Ya, if it came down to that one item being the deal breaker, then, yes, I'd be willing to concede it....

However, we come full circle to my original reply... if IRS is not actually a significantly more expense prospect...then it I say do what most buyers would perfer... and I think that would be IRS.

It's been mentioned that to be successful, the female buyer must be a part of the buying demographic... a smoother street ride would help accomplish this. The solid axle setup *IS* harsh over bumpy roads... it's just a fact.

After having owned RWD solid axle cars, and IRS cars, there is no question I'd perfer IRS. There may or may not be a small advantage to a solid axle at a drag strip or at race track, but again, I think we have to focus on the fact that 98% or so of these cars are NOT going to be competitvely raced.... they are going to be cars that people drive in the real world.

Also, having standard IRS would give the new Camaro something to brag about over the Mustang, and after years and years and years of all the magazines bitching about the "ancient solid axle"... you'd think that they'd go nuts over the IRS in a Mustang - Camaro comparo test.

 

Come on, you know what would happen... the Camaro would lead in every category across the board and in the end Mustang would win due to magical bonus points because of the "retro" solid axle.

 

No, it would win due to magical bonus points because of the name "Mustang" that conjures up such romanticism from magazine editors.

just like the elusive magical bonus points German cars get for being German.

 

I think the 'Stang would win because Car&Driver's "gotta have it" catagory makes the rest of the test irrelevant.

 

A hilarious trio of repsonses!

(and probably true as well! )

 

The Mustang is selling well NOT because of a IRS,Its selling well because of its styling,as hard as some of you retro haters seem to admit to.The GT is selling beyond expectations because it looks killer,has 300hp and you don't sit on the floor and,it has a huge useable trunk.This Camaro idea IS copying Ford,but,it will flat out work.The styling just has to appeal to many(retro touches are a must).Give it a 400hp LS2 Call it a Z28,don't make my 43 year old butt sit on the floor and Im in.

 

One way to look at it is this:
You walk into an auto parts store that carries fully assembled rear ends. On one shelf you have a live axle assembly and on another you have an assembly that's independent rear suspension. Both are for the same vehicle, and both have the same availability.

Is the price on them going to be close?


Yes, but because they starved products.

Ask any 2 people on here, and they'd prefer IRS if price is no object. But you have to think strategically my friend. The Pontiac Fiero was created as a 4 cylinder, mid-sized, parts bin, low priced commuter car. Intresting how the engine bay could accept a V8, and that Pontiac had wanted a Corvette level car for many years, isn't it?

At issue here is creating a car that GM's Product Planning Comittee simply can not resist. A car utilizing existing GM components, made in a low cost efficient factory, that not only fills a product gap but also has a generous profit margin and can expand market share by at least 1 point...singlehandedly!

You know looking at the Fiero, one can always go and add stuff later AFTER you actually get the thing produced. Right?


There's a method to my madness.

 

So tell me what it costs to put a live axle in a platform that was designed for IRS?

What about adapting 30+ year old technology (McPherson struts) into a platform that was designed for LSA front suspension?

 

ya but i would rather not have to spend another couple thousand dollars after installation and void my warranty when it should hve been done right in the first place?

 

Beat me to it.

I fail to see how it would be cost effective to adapt a platform to a whole other set of suspension components. Especially when they would be unique to only that model.

 

Why not use the IRS from the kappa cars? It can obviously be a low cost suspension.

This idea could be easily adapted to the Kappa platform. Why start with a premium car chassis and cut it down when there is a great, RWD platform out there, made in a plant that has plenty of extra capacity. A platform that doesn't have a cowl height problem. Not to mention Sigma has issues with T-Tops, Kappa would not.

Disclaimer: This would be a modified Kappa platform, basically the Torana chassis.

 

Once again, wouldnt adding a Live axle and MacPherson Struts in the front, ADD cost because of the necessity to test them and adapt them to a platform designed for SLA fronts and IRS in the rear

 

I doubt it would hold the power of a V8 combo....

 

What about Corvette's IRS?

 

It's a trans/axle...again, not made for Sigma/Zeta/Beta/VE, etc.... Just Y bodies...unfortunately.