As we all know....some versions of the next Mustang will come with a live rear axle, (yes, in the year 2005 ).

Supposedly this will be completely re-engineered to perform better than you might expect. The story goes....that Ford will do to the live rear axle what Chevy did to the pushrod V8. The word I get, is that Ford is moving up from the old Fox 4 link and going to a Panhard arm arrangement similar to the 3rd and 4th gen F-car. Ford's official line...is that they're doing that to please "drag racers"......but of course, it hasn't escaped me that they're also saving afew bucks by doing that.

The next Camaro will undoubtedly be IRS across the board.

Which way is best?

The Camaro's "IRS for all"strategy or Mustang's "IRS for the top models only" strategy?

 

For image and handling purposes, and because I'd like to buy an affordable IRS Camaro, I'd say IRS across the board.

 

I maintain that a well-engineered IRS can easily satisfy drag racers and give us the real-world ride and handling benefits we want in a modern performance car. It amazes me that people felt the F-car with its live rear was so rediculously outdated, yet it is acceptable on a ground-up new Mustang for them.

Corvette doesn't seem to suffer from bad wheel hop at the track. It'll be interesting to see how well the GTO hooks up. It is past time to shed the "outdated" label on the Camaro and give it a modern suspension.

 

I was thinking......

Ford's mod motors cost way more to manufacture than GM's GenIII smallblock.

There is no way Ford can substantially change their fixed costs on that.....they will always be at a cost disadvantage compared to GM.

Maybe they look at live rear axle ( as opposed to Camaro's IRS)on base Mustang and GT as their great cost equalizer.

 

I tend to think of it more as a liability. At best it lowers cost. In the end though, most people won't know the difference for the shiny new style Mustang in front of their noses.

 

I totally agree on every single point made

 

I don't think an IRS costs all that much...Holden uses them Quite cost effectivly. I think the issue is that the LS had an expensive unit and instead of engineering one one more cost efficiant and less aluminum intensive, etc...thye just slapped an axle on and called it a day.

 

The 2005 Mustang will sell 200,000 units. I think maybe 30,000 of those will actually know what a live axle is. I only think 15,000 of those 200,000 will care that it has a live axle. If it saves them money without affecting sales, then go Ford.

 

This is where an IRS Camaro steps in and can actually steal Mustang sales.

The ride quality on everyday roads is FAR superior with IRS vs. Solid Axle.

A potential customer test drives an F5 , and then test drive a Mustang, and they'll think the Mustang is as crude and rough as a mid 70's pickup truck....

 

Wow, leave it to Ford to come up with an idea this horrible.

They're gonna screw the pooch in the rear end of the car due to the extra jounce and rebound space the live axle needs...

This would be an amazing reversal...

Mustang gets hammered for a bad axle setup and no room in the backseat, and the new Camaro gets praised for an IRS and better rear seat room.

The WoeFully Ignorant (automotive writers) will tie themselves in knots trying to figure out what to bag on the Camaro for....

 

I cannot wait til the GTO hits the strip.I will be shocked if it wont have any wheel hop.The one thing that helps rid wheel hop is traction.The bad part is it's hard on the CV joint axles.99-01 Cobra owners have bad wheel hop due to the lack of traction,And at the same time have problems with the IRS due to breakage from having a sticky tire on it.03 Cobras seem to live quite well with the power but they have breakage issues to.And if someone says a Vette doesnt get wheel hop they are talking out the wrong end.It just depends on alot of different things.Launch RPM, tire choice, track condition etc.

I like the one post though,Bout made me spit Mountain Dew out of my nose.
"[B]
The ride quality on everyday roads is FAR superior with IRS vs. Solid Axle. I can agree with that!!!I drive an 01 Cobra myself,There isnt any comparison.

A potential customer test drives an F5 , and then test drive a Mustang, and they'll think the Mustang is as crude and rough as a mid 70's pickup truck.... thats what the world has thought of the Camaro since it came out!

Im not bashing you Darth,Not in anyway,But boy you sure did make my day.It sucked til I read that.Thank you!

 

No offense taken whatsoever!!

Hell, I honestly think this is a genuine chance for Camaro to take a giant step ahead of Mustang in real world use!!

IRS alone... assuming it is marketed and promoted properly could really pull Camaro out ahead of Mustang if people test drive them both.

 

If GM doesn't price the base Camaro at some ridiculous premium over the base Mustang (HINT, HINT), then the IRS will be a helluva advantage.

It doesn't matter if the general buying public doesn't know what it is. It doesn't matter about what it does on a dragstrip. I'd argue it doesn't even matter how it rides.

What matters is that you can point at one car and say "This has a rear suspension like a BMW, Ferrari, Porsche. The other has a rear suspension like your dad's 1968 Ford pickup truck."

This is something that can be communicated in a single sentence. This is something that reviewers understand. This is something that everyone understands. And if GM is smart, they'll market it this way.

 

I agree with this.If it does in fact come with IRS and it IS marketed right,It will get higher sales numbers then it did when it left.But I think it will be a while before it will "beat" the sales of the Mustang.Just remember,1964 is about to start all over again regaurding the Mustang/Camaro nameplate's.What would have to happen is Chevy would need to produce the Maro in a high enough number to match Mustang sales.If you dont build them,You cant sell them.
One last thought.We shouldnt speculate on how good/bad a vehicle rides til one has driven both.They arent out yet.But we sure as hell can bash the old ones bud!

 

Be careful with generalities. Like many things automotive, god is in the details. Most people agree the Trailblazer rides better than the Explorer, despite the Trailblazer being solid axle and the Explorer IRS. GM just sweated the details better.

IRS is definitely more expensive than live axle, and it generally weighs more too. Despite that, I agree it's time the f-body stepped out of the stone age and gave its pony car a decent suspension out back.