Ford Mustang Thread: 2011 General Talk

[JCE]

The last thing the Mustang needs is to be larger. I hope to death that that camo really prevents us from seeing infact a more smooth sleek and maybe slightly shorter car. I'd hate to see the Mustang get FATTER! But, at this point the only things I care about--and the only things--are a real world IRS and a new V8 power plant which produces inexcess of 350bhp in its base form.

*edit*
Oh, and that is a convertable YSS. Look through the passenger door at the back window--that's too small to be a normal back window.

 

[Philly]

The last thing the Mustang needs is to be larger. I hope to death that that camo really prevents us from seeing infact a more smooth sleek and maybe slightly shorter car. I'd hate to see the Mustang get FATTER! But, at this point the only things I care about--and the only things--are a real world IRS and a new V8 power plant which produces inexcess of 350bhp in its base form.

It does look like there is a lot of extra fluff under that camo. I'm sure that even Ford wouldn't design a Mustang that looks like it is a balloon.

 

[Omnis]

Ah, now this is the kind of change I was seeking. Looks a lot less "fleshy". Hopefully they will have leaned the car out by the time they're done.

 

[Joey D]

The last thing the Mustang needs is to be larger.

Quite right, make the car light and fast and Ford will have a winner.

 

[Philly]

Quite right, make the car light and fast and Ford will have a winner.

Haha. You're a funny one.👍

BUT, I'm sure they can do fast. They have a 500 hp car or two running right now.

 

[Omnis]

Yeah but I'd rather have a lighter car than more horsepower.

 

[Joey D]

See this is where the American muscle car wars are starting to get stupid, they are putting a million horsepower in cars but they are way to hefty. Sure they will scream down the quarter mile but trying braking or going around corners and all that mass will truly show. This isn't even mentioning the stupidly low fuel economy.

This is why sport compacts are so good, you get a decent power to weight ratio and good fuel mileage as well if you drive it sensible. If Ford could make a light Mustang that has a decent amount of power they would have a winner and they would sell better than they already do.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

While I definitely agree with you Joey about lighter cars... making the Mustang even slightly resemble the average sport compact would cannibalize sales, not increase them. Some cars have to stick to their same basic formula, whether that's a curse or a blessing. North America still compares sporty cars on horsepower figures (Brad actually proves the point when discussing the CTS-V), so a Mustang that weighs in at 500lb less with the same 300hp engine (or maybe even slightly less) will still be seen at a disadvantage to the Camaro and Challenger by most people.

I'm hoping the recent trend of heavier and heavier comes to a halt soon though. We need more cars like the Mazda 2 to come here.

 

[TopHat]

See this is where the American muscle car wars are starting to get stupid, they are putting a million horsepower in cars but they are way to hefty. Sure they will scream down the quarter mile but trying braking or going around corners and all that mass will truly show. This isn't even mentioning the stupidly low fuel economy.

This is why sport compacts are so good, you get a decent power to weight ratio and good fuel mileage as well if you drive it sensible. If Ford could make a light Mustang that has a decent amount of power they would have a winner and they would sell better than they already do.

Apples to Oranges those two are.

While I definitely agree with you Joey about lighter cars... making the Mustang even slightly resemble the average sport compact would cannibalize sales, not increase them. Some cars have to stick to their same basic formula, whether that's a curse or a blessing. North America still compares sporty cars on horsepower figures (Brad actually proves the point when discussing the CTS-V), so a Mustang that weighs in at 500lb less with the same 300hp engine (or maybe even slightly less) will still be seen at a disadvantage to the Camaro and Challenger by most people.

I'm hoping the recent trend of heavier and heavier comes to a halt soon though. We need more cars like the Mazda 2 to come here.

IF the Mustang became a "Sport Compact" I'd call it the Mustang III.

 

[Joey D]

I'm not saying make the Mustang a sport compact, I'm saying make the car lighter. And who cares if it doesn't stick with the formula, if gas prices continue going up sales are going to slow down anyways.

 

[Philly]

See this is where the American muscle car wars are starting to get stupid, they are putting a million horsepower in cars but they are way to hefty. Sure they will scream down the quarter mile but trying braking or going around corners and all that mass will truly show. This isn't even mentioning the stupidly low fuel economy.

But traditionally the Muscle car has been about going fast in a straight line. They have always been heavy with insane amounts of power with horrid fuel economy. That said, I do think that weight should be considered when designing the car.

This is why sport compacts are so good, you get a decent power to weight ratio and good fuel mileage as well if you drive it sensible. If Ford could make a light Mustang that has a decent amount of power they would have a winner and they would sell better than they already do.

Going the Elise route. A very good idea. But that will cost a lot more than throwing a big V-8 in an existing car, and it is pretty hard to find a lightweight car currently on sale that can be used.

 

[Omnis]

See this is where the American muscle car wars are starting to get stupid, they are putting a million horsepower in cars but they are way to hefty. Sure they will scream down the quarter mile but trying braking or going around corners and all that mass will truly show. This isn't even mentioning the stupidly low fuel economy.

This is why sport compacts are so good, you get a decent power to weight ratio and good fuel mileage as well if you drive it sensible. If Ford could make a light Mustang that has a decent amount of power they would have a winner and they would sell better than they already do.

Yeah, but the Mustang isn't supposed to be the big heavy hp/torque-monster. That was the Torino's role.

 

[Jim Prower]

And it would be the Falcon's role, if we got it.

The thing is, every car is gaining weight, it's not just the Mustang. What about the GT-R. The Miata? Hell, the Challenger compared to it's '70 brethren.

Honestly, I Doubt the Mustang will be heavier than the Camaro and Chalenger.

 

[Joey D]

But traditionally the Muscle car has been about going fast in a straight line. They have always been heavy with insane amounts of power with horrid fuel economy. That said, I do think that weight should be considered when designing the car.

Well that was in the past when gas was cheap and no one really cared about the environment. Now people actually look at things like gas mileage. And I'm not saying you do this, but a lot of people will say "if you can afford a Mustang you can afford the gas", which isn't exactly true since most American muscle cars are under $40,000.

Going the Elise route. A very good idea. But that will cost a lot more than throwing a big V-8 in an existing car, and it is pretty hard to find a lightweight car currently on sale that can be used.

I'm not saying make it an Elise, but I am saying cut some of the excess out of the car. We don't need super high end 12 speaker sound systems, sat-nav, 20 inch wheels, etc. All of that stuff adds a ton of weight to the car.

Yeah, but the Mustang isn't supposed to be the big heavy hp/torque-monster. That was the Torino's role.

The key word in that statement is was. All Ford has now is the Mustang.

And it would be the Falcon's role, if we got it.

The thing is, every car is gaining weight, it's not just the Mustang. What about the GT-R. The Miata? Hell, the Challenger compared to it's '70 brethren.

Honestly, I Doubt the Mustang will be heavier than the Camaro and Chalenger.

That is the biggest problem with the auto industry, their vehicles are way overweight and it hurts their performance.

 

[Jim Prower]

*sigh* and you'd probably forgo the comfort, convenience and safety features. Many of us enthusiasts would. that's why there's an Exige. But the vast majority of the buying public wants a roomy, powerful, safe, comfortable car, and there's nothing us enthusiasts can do about it. whining isn't going to help. Even the Compacts are balooning in size: my Nova is roughly the same size as a Toyota Yaris Sedan. The Corolla, which my Nova was based on, has grown bigger.

If we get what we want, everybody else doesn't get what they want. It sucks, but that's life. Perhaps we should all buy used cars.

 

[Joey D]

This is because people are idiots, they think a bigger car with more crap on them makes it safer. You can still have a comfortable, safe car, you just need to change the material you are using. And no it is not to expensive to do that, if cars were massed produced with carbon fibre then if would be much cheaper.

 

[Jim Prower]

I've been pondering that myself, but I've gotta say that I haven't heard of a way to produce Carbon Fibre parts without plenty of manual labor. Automate the process, take the human error out of it, make it robust, and, as common as carbon is, you could have a good, light engineering material, provided you could make the resin cheap enough. Of course, it's up to a process engineer to find a way to do it. You could become one: they're looking for Engineers of all kinds. It wouldnt' be hard to find a very well-paying job.

The safety weight isn't just size, either, alot of it is the extra sensors, active systems, side-impact airbags (Those, I think, are a good Idea,) and such associated with safety in a car. And then there's sound deadening materials (There's another materials science that needs work) and big stereos, convenience features, all that jazz, that really have started to turn cars into personal isolation pods. I guess not everyone likes engine and road noise.

It's stupid, but the market demands certian things, and it's a capitalist society: Any good manufacturer will build what the customer wants. "The customer is always right (Even when they're wrong)" may be well worn, but it still holds true.

 

[Tornado]

This is because people are idiots, they think a bigger car with more crap on them makes it safer.

A bigger car is safer in a collision with a smaller car a good portion of the time.

You can still have a comfortable, safe car, you just need to change the material you are using.

A aluminum car designed in the exact same way as a high-strength steel car will be less safe 100% of the time. And designing a car around more expensive aluminum to make it as safe is more expensive than simply making a steel car out of aluminum.

And no it is not to expensive to do that, if cars were massed produced with carbon fibre then if would be much cheaper.

You can say it as much as you want, but it still isn't going to be true. Not unless some company throws a couple hundred million at the carbon fiber production process, which is slow, complex and expensive. Ditto to aluminum, but on a far smaller scale.


Face it Joey: People who will buy the Mustang, Challenger, and the Camaro will not care about fuel mileage, or at the very least it will not be anywhere near the top of their priorities. There are plenty of similarly expensive cars that are just as fast and handle better for the same price as those Mustangs, Camaros and Chellengers. The fact that the Mustang has been selling so well tells you that they don't care. The fact that you think they should is all well and good, but it makes no difference. The Challenger will come out. People will buy every one, and totally ignore the terrible mileage that it doesn't actually possess.
When gas hits $7 a gallon, they might. But as far as I'm aware, people don't seem too particularly worried about it at the moment.

 

[Joey D]

No a bigger car isn't safer, only soccer mom's and weenies think that. I bet you are one of those people who think a Smart car means instant death in a collision. Unless you are a women and have two kids I'll have to assume you are a weenie if you think bigger vehicles are automatically safer.

You have zero concept of material properties if you think cars have to still be made out of the same materials they currently made out of. Seriously go to college and take some courses before you start talking about this stuff. You seriously are just one of those know-it-all teenagers but you really don't know jack...unless of course you have a friend named jack.

You have no idea about economics either, if light weight materials were mass produced they would be cheaper. Even you should understand this.

Yes people will care about fuel mileage, just because you are so short sighted that you can't see fuel prices will be $4.00 per gallon by summer and climbing every year doesn't mean everyone is blind. I'll be more than happy to loan you my glasses, they might help since yours don't seem to be cutting it.

 

[Tornado]

No a bigger car isn't safer, only soccer mom's and weenies think that. I bet you are one of those people who think a Smart car means instant death in a collision. Unless you are a women and have two kids I'll have to assume you are a weenie if you think bigger vehicles are automatically safer.

I've seen Bill Nye the Science Guy. More weight = more momentum. Crash tests show nothing other than what will happen if a car hits a brick wall at an exact angle at an exact speed. That lovely "Mini is safer than a Ford F150" article you tried to herald as proof of your claim? Yeah, what if they head-on into each other? I have a hard time thinking that the Mini will come out the winner.

You have zero concept of material properties if you think cars have to still be made out of the same materials they currently made out of. Seriously go to college and take some courses before you start talking about this stuff. You seriously are just one of those know-it-all teenagers but you really don't know jack...unless of course you have a friend named jack.

Companies are currently investing in high strength steel to lighten cars. If aluminum was as easily usable as you contend, why wouldn't they just use that?

You have no idea about economics either, if light weight materials were mass produced they would be cheaper. Even you should understand this.

That's all well and good. So, who is going to foot the bill to develop this miracle carbon fiber production technology? Because as of now Carbon Fiber is more expensive to produce than steel. Not because not many people use it. But because it is more expensive, period. You are essentially saying something similar to "if diamonds were mass-produced, they would be cheap." That simply does not work in the case you are describing, and for the exact same reason.
Carbon fiber production is a very labor intensive, time consuming and expensive process. Making it so every car uses carbon fiber isn't going to instantly change that. Nor will doing the same to aluminum. Someone first needs to develop a mass-production process, and that takes money.

Yes people will care about fuel mileage, just because you are so short sighted that you can't see fuel prices will be $4.00 per gallon by summer and climbing every year doesn't mean everyone is blind. I'll be more than happy to loan you my glasses, they might help since yours don't seem to be cutting it.

Ah. So all one needs to do to be able to have a "I'm superior to you because I am environmentally conscious" attitude is buy a Mini? I should have known. I figured only hybrid ownership brought out such ideas.
I'm not the short-sighted one. The entire American car buying public is (especially not people who are going to be buying muscle cars). People DO NOT CARE that gas has risen $0.50 in a few months, or at the very least care nowhere near as much as you think they do. If they did, why haven't truck sales gone down the toilet? Why aren't performance car sales completely decimated? Why would GM be starting a "RWD revolution" of cars on the Zeta platform? Why is hype for the Dodge Challenger so high?
Why would Honda make the new Accord 10% larger? Why would Ford keep releasing new Mustang variations? Why is the Mustang selling so well? More importantly, why are people buying all of these?
Give up yet? Maybe its because the American public isn't worried about it at the moment, or at least aren't worried about it enough to do anything about it. So, you expect Chrysler or Ford to lead the charge in changing that thinking? Spend billions of dollars that they don't have to develop lighter vehicles and entirely new processes for producing lightweight materials, simply so you can stand there and say "Chrysler sucks" or "Fords weigh too much." Especially when more and more government regulations would make any weight loss moot.
On top of all that, those billions of dollars have to be transferred somewhere, and guess what? Car costs WOULD go up. Putting Ford and Chrysler in even a bigger hole when people ignore their cars altogether.

The amount of importance you seem to be putting on the entire industry to make lighter cars implies that you know more than the entire industry, and that is something I find to be incredibly laughable. You are right: Fuel mileage is in important. But something is only important to companies when it is important to their customers.

 

[Joey D]

Since you have the Mr. Serious face on again I guess I should inform you that my tongue was in my cheek during that post. Honest to Christ take a friggen chill pill some time.

Oh and I didn't mention the Mini once during my post, so way to clutch at straws...be careful though, straws aren't that strong since they are only plastic tubes. I figured I'd just let you know since you epically fail with material strength .

 

[Tornado]

I love how, when you are worried that you may be proven wrong, you simply say "tongue in cheek." Considering how important you make fuel mileage out to be, the fact that you are completely unwilling to actually debate the topic and instead just say some variation of "I know more than you and am therefore superior" tells me that you don't, in fact, know anything. Quite a shame, too.

 

[Jim Prower]

You know, you need to either:

Stop acting like you are being serious when you make statements like that, OR
Stop going back on what you're saying, by saying "Oh, I wasn't being serious about it."

Reason being that people DO take what you think seriously.

EDIT: Tree'd, darn it, Toronado.

 

[Joey D]

You go out and make this epic posts when it's pretty clear that all my responses to you are nothing more than mocking humour. I mean come on, I will go through and explain to you point by point how un-serious my response was but I don't really want to.

I'll be more than happy to debate a topic with people that understand what's going on, you just look for an argument against anything I say so I don't really take anything you say seriously. If I were you I'd just quit replying to anything I say because you'll just get a bunch of tongue in cheek answers....unless of course we are assuming the internet is serious business.

Reason being that people DO take what you think seriously.

Sorry I just don't assume people are thick and can understand when humour is being applied. It's the internet, just be light-hearted for christ sake.

 

[Jim Prower]

You know, I'm autistic, and I may not be an expert on reading emotions, But I really don't see the humor in your posts.

 

[Joey D]

You know, I'm autistic, and I may not be an expert on reading emotions, But I really don't see the humor in your posts.

You being autistic has nothing to do with this topic, nor does any of this for that matter. If you don't find it funny than don't laugh. But let's just shut up about it and go back to talking about the Mustang?

Anyways back on topic:

I am curious to see if they put IRS on the new model and how it helps the car. People have been crying for it for years, myself included, and it will be interesting to see if it makes the car better like we have all claimed it would.

 

[Tornado]

Both times it has come up, you have said, essentially: "I am right because I've been to college and I therefore know more than you." While that may indeed be the case, you haven't said one thing to back it up other than repeating variations of that same theme. I see no facts, no nothing. Not even any speculation. The only numbers you have posted have been laughably wrong, which before they are proven wrong you hold it above me as if you are a superior being. Its also pretty obvious that you were trying to have a serious debate before I came in and challenged your points. This tells me that you either have no points, or simply don't like it when people prove you wrong.
And if you don't think the Internet is Serious Business, stop bringing up serious topics, and then when challenged on them say "I was only having fun." If you continue to bring up how cars need more fuel mileage, no matter which topic they are in, I will continue to argue it. Its as simple as that. Not because I'm after your blood, but because I would truthfully like to know whether you are just a clueless know-it-all, or whether you actually have insight on the topic. Your points on hybrids tell me the latter, but everything you have said about this topic tell me the former.
At the same time, for someone who is constantly calling people hypocritical, and constantly wagging fingers of shame when people condescend and insult each other; you certainly seem to do it. All the time. In fact, I'm sure this will lead to you badmouthing my opinions where you don't expect me to look. A technique that I will admit to have used, but at the same time I don't constantly remind people that they are breaking the AUP, so whatever.
Furthermore, if you think I have some kind of vendetta against you, I think you need to let the hot air out of you head. I debate with people when I think they are wrong. I don't care who you are. I don't care which college you went to. And I certainly have a better use for my time than following someone around on the internet to prove them wrong. I don't pick fights simply because I don't like a person, and I am far too indifferent to your attitude for it to matter if I did. I've had epic debates with members who have far more contrasting personalities with me than you do, and it hasn't made me dislike them. Me constantly arguing with you simply means you are constantly saying things I disagree with. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

[Azuremen]

Roffles.

Srsly, roffles. Toronado, watch the commas or you will be pulling a TVR soon.

That aside, half the points Joey made, regarding material strength and manufacturing costs, are quite valid. The only reason I can easily see why aluminum and carbon fiber have no been made into standard materials is they are difficult to work with. Doing repairs on an aluminum frame is a pain in the butt and requires special equipment.

And larger cars are not inherently safer. Engineering makes a car safer, not its weight on the scales. Just look at some Chinese car crash tests to see this.

IRS would be a nice modernization on the Mustang, and it is in need of it. But I am also the type that thinks DOHC is vastly superior to OHV, along other modern blasphemes in the department of automotive engineering.

 

[Joey D]

Doing repairs on an aluminum frame is a pain in the butt and requires special equipment.

Ah yes, something I didn't really take into consideration. Carbon fibre is a bit of a pain to work with, but I think we could adapt ourselves to work with aluminum. I'm guessing steele was a pain at one point in time. We need to just start branching out and making advancements.

IRS would be a nice modernization on the Mustang, and it is in need of it. But I am also the type that thinks DOHC is vastly superior to OHV, along other modern blasphemes in the department of automotive engineering.

I tend to agree on the DOHC. Didn't the older Cobra Mustang come with a DOHC?

 

[Gashlycrumb]

In most cases energy transfer has more to do with passenger safety than vehicle mass. You need a car that can absorb as much energy as possible and transfer the remaining energy around the passenger cell. This can equally be done in a light car or a heavy car. You could make a tank of a car that would crush all other cars in its path, but would perform horribly in a crash with a solid object because the passengers would be splattered throughout the interior of the vehicle as there would be nothing to absorb the impact.

To return to the topic at hand, I would prefer a lighter more nimble Mustang. To my mind that is more in keeping with the '65 Mustangs, before they went power mad in the 70's and just plain boring in the 80's and 90's.