2015 Ford Mustang S550 platform name confirmed

[Jarstang]

The platform name for the 2015 Mustang has been confirmed to be the "S550". This will be the sixth platform in the Mustang's nearly 50 year history.

This is the first new platform since the S197, which began way back in 2005. Signifiacant updates to the S197 Mustang came in 2010, 2011 and 2013, but the changes were not substantive enough to warrant a platform designation change.

What to expect from the 2015 Mustang (S550)?

Powertrain/Suspension/Platform:

Ecoboost turbo 4-cylinder
5.0L V8 (spied here)
V6 (remains to be seen)
Independent rear suspension (spied here)
S550 Mustang to be smaller and lighter than current platform (?)

Styling:

Styling expected to be more modern and less retro, possibly taking cues from the Ford Evos Concept.

Sponsored

 

[groundnpounder]

Good info, saw this a couple of weeks ago. Good to know what we'll be calling the new platform instead of the tedious "2015+ mustang"

Are there actually any models already on the S550 platform or will the Mustang be the 1st?

 

[JackHoya]

Time to bump this.

Since I havent seen it discussed in detail, I think this would be a good place to put everything we know about this platform so far..... which is?

1. IRS is a given from the first set of spy shots of the mule and plain common sense that it's about time (3 decades actually) that the Mustang get IRS once again.
2. Position of the rear calipers: the first set of spy shots also showed that the s550 brake positioning will be on the rear of the rear calipers and not on the front of the rear calipers as with the s197.
3. Smaller/lighter chassis? The s197 was actually based off of a heavily modified full-sized sedan platform I believe. Will this platform be completely new and from designed from the ground up? (leads to the question... how much smaller? (wheelbase, etc?), how much lighter? The backseats are already almost cosmetic and not functional right now. How does this get affected?

 

[KZStang]

• All-new unibody.
• Overall track will be slightly narrower (both front and rear)
• There will be a slightly shorter wheelbase (about an inch reduction to 106)
• Overall length reduction which should come from the car's rear overhang (possibly 2" to get us to about 186). However, stricter impact requirements taking effect in 2015-16(?) could prevent this to allow for suitable crash structures.
• You can tell from a comparison of the mule and latest spyshots (and the ill-fitting cover on the latest "prototype") that there is a width adjustment due to a poorly fitted roof panel on the test car.
• The engine bay is more compact as we saw in the spy shots with a more angled/curved front fascia.
• The engine possibly sits lower in the bay.
• Lower center of gravity, lower height perhaps?
• Weight reduction of 1-200lbs due to all of the above, but maybe slightly offset by the IRS. This would bring us to around 3400lb range for the coupe.
• Better weight distribution. Currently 54/46. I'd like to see vicinity of 52/48.

Missing anything/ Anything wrong? I wouldnt expect any of these changes to drastically affect the interior cabin. The exterior panels/overhangs should see the biggest changes. The key is to make it a lighter, somewhat sleeker car without making it too cramped. This means better design and better materials.

 

[CoyoteMan]

Smaller/lighter chassis? The s197 was actually based off of a heavily modified full-sized sedan platform I believe. Will this platform be completely new and from designed from the ground up? (leads to the question... how much smaller? (wheelbase, etc?), how much lighter? The backseats are already almost cosmetic and not functional right now. How does this get affected?

For your third point, from what I've read the IRS is supposed to be a lightweight control blade/multilink setup and actually allow more space for the rear seat and cargo by reducing unsprung mass.

 

[Burnout44]

Why would the impact reqs prevent a reduction in length of the overhangs? You mean as it relates to a shorter wheelbase?

Also, the IRS arms are supposed to be made of aluminum right?

 

[S550Boss]

For your third point, from what I've read the IRS is supposed to be a lightweight control blade/multilink setup and actually allow more space for the rear seat and cargo by reducing unsprung mass.

It's not a Control Blade suspension design at all - that design (seen in the Falcon) was abandoned by Ford well before the IRS design was finalized for the S197 in the early 2000s. It just didn't perform and the geometry was compromised.

 

[NRMStand]

Far as I knew the Falcon control blade IRS was rejected because it didnt fit and/or was deemed not strong enough?

It's great that our mustang will be all growed up for 2015... but you know a few guys will be replacing it with a SRA as soon as they get their paws on one. Some people just stuck in their ways. I'm looking forward to the IRS... hoping it moves weight inboard, reduces brake dive, lowers center of gravity and increases interior room slightly. What do you think?

 

[pistolpete]

Control blade project was a POS far as I remem.

Do we know how much shorter the track will be? A few inches?

 

[BlueVenom]

Consumer reports was saying 4 inches overall which sounds nuts to me if we are still working off a heavily modified sedan platform. How are they goign to engineer that?

 

[S550Boss]

Do we know how much shorter the track will be? A few inches?

You mean wheelbase. The track is actually wider in back with the new suspension and the car will have flared rear fenders (note the position of the gas filler - the car is about an inch to two inches wider on each side). I'm hoping for a sexy "coke bottle" design, kinda like the early SN95 (which when it was in clay originally had flat sides, Coletti specified larger tires and the model changed late in the game).

I think the front track is more or less the same... because the prototype that was spotted with the hood open had a very slight change to the top of the strut tower so that suggests that it also had the new front suspension (which is a strut design unfortunately, but is **rumored** to use a new lightweight lower control arm).

As far as the wheelbase... that's a big question. If they take any out of the front, the engine would have to move forward and that's no good (the weight balance is bad enough now). If they take it out of the back, then the rear seat room gets even more ridiculous. I think it will be more or less the same.

I do think it's clear that some number of inches are coming out of the trunk overhang... which is good because visually it's pretty dumpy now (the 2013 bumper change helped fix that - some).

Now I'll get radical... and I know I won't get any satisfaction here. What I really want to see is a hatchback design. I had a bunch of FOX body cars and the practicality of the hatch made the car great for both day-to-day life as well as track work (where I could carry all 4 race tires and a toolbox under hatch with ease). It really made that car work for me.

The market for hatches is mixed, but I think it's coming back. Look at the Audi A7 - who'd have thought a large luxury car would ever have a hatch! The Fiesta and Focus are offered in North America in both forms... and you rarely see the trunk models (in fact, they look outdated now). The Fusion is only offered with a trunk here... but the European model offers a hatch (with styling so identical you won't notice it until you're on top of it). I want a hatch on the S550. YEs, there could be a weight gain and a loss of structural integrity... but I would point you to the 370Z which uses an aluminum hatch to keep weight down... and has a non-intrusive structural member underneath the floor.

This brings up the topic of the body for the S550. Most photochops, including some laughingly offered by leading magazines, show simple variations on today's body (including one really bad one with just a different front cap). The clay models we've seen (and remember there would have been hundreds of those, what we say may or may not have anything to do with the final design so don't make assumptions) were very much fastbacks and would be entirely suited to a hatchback. So at this point, anything is possible.

 

[NRMStand]

Now I'll get radical... and I know I won't get any satisfaction here. What I really want to see is a hatchback design. I had a bunch of FOX body cars and the practicality of the hatch made the car great for both day-to-day life as well as track work (where I could carry all 4 race tires and a toolbox under hatch with ease). It really made that car work for me.

The market for hatches is mixed, but I think it's coming back. Look at the Audi A7 - who'd have thought a large luxury car would ever have a hatch! The Fiesta and Focus are offered in North America in both forms... and you rarely see the trunk models (in fact, they look outdated now). The Fusion is only offered with a trunk here... but the European model offers a hatch (with styling so identical you won't notice it until you're on top of it). I want a hatch on the S550. YEs, there could be a weight gain and a loss of structural integrity... but I would point you to the 370Z which uses an aluminum hatch to keep weight down... and has a non-intrusive structural member underneath the floor.

The clay models we've seen (and remember there would have been hundreds of those, what we say may or may not have anything to do with the final design so don't make assumptions) were very much fastbacks and would be entirely suited to a hatchback. So at this point, anything is possible.

Now we're talking. I like the radical thinking... that's what these forums are for. You'll actually find from another thread that a few guys on here would welcome seeing return of a hatch. Since we wont be seeing anything like the 69 fastback anytime soon, this would be the next best thing for me. Its popularity in markets they are venturing into may help bring this back one day. I wasn't a huge fan of the design of the Fox cars but liked the extra body style. If nothing else, those cars were big on personality.

 

[BlueVenom]

As far as the wheelbase... that's a big question. If they take any out of the front, the engine would have to move forward and that's no good (the weight balance is bad enough now). If they take it out of the back, then the rear seat room gets even more ridiculous. I think it will be more or less the same.

I do think it's clear that some number of inches are coming out of the trunk overhang... which is good because visually it's pretty dumpy now (the 2013 bumper change helped fix that - some).

Now I'll get radical... and I know I won't get any satisfaction here. What I really want to see is a hatchback design. I had a bunch of FOX body cars and the practicality of the hatch made the car great for both day-to-day life as well as track work (where I could carry all 4 race tires and a toolbox under hatch with ease). It really made that car work for me.

I'll take an even more unusable back seat to even worse weight distribution any day. I'm really curious how many Mustangs back seats are used for something other than storage. I've sat back there before and it is no fun. These cars are uncomfortable enough as it is, can't sit back there for more than 30 min at a time.

As is being discussed in the photoshop thread, I dont see a hatch back making a comeback or a fastback. The modern proportions are so different that it makes a bulky rear end even worse. Just take a look for example at the '73 fastback, it was a whale of a car. If they can go back to their roots and do what they did with the Mustang II by trimming the fat, I would be all for a fast/notch back but structural changes have to be made first.

Sponsored