. It may change some variables such as corner entry and exit, especially on surfaces other than tarmac.

I've owned a 335xi, Good friends of mine have owned and raced STi's and other awd cars. Stop assuming just because you see a car with AWD that it's automatically going to handle well. That's not the case. There's tons of awd cars out there that don't handle for crap. Just like there's tons of rear drive cars out there that also handle like crap.

Handling is a byproduct of chassis dynamics and suspension engineering, not drive wheels.

As mentioned above, also note that for pavement track conditions, all of those cars bias their power to the rear.

Older AWD cars relied on viscous coupling center differentials with limited slip differentials normally in the rear, possibly an open carrier in the front. This was well before the advent of stability management systems.

Once computer controlled braking became a reality, many of these systems went to conical or clutch type center differentials with open carrier differentials front and rear. Since an open carrier sends power to the wheels with the least resistance, you can then use opposite wheel breaking to send power to the wheels with the most grip.

It's a computer controlled function that creates a mechanical response. Noted exceptions are of course cars like the STi which incorporates limited slip differentials, but still utilizes braking control to limit wheel speed on opposite corners. This does in fact help the car rotate. BUT, there's only so much the computer can do to slow wheel speed in slip conditions. It's also a reactive system since it must first detect a pattern of slip. At that point, you're already pushing and bleeding momentum. It limits the amount of trail braking you can do, which tightens you up at the corners apex, only to find that when you plant your foot in the accelerator, you're still pushing until you get the car pointed straight.

You end up with a car that certainly turns better than an older styled awd system, but it will still not rotate on axis as well as a balanced rwd platform.

Talk to anyone that actually tracks cars. Whether for a living, or for fun. Or better yet, go do it yourself. You find out real quickly what drive platforms work with you, or fight against you.

I'm not saying all cars should be RWD, nor am I saying that AWD has no advantages. But for the purpose of this thread, which asks the question, should the Mustang be AWD. It makes no sense.

RandyW

That's what I think, too. AWD would make the Mustang more expensive than most people want to see it. But on a high-performance Lincoln coupe based on the next-gen Mustang chassis, it would be a real nice feature and the prospective buyers aren't going to balk at the price as much.

Or here's one other idea. Others have mentioned wanting to see a high-performance Focus with AWD. I'd love to see Ford bring back the Probe. Use the Focus chassis and mechanicals and give it a sleek three-door body. Give the GT version AWD and a EcoBoost 4. The money invested into developing the parts for one car could be used for both.

tetstang

Agreed. Not on a Mustang. Just wouldn't be "right" or fair to the legend of the car. And, I would go further and say not to put it on another model that is transparently a Mustang. I would buy a Volvo S60R or, Beemer X or some other car if I wanted that.

Nope. Pony car here. Leave it be.

908ssp

The reason you don't see AWD on race cars it is banned. Why was it banned because it was faster and more expensive and an unfair advantage to the cars that have it. Do we need it on a Mustang in a land of speed limits and fuel economy? No doesn't mean it isn't better because it is.

Gabe

Yeah, the Audi quattro system was banned in road-course racing a few years ago as "unfair advantage" ... lol

jlmounce

Both true statements. But, you have to look at the context. the Audi quattro's were banned from racing series like the BTCC where it's competition is overwhelmingly front drive platforms. With a few exceptions.

Of course it has an unfair advantage in those situations.

908ssp

It's AWD was banned in American Trans-Am and IMSA GT racing. Four wheel drive was banned in F1. AWD is faster period if it is designed for that purpose.

bob

To which I say good, I find it somewhat depressing that people want every performance car to devolve into a GT-R clone.

At the very least it proves people like Ron Zarrella right -->the guy who ran GM in the 90's and operated under the philosophy that we all just want different ceral boxes, nobody cares if the stuff filling the boxes is the same corn based sugar coated crap.

At best an AWD Mustang becomes some sterile numbers machine lacking any sort of distinct personality as clever electronic tuning eliminates the fun factor in the car and the driver is reduced to a passenger merely telling the robot on 4 wheels where to go instead of actively controlling the car with timely inputs to the throttle, steering and brakes.

Sure it would be nice to just crush those annoying gnats in thier R32s, EVO X's and Sube Rex's but the only time they mess with me is in the rain, otherwise the just go thier way treating me like some sort of rottweiler off the chain in the front yard, which is to say they just look the other way and pretend I dont exist.

Anyways, I'm not adverse to torque vectoring all-wheel drive systems coupled to the engine with a dual clutch automated manual controlled by electronic power assist and aided by a kinetic H2/CES semi-active suspension system with SLA/IRS. I just think it belongs on something else in Ford's stable (like a kick-*** 50k Focus, even though nobody would buy it in the US)

tetstang

I just think a Mustang is, well... a Mustang. A car in a certain class, that certain people want, like myself. We have an AWD wagon (good for what it does best), a 3/4 ton diesel 4x4 truck (good for what it does best), a beater car, and yes, I used to ride motorcycles.

If you think about it, there really aren't too many cars in the class, and thank G** the muscle car era/demand came back, at least for awhile. A new Challeger pulled up beside me today - and, man, I love to hear that exhaust and look at the retro lines and the power hump in the hood.

I say to Ford, don't blurr the lines with the Mustang. Make it the best you can in the class. You'll sell millions of them, just like you have since '64.

Blackbird.

nevermind