If I buy one of these will I burn in hell??? Man they sure are nice

 

IMO, I cant see it, they are two very different cars. Especially in light of the fact it has a solid rear axle which is a cardinal sin for anybody who is overly fond of mechanical complexity. Nevermind the fact that the stang also has a strut front end which people dont even pay attention to because of the SRA.

Even if the base vette was saddled with an LS1 and was 100 hp down I still feel that somebody interested in a vette wouldn't give the mustang a second thought.

On the flip side, there are quite a few cobra people who are so hung up on the fact that the new Shelby doesnt have an IRS they should really be shopping a vette.

 

Could you point out a few of these people?

Thanks.

 

Sure! Anybody who says in the same breath "I really like the new shelby cobra mustang, but a live rear axle is inexcusable in a sports car costing 35k or more.", or "I regularly open track my cobra and with an IRS I can go through a turn atleast 20 to 30 mph faster." or " We know the engineering team is full of BS, the bean counters got their way and the mustang is saddled with a rear suspension that should'a died out with pushrod engines." or "the SRA mustang crowd are all drag racers and they reperesent only 3 to 5% maybe of the whole market for mustangs, so everybody else got screwed on ride and handling."

 

Thanks. Can you please quote links to those statements from "anybody"? I'd especially like to see the person that says he/she can go through a turn 20-30 mph faster with the IRS.

Personally - as a 3 time Cobra owner, I welcome the live axle. Then again, I swing towards the drag racing side of things - which I think is the bias of most Cobra and certainly most GT drivers. FYI...only ~3-6% of Mustangs had IRS in years they were available - so everybody else has been getting "screwed" since there was a Mustang to be screwed with.

***EDIT: I had "V6" in place of "GT" in the second paragraph. Oops. ***

 

I doubt they'll miss the wheel hop, the IRS being the relatively weak link, the extra weight, etc... With the number most of these things will be putting put, the IRS would have been next to useless if it was anything like the IRS found in the 99-04 Cobra's.

To say that most Cobra owners are dissapointed is wrong i think. Especially when you consider how popular the IRS to live axle swap is within this camp. Much more popular than the Live axle to IRS swap in the more numerous GT crowd...that's for sure. Either way, Ford plans on selling sub-200k mustangs this year, use of the live axle sure hasn't slowed down sales, that's for sure.

I'd wait to see how it handles before signing it off as a slow corner carver.

NEIL, the 04 Cobra was already as fast as the base c6. It ran high 12's and 110-113.5mph traps which is what the c6's run. I expect this GT500 to be well into the low 12's @ 117-119mph.

Guess we'll find out how capable a handler and how capable a drag car it really is once production hits.

 

I with you Bob, I love the knuckle dragging nature of the mustang its only missing a solid pushrod engine to make it complete. However let me see what I can dig up as far as links - I don't know what mustang boards you might subscribe to, but a sure way to start a flame war (as I'm sure you know) is to bring up the subject of SRA vs. IRS

http://forums.bradbarnett.net/index.php?showtopic=19461

http://forums.bradbarnett.net/index....ic=10791&st=14

In any event I'll keep diggin for the reference to the "huge" speed difference between cornering with the 2 suspensions. Its out there in that forum

 

Don't normally post on that one, but ok.

In my opinion, based on my experiences, and given my stated biases, the ONLY real world advantage the IRS has over a live axle is ride quality. Perhaps you can get a slightly better lap time, but on a relatively smooth surface (most tracks fit that, I think), the live axle will do virtually just as well.

FWIW, there are certainly folks that much prefer the IRS - but I think they are in the minority. Likely there are some that won't touch the new Cobra because it does not have the IRS, but I also believe they are in the minority.

Finally....a comment on that first link, the first few posts (I didn't come close to reading them all)...the Cobra will never handle as well as an M3 or Corvette with the current architecture. Doesn't matter if it has an IRS or not - its just not going to happen.

 

I think most forget that the Cobra's roots/platform is shared with a high-volume non-performance oriented $19k v6 mustang. That fact will always prevent the mustang from going head to head with these other word class handlers.

I'm not saying it can't be done. Ford's currently having success with their live-axled Grand Am mustang (kicking *** from what i've heard), and the Cobra R was pretty much up there with the Viper and z06 in the handling department, but the Grand Am car isn't a production car (doesn't have to sacrifice performance for comfort) and the Cobra R was a $55k Mustang geared for race and performance only. The Cobra is no sports car, and above all, it is a compromise and will always remain a compromise when you compare them to better and more expensive M3's and Vette's in the handling department.

At the end of the day, it is a pony car and not a sports car. Personally, i can live with that. If i really wanted a sports car, i wouldn't take a second look at a mustang. I'd be eyeing vettes and Lotus Elise's.

 

Agree 100%.

 

I agree 100%, and I can live with that no problem because you shouldn't have to pimp your wife and daughters to own one. Thats not what a mustang is. Its a cheap performance car and the sort of refinement and level of engineering the other cars possess drives up the cost. Heck the new 3 series with the VANOS system (is that right, or whatever they call that variable valve timing arrangement) drove BMW to develop a composite magnesium/aluminum block just to cut the added weight of the valvetrain. Not cheap stuff I'm sure.

My only real dissapointment with the mustang is the engine - powerwise they are sweet, but If OHC multivalve engines with variable valve timing is so much better than the second coming of christ where is the difference?. Its not there, epsecially when you mod the engines. I dont see gaggle of a 450 to 500 N/A hp 4.6's out there (checking SHM's website they are there, but its an expensive propositon)

 

I've owned RWD cars with both IRS & live axle. Live axle is better, easier, and cheaper to make handle on a racetrack. Live axle can also handle amounts of torque that would rip apart most IRS U-joints and halfshafts.

The only real advantage of IRS is on curves with a rough or uneven road surfaces. My Thunderbird SC can tear up any curve, potholes or not. My Camaro can also tear up corners, but throw a well placed road patch & it steps to the side.

IRS is completely irrelevent on the track. A live axle Camaro Z28 outhandled the new IRS C5 Corvette around a track until GM added electornic dodads to help it out.

THIS IS NOT THE WORK OF BEANCOUNTERS!!
Ford made this car for the aftermarket folks, drag racers, as well as track racers. THAT'S whay it has a very very heavy duty live axle. Ford built in a crazy amount of capacity in these car's driveline.

The engine has forged internals, but is only pumping 8psi at the blower. My Supercoupe ran a max of 15 from the factory, so there's some serious pressure these engines can handle. The tranny is heavy duty, the live axle is heavy duty.

If this car comes in at $35K, game's over.

 

4.6L is a relatively small-cube v8. Like you said, it can probably be done. Ford's N/A 5.0L cammer makes 425-450 horses i believe, and i believe it even makes around 500hp N/A in full-race trim, but they don't come cheap. The 500hp variant is like a 50k engine while the 425hp variant is a 15k engine. Super $$$. The other cheaper alternative is forced induction of course and that's thye route Ford took.

I too would have loved to seen an Ls-7 like 500hp 7.0L all-aluminum pushrod v8 under the hood of the new shelby, but i have zero complaints about the blown 5.4L or 4.6. It doesn't need to make 450-500hp N/A modded because it makes that stock and is capable of a lot more with simple/cheap mods. Especially now that a twin screw comes factory stock . Getting this thing to 700 hp will be too easy.

GM has made me a big fan and believer of the pushrod v8's, but i've got strong admiration for the 4.6L Dohc in N/A and F/A trim. Always had. My one and only complaint about the Ford 4.6L Dphc and 5.4 is their weight . You just know that the Blown iron-blocked 5.4L Dohc is no LsX in that department.

 

Believe it or not, I have actually had a Ford rep come up and talk to me at NMRA/FFW races and ask my opinion of this or that as it pertains to a 'next' Mustang. This was back in 2000/2001, if memory serves. Of course, it was at a drag strip, I'm a drag racer, so you know where my bias is.

The Modular engine simply isn't designe to be high HP platform. The 4.6 is short on cubes, and while the 5.4 has the cubes, it gets it all by adding stroke (and deck height, and thus width, and thus weight). Neither setup can be bored significantly. The 4V heads are, IMHO, spectacular, and make an otherwise so-so performer into something that is at least in the ballpark of an engine with a lot more cid and very, very good heads too (talking LSx series here). It also allows for very conservative cam setups for xyz amount of power.

Of course, when forced induction comes into the equation, all bets are off.

 

yeah, I think I could bring myself to own one.