And on the Ford side of things...

http://media.ford.com/newsroom/images/fordcom/NAIAS/Cobra_FrontQtr.jpg (http://media.ford.com/newsroom/feature_display.cfm?release=16649)(Click on the pic for article)

I have a question...can Ford create something that doesnt copy some former glory?

i mean honestly....do something new; show some vision

can Ford create something that doesnt copy some former glory?
Lets see..

http://www.maximum-cars.com/temp/shelby/images/35.jpg
http://www.maximum-cars.com/temp/mustang/images/52.jpg
http://www.maximum-cars.com/Cars/Ford/2005-GT-1.jpg

Well I guess we know the answer to that question...

Hmm.... I didnt really like the 05 Mustang... now looking at that stance... Hmmmmmm

:uhoh:

holy shit. i never even noticed that there was a pattern goin on. anyways, i think the new shelby looks like ass. the new GT kicks ass, and the new Stang looks sick. i really don't mind the goin backwards thing. i mean as long as it looks good. who cares? i mean unless your a rival company fan who is picking stones to throw at ford. like the chevy guys. hmmmmmm

Oh yeah how could I forget...

http://www.maximum-cars.com/Cars/Ford/2003-Thunderbird-Supercharged-Concept-1.jpg

More pics of the Stang.
http://www.maximum-cars.com/Cars/Ford/2005-Mustang-GT-8.jpg
http://www.maximum-cars.com/Cars/Ford/2005-Mustang-GT-3.jpg
http://www.maximum-cars.com/temp/mustang/images/43.jpg
http://www.maximum-cars.com/temp/mustang/images/19.jpg

V6 model
http://www.maximum-cars.com/temp/mustang/images/33.jpg
http://www.maximum-cars.com/temp/mustang/images/56.jpg
http://www.maximum-cars.com/temp/mustang/images/38.jpg
http://www.maximum-cars.com/temp/mustang/images/59.jpg

well i honestly don't see whats wrong with the ford designs. i mean they look good. who cares if they lack originality. i mean i'd rather see those in the street then some who knows how it would look design.

I like the looks of the V6 wheels better... Has sort of a Shelby vibe to them :dunno:

I still have to wait to see more of the 05 Mustang to make me want to trade in the car for one.

I think Ford is trying to capitalize on baby boomer memories of a day when you could actually be proud to own an American car... :rolleyes:

I think it's a good idea, sure beats the hell out of modern automotive styling. :sunglasse

Well I think that the Stang and the GT models are both great cars Gt most of all.(I mean who wouldn't want a car that they could say was like the ones that beat out the Ferrari, in I believe the 70s).

I'm not a big fan of the back of the Stang though

I'd rather have an original Shelby Cobra...

Hell, I was sold on the new Mustang when I saw the actual production model pictures. I wanna buy one in 2008, so I'll have a 1968 and a 2008. :)

that's one HUUUGE shifter..
oh, and about the Tbird, don't go there dude, us ford fans are trying to forget.
at least it wasn't teh PT cruiser.
as far as new ideas goes, how about focus, new f150, and the new lincolns coming out. not too retro!
I want to see the Taurus come back, with an SVT option. that would be sweet.

Hell, I was sold on the new Mustang when I saw the actual production model pictures. I wanna buy one in 2008, so I'll have a 1968 and a 2008. :)

With this retarded war going on, lets hope we reach 2008 :lol:

i'm liking their retrospective look at cars and application of more modern styling... at least it solves the question "what would that look like if it were built now..."

ah yes, and Ford GT40 still > ford GT

I like the GT and the Mustang, but I like the current generation stang's looks better. That interior though is a big improvement. The Mustangs have an thing that allows you to change the color of the guages which very well. 128 colors to choose from or something.

Focus, what about it? Is something going to change on it?
F150 looks pretty but those are the hardest leather seats I've ever sat in, like bricks. Plus not that much space in the back. The bed doesn't seem big enough either for a fullsize. And I'm talking about the longbed not the shortbed.

Well on the Chevy side we have the almighty AVEO!!!! Yeah its the modern day Geo Metro with a 4-cylinder. Dumptrucks and John Deere Tractors beware!

Okay. First and foremost ColeIketani, I must point out that the Cobra Daytona coupe "defeated" the Ferrari 250GTO in 1965. However, the 289 FIA Cobra failed in this stead.

Also, it is worthwhile to point out that the 250GTO, which had won 3 straight World Manufacturer's Championships (1962, 1963, 1964) previous to the Cobra's appearance, was in essence a design from 1952. The engine had been evolving since the 166MM of 1948.

In other words, the Cobra victory is nothing remarkable, particularly when you consider Ferrari factory development had been pulled from the GT class to concentrate on prototypes, namely the 330P series, which led to triumph over the GT40's in the World Manufacturer's Championship in 1967 when the series evolved into the 330P4.

I particularly like this headline.

http://www.imca-slotracing.com/images/1967-1d.jpg

i just read hte new car and driver, and holy shit. the new Stang does not have a IRS!!!! i thought they were goin to give you an option of having an IRS or a live axle. but instead its available only in live axle. and to make things worse. they copied the F body rear suspension by eliminating the 4 link and now uses a torque arm and a pan hard rod. why are they copying everyones shit? i'm mad at the fact now that they can't even do their own suspension and they ditched a IRS this crap. ( no offense F body guys)

i just read hte new car and driver, and holy shit. the new Stang does not have a IRS!!!! i thought they were goin to give you an option of having an IRS or a live axle. but instead its available only in live axle. and to make things worse. they copied the F body rear suspension by eliminating the 4 link and now uses a torque arm and a pan hard rod. why are they copying everyones shit? i'm mad at the fact now that they can't even do their own suspension and they ditched a IRS this crap. ( no offense F body guys)
its called Cost...


The IRS will be on the Cobra. I dont think the GT should have an IRS, its suppose to have a Live Axle.

i just read hte new car and driver, and holy shit. the new Stang does not have a IRS!!!! i thought they were goin to give you an option of having an IRS or a live axle. but instead its available only in live axle. and to make things worse. they copied the F body rear suspension by eliminating the 4 link and now uses a torque arm and a pan hard rod. why are they copying everyones shit? i'm mad at the fact now that they can't even do their own suspension and they ditched a IRS this crap. ( no offense F body guys)

The next Mustang Cobra and possibly some other special editon models will get IRS. I wouldn't call the 3 link setup with a panhard bar a GM "F-body" setup. Ford has used slmost this exact setup on their full size car platform for some time now. Why Ford's plain jane Crown Vic has had this setup for years and the Mustang is just now getting it. Now THERE is a good question.

Okay. First and foremost ColeIketani, I must point out that the Cobra Daytona coupe "defeated" the Ferrari 250GTO in 1965. However, the 289 FIA Cobra failed in this stead.

Also, it is worthwhile to point out that the 250GTO, which had won 3 straight World Manufacturer's Championships (1962, 1963, 1964) previous to the Cobra's appearance, was in essence a design from 1952. The engine had been evolving since the 166MM of 1948.

In other words, the Cobra victory is nothing remarkable, particularly when you consider Ferrari factory development had been pulled from the GT class to concentrate on prototypes, namely the 330P series, which led to triumph over the GT40's in the World Manufacturer's Championship in 1967 when the series evolved into the 330P4.

I particularly like this headline.

http://www.imca-slotracing.com/images/1967-1d.jpg
That Ferrari formation finish couldn't have been a little bit of revenge for Ford's 1-2-3 formation finish at Lemans in 1966 could it? Naaah...lol

Yeah, the 67 Daytona 24hr race proved that the GT40 MkII had seen it's better days. The J car that Ford intended to race at Daytona would become the GT40MkIV. That MkIV and the Ferrari's P4 gave the racing world a rivalry of "kill or be killed" not seen in a long, long time.

Sorry to ramble on, but even not being alive then I know that those were indeed the days for auto racing.

BTW, I believe he was referring to the GT40MkII and it's 1966 season.

like i said. why did they get rid of the 4 link? even if they stayed with a live axle. atleast keep it a 4 link. i mean the pan hard rod doesn't control fore and aft movements as well as a 4 link does.

like i said. why did they get rid of the 4 link? even if they stayed with a live axle. atleast keep it a 4 link. i mean the pan hard rod doesn't control fore and aft movements as well as a 4 link does.
Again... Cost :dunno:

Ford's got a decent design team right now. Much less I can say of GM, as the execs don't seem to have a clue (Unless of course they build that one Camaro concept that was posted on here).

Ford's got a decent design team right now. Much less I can say of GM, as the execs don't seem to have a clue (Unless of course they build that one Camaro concept that was posted on here).
Too bad it was designed by some kid and not GM :(


It looked pretty sweet too.

like i said. why did they get rid of the 4 link? even if they stayed with a live axle. atleast keep it a 4 link. i mean the pan hard rod doesn't control fore and aft movements as well as a 4 link does.

Goto Griggs Racing or Maximum Motorsports websites the 2 leaders in Mustang Suspension technology and see what they do about the stock 4-link set-up. See wha they think about using a panhard bar. I think you might take this statement back.

And for the record, the IRS was not taken out due to cost, it was taken out due to weight and reliability issues.

i just read hte new car and driver, and holy shit. the new Stang does not have a IRS!!!! i thought they were goin to give you an option of having an IRS or a live axle. but instead its available only in live axle. and to make things worse. they copied the F body rear suspension by eliminating the 4 link and now uses a torque arm and a pan hard rod. why are they copying everyones shit? i'm mad at the fact now that they can't even do their own suspension and they ditched a IRS this crap. ( no offense F body guys)
No no no no no no!!!!!! Why spoil what is the second decent think to some out of Fords shop floor in the last decade with the stupid Live rear axle. IRS should definitely be on the options list, so the bougans at the local strip can stick to thier live axles and the corner carvers can have some fun with thier IRS. Makes sense doesn't it?

While I'm at it, is the V6 model using a carry-over engine??? Or have Ford taken the liberty of giving it a proper V6, or aren't those details public yet?

Oh well guess I'll wait to see what the Cobras like, the current Cobras are sweet, save for the Interior and fast dating styling, but I won't deny that the new Mustang certainly looks the part, but why no IRS option???

IRS should definitely be on the options list, so the bougans at the local strip can stick to thier live axles and the corner carvers can have some fun with thier IRS
Why no IRS? You just said it, the Cobra. If you want to make a track-based Mustang then buy the Cobra. I say leave the GT with the live axle, keep it towards drag racing.

Hasn't anyone here ever watched USAC asphalt sprint car racing or Trans-Am? A properly set up live axle suspension can be a lightweight grippy alternative to an independent suspension.

Of course, that's to say "properly set up". I happen to know that Ford can't set up a chassis at the factory to save their lives. The new rear suspension might finally get rid of the bind that Mustang rear ends are famous for, but I'm willing to be at the cost of increased wheel hop and lateral movement.

Yes, but what about those who want the IRS and indeed want a track car, but can't stretch to a Cobra???


Doubtlessly, though, Ford won't feel any implications sales wise, for doing as they have,, the new Stang is going to sell on style alone to 70-80% of the purchasers

Jimster, you really need to look into those live axle modifications before you say anything else. And, tracks are usually smooth... Really, live rear axle isn't a bad thing. Look at the Alfa Romeo GTA.

With all the power the new mustangs have, look elsewhere for your IRS track car anyway. They need their strength. Yes, for the price of the Cobra, I'd want a Lotus Elise. For the price of a Mustang GT, I'd want an RX8. I'd rather have front A-arms and a live rear axle than Mac struts and IRS. Go on, look at my avatar and call me a hypocrite...

I originally posted this in the mustang forum, but will post it here now too, so you folks can gain some knowledge.
http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=172248

Jimster, you really need to look into those live axle modifications before you say anything else. And, tracks are usually smooth... Really, live rear axle isn't a bad thing. Look at the Alfa Romeo GTA.

With all the power the new mustangs have, look elsewhere for your IRS track car anyway. They need their strength. Yes, for the price of the Cobra, I'd want a Lotus Elise. For the price of a Mustang GT, I'd want an RX8. I'd rather have front A-arms and a live rear axle than Mac struts and IRS. Go on, look at my avatar and call me a hypocrite...
Fair enough on the alternate choices, of course I'd go for an Elise for the track, but after about an hour in the Elise, your bum really starts to ache, I also can't fit in an Elise comfortably (too tall) I probably wouldn't go for an RX8, it'd more than likely be an Evolution VI.5 TME or a Nissan S15 200SX, in of course, it's JDM Spec R Trim.

I did forget about the Alfa GTA, I nearly died when I was told that it had a Live Rear axle. But Fords live rear axles, as they come from the factory, have in my opinion (after driving many a Falcon) been rubbish.


It's really subjective in the end, but Ultimately I still find IRS to be the superior of the Live rear axle

so based on driving a car from the 60's, ford axles susck?

so based on driving a car from the 60's, ford axles susck?
No, no- the Ford Falcon, is a big RWD saloon made in Australia, it's a little smaller than a Taurus, powered by a 4.0 "Barra" Straight Six or a Windsor 5.0 or 5.6 V8 (The later ones are powered by the DOHC 5.4's, though) before the latest BA Falcon there were the EA-AU Falcons (1989-2002) which all had coil-sprung live rear axles (And the wagons used *Shudder* Leaf-springs- but it worked in the case of load-lugging and towing) it translated to some rather unrefined road manners, especially on New Zealand roads. It's a well known fact that the new BA Falcon using Fords excellent Control blade IRS, has shot the car up to dizzying heights as far as handling is concerned, I'm renting one when I next pop down to the South Pacific, so I can sample one for myself, but from what my NZ and Australian magazines tell me it's a huge improvement handling-wise, even beating the VX and VY Commodores, which is an advocate to how IRS isn't always shit-hot.

Yes, but what about those who want the IRS and indeed want a track car, but can't stretch to a Cobra???
Then you try and make a live axle car handle even better, or you go to the length of converting your GT to a IRS setup probably from the Cobra. Spend some money.

You gotta face the fact that this is America where making a track car isn't the thing most common people are interested in. Drag racing is very popular here and the Mustang is the platform Ford guys use. Ford knows this and they give the people what they want because it sells. Ford doesn't mind either since its cheaper to build.

Try to remember that this is a car designed for America. If any of you from other countries have never been here, trust me, your average American country road is as wide as your average European freeway and much, much straighter. Not too many twisty roads here unless you go out of your way to find them. Why should Ford spend the money on an IRS when the Mustangs target audience wouldn't really use it to its full potential?

yep.

Try to remember that this is a car designed for America. If any of you from other countries have never been here, trust me, your average American country road is as wide as your average European freeway and much, much straighter. Not too many twisty roads here unless you go out of your way to find them. Why should Ford spend the money on an IRS when the Mustangs target audience wouldn't really use it to its full potential?

go to Pa you have to go out of your way to find straight roads,the parts of maryland ive been to are also like that. see your point though and its a good one. plus you said average.

Hi-Flow's post with the link was very good, but I am going to add a thing or two.

That article mentions that the new V-6 is a SOHC, 4.0L, V-6. For those who aren't up on things "Ford", that 60 degree V-6 is the Cologne-built unit form the Ford Explorer. It is a little more powerful and a lot smoother than the outgoing 90 degree 3.8L.

Rumours say this is a temporary unit to be replaced by the new 3.5L DOHC "Cyclone" V-6 when it arrives. I personally think the 4.0L SOHC will be with us for a while. Eventually, it may be replaced by the inline six out of the Aussie Falcon as the next Falcon is supposed to be based on the Mustang's S197 chassis, and that car's inline six was just redone.

There is even a rumour that the Mustang Cobra and other special editions will be using a control blade IRS just like the Falcon, instead of the previously expected DEW98 unit. But, wether the 4.0L six will ever be replaced anytime soon is just speculation and the control blade IRS is a currently just a rumour.

As for IRS, nobody is ever going to convince me that the main reason the GT and base cars will still have a live rear axle is anything but a pricing consideration. At NAIAS Bill Ford even said that both V-6 and V-8 Mustang pricing would start under 20 grand. (A LOT of people believe this was an error in regards to V-8 pricing.) But, even if a V-8 pony ends up starting at 25 large that is still a pretty good deal and I am not convinced it could be done with IRS out back.

This is fine with me as anyone with a desire for better handling can step up to a special editon Mustang. And, those Mustangs really shouldn't be out of the price range of other rwd IRS performance coupes with a hi-performance engine under the hood.