Z284ever

That's an interesting thought....retrofitting the DEW98 front suspension back on for the Cobra....that combined with the CBS IRS would sure make it handle! I wonder if they actually considered that?

Getting back to the GT....

For $25K, you get an all new, stylish, well equipped, 300 hp V8, RWD car.
I think the Mustang GT will be a popular car.....for the non-discriminating enthusiast.



Maybe Camaro has an opportunity here.

Evil Turbo SS

Im a bench racer when it comes to the twisties but I do take my cars to the drag strip a lot. 3 times a month during the summer. So for me and many others The sold is a benifit. Drag racing is the cheapest form of racing. The Mustang has for the most part been a drag car when built. Its good that they can give drag racers what they want, cut costs and still deliver a above average handling car that appears to have a good interior. Well done Ford. for once.

SNEAKY NEIL

That is true about the Northstar, but it is not geared for performance duty like the Mustang 4.6 is. They have to make sure it is quiet, smooth, and much more "tame" than a performance engine.

My point is, I am not really knocking Ford, having 300 hp on regular gas is fine and good but 300 hp is not going to cut it anymore in this performance age. They have to keep the price of the GT pretty low and far below the Camaro or even GTO pricetag because when the new GT hits the streets, they are going to have a lot of competition from these and many more. I guess this all relies on the Mustang's price and the price of competitors.

You have to think that GM has learned a few things with the Camaro and I am guessing they won't make most of the same mistakes with the 07'. If the LS2 Camaro is priced anywhere near the GT, Ford will have some power problems with that 4.6.

Z284ever

Well, I don't think Camaro needs 400 hp to compete directly with Mustang GT. As far as the GT motor running on 87 octane...I think that's a good idea.

A Camaro model, with ---perhaps---- a detuned LS2, with lower compression, (to run on unleaded), more conservative cam and valvetrain with say 320-340 hp, priced in the mid to high 20's would compete well with Mustang GT, and even cut into the "Specialty Mustang" models.

A modern chassis would seal the deal.

SNEAKY NEIL

But why detune it when the current form is already being produced? You don't have to do any R&D so that would save cost, even if it would not be that much. Also, do people really care about thier perfomance car running on regular or premium? I can see why this would be an issue with the V6 base model because that is the "economy" model but on the V8, I think people would rather have the extra performance than the lower octane rating. Not to mention that most people I know or have talked to put in a higher grade anyway, weather it is actually proven to be better or not.

Maybe if GM did a separate model with the "detuned for economy" motor and did all the things you mentioned and priced it say, 1,000 less than the other model. The thing is, I just don't see people going for that. If you give people a choice, I believe they will go for the "regular" engine. Would many more people buy a GT with a 92 octane motor that produced 330 hp for maybe 1k more...........................I think so.

Z284ever

I think a certain segment of the market....maybe especially the kind of consumers looking for a $25K GT...would consider at purchase time (whether they admit it or not), saving 20-25% on the grade of fuel they'll be using for the next few years. Yes, I believe this is a selling point. Also, I don't see a need for a 330hp GT....especially since the next Mustang up the pecking order will probably have approx. 350 hp from a SC 4.6. Too much overlap with 330hp....both in performance and even cost.

As far as LS2 goes....you'd take the 400 horsies, and so would I...but I feel that is alittle too scary fast for most people in that segment. The majority of people shopping a GT or it's Camaro equivalent aren't necessarilly looking to go 12's off the showroom floor. They are looking for some style, some performance, in an affordable, easy to live with package.

Cost savings? Well, I believe that LS2 carries over LS6's sodium filled valves and premium valve springs...for one thing. There may be afew more dollars in savings here and there on the motor...but the big savings might be on things like drivetrain. Like clutches, CV joints....maybe even brakes.

Think of these motors having the same relationship as the old L-48/LT-1 or the LM-1/L-82.

If Camaro wants to sell at high volume....something between the V6 and a 400 hp V8 needs to exist. I believe that Camaro will have such an option. I haven't figured out if it will be a 6.0 or a 5.3 though.

GOATCRAZY

I think what I was trying to convey was lost in the translation........I don't think GM (or Ford) NEEDS to produce performance V-8's that run on regular. But I certainly feel that it's noteworthy that Ford can . What one could then think is, well...If they can do this with VVT, can they then produce the equivalent amount of horsepower of, say, a 13:1 racing compression engine that would normally require racing gas, on premium gas?

Keep in mind that this is the same technology that the competition from overseas is making big-time horsepower out of small displacement 4-bangers for years. (Can we say VTEC boys & girls?)

I've personally always considered Ford to be in the "dark ages" as far as their engine technology, but I think that they might have seen the light at the blue oval....

dream '94 Z28

Mainstream racing?...comparing your suburban to a Camaro?...solid axle articulation offroad vs. ind. susp?...feed back when the rearend hops out?....drag racing is about more than going fast in a straight line?....

You're funny.

IMO IRS offers too many benefits to both enthusiasts AMD non enthusiasts. It's a bragging point, it'll offer a better ride in real world conditions whether your driving spiritedly or just cruising.

From a heritage standpont these cars were the answer to the Mustang on the street and track...that track being the SCCA Trans Am series, NOT drag racing.

And when was it determined that IRS (properly designed on the right chassis) is heavier than a huge cast iron axle with 5 arms attached to it. I thought a couple of years ago we were saying IRS would be a weight savings.

And Mustang owners may be nuetral to having struts compared to SLA, but EVERY 'Stang owner whose looked under the front of the '98 Z has been left rather envious.

My message to GM...IRS, IRS, IRS!

Z284ever

Thank You

Quote:

And Mustang owners may be nuetral to having struts compared to SLA, but EVERY 'Stang owner whose looked under the front of the '98 Z has been left rather envious.

And, Thank You........

guess who

No envy here.The strut set up will be easier and cheaper to maintain in the long haul.I have a question for all SLA lovers here.Have you personally driven the 2005 Mustang?Do you know how it handles?If your to say that it wont handle well because of this then why is it a 20 year old Fox chassis Cobra R stuck right with your Z06?Sure it is bench racing but it is a very SOLID point.

FWIW Ive seen a video of "Nitrous Pete" in a 03 Cobra run a 9.9Xe.t. with the stock IRS!It had a AOD trans though,The hardest thing on an IRS is the shock of a manual transmission.Not that having 800hp on a engine that was never opened since it left the factory had anything to do with the breaking of certain clutches and misc. parts.


People get more excited to see the huffer on the top of an 03/04 Cobra then look at a LS1-2-6.The LSx series engines are ugly as sin.

Z28Wilson

Key word here being cheaper.

Maybe I'm in the minority but personally I could care less about what an engine physically looks like. It's an engine, something that isn't seen except for the occasional weekend car show. Given the choice between an underpowered beauty queen and an "ugly" beast it's no contest.

Z284ever

Soooo...what you're saying is...the Cobra R .....got good lap times.....NOT because it was a purpose built, gutted, stripped for light weight, limited volume semi-racecar (actually,it was a race car, nothing semi about it), with IRS, huge brakes,sticky rubber and aero aids...and a custom built motor....no sirreee Bob.

It ran with the Z06 because of those sh!tty struts.

Just imagine if it had a decent front suspension....it may have beaten the Z06.


I do agree with you about the LSx motors though...they are pretty ugly.

AnthonyHSV

Some info on the IRS system that will probably be going into the new Camaro.

http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/040107/clw069_1.html

Evil Turbo SS

I have to CALL BS.....

I like the z06 a lot better than the Cobra R but. Its no race car. It lugs a lot more pounds around than the Z06. Had smaller tires than a z06 and the weight dist. was worse. His point was that you can get a strut set up to handle as well as a Z06. In a lighter , stiffer frame you could get it to handle better.

The point...... To make the Mustang cheaper they go with a lesser design that can still be made to handle and perform like a world class car(at the cost of comfort). Im sure the Mustang guys wont mind the lack of comfort when they are lapping the same tims as a car that costs twice as much and many couldnt afford anyway.

It is silly that you would compare the two cars anyway other than srt8 line drag racing.

Z284ever

Of course, you can tune a strut (BMW has got it down to an art in the 3 series). But it's not merely a matter of trading ride comfort for handling. Nope.

McPherson struts have one unfixable inherent flaw......DEFLECTION!!

With a McPherson strut, a control arm is used to support the suspension at the bottom (AND ONLY THE BOTTOM!), and a spring-over-shock is used as the suspensions' upper mounting point. The advantage to this type of suspension is the ease and low cost of manufacture. The problem though, is the "shock absorber" not only damps the spring action, but must also act as the steering pivot and must absorb acceleration and braking forces as well. Perhaps more important, is the loss of tire contact with the road as the wheel moves in a big arc in response to road irregularities.


A strut type suspension means less tire on the road and less consistency in dynamic conditions. This means less traction available for braking and turning!