Has the loss of acceleration performance cooled your enthusiasm for the S550?
10/16/14, 06:27 PM
#42
Bullitt Member
Join Date: July 3, 2012
Location: Oregon
Posts: 364
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'll buy one in a few more years. I've had my 2011 for 4 years and 5 months and only have 21,200 miles.
With the extra weight of the IRS, i don't see why Ford didn't try to get the weight distribution 50% front and 50% rear? That would have been something to 'brag about', in my opinion
With the extra weight of the IRS, i don't see why Ford didn't try to get the weight distribution 50% front and 50% rear? That would have been something to 'brag about', in my opinion
10/16/14, 08:39 PM
#43
Legacy TMS Member
I wish they'd do a displacement bump when the LT1 powered F6 gets here. The coyote motor would gain all kinds of goodness from an extra 40 or 50 cubes.
I know its not really possible but the gains under the curve would really be a welcome addition.
10/16/14, 11:39 PM
#44
Legacy TMS Member
I just responded in the other thread haha. I said 6.0 in the other thread, but a nice 5.8 351 would have a good ring to it!
10/20/14, 04:59 AM
#45
GT Member
Join Date: February 3, 2014
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 147
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bob brings up a great point I have been saying for years. If Ford really gave two craps about keeping up with GM and MOPAR, they would have matched displacement first. The bigger (insert favorite name for male genitalia here) always wins when you can buy size to some buyers.
Why Ford didn't design the Coyote around a higher displacement is beyond me, other than trying to stick to EPA guidelines. In the performance world, isn't it the smallest V8 offered? Long gone or the old days when you had a choice of three or four different V8's under the hood. Of course, this "tiny" 5.0 spanks the 428 from the '70's.
Why Ford didn't design the Coyote around a higher displacement is beyond me, other than trying to stick to EPA guidelines. In the performance world, isn't it the smallest V8 offered? Long gone or the old days when you had a choice of three or four different V8's under the hood. Of course, this "tiny" 5.0 spanks the 428 from the '70's.
10/20/14, 05:16 AM
#46
Shelby GT350 Member
Thread Starter
Bob brings up a great point I have been saying for years. If Ford really gave two craps about keeping up with GM and MOPAR, they would have matched displacement first. The bigger (insert favorite name for male genitalia here) always wins when you can buy size to some buyers.
Why Ford didn't design the Coyote around a higher displacement is beyond me, other than trying to stick to EPA guidelines. In the performance world, isn't it the smallest V8 offered? Long gone or the old days when you had a choice of three or four different V8's under the hood. Of course, this "tiny" 5.0 spanks the 428 from the '70's.
Why Ford didn't design the Coyote around a higher displacement is beyond me, other than trying to stick to EPA guidelines. In the performance world, isn't it the smallest V8 offered? Long gone or the old days when you had a choice of three or four different V8's under the hood. Of course, this "tiny" 5.0 spanks the 428 from the '70's.
Basically, 5.0L was chosen for a number of reasons, not the least of which is that it allowed the continued use of some of the tooling from the 4.6L era.
10/20/14, 10:04 AM
#47
Bullitt Member
Join Date: August 21, 2013
Location: New England
Posts: 325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There's a very good thread about this on this forum...If I have some time, i will search around and see if I can't come up with it. Basically, 5.0L was chosen for a number of reasons, not the least of which is that it allowed the continued use of some of the tooling from the 4.6L era.
http://www.mustangandfords.com/parts...e/viewall.html
10/21/14, 09:40 AM
#48
Join Date: January 30, 2004
Location: DMV
Posts: 2,980
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Kind of related, but some of the things with the new Mustang remind me a lot about the old MN12 Thunderbird of the late '80s and early '90s:
From Wikipedia (but reflect my thoughts and recollections from way back when):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Th...nth_generation)
The S550 too, while accomplishing many great and long-overdue technological achievements perhaps did so by piling them on while lacking some engineering discipline when it came to size and weight, and perhaps cost. So while an excellent car in most ways, I think it's a bit larger than it should be and missed its weight bogie by 400lbs, being nearly 200lbs heavier where it should have been nearly 200lbs lighter than a similar S197, i.e., a GT should be in the lean 3,400lb weight class, not the 3,800lb. chubsters class with the Camaro.
I wonder if this will open a big window for the soon to be next Camaro to actually realize a significant size and weight trimming on its new chassis? Or whether it, seeing its plus-sized Pony car brethren, will similarly throw weight discipline out the window and start noshing on those Quarter Pounders with Cheese.
From Wikipedia (but reflect my thoughts and recollections from way back when):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Th...nth_generation)
In spite of the new Thunderbird's merits, it was considered a failure by Ford's top management. On January 17, 1989, Ford President Harold A. Poling, with Ford CEO Donald Petersen and Ford Executive Vice President Phil Benton looking on, lambasted the MN12 program's staff in a meeting for badly missing the Thunderbird and Cougars' weight and cost targets (250 lb (110 kg) heavier and $900 US$ more per car than planned). This criticism came as a surprise to the program staff who expected to be praised for the Thunderbird and Cougars' technical achievements and positive reception. Anthony "Tony" S. Kuchta, manager of the MN12 program, was angered by Poling, not for his points about weight and cost overruns but rather that he directed his tirade at the program staff instead of at Kuchta who was responsible for all of the important decisions that determined the program's direction. Ironically, many of the decisions that Kuchta made regarding the MN12's development that resulted in the weight and cost overruns criticized by Poling were caused by the very things that set the MN12 cars apart from other cars in their class (such as rear-wheel drive and an independent rear suspension). Falling out of favor with Ford management after the Thunderbird and Cougars' launch, Kuchta voluntarily retired early from Ford in May 1989.
I wonder if this will open a big window for the soon to be next Camaro to actually realize a significant size and weight trimming on its new chassis? Or whether it, seeing its plus-sized Pony car brethren, will similarly throw weight discipline out the window and start noshing on those Quarter Pounders with Cheese.
1/18/15, 07:38 AM
#49
GT Member
Join Date: August 20, 2012
Location: Pensacola, FL
Posts: 143
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
.1 "slower" I can live with. .95g on a skid pad and no more jitters over bumpy or uneven roads thanks to a NEW IRS I can also live happily with. As for appearance...I LOVE IT. 2015 GT Premium Race Red, auto, 20x9 rims, 401A, spoiler delete, 3.55 rear gears...does it get any better?
1/18/15, 09:25 AM
#50
Banned
Join Date: August 2, 2013
Location: Little north of Stuttgart, Germany
Posts: 3,090
Received 254 Likes
on
230 Posts
.1 "slower" I can live with. .95g on a skid pad and no more jitters over bumpy or uneven roads thanks to a NEW IRS I can also live happily with. As for appearance...I LOVE IT. 2015 GT Premium Race Red, auto, 20x9 rims, 401A, spoiler delete, 3.55 rear gears...does it get any better?
1/18/15, 09:38 AM
#51
Super Boss Lawman Member
I did not even do any lap time or drag time research when buying my mustang. it appealed to me regardless of how it even stacked up against the camaro etc. I don't think the majority of buyers gave a **** about a couple tenths of a second here or there. The test drive sold me on mine. I am sure the '15 will do very well. the 16 will be even better probably. so in my opinion the current trending numbers will not cool demand for the '15.
1/18/15, 12:16 PM
#52
Member
Join Date: September 15, 2006
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes! This is typical with every new generation of a beloved car. People become emotionally invested in their own version and it's sometimes easier to find faults with the new version rather than facing the cognitive dissonance that comes with admitting faults in the car that you have been praising for a long time.
That said, some of us (yours truly for example) are in a position (both emotionally and financially) to buy the new car but need to weigh the value of the improvements...and seeing disappointments like this are sometimes enough to make the purchase less enticing.
I dig the S550s a lot. The styling is great, interiors are beautiful, new version of the already spectacular Coyote sounds like a win...but all of the promises upon which I based my plans of actually buying one have been met with fail.
Lighter? Nope
Smaller? Nope
Faster in the quarter? Nope
More sportscar-like in driving experience? Nope
End of Wheelhop issues with modern suspension? NOPE
A huge leap in road course performance? Nope
Buying one? Nope
(at least not yet...)
That said, some of us (yours truly for example) are in a position (both emotionally and financially) to buy the new car but need to weigh the value of the improvements...and seeing disappointments like this are sometimes enough to make the purchase less enticing.
I dig the S550s a lot. The styling is great, interiors are beautiful, new version of the already spectacular Coyote sounds like a win...but all of the promises upon which I based my plans of actually buying one have been met with fail.
Lighter? Nope
Smaller? Nope
Faster in the quarter? Nope
More sportscar-like in driving experience? Nope
End of Wheelhop issues with modern suspension? NOPE
A huge leap in road course performance? Nope
Buying one? Nope
(at least not yet...)
But since I sold my S197 a few years ago, I'm very much on board with a 2015.
2/1/15, 11:37 AM
#54
Bullitt Member
Join Date: October 24, 2012
Location: East Lansing Michigan
Posts: 247
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2/1/15, 03:12 PM
#55
GT Member
Join Date: August 20, 2012
Location: Pensacola, FL
Posts: 143
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2/2/15, 07:51 AM
#56
For me(and I believe, many others) my suspicions were confirmed as soon as I test drove it- The s550 doesn't drive "like a Mustang". THAT is is primary reason I considered, and bought it! I have matured waayyyy past the point of tolerating a chattering rear suspension going around a corner or putting up with a ultra-cheesy interior for the sake of acceleration. This is a car that Ford can proudly put on a world stage, and make very few excuses for. I doubt the guys that only want a pony car with a ridiculously over powered engine will embrace it, but I'm not entirely sure they were Ford's target market to begin with. I bought this car for my wife- and she loves it! she hasn't felt this strongly about a car in the last 20+ years. What does that say about Ford's ability to build what will sell? There is just something about this car- it feels just as comfortable at 100 as it does at 40. There isn't many cars out there that can say that.
2/2/15, 11:33 AM
#57
GT Member
Why waste the R&D when all signs point to smaller and smaller V8's coming down the pipe in the future.
2/2/15, 12:25 PM
#58
THE RED FLASH ------Moderator
2/2/15, 03:28 PM
#59
For me(and I believe, many others) my suspicions were confirmed as soon as I test drove it- The s550 doesn't drive "like a Mustang". THAT is is primary reason I considered, and bought it! I have matured waayyyy past the point of tolerating a chattering rear suspension going around a corner or putting up with a ultra-cheesy interior for the sake of acceleration. This is a car that Ford can proudly put on a world stage, and make very few excuses for. I doubt the guys that only want a pony car with a ridiculously over powered engine will embrace it, but I'm not entirely sure they were Ford's target market to begin with. I bought this car for my wife- and she loves it! she hasn't felt this strongly about a car in the last 20+ years. What does that say about Ford's ability to build what will sell? There is just something about this car- it feels just as comfortable at 100 as it does at 40. There isn't many cars out there that can say that.
Both cars have their strengths and weaknesses. Both are good cars. If your intention on this forum is to try and pretend that every Mustang model ever made until the one you bought is some kind of lackluster junk heap than I suggest you might be more happy over on Mustang6G. There are plenty of us around here that do not subscribe to your narrow minded and ultimately inaccurate point of view about the S197 Mustangs.
2/2/15, 03:37 PM
#60
Legacy TMS Member
You keep making these claims about the S197 car and yet you have never owned or apparently even driven one. I, on the other hand, have actually driven an S550 in premium trim. The interior, while moderately improved, is not that much better than the 2010 to 2014 car. If the interior of the 2014 car is "ultra cheesy" than the interior of the S550 would have to be classified as "really cheesy" by comparison. The rear suspension of the S197 does not in any way "chatter" while going around a corner. But than given that you believed the S197 used leaf springs until you were corrected I'm not surprised you think that. In normal day to day driving I felt absolutely no difference in the comfort or handling capabilities of the S550 as compared to the S197. It is only in the seriously hard cornering (which your wife probably won't engage in) that the S550 has a slightly better grip thanks to the independent rear suspension. Heck at least the S197 can accelerate hard without the rear wheels bouncing all over the road, unlike the S550. Both cars have their strengths and weaknesses. Both are good cars. If your intention on this forum is to try and pretend that every Mustang model ever made until the one you bought is some kind of lackluster junk heap than I suggest you might be more happy over on Mustang6G. There are plenty of us around here that do not subscribe to your narrow minded and ultimately inaccurate point of view about the S197 Mustangs.