Ford's RWD DEW98 chassis to be replaced by Mustang's D2C.
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.
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.
Re: Ford's RWD DEW98 chassis to be replaced by Mustang's D2C.
Originally posted by Z284ever
The next Australian Falcon will also reportedly be based on D2C.
The next Australian Falcon will also reportedly be based on D2C.
Originally posted by Z28x
Will they finally get ride of the Crown Vic platform
Will they finally get ride of the Crown Vic platform
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 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 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.To say the S197 will be that high is plain dumb.(I know you didnt say this Sixer your just retyping what you read
)
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.
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
)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 Z284ever
What makes you say he was refering to the T-Bird?
What makes you say he was refering to the T-Bird?
".(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.
..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
!!!!!!


