guionM

My 85 Mustang 5.0 weighed a hair over 3200 pounds.

It had no power windows or mirrors.

No Navigation
.
No power seats, let alone heated versions.

The rear seat didn't fold down.

It didn't have leater interior (which weighs more than cloth).

It had just 5 speeds in it's manual transmission.

It's brakes were barely bigger than coffee saucers.

I could cover the tiny front brake calipers with my fist.

Anti lock?? Ha!

The sound insulation wasn't much thicker than a flannel shirt.

It didn't have a center console (it was optional in the LX).

It had zero airbags.

The rear axle weighed half as much as an IRS setup, but it was just a log attacked by springs, shocks, and 2 control arms. Something found on perhaps Fred Flintstone's car.

The doors were flimsy enough that if you got T-boned, you'd feel the texture of the grille of the vehicle that hit you.

If you hit something head on, the roof would buckle right above the steering wheel.

The Chassis was so flimsy, that if you modded your 210 or 225 hp engine to put out more than 300hp, it was reccomended that you add chassis braces to the midsection of the car.

Speaking of flexible bodies, if you were serious about handling, you needed a brace between the strut towers to make them stay the same distance from each other under all conditions.


Point to all this is... you're never going to see 3200 pounds in a V8 powered car ever again. Even a 4 cylinder BMW 328 (which at 181" is exactly the same size as a Chevrolet Cruze) weighs in at 3300 pounds to start (all things equal, RWD's drivetrain and rear end does add weight over a FWD car). Sure, even I'd like another car like my old 5.0 LX. But in the end, I'd have to admit the novelty would wear off in 2 days when I'd realize how much sacrifice it takes to get back to that weight.

The problem isn't that car makers simply added pounds for S&G. Our (car buyers) standards have gone through the roof. Performance has gone through the roof. As for Federal standards, if you look at the weight cars have gained through Fed mandates versus buyers demands and things needed to remain competitive, Fed mandates aren't even in the same ballpark as the mandate we have of power seats, 6 piston brembo brakes, 425hp engines, 6, 7, or even 8 speed transmissions, navigation systems, vault-like NVH, sophisticated IRS, and 20 disc CD changers with 10 speaker sound systems.

Sure, if you can make a iron block and head V8 Mustang weigh 3200 pounds in 1985, you can do it with aluminum engines today.

But who'd buy it?

From 1995 to 1998, Ford made the Mustang GTS. It was the spirit of the old 5.0 LX Mustangs. Low content. Many items deleted. It's best year it sold 6300 cars (compared to nearly 9,000 Cobras annually back then).

The unpleasant fact is that no one buying a new car really cares about weight. They care about comfort, features, how it drives, it's fuel economy, and to a very small, minute sliver, how fast is it compared to the competition (Mustang and Camaro core buyers are Chevy or Ford enthusiasts, so they are going to buy their car regardless as to how it stacks up against the competition). All the new car buyers who are actually aware of what their vehicle weighs would barely be enough to hold a good card game.

The number that care enough to go without modern comforts and performance would probably fit in a phone booth.

Bob Cosby

My 88 Coupe weighed 3020 lbs. Power windows/locks, a few other minor options, but no A/C.

I do have to agree with the basic content of your post....sadly.

graham

If you put a jack under one corner of a fox body to change the tire the doors usually won't shut until you let the car down.

94LightningGal

Yet, Fords goal for the 2014.5 Mustang is a weight reduction of 300lbs.

I guess we will see how they do.

Bob Cosby

LOL. Nah, you just have to slam it harder....

93RedDevilZ28

Provide the source that states a 1982 Corvette came from the factory weighing 3,000lbs. It appears to have weighed much more than that.

HowStuffWorks "1982 Corvette Specifications"

Chevrolet Corvette (C3) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Bob Cosby

I had an 80 Vette. Don't remember the exact weight, but it was MUCH more than 3000 lbs. Something along the lines of 3550 with me in it (about 165 at the time - 1987).

SRFCTY

Speaking of weight...why do GM cars always seems to be 200-300 lbs more than their class competitors? There has to be a way to get the weights down, and do it cost-effectively, as other manufacturers don't seem to have as many weight issues with their vehicles.

93RedDevilZ28

What makes it certified? How do you know when it was last calibrated?

Still waiting for a link to the source...

guionM

Funny you say that... I thought that was prety odd when it happened on mine. I attributed it to age at the time (I had already had it 8 years), and prompted me to get rid of it.

Fox Mustangs are featherweight cars, and I still have a lot of love for them. But they are example of weight cutting gone wild. Flimsy brakes, flimsy structure, and next to no sound deadening. They are extraordinarily nose heavy because putting a small relatively light V8 in that car was like putting a boat anchor on the hood of a Mini.

It was never made to handle anything near 200 hp either. Ford resorted to slap bars then finally rear quad shocks and carving the daylights out of the wheelwells just to fit a set of 225s on the car.


I don't believe it....per se. Here's what I mean.

I think Ford can easily take 100 pounds out of the base Mustang simply by dropping the V6 (or making it optional) and switching to an EcoBoost 4. The engine and related lighter drivetrain will easily shed 100 pounds. I believe the use of high strength steel, trimming a little bit of length out back, and going through the car saving an ounce or two here and there might even loose another hundred pounds.

But most of that weight is going right back on the car in the form of an IRS and a 8 speed automatic. and whatever the latest electric and electronic gizmos Ford will need to stay competitive. The structure will be the same, the 5.0 and Shelby drivetrains aren't going to loose weight, and those big heavy iron brake discs and Brembo calipers aren't likley to go away either.

I'd expect Ford to say they cut X pounds of weight to make up for added features, but I personally think the whole exercise is going to come out virturally a wash (save perhaps the base model).

Just my thoughts.

guionM

Good luck to you saying "I told you so" Aaron.... you're gonna need it.

I'm not sure what to make of your post. It seems you believe weight on today's cars simply appeared out of nowhere, or perhaps they were added on cars simply because today's engineers have nothing to do but find ways to add weight to cars. I'd like to hear your view on this.

Untill then, a few corrections.

A base 1982 Corvette weighs 3345 pounds, not the 3000 pounds you posted. This was weighed by GM and car magazines that ran tests at the time. No offense, but I think most everyone would put more stock in this number since it's multiple sources and presumably more accurate "certified" scales.

Next, the difference in the weight of a cheap, often broken Fox Mustang seat and a modern seat complete with power motors, airbag sensors, lumbar inflators, heaters, and such (not to mention the fact that they are much stronger than those Fox seats is a bit more than 20 pounds each.

As memory recalls, the stock rotors on my 5.0 weighed at or just below 10 pounds (perhaps about 20 pounds together). Rotors on Brembo weigh in at over 50 pounds a pair (about a 60 pound increase alone, not including calipers that are at least twice the weight of 5.0 Fox calipers).
Brembo Cross Drilled Sport Disc Brake Rotors Camaro SS Rear 2010-2012 - Lingenfelter Performance

Perhaps that Garmin you buy at Radio Shack weighs 1 pound, but the one in the car, complete with wiring is at least 2. A pair of power window motors are 14 pounds. A/C weighs about 80-90. A modern stereo system with speakers is just a hair under 18 pounds (about 9 pounds more than my 5.0's stereo). The padding difference between a fox Mustang and the current one is at least 30 pounds (includes what is injected into the pillars and the sandwiched metal that the fox didn't have), and that's probably being conservative.

IRS adds about 100 pounds to a car.

Supercharger/Intercooler, another 100.

Horsepower adds heat, that means a bigger cooling system: A new Shelby holds 21 quarts of coolant....5.0s held 11.

More power means tougher and heavier transmissions: the Fox Mustang's T5 transmission weighed 75 pounds. The 6 speed that replaced it weighed 115 pounds. The Tremec in the Camaro SS (and Shelby GT500) is 146 pounds.
6-speed Manual Specifications (SS) - Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com

I could go on and on, but I think just 15 minutes spent checking my files and free researching to show at least 440 pounds of weight pretty much proves the point (I could pull up additional files and go over everything pound by pound, but I have better things to do on a rare Friday off, with sunny weather).

Point is that anyone who thinks weight is being piled on for no reason needs a major league reality check. Car manufacturers are stuck between the 2 opposing sides of a need to reduce weight to improve fuel economy and the additional weight required to have all the performance and creature comforts that buyers (including us here) demand today, or they'll go elsewhere.

Finally, in addition to this More material=More money!!

If GM, Ford, Chrysler, BMW, Mercedes, Nissan, or any other car company on the planet can save money using 3200 pounds of steel and plastic instead of using 3800 pounds of the stuff, they'd be all over it as if it was a cure for cancer... that means higher profit margins (lower material cost+ same selling price=higher profits.... for those that need equasions).

Sure, you could build cars completely out of Titanium... but who's gonna pay for it?

So, once again, lets drop this bogus "[i]Engineers are lazy, that's why cars weigh so much[i]" nonsense.

Z28Wilson

On the issue of weight, we know these cars are built the way they are in part to handle insane horsepower numbers.

Maybe I'm in the minority here, but I see the ZL1 and to a greater extent, the '13 GT500, as absurd cars. I have no want or use for 600-700 HP in a street car. Don't need brake rotors the size of lawn and garden trash can lids either.

I'm probably dreaming at this point but I'd love it if GM and Ford got back to basics - a chassis designed to handle maybe 450-500 HP from the factory at most, with a nice screaming smallblock. Now, the very top end cars in that scenario might be a few ticks slower over 1320' than today's GT500/ZL1 but I personally would be ok with that. I don't really know what you do for an encore when a couple of simple mods puts these supercharged cars deep in the 10's.

Used to be you bought a Camaro or Mustang and if you wanted to go wild with it, you did it on your own dime. Now, we're essentially building turn key race cars and sacrificing some performance metrics at the lower, more "everyman" trim levels to do so. It just isn't making much sense to me anymore.

Oh by the way, get off my lawn.

Dan Baldwin

1985 Corvette weighed 3250 lb. New one weighs about 100 lb. more while meeting all additional regs and maintaining the same relative price and performance. Not bad...

The reasons for most of the Mustang's ~400 lb. weight gain are:
1. going to the bigger/heavier OHC/DOHC engines
2. moving from the Fox platform to a bigger/heavier luxury sedan platform (LS).

While some factors do legitimately conspire to add weight, better design and analysis, better materials, better manufacturing techniques, etc. act to negate the weight gain.

Another car to consider: the new Toyobaru twins (Scion FR-S and Subaru BRZ). This car is almost identical to the 1989 240SX in size, layout and relative price/performance. The '89 SX weighed ~2650 - 2700 lb. The FR-S/BRZ weighs in at ~2750 lb.

New cars do not HAVE to be so much heavier, but the will has to be there in the development process to keep it down.

And if you start with a HUGE 4200 lb. full-size sedan like they did with the 5th gen, all hope is lost...

[/quote]The rear axle weighed half as much as an IRS setup,[/quote]The IRS cobra did a lot to suggest that IRS must add 150 lb. or so, but in reality there is little to no weight penalty. For one thing, about half of the IRS Fox Cobra's additional weight was unrelated to the IRS, and for another, the weight gain that WAS associated with the IRS was due to adapting it to a chassis designed around a live axle without changing the structural hardpoints.

For a dedicated IRS design, no significant weight penalty.

Which is not to say that a new 3200 lb. V8 Mustang would be a flexi-flier.

FWIW, my RX-7's chassis is pretty stiff, and it weighs ~2825 lb. empty with the LS2.

I don't think this *has* to be the case.

Modern BMWs are pigs. They said goodbye to the concept of cool, minimalist, small cars like the 2002 and E30 3-series long ago

Not as much sacrifice as you might think, I bet.

Yet some (few) cars have gained only very little weight...

It is possible.

IMO, the modern Camaro is really more a modern Chevelle than a pony car.

The Mustang, too, has strayed from the original formula.

They both suffered from being based on larger sedans.

I might...

I'm not saying the current car should be de-contented, and in fact no amount of "de-contenting" would make a serious dent in the weight. Keep the content (optional), but put it on a smaller-on-the-outside, lighter-weight platform. Which I *think* is actually the plan...

They probably do, but indirectly. A bigger/heavier car just can't feel as immediate and *fun* as a smaller/lighter-weight car.

Also...

Ah, yes. This could become much more important again. In which case we *should* (I hope) be getting smaller/lighter-weight cars.

I'm suggesting that we should be able to get the similar real comfort and content in smaller/lighter-weight/more fun/more efficient packages.

94LightningGal

The Mustang does not ride on the DEW platform. The only thing the Mustang platform shares with the DEW, is a piece of the floorpan. Everything else is unique to the car.

Ford will be utilizing carbon fiber in alot of its vehicles. It is working with a carbon fiber manufacturer to develop a cost effective way to create the bodies. Carbon fiber in and of itself is not hideously expensive. The processes needed to work with it are. Their goal is to take carbon fiber mainstream.

falchulk

What he is trying to say is power=more weight. In your example a 240sx made 140 hp and the BRZ makes 200hp. Big diffrence between that and a mustang that made 200hp and one that makes 420hp. In order to handle that power you either need expensive materials or heavy materials...at least today. The current corvette may weigh 3350 but look at its cost.