MBK

cobalt turbo is torsion beam

GTJOHN

I think its safe to say that the next generation Mustang will have IRS. We already know DI is on the way, so the car should be fabulous.

FordBlueHeart

Oooooh! Imagine the possibilities?

FordBlueHeart

Man you sure dont hear everyone screaming about that being non IRS!

mot250

I go back to my post on price. Don't look at the Challenger as an example for comparison to the Mustang GT in price with a SRA. The base stripped V-8 Challenger stickers for nearly $32K or higher. Sure, that gets you an IRS but comes with the minuses of automatic, skinny 18 X 7.5 inch wheels, no limited slip rear available, intrusive traction control that you can not turn off fully and, what is it, over 4100 pounds to push around? To get a limited slip and the ability to turn off the traction control fully, you need the manual trans option (+$1000) AND the 20 X 8 inch wheel package ($1400?). Want any other normal creature comforts (nav, stereo upgrade, power seats, etc) and your looking at nearly $39,000 sticker price for your Challenger with IRS. I know I'm dating myself but my 06 Mustang was under $30 with all available options except upgraded stereo and convertible top. Sure, Ford now offers nav and other options that will put the loaded GT price well over $30,000 but sheeesh. Without including dealer markups, can a loaded Mustang GT sticker anywhere near $39,000 (even in a Bullitt or Shelby GT)?

Force Ford to include IRS and push up the price of the Mustang in today's current market and we could be looking at the end of the Mustang if sales numbers drop. The IRS may appeal to those Euro lovers brainwashed by the media that IRS is the end all for performance but if the price forces the "secretary" buying pool to switch to a "Nisyota" then what?

MBK

my 07 was under 30 with premium package, heated seats, alarm, sirius, 3.55, power passenger/driver, side air bags. if it had 18s it still would have been under 30. thats sticker, not what i paid.

FordBlueHeart

2008 Premium GT Rear spoiler delete, Active Anti-Theft, Wheel Locking Kit, Sirius, HID headlamps, Shaker 1000, Ambient lighting. MSRP 30690 A Plan Price 27437.98 Current incentives in Michigan $5000!

Evil_Capri

I didn't know the Mustang was in the same class as the Cobalt SS. And this is a Mustang site . . . who are you expecting to scream about the Cobalt's rear suspension.

mot250

Ok, still just talking price...what is the actual "about" starting price for a 2009 Mustang with a V-8 so we can compare it to the quoted base price of a V-8 Camaro (how many will actually sell for "about" $31,000)? How about the price of a Camaro as most performance enthusiasts would have it, that is with manual trans, limited slip rear, decent rear gears, normal creature comforts, etc? I don't see the Camaro price being in the ball park of a Mustang when those things are considered. Just like with the Challenger as I described previously.

Is a cheap, poorly designed IRS system better than the Mustang's current SRA (Ford doesn't have the cash flow to spend a whole lotta dough on it right now)? If a decently designed SRA can perform nearly as well as a car with IRS, what is the point of making the change for FORD if the car with the SRA still sells? Ford is not in the habbit of making "Enthusiast" cars within a decent price range. Model for the masses goes back to the Model-T.

FordBlueHeart

All the chevy fanboys disguised as stang owners.

MBK

you'd think the cobalt was in a higher class with better times than a 135i

Vermillion06

Ford is not BMW. People seem to forget PRICE. BMWs cost more than Fords. You pay more for the "handling+hp". Mustangs are built to be a value priced sporty car for the masses. BMWs aren't.

Evil_Capri

Yup, and many others . . . . nicely balanced little fast car for sure!

Zoomie

I am quite well aware of that. I cited the BMW as a case where working on handling first and then adding power paid huge dividends. It is well known that this is not the "Murican" way - too much hp is never enough, and screw braking and turning.

Yes, yes, yes, Ford is NOT BMW. The Mustang is not a Cobalt SS (thank God!). Ford relies on selling "secretary" flavor Mustangs in order to keep the model alive for us enthusiasts, for which I am eternally grateful.

Nevertheless, there is a significant number of true Mustang enthusiasts that understand the benefits, even to those other Mustang owners and enthusiasts who do not know or understand the differences, to having a well-sorted IRS in a performance vehicle. Maybe in the base V6 an SRA would be fine (for the "secretaries"); and a stout SRA available in a V8 performance package for the straight-line folks; with the IRS in the GT & mid-level SE's? The cost-conscious could buy at the lower end and be satisfied; the drag racers who generally spend money for add-ons anyway can have the SRA they want; and those of us who enjoy driving less-than-straight roads (not Kamikaze; at safe speeds), or who commonly drive on crappy pavement (I do both) can have the handling/ride benefits of IRS

But cost shouldn't be that big an issue. IIRC, the original IRS designed for the '05 was supposed to up the production cost less than $200 per vehicle. If that is true, then the cost/benefit ratio there should be more than acceptable, especially compared to some of the other options Ford has offered and is about to offer.

If on the other hand IRS raises the cost by an order of magnitude over that, say roughly $2000, then I quite understand why Ford is NOT offering it, at least not yet. And even if they did offer it on an SE, it would likely be out of my price range.

So I'll continue to drive a SRA Mustang because I am a Mustang enthusiast. I don't want a Camaro, Challenger, G35, 335i, M3, Cobalt SS or whatever else comes down the pike. I just want the best Mustang I can get my hands on. For me, that would include IRS.

I recognize that IRS is not for everyone, though, and for those that are happy with the SRA, good on ya. I'm happy that folks are happy with their Mustangs in any flavor, and happy that Ford has made it such a flexible vehicle that it offers so much appeal to such a broad spectrum of folks.

But for me, and at least a few others, IRS (at a reasonable price) would be a significant improvement. And I will continue to lobby Ford that one day it may come to be...

Vermillion06

Even way back in the stone age 60's, nearly every "Murican" muscle car had an optional heavy duty suspension package or handling package with stiffer springs, better brakes (bigger finned drums with metallic lining brake shoes, heck yeah!) , bigger sway bars, etc. They offered it, but very few customers cared enough to order it.

$200 X 120K vehicles per year = $24,000,000 per year. I'd say that is a pretty large production cost. In light of that, I can understand why they chose not to offer the IRS.

Yes, an independent rear suspension would be nice to have, and if it was offered as an option I'd likely buy it. All the elightened, sophisticated "true enthusiast" bench racers make it seem like the lack of it in a Mustang is this HUGE crippling flaw, when it's not.

I've got a 240z with IRS, and quite frankly, my S197 rides & handles just as well, maybe even better. Not bad for a car that weighs a thousand pounds more and has twice the passenger capacity.

97GT03SVT

OK first off everyone raving about how cheap they got their loaded GTs is because they are selling below MSRP. The car is not as popular anymore not because it is the better priced car.

If you guys wanna use that strategy the 05-06' GTO at rebate was selling for less than a comparably priced Mustang GT. The GTO had 100 more HP, 6 speed, IRS and was a better flat out performance car stock for stock.

Yes, the car still sells but bonehead moves like letting yourself get spanked by the competition may remove them from that spot.

The base V8 Camaro comes with all the basic creature comforts, you don't need 20s, leather and a 1000 watt sound system.... I personally don't care what Ford's financial status is. Last I checked GM is in the same boat yet they are continuing to deliver one great Performance ride after another (Z06, ZR1, G8, CTS-V, Cobalt SS etc....)

How do you know that GM's IRS system is cheap and poorly designed? Last I checked GM has been making 500-600HP Corvettes with them.... Wait a minute isn't the four door full size sedan CTS-V a better overall performer than the GT500? Just wait until the first comparison tests of the SS Camaro vs 10' GT. It is going to mop the floor with the GT. If we are going to have the Bullitt suspension as rumored, I'll bet on it.

And again stop using cost as an excuse. Ford was the first of the big three to offer an IRS on it's Cobra model from 99-04. Keep this in mind the difference in price between the last SRA Cobra of 1998 compared to the all new 99' Cobra was just $1760. Remember that the 99' Cobra was a brand new restyle that offered a host of improvements including more power, revised suspension and just more overall content.

I'm not sticking up for GM by any means, but I sure will defend my valid arguments.

max2000jp

I don't understand why people are against progress in terms of Mustang technology. A SRA is a dated technology and inferior to an IRS rear. Ford needs to embrace change and take some risks instead of being bull-headed and slow to react. Ford's current business model isn't working.

I think it would be great if Ford showcased some modern technology in the Mustang. The new 5.0 is a start, but how about direct injection, a Dual Clutch Transmission, and a modern suspension? Ford needs to start planning for the future!

MBK

the 5.0 is key

max2000jp

I'd take the 3.5 Ecoboost too and some weight savings.

MBK

def... we'll get there