Sponsored

2015 Mustang Weight Gain

Mriley

Guest
Man do I hope your guys are right Thed. I suspect, like the various rumors out there, this is a case of conflicting sources.

Until we find out who is right, I'm keeping the faith that Ford hasn't turned back all the talk about taking 200+ lbs out of future vehicles.
Sponsored

 

Overboost

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2012
Threads
1
Messages
348
Reaction score
0
Location
Earth
Vehicle(s)
S197
Why we should care is that a car's weight is responsible for about two-thirds of the energy needed to move it, with the energy required to move a vehicle increasing roughly in proportion with its heft. Heavier cars need bigger/more powerful engines to achieve the same acceleration and those engines use, on average, just 8 percent of their power in highway driving and just 5 percent in the city. In other words, lots of wasted power. Inefficient. Making a car lighter is by far, the easiest way to boost gas mileage. As for safety, weight should not be confused for size. Larger cars are generally safer, but weight has very little to do with it. Weight mostly just affects fuel economy and in this day of high gas prices, that's a no no.

Weight is also the enemy of brakes, tires and just about every aspect of the car. Further, horsepower, displacement and emissions output leads to higher taxes and insurance, particularly in other parts of the world where the Mustang will be selling.

Heavier cars also require more and heavier equipment (more powerful brakes, bigger wheels, stronger frame/suspension etc, all of which cost $) and in simple terms, regardless of power, a heavier car takes away from a visceral driving experience. Making mass move faster takes more time. Stopping more mass requires more distance and time. Redirecting mass takes more effort and time. There are ways to offset the issues (electronics, computers) but at that point you're fixing the symptom, not the problem.

You point out the 1LE. Compare it to the lighter Boss 302. The Camaro may nail the numbers but the Boss by far has the better feel. The 1LE has to rely tremendously on mechanical assistance in order to do its bidding. Nearly all reviews will tell you that despite being slightly slower, the lighter weight Boss 302 makes for a more engaging ride with great cornering and steering feedback. ALL of this is a result of a lighter weight. This is not even mentioning everything that has been said already about competition, CAFE, etc.
I appreciate the physics lesson. Once the facts start coming out, it'll all make sense. I'll leave it at that.
 

Mechanic

Guest
I appreciate the physics lesson. Once the facts start coming out, it'll all make sense. I'll leave it at that.
No prob. Given your puzzling lack of understanding of what "the big deal" is, it seems you needed it.
 

Overboost

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2012
Threads
1
Messages
348
Reaction score
0
Location
Earth
Vehicle(s)
S197
No prob. Given your puzzling lack of understanding of what "the big deal" is, it seems you needed it.
Perhaps you should read my other posts. I'm in the camp that wants to see it lose weight, precisely for the reasons you described, but I also understand the bigger picture. The vast majority of people who purchase the car won't notice the difference and will enjoy it either way. The enthusiast market, although small, will always be the vocal minority. We'd like to see a lighter, faster, more agile car, no matter what the cost. Truth is, if that were the case, a GT would cost $50k+ easily. Keeping the car affordable is a gift and a curse of the Mustang. It has to be affordable (using more common materials, cheaper components, etc.) but still have the performance for the opposite end (us) to enjoy. My "lack of understanding", as you put it, is just my personal understanding and the lack of tunnel vision so many have been using regarding rumors, to hope and pray that S550 is going to be the "be all end all" Mustang. I have no doubt it'll perform great, but it'll do so heavier than the S197.
 

Mechanic

Guest
Fair enough but we will have to disagree on your contention that a lighter, faster, more agile GT has to easily cost $50k+. Sure, to do that on the S197 platform may drive up the costs of the current car that much but that is precisely what new platform development is all about.

This isn't about tunnel vision, rumor mongering, or hoping this is the be all end all Mustang. Any engineer worth his salt will tell you that losing weight is the most cost effective way to meet federally mandated fuel efficiency standards. And common sense will tell you that the Mustang putting on 1-200 pounds and the Camaro losing 2-300 (conservatively) will not do any favors for Mustang sales.
 

Sponsored

FordBlueHeart

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2013
Threads
3
Messages
283
Reaction score
48
Location
Traverse City
First Name
Torr
Vehicle(s)
2019 GT 301A PP1 A10 Magneride
So much for Ford being a world leader. Looks like we're back to the '80s and "just enough" engineering.
I don't really care about gas mileage increasing as the exponential value isn't really there unless you are driving a ton. I figure I am going to have to "pay to play."
These little cat fights (or should I say, "pony fights") over visual and weight differences are the byproduct of information overload in our current society. I'm more pissed about the junior high "I know something you don't" tactics that come into play. I can't blame those who know more than the rest of us as they truly want to tell us everything, but must not endanger their sources.
 

Maestro5.0

Guest
So much for Ford being a world leader. Looks like we're back to the '80s and "just enough" engineering.
True although cars back then were much lighter on their own merits, albeit with fewer safety equipment and less stringent regulations. At least then pony cars were offered in various trims that included fairly stripped down (by today's standards) models like the LX. Nowadays the lowest common denominator is the mainstream buyer and enthusiasts are left to gutting their cars at their own risk and expense.

I don't really care about gas mileage increasing as the exponential value isn't really there unless you are driving a ton. I figure I am going to have to "pay to play."
Yes it is arguable how much difference real world mileage and gas savings we are talking but regardless of whether we care or not, Ford has to. They must find a way to meet (whether fudged or not) CAFE numbers or face penalties.

These little cat fights (or should I say, "pony fights") over visual and weight differences are the byproduct of information overload in our current society. I'm more pissed about the junior high "I know something you don't" tactics that come into play. I can't blame those who know more than the rest of us as they truly want to tell us everything, but must not endanger their sources.
Agreed. I'm tired of the he said/she said, which is no better than some people here trying to discredit conflicting rumors from big news outlets. I'd like to point out the irony there if no one sees it. If these sources are willing to drop hints to others, then let them come here and discuss it themselves otherwise it's all hearsay.
 

SStormtrooPer

Dark Side
Joined
Aug 17, 2013
Threads
5
Messages
426
Reaction score
54
Location
Lafayette, CO
First Name
Jesse
Vehicle(s)
Single Turbo GenII Coyote Swapped '92 SSP
So much for Ford being a world leader. Looks like we're back to the '80s and "just enough" engineering.
IF this car truly gains weight, that is exactly what it is -- making decisions like those that got the American auto industry in bind the first time around. Sorry for anyone who wants to defend these issues and make excuses for Ford, but its the truth.

They can engineer "around" a weight issue all they want, but with all this talk about weight savings on their cars, and the voices of the fans -- not engineering the weight issue out of the car all together would be proof that the passion that made Mustang has been lost.

Most Mustang "enthusiasts" modify them -- they make them faster, lower, handle better, etc. If Mustang is 3800lbs. we are stuck with that weight, short of gutting the car. We are stuck with a drive train and suspension that can't handle much more power because its strength is being used to move the extra fat around.

True although cars back then were much lighter on their own merits, albeit with fewer safety equipment and less stringent regulations. At least then pony cars were offered in various trims that included fairly stripped down (by today's standards) models like the LX. Nowadays the lowest common denominator is the mainstream buyer and enthusiasts are left to gutting their cars at their own risk and expense.
You can thank the magazines for this. They are the ones that brainwash people into thinking their muscle/sports/pony cars need to be optioned like a Cadillac. They are the ones that caused cost to be driven up when companies initially added all that garbage. Options used to be the exception for those that wanted to spend more money, but now they are the rule for everyone. Sadly, we will never see the day of a stripped down “volume” trim level, i.e. an “LX”. The demand for all the amenities is so much higher than none, that Ford would incur SIGNIFICANT cost to modify the assembly process for a few cars that don’t have power options, A/C, stereos, etc. And the reality, you aren’t saving that much weight. Power windows mechanisms are actually lighter than manual. With A/C and stereo, you are looking at what, 50 lbs? It’s probably 200 if you strip the interior – but that is unrealistic for a street car. Yes, it all adds up, and every pound counts, but ultimately the weight loss needs to come out of the bones of the car. The guys that race these cars aren’t going to want to gut it and strip it down just to end up with a car that weighs what the outgoing model weighed.
 

thePill

Camaro5's Most Wanted
Joined
Aug 13, 2012
Threads
37
Messages
6,561
Reaction score
699
Location
Pittsburgh
Vehicle(s)
S550
This video will set your mind at ease Jesse. This is Chief Mustang Engineer, Dave Pericak talking about weight reduction in the S550 in 2010 (at 4:30). They also talk a little trash on the Camaro in the opening discussion.

The Mustang was locked down (confirmed) in September 2011, it very well could have been locked down before J Mays confirmed that. There have been test mules spotted prior, testing in what seemed to be S197's but, they were not.

 

Overboost

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2012
Threads
1
Messages
348
Reaction score
0
Location
Earth
Vehicle(s)
S197
That video was a long time ago. There are always goals you try to achieve, but things change and evolve over the development of the program.
 

Sponsored

SStormtrooPer

Dark Side
Joined
Aug 17, 2013
Threads
5
Messages
426
Reaction score
54
Location
Lafayette, CO
First Name
Jesse
Vehicle(s)
Single Turbo GenII Coyote Swapped '92 SSP
This video will set your mind at ease Jesse. This is Chief Mustang Engineer, Dave Pericak talking about weight reduction in the S550 in 2010 (at 4:30). They also talk a little trash on the Camaro in the opening discussion.
My mind is at ease -- I have always been convinced S550 was losing weight over S197, and will continue to feel that way until I have solid proof that it is not.

Aside from Fords comments and goals, everything else is all hearsay, and there is more "hearsay" that says the car is losing than gaining. ;)

And should the car not lose anything -- I am confident I will have some other options that are going to be pretty good.
 

Melino

Guest
I will agree with Overboost that most people (as in more than half of Mustang buyers NOT being enthusiasts) wil not care or notice if it packs on some weight, but enthusiasts will, and let's be real enthusiasts are the driving force behind the iconic status of these cars. Without enthusiast support and excitement, the brand becomes limp and will fade away just like some pony cars did for so many years.

So yes most regular BUYERS may not care or notice but where the enthusiasts go so too will the excitement, and regular buyers will soon follow not long after.
 

thePill

Camaro5's Most Wanted
Joined
Aug 13, 2012
Threads
37
Messages
6,561
Reaction score
699
Location
Pittsburgh
Vehicle(s)
S550
I will agree with Overboost that most people (as in more than half of Mustang buyers NOT being enthusiasts) wil not care or notice if it packs on some weight, but enthusiasts will, and let's be real enthusiasts are the driving force behind the iconic status of these cars. Without enthusiast support and excitement, the brand becomes limp and will fade away just like some pony cars did for so many years.

So yes most regular BUYERS may not care or notice but where the enthusiasts go so too will the excitement, and regular buyers will soon follow not long after.
Well, it isn't the enthusiast that are demanding the weight cuts, it's the Federal government that is demanding more MPG's. The engine technology to meet this demand is not attainable at this time... The transmission technology is still a ways out.

The video was a long time ago but, I think most know the S550 wasn't just thrown together this year. The S550 is being operated on the largest Mustang budget ever... I'm will to bet the chassis itself is much lighter than the S197's... If the standard equipment takes it back up to the S197's weight is beyond me. From my experience, I am having trouble accounting for the additional weight.

If the Mustang's Chief Engineer says 200lbs is within reach, I believe him. It may not be a physical factor but a financial one. I know a lot hate hearing this but, that is a huge advantage of having a 10 year platform vs. a 5-7 year. If Ford started the S550 in 2008, that means they would have to start working on the S1100 in 2016... waaaaaaay before the S550 is paid for. Not happening, it will drive the base cost up drastically.

That video was a long time ago. There are always goals you try to achieve, but things change and evolve over the development of the program.
I know, it happens every generation. There was a time you told me the EVOS was not the next Mustang, even though I was told, in FF and Koln that was indeed the direction we are going. This was a pretty large budget, rumored to be just as large as the Stingray's... Talking almost double digit BILLIONS... There is enough money, the drivetrain has been paid for twice over, the chassis, interior and handling components were the focus here.

I can run simulations (LOL) based on numerous budgets and projected profits per vehicle and tell you how many they need to sell annually and for how many years. It can paint a pretty good picture of this generation if you have some numbers. I doubt there will be official numbers but, I can dig...

If anything, the cost of 2008-2011 technology has decreased and, will continue to decrease. What was going to carry a $40,000 MSRP in 2010 will likely be reduced within those 5 years. Look at the cost to produce a 2005 and 2014... They are nearly identical and only scale due to inflation. $25,000 in 2004 is $30,000 now... They are literally asking the same MSRP for the 2005-2014 S197, making more profit per vehicle after 2007 (S197 paid for), which they reinvested in the GT500, SE's, Boss 302, Coyote, Getrag, Ford Racing, 2010 refresh and 2013 refresh. Now, as the initial cost of production decreases over time, the MSRP will be increased from inflation and, the improvements made over the generation. Weight reduction is not an enthusiast demand, it is a Federal demand that will require Ford to reduce weight (Boron/UHSS/Aluminum, reduce parasitic losses (Electric Power Steering) and create more fuel efficient power trains. Ford is leading the industry in weight reduction, getting very close with the efficiency and, have the Ecoboost engines taking care of power trains (as well as some TiVCT).

A Chief Engineer of any program has more pull then most think... 200lbs in 2010 could very well mean more (since things can change) in 2015 ya' know...
 

HGFireHazard

Mustang Enthusiast
Joined
Jun 6, 2013
Threads
14
Messages
442
Reaction score
44
Location
Oklahoma
Vehicle(s)
2016 GT Premium PP
You can thank the magazines for this. They are the ones that brainwash people into thinking their muscle/sports/pony cars need to be optioned like a Cadillac. They are the ones that caused cost to be driven up when companies initially added all that garbage. Options used to be the exception for those that wanted to spend more money, but now they are the rule for everyone. Sadly, we will never see the day of a stripped down “volume” trim level, i.e. an “LX”. The demand for all the amenities is so much higher than none, that Ford would incur SIGNIFICANT cost to modify the assembly process for a few cars that don’t have power options, A/C, stereos, etc. And the reality, you aren’t saving that much weight. Power windows mechanisms are actually lighter than manual. With A/C and stereo, you are looking at what, 50 lbs? It’s probably 200 if you strip the interior – but that is unrealistic for a street car. Yes, it all adds up, and every pound counts, but ultimately the weight loss needs to come out of the bones of the car. The guys that race these cars aren’t going to want to gut it and strip it down just to end up with a car that weighs what the outgoing model weighed.
I'm not sure I would place the blame necessarily on magazines or media. I want a car that has a lot of options. I want my Mustang to be a performer, but I also want the option to be able to drive it not only to the drag strip, but across county, and COMFORTABLY, if I so choose.

I want the tech goodies, a good radio, heated/cooled seats and so on. I'm also willing to accept the weight that comes with that. However, when I say I want this car to be lighter I mean the chassis as well. When weight starts being added for performance options such as bigger/better brakes or a beefier rear end or suspension, I'm okay with that. Most likely if I end up with a S550 no matter what weight savings they end up arriving at will be offset by my additions, and that's fine with me. BUT, I won't be okay with that if it comes with marginally or barely improved performance for a very similar weight as the outgoing car. I don't want to and won't buy new for the sake of buying new. In that scenario I'd rather have a 13/14 and spend what I would have spent on a 2015 on mods.
 

thePill

Camaro5's Most Wanted
Joined
Aug 13, 2012
Threads
37
Messages
6,561
Reaction score
699
Location
Pittsburgh
Vehicle(s)
S550
I'm not sure I would place the blame necessarily on magazines or media. I want a car that has a lot of options. I want my Mustang to be a performer, but I also want the option to be able to drive it not only to the drag strip, but across county, and COMFORTABLY, if I so choose.

I want the tech goodies, a good radio, heated/cooled seats and so on. I'm also willing to accept the weight that comes with that. However, when I say I want this car to be lighter I mean the chassis as well. When weight starts being added for performance options such as bigger/better brakes or a beefier rear end or suspension, I'm okay with that. Most likely if I end up with a S550 no matter what weight savings they end up arriving at will be offset by my additions, and that's fine with me. BUT, I won't be okay with that if it comes with marginally or barely improved performance for a very similar weight as the outgoing car. I don't want to and won't buy new for the sake of buying new. In that scenario I'd rather have a 13/14 and spend what I would have spent on a 2015 on mods.
Come on now, you can't have a lightweight car and heated seats... Come on man!!!

There will never be a manufacturer that can lose weight from better suspension, spring/strut, brakes and wheel/tires.
Sponsored

 
 








Top