and yet we still make them our **** in pony car sales

Bring on 2010... I want to see this fight

 

The Mustang just needs to stick to what won the 4th Gen car wars. Make sure the Mustang is cheaper than the competiton. But i gotta say it would be nice if the Mustang was faster than the Camaro. A faster Camaro would be a tough reminder of my highschool days when my buddy's 99 Z28 would destroy my 97' GT everytime we'd run. For me the 03' Cobra changed that but he is lookin into a "SS" Camaro of the next Gen

 

Hello All,
First post here.

I'm hoping to buy a convertible Mustang when I finish my Baccalaureate.
(Medical field, not mechanical engineering or I wouldn't be asking this question)
After reading the post from Igor and all your other posts, I still have a question regarding the next gen Mustangs.

What is so important about HP? I mean, I know +torque=quicker takeoffs, +HP=more power at speed. But for me, as long as I can accelerate quickly up to hwy speeds (0-60 in 7secs or so) and have good passing power then I'll be a happy camper. My wife's Rabbit is almost good enough for me. Is the next Mustang having more HP than a Camaro really so important? Or is performance more important. In other words, lightening the chassis seems more important to me than simply increasing the displacement.

The next gen having the Duratec 3.5 for a base model seems good enough for a lot of folks to me. It would probably aid Ford with the stupid CAFE requirements too. And these days, economical sells.

 

welcome to TMS!

You sure are easy to please with a 7 sec 0-60. a V6 mustang would make you happy.

Lightening the chassis is the best to due becuase it improves every aspect of the car but hp can effect car sales casue the average consumer doesn't know how all around performance is. The msuatng needs to stay close in hp to the camaro but i doubt it has to match or beat it to contiune its sales.

 

The Camaro was not introduced until Sept 1966, 2-1/2 years after the Mustang went on sale.

So the the Mustang had a HUGE HP margine over the Camaro for it's first 2-1/2 years.

 

Welcome! Enjoy the show, don't be afraid to join in, post pics if/when you buy a 'Stang

Lightening a chassis is very nice (I have a Miata, its soooo much fun), but difficult to do. The Mustang needs to have a usable backseat, comfortable interior with good ammeneties, a whole bunch of electronics, safety equipment, and a decent-sized trunk. Tha's alot, and it weighs alot. You could use lighter-weight materials, but lighter materials cost more and part of the Mustang's whole is its affordability. So the easier and more cost-effective solution is Horsepower. With CAFE and the gradually-reducing cost of various materials, I believe/hope the weight will eventually trend downward. But it will not be very soon.

As the Horsepower relates to the Camaro: the Camaro is the enemy, the competition. For new Pony Car buyers, they're seduced by power. For old-time Brand loyalists, they want to be able to keep up with beat the competition.

I heartily endorse V6 'Stangs. Its cost-effective and efficient, and its no less a Mustang than a GT (though it is slower ). And with the Pony package, you can get a very well kitted V6 too.

When are you completing your courses? There may be a Twin-Turbo V6 (V8 power at V6 efficiency) in the not-too-distant future.

 

Lol, good point, but when it was introduced, the camaro was billed and has been billed as the "serious" performance pony car.

However, in the long run, that led to a great many compromises (in order to get that performance at an affordable price) and ultimately spelled the demise of the car.

It is what it I suppose, I'd like a Mustang that would be able to wipe the smirk off of an Fbody guys face if for no other reason than they have become exceedingly arrogant (then again that may have something to do with the way Camaro has been marketed and the types it attracts) and hold anything in contempt if it doesn't beat the pants squarely off of the Camaro or Corvette at the same price point or better.

--->edit<---
Then again , the GM faithful better pray to the automtive gods that the new Camaro is successful, if it fails again, there will not be another Camaro for a long time or ever again. From what I understand, the moon and stars were aligned just right to make the F5 happen so there is alot riding on the new Camaro when it comes out.

 

I have discussed some of this in another post and I think the biggest problem for the Camaro and Challenger is that they are arriving to the party too late. I think this whole new muscle car craze is gonna be short lived. As interesting as it looks there are so many things to consider. These new age muscle cars are far more expensive than the originals (not too many young late teens to early 30s) can afford these cars with today's economic woes....I was watching CNN this morning and rumor has it that gas could hit $4.00 by this summer. Another cause for concern for these competitors is that both chassis are much more expensive to produce. During my breif tenor at a Dodge dealership i was informed that the Challenger was to be only in V8 trim and coupe only (this will be a short lived vehical) GM estimates that a base V6 coupe will run the consumer about $22,000.... Imagine what the Z28 and SS models will cost. The good news in the Ford camp according to several news articals i have read is that the Mustang is one of the cheapest cars in Ford's lineup to produce... Though with future engine upgrades and IRS i'm sure their prices will increase a great deal also.

 

You make a good point. Power does not always sell good and Mustang is a perfect example. They were underdogs for many years but ultimately the Camaro and Firebirds got killed off by GM. The GTO had a fabulous drive train imo and their dead only after a few short years. Looking like a Cavalier didnt help them any. Who ever at GM approved that body style should be shot.

Here is my story. I was about to buy a Z28 back in 02 but was really a Ford guy at heart. The Z would stomp a GT stock to stock and I was willing to overlook its short comings simply due to getting the ls1 engine. I simply could not overlook a major difference in power but thats me. Then the Mach 1 and new Cobras came along and I knew the Mach would hold its own. It had a little less power but it was close. Plus, the overall qualitys of the car made it more user friendly for me. So I bought the Mach 1 when the rebates hit and have no regrets.

With fuel prices hitting all time highs Im not sure what is going to happen with the future. Im the first guy to scream to Ford for more power but there is nothing wrong with a guy getting a v6 model. I dont think the v6 is all that much better on gas but it sure saves on insurance and the purchase price and I fully understand that. Truth be told I would say guys like me are probably in the minority of Mustang buyers.

 

I'm halfway done, so maybe 2 - 2.5 yrs I'll be set. By then the next gen Mustang will have been on the floor and hopefully debugged.

I like the idea of a reliable V-6 mated to a 6-speed AT (I'm a family guy now & wifey don't like manuals...oh well) and that engine would be as efficient as possible, but powerful when needed. So a "Sport mode" on the transmission that delays upshifts and agressive downshifting would fit quite well on the 'tamer' Mustang. Also, I'm not sure if it is possible or even desireable, but fuel saving cylinder de-activation could be another tool in Mustang's bag to fight CAFE.

As for a TwinForce V-6..... um, I don't get it. It seems the cost of premium fuel pretty takes away some of the cost savings from efficiency. Plus turbos are more prone to failure (or at least they used to be?).

I'd be happy with a standard D35 V-6, unless the efficiency is super incredible!

 

Y'know, speaking of debugged, the Mustang had one of the most trouble free new car launches, its had a few TSBs but no major recalls and has proven to be pretty reliable (while been counters get most of the blame for the SRA, I'm sure the reliability of a live axle was considered as well)

 

I agree, the Camaro & Challenger appear to be targed at empty nest Baby Boomers with lots of disposable income. They will be too expensive for most of the under 30 crowd and will not last more than a few model years.

 

IRS is a mature technology. Ford has produced 10s milions of vehicles with IRS. IRS would not impact Mustang reliabilty and launch problems.

 

Sure, but cheaply producing a relatively lightweight IRS that can handle copious amounts of power (say 600hp with a warranty) isn't all that feasible, and would probably spit its guts all over the track when somebody bolted a set of slicks to it.

Maybe weight was a factor too? That might sound weird, but thats why the F-body cars came with the notoriously weak axle they are known for.

 

I dunno about that, I'm pretty sure the F-Bodies had solid rears too.

 

Compared to the 8.8 the f-body axles were unreliable, the Ford equivalent would have been to leave the 7.5 in the Mustang. Imagine using the V6 axle on the current car with the 4.6 3v or backing the 5.4 S/C. Thats what the f-body guys were up against.

GM had a weight they had to achieve to keep the car in a certain classification, if they had gone to a heavier duty axle it would have slipped over (and there were probably financial reasons for not making a light weight heavy duty axle - which could have been as simple as using upgraded materials in the selected design).

 

Oh ok, sorry I misunderstood I thought you were saying they had IRS or something...

 

V10,
I don't mean to pick on you but you've written some erroneous comments on this page.
First, an IRS will add weight to an already overly heavy car. And, like Bob mentioned it is one of the first mods Terminator guys make to their cars because they can't handle any amount of serious HP. It is a good idea but not feasable to put one into a modern mustang and keep it relatively inexpensive.
Second, the Camaro has pounded the Mustang in HP performance since its inception. Anyone that bleeds Ford blue has to acknowlege that Chevy drivetrains have always dominated Fords as far as normal production street cars go( the rlatively recent terminator Cobras being the exception to the rule). Yes, there are advantages to the Mustang, but it is rarely HP.
Ford needs to come through with this Hurricane/Boss motor or we are going to be right back where we were in the 80's and 90's getting laughed at by bowties. I don't think the argument "the Mustang has been around for 40+ consecutive years" will hold much water against an LS3.

 

I'm kinda on the fence with the IRS opinion. The 03-04 Cobra IRS is fine until you start hitting 600HP or so ....... not many will mod their cars that far. Plus the 99-04 IRS on the Cobras is a poor and compromised design. The IRS was built around the flatform that was never meant to have it. I agree that is does at a great deal or weight and cost, but I feel that IRS is stronger than people give credit for. the 505HP Z06 and the new 600HP Viper both have IRS. but I agree that Ford needs to wake up with their engine development. The lack of an SVT Fusion has cost Ford a car sale (i'm deciding to look at other brands that offer a sport sedan) The next time I look to buy an SVT Cobra/Shelby it better be compairible in power and cost to the rivals at GM, Chysler or i'm gonna once again took at the competiton.

 

The incremental weight due to IRS is minimal, don't belive all the BS Ford put out when the S197 was introduced to justify the SRA.

As far as IRS being weak, look no farther than the Corvette. Are you saying that Ford is incapable of designing a proper IRS?

As far as the Camaro vs. Mustang HP race. Did you actually read my post? I NEVER said the Mustang had more HP than the Camaro. I was making a joke about the Camero being a me too product that came out 2-1/2 years after the Mustang defined the market segment.

When you're chasing the market leader you have to offer more of something in order to take away sales from the market leader.