FordBlueHeart

Why do you fail to give me any PROOF of what you say? Why dont you ever answer my questions with an answer that pertains to my question? All I asked for was a simple list of cars out there now, not just about to be released. Humor me.

zzcoop

What's red and smells like blue paint?

Red paint!

Wackity-schmackity-doo!

FordBlueHeart

I do agree that IRS is a progression. But why does the mustang have to progress if it does what it is intended to do (for public consumption)? The mustang has for 45 years, been designed to be a working man's car that was sporty and stylish and inexpensive to drive. Any diversion from that, and it loses its appeal. It wasnt meant to be an all-out race car. It competes and does quite well. But affordability has always been at the forefront.

FordBlueHeart

zzcoop

That's just the kind of reaction I like to see.

max2000jp

Quote:

Originally Posted by FordBlueHeart

I do agree that IRS is a progression. But why does the mustang have to progress if it does what it is intended to do (for public consumption)? The mustang has for 45 years, been designed to be a working man's car that was sporty and stylish and inexpensive to drive. Any diversion from that, and it loses its appeal. It wasnt meant to be an all-out race car. It competes and does quite well. But affordability has always been at the forefront.

Since when does an IRS make the Mustang an all-out race car? A Honda Accord comes standard with an independent rear.

The competition is coming with IRS. C&D was raving about the V6 Camaro’s handling compared to the Mustang. Imagine how good the SS will be! Ford needs to start building world class products instead of building products that are average. Ford has the technology to do this, but for some reason holds it back in North America. American consumers want more from their cars and Ford isn’t giving it to them.

Anyone that disagrees can go to Google Finance and type “F” into the search box. Take a peek at Ford’s financials and stock price.

Kevindust

Yes, there is an advantage...a properly designed IRS: rides better and is more stable on regular roads in a straight line, over expansion joints, over railroad tracks, over bumps, pavement ruts, cresting hills, changing surfaces...basically every road in North America, not just the crappy ones. This goes double for all of those situations while cornering at modest speeds...and triple for cornering at high speeds. On the road, a proper IRS is simply better in every conceivable way except a full throttle launch from a dead stop.

I'd rather take advantage of the benefits of IRS for 365 days and 20K road miles a year rather than a SRA for 10-20 passes a year at the strip.

Some of you like to discredit the opinions of car magazines. I'll admit that Motor Trend is for the most part a glorified automotive brochure but Car and Driver? They drive and compare hundreds of cars every year, they have a staff full of former/current racers and automotive engineers and they openly criticize shortcomings based on their expertise. Sure they don't always get the best time slips, especially compared to mags that specialize in Fords, but they have to follow certain procedures to maintain test accuracy across the board. I don't always agree with them because I (like most of you) have different goals, needs, passions and tastes...but for the most part, they are spot on. The most honest reviews tend to be after a new model has had some years to sink in...the comparison tests featuring 3 or 4 year old models really shed light on their shortcomings...and every single one of them featuring a Mustang mentions the SRA because it is a shortcoming (period)

Zoomie

IMHO, Ford is holding back on the IRS for the Mustang for 2 primary reasons:

1. Lots of folks, as many have expressed on this thread, are perfectly satisfied with the SRA and would prefer Ford put the money elsewhere (displacement, HP, for example);

2. Ford sells as many Mustangs as it can make with the cheaper SRA. If they save only $100 per vehicle, times 50k Mustangs that's $5m. Not chump change to a company needing cash.

Don't get me wrong; I'd rather have an IRS than SRA, even as just a daily driver, on the crappy road surfaces I have to drive. Even though the GT is now bumping up against my upward budget allowance, with all the goodies Ford keeps throwing on it, if push came to shove I'd rather have the IRS than nav, or Sync. I can read a map, or buy a portable GPS nav relatively cheap, and I don't talk on the phone while driving. But I could certainly make good use of a well-tuned IRS, and I'D KNOW THE DIFFERENCE.

But that's just me...

MBK

if car and driver did a truck comparison they'd give the win to the 3 series

read that somewhere on here

MBK

GM: $2.95 Stock Price
.61 Billion Shares

Worth 1.80 Billion Total

Ford: $1.87 Stock Price
2.39 Billion Shares

Worth 4.47 Billion Total

they are in bad shape but they are in the best shape domestically; if you take a look at GM's liabilities compared to Ford's i think that would be an eye opener. i could be wrong about this i just took it from Google Finance, someone please clarify if this calculation is incorrect

FordBlueHeart

Since when was a Honda Accord anywhere close to being a Mustang? The mustang is an icon. It doesnt need to be changed at this point. In three years probably, but not now. But thats what you want isnt it? The SRA does great in normal driving conditions. The benefits of IRS are not significant enough to change that. I drive cars for a living. I drive both IRS and SRA equipped vehicles every day. For normal driving, the difference is not that great. If it is, you are paying a lot for the differences and other features.
Come on people, show me the rear wheel drive coupe cars with IRS that are available for mid twenties right now?

rhumb

In normal, smooth road driving, just about any suspension is great, including that on the go-cart I scooted around in as a kid. So yes, by that measure of low expectations, the SRA does meet that level of mediocrity and an IRS's much higher overall capabilities never come into measure. Unfortunately, I think it is this appeal to a low level of acceptable mediocrity that the domestic makers aspire to, among many other things, is precisely what has got them in the dismal situation they are now.

Rather, I'd like to see them strive for world class excellence than simply what they think they can get away with in foisting upon a gullible and unscrutinaizing public. Sure, the SRA is "good enough," it's just that in today's ultra competitive world, good enough simply isn't good enough. Sure, the Mustang has been able to get away with it in its comfy little market niche of one, but those fat and lazy days are now coming to an abrupt end (presuming Ford doesn't come to an abrupt end first).

Black GT500

LOL You are absolutly right! In normal driving on normal roads, the 2005+ Mustang solid rear axle suspension is great. So yes, the SRA does meet the level of GREAT in normal driving, which ultimately is the type of driving MOST drivers do in Most Mustangs MOST of the time. You are right, the IRS's much higher overall capabilities never ever come into measure.

This is exactly what we have been saying right along. In most driving, most of the time IRS will not provide a noticeable improvement.


This is an entirely different conversation and issue. Ford putting more or less dollars into questionable features for the Mustang isn't what got them into this dismal situation they are in now.

All of the Automakers are hurting.


At what rising price point does striving for world class excellence cut out too many of your customers? Being conservative and appealing to the masses is far less likely to add strain to Ford's financial woes than spending excessive dollars on niche features.

max2000jp

Yes, the Big 3 is in bad shape, that's well know. Look at the import mfg stocks and then compare the performance to Ford.

max2000jp

I was simply pointing out that all cars, even family sedans use IRS. The SRA is average in normal conditions. The rear feels unsettled in stock form.

Hollywood_North GT

Ha ha. Tell that to my *** while I'm riding over rough pavement.

Sure, if all your roads are smooth as a baby's bottom, then a silver cross pram would be just fine, too.

Of course it is. Because it's part of a systemic problem that American automakers have had for YEARS: lowest common denominator manufacturing coupled with myopic product planning. Add to that greedy unions, legacy costs and a government that enables unfair free trade practices with the Orient and you have the makings of a disaster.

Which is what we're facing now.

At no point. Just ask those other automakers striving for world class excellence. And if IRS is such a niche feature, then I guess Ford must be the ultimate niche manufacturer...since they're the only ones using an SRA in a car like this.

Five Oh Brian

Oh my, we're all still arguing about SRA and IRS in our beloved Mustang? Why waste the time beating this dead horse (the SRA vs IRS debate, not the car itself). Some of us actually want an SRA in our Mustangs for our own reasons, while others desperately want an IRS in their Mustangs. The simple solution is for Ford to offer either as an option, much like offering a choice of transmissions or engines. If Ford can offer 56 different combinations of F-150 cabs vs box lengths vs trim levels, then is 2 different suspensions in a Mustang isn't too much to ask, is it?

holderca1

RWD Coupes:
Chevrolet Camaro (for sale soon enough)
Dodge Challenger
Mazda RX-8
Nissan 350Z

RWD Performance Sedans:
Dodge Charger
Pontiac G8

karrnutt

I share your thoughts on this ,they did this with the previous Mustang and its Cobra edition .They did it then why not consider it now and end this never ending nonsense !

cati

Guys - might be worth looking up the word luddites on google as well. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luddite
)
The only reason ford want to keep us with an SRA is to save money...period. After all why clain to have designed the 05 with an IRS and change your mind at the last minute? ( it's also why our SRA are not painted - I guess our drag racing friends would claim it saves weight), it just so happens many of us fall hook line and sinker for their line about drag racing. I love my mustang for all it's faults, much in the same way my wife loves me, but I would love an IRS as much as she would like me to loose 20 pounds. In fact it's the only reason I would by a 2010

It is inconcievable in the 21st century that we have a muscle car with no IRS option. it is also inconcievalbe that the pioneer car that started this whole thing off - is..........now the only muscle car in production without one!!!! Kool aid.....can someone pass me the kool aid I am starting to doubt Ford.... 1 gallon of kool aid stat!!!


Last list - RWD coupe's IRS under 30k - BMW 3 series, Dodge Mercedes 200slk rip off, Mazda miata/ MX5. Saturn Sky, Pontiac Soltice.

If you want to see what faces the US car industry in the next ten years - go and take a look at the british car industry in the 70s - uncompetitve, poor materials and old fashioned concepts lost out to foriegn competition. The styling and the ethos was still great the MGB, TR7, Jag XJ where cutting edege. but the under neath the smart clothers the running gear was not up to standards in other competitors.