did you see the photoshop he made in the other thread?

 

I did........but I'm hoping (as it was based on the Lotus concept) that he was showing us how far the Mustang look can be pushed into a modern looking coupe. I'm hoping the real thing will be several steps back with a clear link to the current car (and not just the taillights, c-scoop etc).

TN provided some very VERY close images/photoshops of the 2010 on the run-up to its release, so I take everything he posts very seriously.

 

agreed. I liked the description he provided, so I've got my fingers crossed on how its executed

 

I agree with TN's predictions and to add to that I believe the Aussie Falcon will also share the Mustang/Lincoln chassis which lends credence to the IRS predictions. Ford has already hinted at the tie between Mustang and Falcon. The Falcon is already offering the Coyote as an option including a supercharged version. I just wonder if there will be a SRA option for the drag race crowd? If not, retrofitting an SRA into the next gen might be a good business to invest in...

 

I saw it a few days ago but couldn't post on it. Though I thought the info seemed dead on to what I would assume for what's coming for the Mustang. Toss in Start-Stop probably and we're well on our way to guessing. After driving my 335 for a while, I thought that a lighter but less powerful Mustang wouldn't necessarily even be the end of its world. Not for me anyway. The car would still be loads of fun to drive and good god, we've all probably seen the 2011 FRPP parts catalog, not to mention the numerous other tuners. I'm just not that worried.

 

Agreed. Many seem to fixate narrowly on simple raw power numbers as a nearly sole measure of a performance car's goodness. Rather, there is far more that goes into a car that makes it go fast, never mind actually fun to drive while going fast (or any speed for that matter). Remember, its just not only how fast a car goes, but how a car goes fast that matters most. BMW is an iconic, though hardly sole, exemplar of this and the Mustang of late seems to be "getting it" too, what with its more broad band focus on performance beyond simple little 1/4 mile wind sprints.

A lighter, sleeker and more capable Mustang could be just as fast, if not faster, in raw numbers but far more fun to actually drive and in far more driving arena's than 1/4 mile spurts.

 

Of course numbers arent all. Look at lotus, supercharged I-4 makin some decent power, but is one of the most exhilerating carsvto drive. BMW is just so refined, those M3 cars are the benchmark for sport cars IMO.
The mustang is definitely taking steps in the right direction, lets hope they stay on track

 

Am I the only one that doesn't want a **** IRS??????

 

Well if you take a drive on any bumpy or twisty, or a bumpy twistyroad the mustang has alotta terrain steer or "tramlining" and really doesnt inspire much confidence in drivin on challenging roads. IRS is much better for that kind of driving. If youve ever driven something like a corvette or even a camaro, they both have IRS and are much more refond on those bumps and twists. It all comes from a handling and refinement perspective

 

you're not alone. I'm fine with the stick axle

 

That's two.

If enough step forward, perhaps Ford will bring back leaf springs, drum brakes and bias ply tires too.

 

Well, if it is anything like the current axle, the Leaf Springs would be completely un twistable, and stay put, the drums would dissipate heat and work better than most rear discs and the tires would not only be grippy, they'd gain better fuel mileage for the car as well. Just saying, all things compared.

I like the idea of an IRS, but everyone here agrees that it has to trump the SRA currently used.

 

I guess I'm one of those guys with the "if it aint broke don't fix it" attitude. If the car was being outperformed by its competition or it was extremely uncomfortable I'd be all for IRS. But since its not I really couldn't care less

 

"if it ain't broke, don't fix it"

Trouble is, that can easily be the recipe for stagnation, which, in this very competitive Pony Car era, is tantamount to death. The Mustang is outperforming many of its competition, but I would argue that is in spite of, not because of, retaining the live axle. While trepidation on moving to newer tech is perhaps understandable, given that the current SRA is close to the acme of what can be done with a live axle, that shouldn't necessarily preclude moving on to even better, more capable technologies. The rest of the Mustang has pretty much done that over the years and to excellent effect. Perhaps time to put this last bit of yestertech out to pasture for a well earned retirement.

"...it has to trump the SRA currently used."

I would say that is almost self-evident and applies to any aspect of a new, superseding car and technology and I am completely confident that Ford, given a clean sheet Mustang redesign (in sharp distinction to the constraints limiting the SN95's IRS), would be significantly superior to the current SRA, as good as it might be.

 

I agree with both. Though I didn't mean for the last part of my quote to be aimed at your post, more of a response to another post. I see what I did though.

 

ok, but if we get a heavy, expensive, non-durable IRS next gen I blame you rhumb

 

Uh oh....

Note to Ford engineers: don't screw this one up!

 

Hopefully the ford suspension engineer we had here (groot) is still out there lurking

 

Not only IRS but I say it again a rear mounted transmission like the Vette.

 

Yea the rear mounted transmission andwould really help with the balanceof the car. They could actually take some suspension details from the vette as well. Like the adjustable shocks and what not. Big manufacturers can really learn alot from each other