¡ƃuıʇɐʌɐɹƃƃɐ ʎllɐəɹ s,ʇı ¿ɐʎ llıʍ 'ʇno ʇɐɥʇ ʇnɔ ʍou

 

Ooopss! I forgot to insert the link
HERE it is now, my bad

 

 

 

 

wow....cool typing directions..

 

Can anyone explain how these out dated SN197 solid rear axle KONI Challenge Series Mustangs manage to spank the vastly superior IRS BMW's Porsche 's and Subaru's?

Unless you are driving really fast in the corners on really crappy roads is there even a advantage anywhere? I'm really trying to understand what exactly about the IRS makes it such a "must have" feature?


KONI Challenge Series
Mosport International Raceway Results
Mosport International Raceway
Bowmanville, Ontario


POS NO. CLASS CLASS POS. DRIVER TEAM/CAR
1 55 GS 1 Foster / Maxwell Hyper Sport / Ford Mustang GT
2 60 GS 2 Canney / Plumb Rehagen Racing / Ford Mustang GT
3 18 GS 3 Johnson / Milner Motorsport Technology Group / BMW Z4 M
4 5 GS 4 Dumoulin / Nastasi Blackforest Motorsports / BMW M3 Coupe
5 09 GS 5 Segal / Thornton Automatic Racing / BMW M3 Coupe
6 39 GS 6 Ende / Pumpelly TRG / Porsche 997
7 37 GS 7 Gue / Seafuse JBS Motorsports / Ford Mustang GT
8 97 GS 8 Ortiz / Salama Turner Motorsport / BMW M3 Coupe
9 19 GS 9 Aschenbach / Davis Motorsport Technology Group / Porsche 997
10 52 GS 10 Mason / Pecorari Rehagen Racing / Ford Mustang GT

 

Maybe because Ford knows something that every other automaker in the world doesn't?

 

I will tell you why...they are using the 5.0L cammer motor that is making close to 450hp in race trim while cars like the M3 are bone stock down to the intake on the S54 3.2L motor. Last time I checked the Mustang didn't offer the 5.0L cammer motor..yet Also the suspension on the Mustang Koni cars is far from OEM while cars like the M3 and 997's are allowed shocks and springs and that's it.

That doesn't take away from the fact that the 997's and M3's when new are quite abit more expensive than the Mustang. If you ever watched one of these Koni races it's in the corners under braking and turning that the other cars can catch up, but when the straight aways come..look out. That 5.0L cammer motor just pulls and pulls.

Dave

 

Good post.

Grand Am Cup is like NASCAR, in fact it's owned by the France family. The rules are there to equalize the competition. Look at the rules for campaigning cars. The Mustang is allowed a ton of mods to bring it up to par with the competition.

 

And there is added weight on the Mustangs as well. I enjoy the racing, but there is endless meddling both ways.

 

Especially to bring the Mustang SUSPENSION up to par with the competition.

I love this IRS vs. SRA debate, because it's no debate at all...certainly not for every other performance coupe manufacturer in the world.

It's like arguing on behalf of using scissors to cut your lawn.

 

Here is a basic overview:

Ford Mustang GT (5.0) 2005

3:55 :1

20.0

3275

Tire size: 275/35/18. 5.0 liter engine # M6007-R50P with fixed runner length at 3 and 4 inches. Must use ECU and exhaust manifold as supplied with engine. M-7003 T56-RP transmission pkg. M-4602-J one pc. Driveshaft. M-3075-R front control arm. M-3130R front outer tie rod. M-5649-R rear control arm. 355 mm front rotor with caliper upgrade per rule book. Fuel cell mounted behind rear axle. 307-0011 Steeda Hood and 307-0009 Steeda rear wing allowed Must use Grand-Am air restrictor as supplied. Steeda rear Panhard bar #555-2551 allowed. Engine must be sealed as presented by Multimatic Motorsports Inc. All rebuilds must be performed by Multimatic Motorsports Inc. May use ABS unit #7R33-2C353-AB as alternate to the original.

 

modded or not, its still an SRA

 

Modified smodified, if IRS were indeed so superior, SRA couldn't compete, yet they do, and win.
Which was the whole debate in the first place, What's the BFD with IRS? .

The BFD with IRS is a weight penalty, a cost penalty, a more complex system that basically only actually has superior performance when driving on really crappy roads and going really fast around really crappy corners.

 

I ask you to look at cutting edge race cars and look under the rear end. You won't find a solid rear suspension anywhere in the pits. Grand Am Cup/Koni challenge is a production based NASCAR type series. We all know that NASCAR is far from cutting edge in terms of automotive technology.

 

I don't know if any of you guys actually watched a Koni series race (Grand Am) but the Mustang has it's hands full in the corners, but when the straight aways come it just pulls away. In fact the M3 won last years championship with Turner Motorsports, in a car that isn't even built any more. They are running an older E46 while the BMW's are running the E9X with 4.0L V8's that are making 414hp in street trim that turn 8400rpm.

The fact of the matter is the Mustang is allowed much more modifications to run with these cars. I read a GT500 with a pro driver ran just under a 9:00 minutes or so at Nurburgring while the new E9x M3 runs a 8:05 and a 997S runs this course under 8:00 minutes. The older E46 M3 completely stock did this course in 8:22 with almost a 200hp disadvantage...how did it do this you may ask?? Chassis dynamics...and a lot lighter weight.

The first year the Mustang was running in the Grand Am series it cleaned everyones clock, but they choked off the intake a little as in race trim these cars were pushing 500hp, now they are only making 450.

The only reason why the IRS was so much more heavy than a SLA is Ford skimped on the materials of the control arms. The E46 M3 from the factory fully loaded was just over 3400lbs. In the Koni series it's only 125lbs lighter than the Mustang with over a 100hp deficit.

Dave

 

Honestly, I am convinced that you and the others defending IRS really don't understand the original question. The question is WHY IS IT A BIG DEAL TO HAVE IRS IN THE MUSTANG?. Someone says that IRS is inferior in handling and site how a car like the M3 handles better. Yet, when someone brings up the mustang winning races with an SRA setup someone claims that SRA just sucks on the road. I gave REAL WORLD examples of how IRS isn't that much better and then it goes back to SRA sucks at the track. It's frustrating arguing with you guys because you go in circles.

If in fact, the mustang drives good most of the time on road (unless there are pot holes everywhere in which case you need to contact your city and tell them to fix them), then why does it matter if an IRS system is setup on the mustang?

It isn't about putting the best suspension on the mustang because it doesn't ride bad as it is, so it would be a waste of money. It is like the GT500 getting a new engine because the current one it has isn't the best out there. The car does fine with the 5.4L it has so there is no need to just arbitrarily upgrade it to make a few people happy.

NONE of those other superior IRS cars that offer similar straight line suspension cost the same. The closest is the 350z and it isn't that much better in the handling department. I mean come on, the mustang won't handle like a M3 because it isn't even in the same price league.

 

Every one of your remarks has already been addressed ad nauseum in this thread and others. I'm not going to rehash them all here, I'm only going to reiterate that there is no longer any valid excuse left for Ford to be using an oxcart suspension in a 21st century performance car when no other manufacturer in the world would even consider such a Byzantine solution, for myriad reasons that have been pointed out repeatedly.

Is the solid axle good enough? Sure. But so is a carburetor and wind-up windows...and who wants those anymore, either?

 

i would have bought my mustang either way. this and the ford panther platform seem to be the only ones left using an SRA ion a car on the street. at some point they have to switch, but to this day i cant say i hate my sra that much.