Ford's RWD DEW98 chassis to be replaced by Mustang's D2C.

Apparently Ford's DEW98 chassis (Lincoln LS, Jag S-Type), is nearing the end of it's lifespan.

This chassis was going to form the basis of the '05 Mustang, a couple more Lincolns....and pretty much all future RWD Ford products. The problem. It was too expensive.

The Mustang's new D2C chassis....very loosely based on DEW...will be it's replacement.

Similar to GM's new RWD chassis (call it Sigma Lite, Sigma Mass...or whatever)....D2C will be flexible enough to use on various models. From sporty Mustangs to LARGE Lincoln sedans. It will be available with a live rear axle or a sophisticated multi-link IRS. The next Australian Falcon will also reportedly be based on D2C.

Cool, I’ll have to take note of that.:thumb:

Will they finally get ride of the Crown Vic platform

Originally posted by Z284ever
The next Australian Falcon will also reportedly be based on D2C.

Don't tell any Aussie Ford fans that, you would be shot onsite for that comment. If the falcon platform went to a US design they would no longer be able to say that the Falcon is more "Australian" than the commodore :rolleyes:

Originally posted by Z28x
Will they finally get ride of the Crown Vic platform

I'm not sure why they would have to. They could do a modern looking rebody that car, stretch the wheelbase some and keep on making it for a long time. I think there is a niche for a big, cheap RWD car.

It's very good at what it does - the body on frame is well suited to heavy duty use (such as Taxis and Police Cars). It just needs to be updated (and uh, have the gas tank moved).

My question is: since it cost too much, what will get sacrificed in the name of cost reduction? I am guessing it will be more than just a reduction of cost in the manufacturing or material cost.

Originally posted by Z28x
Will they finally get ride of the Crown Vic platform


I think the Panther platform will be around and updated until at least around 2010.

Originally posted by SNEAKY NEIL
My question is: since it cost too much, what will get sacrificed in the name of cost reduction? I am guessing it will be more than just a reduction of cost in the manufacturing or material cost.

I guess we'll all know what cost reducing changes there are in afew weeks.

But I believe that D2C will have far fewer aluminum suspension components than DEW98. If you ever got a good look under a Jag S-Type, you'd see lots and lots of beautiful aluminum control arms.

I believe those are all gone on D2C. Also D2C will have the Australian based rear Control Blade Suspension. This IRS is said to be cheaper, more compact, lighter and with better dynamics than DEW98. It's also made from common steel vs the many aluminum components in DEW. The live rear axle versions will have a a Panhard rod and torque arm arrangement similar to the 3rd and 4th gen F-car rear suspension.

Also, and unfortunately.......D2C is rumored to carry cheaper McPherson struts in front over DEW's SLA front suspension.

If D2C uses less weight-saving aluminum than DEW98 did, then perhaps the 3800lbs. 05 Stang rumors have some legitemacy to them... I still doubt it will be that heavy though.

Originally posted by Sixer-Bird
If D2C uses less weight-saving aluminum than DEW98 did, then perhaps the 3800lbs. 05 Stang rumors have some legitemacy to them... I still doubt it will be that heavy though.

Good point....but who knows. It is said that the new control blade rear suspension is actually lighter in steel than the DEW IRS is with aluminum control arms.

Originally posted by Sixer-Bird
If D2C uses less weight-saving aluminum than DEW98 did, then perhaps the 3800lbs. 05 Stang rumors have some legitemacy to them... I still doubt it will be that heavy though.

The 3800lb. came directly from how much the Thunderbird weighs.To say the S197 will be that high is plain dumb.(I know you didnt say this Sixer your just retyping what you read :bow: )
The T-Bird has SO much extra material for bracing and stiffness (remember its a vert.) of course it would weight that much-Plus like Z28 said the Control Blade is extremely lite compared to the Bird/LS IRS.But then again the GT will have a solid axle..We'll know soon enough.:)

Originally posted by guess who
The 3800lb. came directly from how much the Thunderbird weighs.

What makes you say he was refering to the T-Bird?

Originally posted by guess who
The 3800lb. came directly from how much the Thunderbird weighs.To say the S197 will be that high is plain dumb.(I know you didnt say this Sixer your just retyping what you read :bow: )
The T-Bird has SO much extra material for bracing and stiffness (remember its a vert.) of course it would weight that much-Plus like Z28 said the Control Blade is extremely lite compared to the Bird/LS IRS.But then again the GT will have a solid axle..We'll know soon enough.:)

Thats what I figured. I doubt the live axle would weigh any more than the CBS. I guess we'll see what the real weight is soon enough. I'm still surpirsed that Ford is dumping the DEW98 after such a short lifespan.

Let's wait until the car comes out before judging it. Too much speculation, and often times in the past such speculation about cars has been wrong.

Originally posted by Z284ever
What makes you say he was refering to the T-Bird?

Please note in my previous post.

".(I know you didnt say this Sixer your just retyping what you read )"

There was word going round for a while that the S197 was going to weight 3800 pnds.And where that info came from was someone thought (not blaming Sixer here) they would go and look up the only 2 door DEW98 platformed car (T-Bird) and say hey look how heavy the new Mustang will be. :rolleyes: ..Which (like Sixer see's already) the CBS will be lighter then the DEW IRS.The front suspension should be "fairly" equal in weight when you remove the upper control arm and replace the shock with a strut.

SIXER-Here is something for you to think about.This may hit you odd.A Lincoln LS V6 curb wt. is 3681 (4 door car ;) )
LS V8 curb wt. is 3762.
The Bird T-Bird is heavier then both of them :eek: !!!!!!

We should know more about Mustangs specifications in just over a month from today, so stand by. :)

As for the D2C, there's likely alot of ways to make it cheaper without having to resort to massive weight increases over the DEW.

The DEW (almost like the MN12) was intended to be spread out over a wide range of cars that never happened (Lincoln Mark IX, small Lincoln sports sedan, Ford Taurus replacement) as well as the Jaguar, Lincoln LS, Thunderbird & Mustang. Without that cost spread, the LS is still an expensive chassis.

Ford essentially created a new chassis when they took cost out of the Mustang's version of DEW (the lack of a wider cost spread made DEW too expensive for Mustang to use it profitably). A live axle is one way to cut alot of assembly cost, but also creating a chassis that's modular in construction (ie: GM) can create a wide range of vehicles for little money.

What's really ironic is how the mistakes of the MN12 were all but repeated with the DEW. Weight: The V8 LS weighs as much as the larger V8 MN12 Thunderbird, Complexity: DEW & MN12 are world class, but expensive chassis, and marketing mistakes: Both were created to be widely used, but many models that were to use these chassis were cancelled, dooming the chassis way before it's time. :think:

Originally posted by Sixer-Bird

I'm still surpirsed that Ford is dumping the DEW98 after such a short lifespan.

I wouldn't be too surprised to see Sigma "evolve" once the cheaper Sigma Mass is on line.

Originally posted by Z284ever
I wouldn't be too surprised to see Sigma "evolve" once the cheaper Sigma Mass is on line.

Well, the CTS is due for it's 1st major change in 2007. :think:

Originally posted by crYnOid
Don't tell any Aussie Ford fans that, you would be shot onsite for that comment. If the falcon platform went to a US design they would no longer be able to say that the Falcon is more "Australian" than the commodore :rolleyes:



Good One :D :D :D

Originally posted by guionM


The DEW (almost like the MN12) was intended to be spread out over a wide range of cars that never happened (Lincoln Mark IX, small Lincoln sports sedan, Ford Taurus replacement) as well as the Jaguar, Lincoln LS, Thunderbird & Mustang. Without that cost spread, the LS is still an expensive chassis.



DEW98 was supposed to encompass both a RWD and a FWD platform - it was more of a "program" than a mere "chassis designation." Poor market demand killed the Mark IX, a move that happen latter than most people think. After all, Ford held on with the Mark XIII a year after it should have died. The European Ford Scorpio replacement died because of a market shift away from "non-prestige" executive cars. (That, and the last restyling of the Scorpio was so appalling that fleeing Ford buyers kept the Omega longer than most of the "big" mass-market cars.)

Of course, the FWD part of the program died long before the lower-end RWD application. Perhaps that's why the '96 Taurus platform has lingered so long.

Originally posted by guionM
Well, the CTS is due for it's 1st major change in 2007. :think:

More proof that GM hasn't learned the lesson of short model cycles from the Japanese. Even the current E46 3-series is getting a full redesign sooner than most people think.