What's the BFD with IRS?
10/7/08, 01:02 PM
#61
The Mustang Source FOUNDER
Join Date: January 29, 2004
Location: Vestavia Hills, Ala.
Posts: 9,887
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes
on
10 Posts
I'd say that if you took two new Mustangs, one SRA and one IRS and picked 10,000 owners of S-197s (regardless of trim) at random to test drive them and didn't tell them that there was any thing different about them, 90% of them couldn't tell you what the difference was (if they noticed any at all) and half of those wouldn't even know the difference between IRS and SRA unless you explained it to them. The only people who argue about this (or even know what rear suspension it has) are the true car enthusiast, and people who have read that SRA is bad in magazines, and listen to Jeremy Clarkson bash American cars. Do you think the 16 year old fat chick down the street with the V-6, auto, 'vert knows what rear end it has? The fact is, the majority of Mustang owners fall into that category.
I personally don't care if is has IRS or not. I don't drag race mine, and I don't take it to the track. And I highly doubt that your handling is restriced by the SRA on the street. If it is, you are headed to jail or the morgue because I have yet to find a public road where I can push mine to it's limit without being reckless, irresponsible, putting someone else's life in danger, or just plain stupid.
The only reason I would object to them changing to an IRS is if it added significantly more weight. The car is porky enough as it is, it doesn't need even more fat to haul around.
I personally don't care if is has IRS or not. I don't drag race mine, and I don't take it to the track. And I highly doubt that your handling is restriced by the SRA on the street. If it is, you are headed to jail or the morgue because I have yet to find a public road where I can push mine to it's limit without being reckless, irresponsible, putting someone else's life in danger, or just plain stupid.
The only reason I would object to them changing to an IRS is if it added significantly more weight. The car is porky enough as it is, it doesn't need even more fat to haul around.
10/7/08, 01:10 PM
#63
Needs to be more Astony
10/7/08, 01:21 PM
#64
Shelby GT500 Member
Join Date: September 2, 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,594
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And isn't Chevy the only mfg offering a push-rod V8 in a sports car? Are they out of touch with the consumer and competition simply by being unique (or in this case, a holdout to OHC's)?
Look, we're all going to continue to disagree on the merits of SRA vs IRS in our beloved Mustang. Just know that the "everyone else is doing it" argument doesn't work for me, and it's a rather juvenile argument anyway. Even my teenage daughters have given up using that kind of argument on me for everything they want.
Look, we're all going to continue to disagree on the merits of SRA vs IRS in our beloved Mustang. Just know that the "everyone else is doing it" argument doesn't work for me, and it's a rather juvenile argument anyway. Even my teenage daughters have given up using that kind of argument on me for everything they want.
Ford's rear suspension does not match the competition. Again, Ford is the only company pushing a SRA axle. It's an inferior setup, I don't think ANYONE will argue that.
Lastly, I am tired with the 03-04 comparison. Everyone get that out of your heads. The SN95 chassis was never designed for a IRS rear and Ford's engineers did an amazing job building that suspension. It was a huge comprimise in terms of enginering due to the fact that you had to use the existing SRA mounting points. The S197 IS designed for a IRS rear and Ford has a well designed control blade unit in Australia.
10/7/08, 01:34 PM
#65
Cobra Member
Join Date: October 27, 2007
Posts: 1,380
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
and Ford isn't the only manufacturer that has unpainted rear axles
10/7/08, 01:37 PM
#66
Cobra Member
Join Date: October 27, 2007
Posts: 1,380
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd say that if you took two new Mustangs, one SRA and one IRS and picked 10,000 owners of S-197s (regardless of trim) at random to test drive them and didn't tell them that there was any thing different about them, 90% of them couldn't tell you what the difference was (if they noticed any at all) and half of those wouldn't even know the difference between IRS and SRA unless you explained it to them. The only people who argue about this (or even know what rear suspension it has) are the true car enthusiast, people who have read that SRA is bad in magazines, listen to Jeremy Clarkson bash American cars, and the internet racers who base their opinion of a car on the numbers a magazine test says it does on a track (but will never achieve it or even try it for themselves if they had the car). Do you think the 16 year old fat chick down the street with the V-6, auto, 'vert knows what rear end it has? The fact is, the majority of Mustang owners fall into that category.
I personally don't care if is has IRS or not. I don't drag race mine, and I don't take it to the track. And I highly doubt that your handling is restriced by the SRA on the street. If it is, you are headed to jail or the morgue because I have yet to find a public road where I can push mine to it's limit without being reckless, irresponsible, putting someone else's life in danger, or just plain stupid.
The only reason I would object to them changing to an IRS is if it added significantly more weight. The car is porky enough as it is, it doesn't need even more fat to haul around.
I personally don't care if is has IRS or not. I don't drag race mine, and I don't take it to the track. And I highly doubt that your handling is restriced by the SRA on the street. If it is, you are headed to jail or the morgue because I have yet to find a public road where I can push mine to it's limit without being reckless, irresponsible, putting someone else's life in danger, or just plain stupid.
The only reason I would object to them changing to an IRS is if it added significantly more weight. The car is porky enough as it is, it doesn't need even more fat to haul around.
Great post
10/7/08, 01:40 PM
#67
Cobra Member
Join Date: October 27, 2007
Posts: 1,380
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Probably because developing and offering two completely different suspensions in a bargain performance car isn't cost effective for Ford. I'm guessing that two different suspensions requires other mechanical and engineering adjustments to be made on the assembly line as well, complicating the whole process.
As to the argument about SRA being a cost cutting measure: sure, it cuts costs for Ford. But don't think for one moment that they're passing those savings onto us customers. They're pocketing it for themselves.
There's simply no economic or practical reason Ford could not offer the current Mustang GT with IRS for a price within $1000 of what we're now paying.
No other performance coupe on the planet...in the world...in the entire known universe, uses SRA. Hmmmmmm... I wonder why?
As to the argument about SRA being a cost cutting measure: sure, it cuts costs for Ford. But don't think for one moment that they're passing those savings onto us customers. They're pocketing it for themselves.
There's simply no economic or practical reason Ford could not offer the current Mustang GT with IRS for a price within $1000 of what we're now paying.
No other performance coupe on the planet...in the world...in the entire known universe, uses SRA. Hmmmmmm... I wonder why?
10/7/08, 01:42 PM
#68
Cobra Member
Join Date: October 27, 2007
Posts: 1,380
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No, they SHOULDN'T be surveying Mustang owners at all. They SHOULD be interviewing BMW and Nissan Z owners and heck even Camaro/GTO owners, and say "What would make YOU buy a Mustang?" Mustang fan boys, will buy a Mustang no matter what they stick in it, you've got THEIR money already. If the 2015 Mustang comes out as a plug in hybrid Minivan, Ford will still sell them out to fan boys.
Ford had better listen to it's core buyers
10/7/08, 01:49 PM
#69
Shelby GT500 Member
Join Date: September 2, 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,594
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ford needs to listen to competition and THEIR buyers. Mustang owners are loyal and it wouldn't surprise me if many would still want drum brakes and leaf springs if it dropped the cost. If you haven't notice Ford's market share has been plummetting due to them not building relevant cars that consumers want.
10/7/08, 01:51 PM
#70
I'd say that if you took two new Mustangs, one SRA and one IRS and picked 10,000 owners of S-197s (regardless of trim) at random to test drive them and didn't tell them that there was any thing different about them, 90% of them couldn't tell you what the difference was (if they noticed any at all) and half of those wouldn't even know the difference between IRS and SRA unless you explained it to them. The only people who argue about this (or even know what rear suspension it has) are the true car enthusiast, people who have read that SRA is bad in magazines, listen to Jeremy Clarkson bash American cars, and the internet racers who base their opinion of a car on the numbers a magazine test says it does on a track (but will never achieve it or even try it for themselves if they had the car). Do you think the 16 year old fat chick down the street with the V-6, auto, 'vert knows what rear end it has? The fact is, the majority of Mustang owners fall into that category.
I personally don't care if is has IRS or not. I don't drag race mine, and I don't take it to the track. And I highly doubt that your handling is restriced by the SRA on the street. If it is, you are headed to jail or the morgue because I have yet to find a public road where I can push mine to it's limit without being reckless, irresponsible, putting someone else's life in danger, or just plain stupid.
The only reason I would object to them changing to an IRS is if it added significantly more weight. The car is porky enough as it is, it doesn't need even more fat to haul around.
I personally don't care if is has IRS or not. I don't drag race mine, and I don't take it to the track. And I highly doubt that your handling is restriced by the SRA on the street. If it is, you are headed to jail or the morgue because I have yet to find a public road where I can push mine to it's limit without being reckless, irresponsible, putting someone else's life in danger, or just plain stupid.
The only reason I would object to them changing to an IRS is if it added significantly more weight. The car is porky enough as it is, it doesn't need even more fat to haul around.
First, I think consumers have become much more affluent to the ride quality of vehicles. More so than you allude to in your above posts. If not, why have some many FWD moved to IRS. It would certainly be cheaper to keep the solid axles that were found in many early FWD cars.
Second, I know our two cars rear suspension setups are different and FMC has done a great job on the S197s, but even with my rear suspension modifications and having driven a number of S197s I can still feel rear wheel axle 'hop' over roadway bumps when taking a nice corner in a spirited fashion.
Not trying to take shots, just offer my perspective in the discussion.
By the way, I am keeping the SRA in my Mach. I have thought about IRS, but a Panhard will be enough for me . . . . I think! 
10/7/08, 02:03 PM
#71
Cobra Member
Join Date: October 27, 2007
Posts: 1,380
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ford needs to listen to competition and THEIR buyers. Mustang owners are loyal and it wouldn't surprise me if many would still want drum brakes and leaf springs if it dropped the cost. If you haven't notice Ford's market share has been plummetting due to them not building relevant cars that consumers want.
There is no way that any loyal Mustang owner would support drum brakes and leaf springs. You know that. Just as they would not support the Mustang name on any other car, front wheel drive or mini-van, as you have suggested.
You can however rest assured that Ford pays very close attention to the competition, Ford however knows it's core buyer, and won't be building a Beemerzeemarogoat, which would be shear disaster.
10/7/08, 02:32 PM
#72
Cobra R Member
Join Date: September 26, 2007
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 1,931
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
10/7/08, 02:36 PM
#74
Cobra R Member
Join Date: September 26, 2007
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 1,931
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Trust me these IRS Cobras can handle plenty of power. I know people who have IRS Cobras making up to 700HP with no problems. Mine is a shade under 500HP and I also have no durability problems with my IRS. These hard core drag racers swap out their IRS in Corvettes and GTOs too. The bottom line is the average Mustang owner isn't looking to convert their brand new Mustang into a full time race car.
10/7/08, 03:28 PM
#76
Cobra Member
Join Date: May 16, 2006
Location: NV
Posts: 1,322
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
10/7/08, 03:30 PM
#77
Swamp Donkey Aficionado
Join Date: November 23, 2006
Posts: 1,863
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
10/7/08, 04:04 PM
#78
Team Mustang Source
Join Date: June 19, 2004
Location: Phoenixville, PA
Posts: 6,840
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Ford needs to listen to competition and THEIR buyers. Mustang owners are loyal and it wouldn't surprise me if many would still want drum brakes and leaf springs if it dropped the cost. If you haven't notice Ford's market share has been plummetting due to them not building relevant cars that consumers want.
10/7/08, 04:53 PM
#79
Join Date: January 30, 2004
Location: DMV
Posts: 2,980
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd say that if you took two new Mustangs, one SRA and one IRS and picked 10,000 owners of S-197s (regardless of trim) at random to test drive them and didn't tell them that there was any thing different about them, 90% of them couldn't tell you what the difference was (if they noticed any at all) and half of those wouldn't even know the difference between IRS and SRA unless you explained it to them. The only people who argue about this (or even know what rear suspension it has) are the true car enthusiast, people who have read that SRA is bad in magazines, listen to Jeremy Clarkson bash American cars, and the internet racers who base their opinion of a car on the numbers a magazine test says it does on a track (but will never achieve it or even try it for themselves if they had the car). Do you think the 16 year old fat chick down the street with the V-6, auto, 'vert knows what rear end it has? The fact is, the majority of Mustang owners fall into that category.
I personally don't care if is has IRS or not. I don't drag race mine, and I don't take it to the track. And I highly doubt that your handling is restriced by the SRA on the street. If it is, you are headed to jail or the morgue because I have yet to find a public road where I can push mine to it's limit without being reckless, irresponsible, putting someone else's life in danger, or just plain stupid.
The only reason I would object to them changing to an IRS is if it added significantly more weight. The car is porky enough as it is, it doesn't need even more fat to haul around.
I personally don't care if is has IRS or not. I don't drag race mine, and I don't take it to the track. And I highly doubt that your handling is restriced by the SRA on the street. If it is, you are headed to jail or the morgue because I have yet to find a public road where I can push mine to it's limit without being reckless, irresponsible, putting someone else's life in danger, or just plain stupid.
The only reason I would object to them changing to an IRS is if it added significantly more weight. The car is porky enough as it is, it doesn't need even more fat to haul around.
And the argument that an IRS doesn't make any difference in performance street driving -- that to plumb its capabilities would be dangerous and foolish -- is an argument that would be 10Xs as relavent to a 300hp V8, never mind a 500hp motor. I presume you're not thus recommending the return to the safe and sane 88hp 2.3 four-banger from the Mustang II, which is more than enough oomph for a Dunkin Donut run?
Indeed, an IRS's superior capacity for NOT getting bucked off the road by lumps and bumps would in fact recommend it from a safety standpoint. It would be far saner and safer to argue, in terms of real world vs track performance, for excellent brakes and handling before even considering adding a single extra hp to any car. Excellent brakes and handling will only increase a car's safety envelope while added hp will only, but in the rarest of circumstances, decrease it.
The safest way to sane street performance is to (1) start with a skilled driver (by far the biggest variable to real world performance), (2) build a fast chassis (brakes and handling) capable of competantly handling any speeds and conditions, and then, finally, (3) adding horsepower. Tragically, far too many people get this backwards by hot rodding outrageously high-powered car with chassis that has no right going beyond a walking pace outside an empty 100 acre parking lot that is then driven by some cocky fool with far more ***** than brains.
10/7/08, 05:29 PM
#80
Shelby GT500 Member
Join Date: September 2, 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,594
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you haven't noticed all manufactures market share has been plummeting.
There is no way that any loyal Mustang owner would support drum brakes and leaf springs. You know that. Just as they would not support the Mustang name on any other car, front wheel drive or mini-van, as you have suggested.
You can however rest assured that Ford pays very close attention to the competition, Ford however knows it's core buyer, and won't be building a Beemerzeemarogoat, which would be shear disaster.
There is no way that any loyal Mustang owner would support drum brakes and leaf springs. You know that. Just as they would not support the Mustang name on any other car, front wheel drive or mini-van, as you have suggested.
You can however rest assured that Ford pays very close attention to the competition, Ford however knows it's core buyer, and won't be building a Beemerzeemarogoat, which would be shear disaster.
Leaf springs work just like a SRA rear. I bet 99% of the public couldn’t tell the difference. I am just playing devils advocate. The fact of the matter is if Ford wants to build a competitive vehicle, IRS will need to be added in the near future.