you could stamp complete car outta aluminum and save 500lbs. but it might raise msrp by 10k.

 

I think the GT could use a diet but the next Shelby/Cobra/SVT needs to be much lighter. It's a shame that the Cobra was once a corvette beater and now is not even in the same league as it. I say Ford should pull out all the stops for the next SVT, People are paying up to $70,000 for it they should make it perform like it. Ford knows that they have a market for a $70,000 mustang. For the first time in a while i think the base vette is actually a better bargain than the SVT stang. Whats the shelby's weight? over 4000lbs?

 

Depends on what is on the car. I just looked at a 5-speed 2008 CS/GT coupe with 18" Bullitt wheels and the curb weight was 3483lb. This lets us reasonably state that a Mustang GT coupe currently starts at about 3450lb. A reduction of roughly 100lb in curb weight would obviously then give give us a 3350lb car in base trim, and while too few here seem to grasp this 3350lb for a car in this class is impressively light and would be an impressive achievement, especially when you factor in the future addition of a heavier IRS setup.

Any number that starts lower than 33xx probably isn't plausible for a Mustang GT without a reduction in size large enough to compromise the car itself or a serious increase in price.

You would likely gain more from a reduction in section height rather than overall width. And a reduction in section height would likely improve the visual balance of the car as well.

VW takes the Golf's basic chassis and stamps much of the front structure out of aluminum to render the more upmarket Audi TT. And of course Chevrolet uses a somewhat similar approach for the Z06. Ford could potentially develop a special 'Boss/Shelby/SVT' chassis from the next standard Mustang chassis which employs the same method if they broadened the availability of high performance Mustang variants. Vehicles like the GT500 or a potential Boss 302 could use this aluminum intensive version of the Mustang chassis to minimize mass. And of course the same would be made even more feasible through the introduction of a more upmarket Thunderbird roadster or Lincoln coupe intended to share this more aluminum intensive chassis. Just a thought.

 

Ehhh... a Mustang in any form hasn't been a corvette beater (except maybe straight line) since probably the C4, the C5 certainly elevated the envelop beyond what Mustang could compete with, and C6 put it into overdrive. Them's the facts.

What Ford needs to do if there are a gaggle of Ford fans with 70k+ burning a hole in thier pocket is to offer a proper sports car and leave the Mustang alone. Its mission never has been to be a vette fighter. Mustangs are the everyman's sporty car (and there in lies the difference and the reason why its been successful) .

 

The Vdub must use a seperate subframe if its a steel/aluminum chassis? As far as I know, Honda with the NSX was the only company that dabbled with welding the dissimilar metals together. Mustangs for whatever reason have always been unibody cars unlike the vette or even early F bodies. The latter easily using an aluminum structure like you mentioned due to its full frame nature or inclusion of sub-frames.

Thats not to say Mustang couldn't make more extensive use of light weight metals, indeed, apart from the unibody structure they could do alot. Heck going to 2-piece rotors would save around 14 pounds (although the price would probably add a few bucks, in the aftermarket, going to aluminum/cast iron rotors costs in the neighborhood of 1400.00 bucks for the discs alone), dunno what the OE savings would be, but I guess it'd still cost a coupla hundered.

 

I definitely agree with your statement concernng the reduction in section height improving the visual balance of the car.

Being as the current height from a visual standpoint. Gives the car, the apperance of having too high of a waistline lol.

 

VW is indeed putting aluminum and steel into one unibody. It appanrelty involves a lot of punch rivets and glue...below are a couple of links I found which do a pretty good job of describing the process.

Realistically Ford would likely be much better served to dedicate resources to lightening component parts like suspension bits through the increased usage of aluminum rather than try and cheat the demons of disimilar metals as Audi is doing. But it does make for an interesting conversation on lightweight cars.

http://www.audi.com/etc/medialib/cms....0305.File.pdf

http://www.carbodydesign.com/archive...white-2-lg.jpg

 

I thought that would have been the case, I beleive BMW uses similar technology with thier aluminum front structures. Great on weight savings, bad if you get in a collision. When first introduced, if you wrecked your car, the cost of repair exceeded the value of the car and alot of insurance companies would junk the vehicle. I don't know if the repair tech has advanced enough or become common enough to the point that is no longer the case and thats something else to conisder when your talking total costs for the car over its life. If Ford where to magically implement light weight technologies at a reasonalbe cost, yet required pretty advanced repair technology then the cost of ownership would go up (interestingly, while running my mouth on a brand-X board, on the insurance costs of a high horsepower car - in this case GT vs GT 500 the cost of 300 vs 500 hp worked out to be about 82 dollars extra a month, but the cost of collision was an added 102 dollars I would guess for the different sheetmetal and added equipment like the intercooler with associated plumbing).

However I'm in agreement on weight savings elsewhere and on non-structural body panels.

 

IIRC, Ferrari used a material called "Feran" to join aluminum and steel in its 456 GT. Maybe they still use it for its current model lineup?

 

I think a cheap alternative would be fiberglass the covette has used it for 50+ years and maybe hard plastics like in the viper. If i'm not mistaking i think the 93-02 F-Bodies had plastic fenders perhaps the Mustang can save weight that way too

 

you are mistaken, my friend crashed his 98 Z28 and the fenders were metal.

 

I don't think that an all aluminum stang is happening anytime soon, much to everyone's dismay. I do think a few aluminum body panels would be helpful.

Making the roof, hood and trunk out of Al shouldn't be toooo expensive, and it would be a nice performance option to have. I'm not quite surewhat the hood, roof and trunk weigh now, but switching to aluminum would yeild about a 50% savings in weight for those panels, I can't imagine that being less than 150ish lbs (if someone can correct me, please do)

Also, its probably far too crude but another interesting idea i thought of was something i did back in hihg school for our robotics team. in order to meet the weight reuirements, we cheeseholed unimportant areas. I don't know where on a car would be best to do that, but its just another teenage musing

 

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth-...evrolet_Camaro "The new design incorporated lightweight plastic body panels over a steel spaceframe and a much improved suspension design." I believe the rear quarters and the door panels were plastic, while the front fenders were metal.

 

-Actually, the rear quarter panels are metal. Someone I know dented the rear panel near the door on his Camaro and he ended up pounding it out and doing the "swiss cheese"/"bullet hole" dent repair method.

-Using aluminum for body panels would be nice, S197s use Al hoods already. Don't know if Ford would be willing or able to take on increased costs of using more aluminum in its vehicles and if most auto body shops are able to handle Al body panel repairs.

 

That is what I originally thought.

The roof, doors, hatchback panel and rear deck spoiler were made of sheet molded compound (SMC), made of chopped glass in a polyester resin. The front fenders and front fascia were reaction injection molded (RIM).

Point being, the Camaro did make use of other materials and processes.

 

hmm i guess i was wrong.

 

From what I understand the composite construction of the F4's weren't all they were cracked up to be, the F5 will be more conventional in build.

As far as making a mustang like the vette or viper, that would require going to a full frame. Other than the soon to be dead panther cars and trucks, somebody tell me any mass produced 4 passenger car designed in the 21st century that uses a full frame and not uni-body construction.

 

Well if shedding weight isnt possible the next base V8 should have at least 400hp. Looking at what the competiton is planning perhaps a more powerful engine is cheaper than making the car lighter. The Camaro is gonna have at least 400hp Ford should match it or we are gonna have to relive getting spanked by Camaros like we did during most of the 4th gen wars........

 

GM will always make sure that the Camaro out performs the Mustang, its part of thier marketing for the car and has been since day one. If Mustang comes out with 400hp, GM will have 450hp, if Mustang comes out with a base 450hp car, GM will do a 500hp base Camaro.

 

LOL, Ford should do that - make it like a Cold War era arms race, since GM cannot let the Camaro out-power the Corvette. That would force GM to spend money and engineering resources on two platforms or else they will lose their bragging rights.