Ford Mustang Thread: 2011 General Talk

  • Thread starter Thread starter YSSMAN
  • 1,163 comments
  • 76,446 views
Chalk this up to potential old-person-crazy-talk, but when I mentioned how the '10+ Mustangs have sequentials to my dad (in an effort to sway his planned purchase of a sports car of that class in 2 years), he mentioned that an older muscle car back in the 60's or 70's had it too. I always wondered why they weren't more popular.

On a similar note, BMW experimented with brake lights that changed their intensity depending on pedal pressure. While I see the problem there (braking lightly would hardly illuminate anything), tweaking the formula could work. Using the Mustang's taillights as an example, light braking uses one bar; medium, two; full on emergency stop uses three?

That's stupid and dangerous. If my foot goes on the brakes, I want the other guy to see my reds no matter how hard I'm braking.
 
What's wrong the 5.0 ND4SPD? And if you're selling, depending on price, dibs!

Nothing wrong with it, in fact I love it more each day I drive it. It handles like a completely different car now with the Steeda Strut tower and Steeda lowering springs. Its just that the 99-04 was the Mustang gen that I've always wanted, especially a terminator 'Stang, so when this car turned up I couldn't say no at all. Anyways, I'm still waiting for an answer from the dealership if my application went through. If I do get the car, I'll update my thread and my fox might be getting bought by one of my good buddies. So it won't be going too far.
 
So you want a 99-04? Hmm pick the Cobra with Independent rear suspension. Supercharge it and you will have great sports car.

I still cant believe the 2011 models still have a live axle in the rear, if it had independent it could be the greatest sports car of this generation! Ford should make an OPTION for independent suspension, even if it was 2-4 K more, people would gladly buy it!
 
Because they weren't very reliable, mostly. And until computers became so engrained in automobiles like they are today, they were far more complex to implement.

They were all over the place in Ford products during the late 60s. Bird, Cougar, GT/CS Mustangs (and Shelbys), etc etc.
 
So you want a 99-04? Hmm pick the Cobra with Independent rear suspension. Supercharge it and you will have great sports car.

I still cant believe the 2011 models still have a live axle in the rear, if it had independent it could be the greatest sports car of this generation! Ford should make an OPTION for independent suspension, even if it was 2-4 K more, people would gladly buy it!

Terminators are supercharged and are still going for insanely high prices around here....

Don't rag on the LRA too much now, Ford has perfected it over the years and that the current car is a hell of handler nowadays.
 
Good god let's not turn this topic into the cesspool LRA vs IRS argument that has been beaten to death.
 
Is there a LRA v. IRS argument thread already? I need to read up on how each one behaves. Like, let's say the Mustang handles perfectly with an LRA. What would be the improvement of a perfected IRS setup, etc?
 
Depends on just how good it is. I'm not sure what the Mustang's using back there, personally, I feel the 4-link is the best setup, but I'm sure some people rather the panhard bar setup, but it don't matter much...Ford hath wrought a damn good LRA setup.

The main advantage to a LRA is the ability to handle lots of torque suddenly without frying CV joints. It's also lighter when properly made, EXTREMELY durable (hence one reason Monster trucks haven't moved to independent suspension, the other that there's no independent Planetary setup) and easier to maintain. It's why the drag racers have held onto it so fervently...They don't seem to know how to make IRS work for them. I think, with the Terminator, Holdiacs, and new Charger, they figured it out somewhat, but a lot of guys running 1000+hp will switch it back to a hugely overbuilt solid rear end. Usually a Ford 9".

On the other hand, there's the road course guys. We won't get into offroad (where I think Independent suspension holds the biggest advantage over solid axles,) but on the road course, the big advantage is on a rough surface. You see, when one tire hits a bump with a LRA setup, it changes the camber angle of both tires, and can also cause the entire axle jump a bit, which makes traction hard to find, even with a limited slip diff. Not to mention, the whole system is unsprung weight, while in an IRS system doesn't have the pumpkin, and the halfshafts and control arms are all partially supported.

However, when dealing with massive power and torque, the CV joints become weak points. Regulations aside, it becomes cheaper with LRA to build an 800+hp tube-frame road or circle-track racer. I'm not saying it's impossible - F1 handled over 1200HP in the '80s, but it's a lot more expensive to develop halfshafts and IRS diffs for road race cars. The other thing is that camber angle on an independently suspended car is dependent on body lean, while LRA systems are independent of the body. I think there's even cambered rear ends nowadays. However, an LRA setup typically has no camber, and it can't be adjusted without removing the entire axle and replacing it. Personally, I think the body lean issue is minimal, since road race cars have so little suspension travel, anyway. It'd only be a disadvantage in an application with lots of lean, like a trophy truck or buggy.

That being said, there are now kits on the market that allow hot rod builders to run IRS setups based around the Ford 9", but they're pricey. Looking one up, it'll run you about $4,500 U.S. complete.
 
Depends on just how good it is. I'm not sure what the Mustang's using back there, personally, I feel the 4-link is the best setup, but I'm sure some people rather the panhard bar setup, but it don't matter much...Ford hath wrought a damn good LRA setup.

The main advantage to a LRA is the ability to handle lots of torque suddenly without frying CV joints. It's also lighter when properly made, EXTREMELY durable (hence one reason Monster trucks haven't moved to independent suspension, the other that there's no independent Planetary setup) and easier to maintain. It's why the drag racers have held onto it so fervently...They don't seem to know how to make IRS work for them. I think, with the Terminator, Holdiacs, and new Charger, they figured it out somewhat, but a lot of guys running 1000+hp will switch it back to a hugely overbuilt solid rear end. Usually a Ford 9".

On the other hand, there's the road course guys. We won't get into offroad (where I think Independent suspension holds the biggest advantage over solid axles,) but on the road course, the big advantage is on a rough surface. You see, when one tire hits a bump with a LRA setup, it changes the camber angle of both tires, and can also cause the entire axle jump a bit, which makes traction hard to find, even with a limited slip diff. Not to mention, the whole system is unsprung weight, while in an IRS system doesn't have the pumpkin, and the halfshafts and control arms are all partially supported.

However, when dealing with massive power and torque, the CV joints become weak points. Regulations aside, it becomes cheaper with LRA to build an 800+hp tube-frame road or circle-track racer. I'm not saying it's impossible - F1 handled over 1200HP in the '80s, but it's a lot more expensive to develop halfshafts and IRS diffs for road race cars. The other thing is that camber angle on an independently suspended car is dependent on body lean, while LRA systems are independent of the body. I think there's even cambered rear ends nowadays. However, an LRA setup typically has no camber, and it can't be adjusted without removing the entire axle and replacing it. Personally, I think the body lean issue is minimal, since road race cars have so little suspension travel, anyway. It'd only be a disadvantage in an application with lots of lean, like a trophy truck or buggy.

That being said, there are now kits on the market that allow hot rod builders to run IRS setups based around the Ford 9", but they're pricey. Looking one up, it'll run you about $4,500 U.S. complete.

^^^That's a pretty complete run-down of it.

I'd like to add... road cars are unlike road-race cars in that they have to have a suspension sprung to provide at least some cushioning against road bumps, and this is where IRS is better than LRA... you can keep it softer for the same handling performance. But there are many factors that have to be considered, and manufacturers can get very creative with bushing deflections, anti-roll bars and damper settings, so this is on a case-to-case basis.

On most roads, an LRA is a match for IRS. On others, where you find a preponderance of single-wheel bumps or potholes around the apexes and exits of corners, you will notice the difference. In other words... LRA is great everywhere except the UK. :lol:
 
JCE
Photoshop one up so we can see what it would look like. I bet it would look ok.

I guess the best way to include them would be like an LED cluster on those reflector squares, like so:

2011fordmustanggtpremiu.jpg


It's a poor angle to demonstrate what I'm thinking, but I think you can visualize what I'm talking about from there.

Here's another pic:

96074d1271163770-snapped-some-pics-2011-mustangs-autoshow-p4030273.jpg


See how the reflectors are illuminated? Those should be the amber LED clusters, and then there should be a red LED rectangle-ring around each amber. Or they could work some audi/bmw magic and come up with some kind light tube or reflector solution to achieve the same effect without the unappealing discontinuity of separate diodes.
 
Funnily enough, I've been reading about solutions to provide edge-only LED backlighting for computer and smart phone screens. You could probably pull off the same sort of thing here.

If anything, though, if ambers are needed, two of the four reverse lights can be sacrificed. or all of them, put a reverse light and red fog in the bumper.
 
I saw an '11 today with these in motion when he was signaling. The light would travel from the inward-most to the outer "bar". Pretty nifty, but also a bit weird to see in person.
 
You can't do sequential turn signals with only 2 lights!
Who said anything about sequential ambers? Vaughn gittins drift car has the outside reverse lights converted to ambers
 
When I first saw the sequential tail lights on the new Mustang, I thought it was an aftermarket mod. They do look sweet!

Saw an '05 body style one with a mod for this one day and I thought it looked great.
 
Pretty nifty, but also a bit weird to see in person.

I voted "bad-ass" immediately, a nice nod to the old Shelby GT500 that did the same with the Thunderbird lights they put in the back of the car.
 
A 9,000 rpm, twin turbo, Mustang? Ya I'll chime in. That's full of huge amounts of win. I hope they drop the V8 program (or just leave it for the GT500) and make this thing a beast.
 
Why do they assume it's a turbo? I wish we could see what those A-pillar gauge pods were. It's just the Boss 302 fascia with the Cali grill.

My guess is a V6TT, a supercharged 5.0, or a highly tuned NA 5.0.

If they stick with the V8, this might be a Mach 1 revival... Something that slots under the Boss. How high did that Boss engine rev? That high redline might rule out a supercharger.

If they go with a TTV8, wouldn't that leave Shelby in the lurch?

edit: Maybe it's.... a 4 banger?
 
Last edited:
A 9,000 rpm, twin turbo, Mustang? Ya I'll chime in. That's full of huge amounts of win. I hope they drop the V8 program (or just leave it for the GT500) and make this thing a beast.
The redline is clearly at 8000, not 9. Whoever wrote that article probably thinks their Camry can go 150 just because that's where the speedometer ends.

How high did that Boss engine rev?
7500. The reasons they think it may be a smaller turbo engine is because of the higher redline and requirement for premium gas. If the Mustang is going to get any new engines, I think an Ecoboost 4 replacing the V6 makes the most sense.
 
The redline is clearly at 8000, not 9. Whoever wrote that article probably thinks their Camry can go 150 just because that's where the speedometer ends.

True, however just because the tach redlines at 8k, doesn't mean it stops there.
 
lrs-17626cs_3746.jpg


This is an OTC front lip that is standard on the 'California Special' Mustang not some special prototype for test mules.

Also, there's been photos/rumors about a direct injection variant of the 5.0L engine. My guess is that this is probably a test mule for the new fuel system. The benefits of DI are higher compression ratios which yield better efficiency. Some DI engines are having problems with carbon buildup, lets hope Ford gets it right.

If it is a turbo something under the hood, it's probably a V8. The Shelby GT500 still uses the older modular engine and is due for a fresh mill. I'd expect something even more potent than 550HP while avoiding gas-guzzler taxation. Turbos seem like a good way around that while simultaneously scaring the bejeezus out of whoever is brave enough to be a passenger.

When the OEMs have horsepower wars; everyone wins.

.....

Buying a Mustang? I recommend these:
bilstein.jpg


I absolutely swear by these things.
 
Before I looked at the images and saw where the redline actually was, my first thought was a bit unusual; 9k RPM and a turbo? Mazda really is working on a turbo rotary?!

:lol:

I'd love to see the Focus ST's engine thrown into the Mustang, and keep the V6 in the lineup for those who just couldn't bear the thought of a 4-banger in there (and who don't remember the SVO). Of course, now that the ST's going to be on sale alongside the Mustang, I doubt that would help the Focus' case. I like Superior's idea of it being a new GT500, with perhaps the new 5.0L taking on a turbo. The current engine can't be long for this world...
 
This is most likely some Shelby model in development, or a Ford Racing Performance test vehicle.


And other than a vague, pulled-out-of-their-ass conclusion, I don't see how this is actually a turbocharged model, either.
 
Last edited:
Back