2015 Mustang Weight Gain

[Dyno]

We have the heaviest and yet most fuel efficient Mustangs ever. The two don't correlate exactly like that. Weight does affect handling, steering and overall feel of the car, to which I think it is safe to say matters most to enthusiasts. Consumers are speaking with their wallets opting for lighter cars in general but pony/muscle car buyers who want lighter weight aren't usually after better fuel economy. Point is, enthusiasts are the ones that really care about the weight of a pony car. The rest would be more than OK with a Mustang that looks good and performs on par with the current one. Sure, it is impossible to disagree that a lighter car wouldl help Ford achieve CAFE reqs but that doesn't stop them from crunching the numbers to see how best they want to get there -- either through a lighter frame or advances in powertrain and other technology.

Sponsored

 

[SStormtrooPer]

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 am not saying you shouldn't have the option to add all the tech or amenities that you want -- I am saying the magazines/media and outfits like Consumer Reports, for the most part, started the chain reaction and brainwashed non-enthusiasts who are the majority of buyers, into believing the measure of ANYTHING, not just cars, is how much "stuff" it has.

The magazines/media changed how people buy things. I would be willing to bet money that at least half of all drivers with cars less than 8 years old or so don't even know what some of the features are that their car has, let alone have any clue how to use them. Just think about how less complex cars would be if you removed just those items/features. Hell, some people can't even figure out how to use the 50 buttons that control the HVAC and the radio on new cars. So becasue the media told them they "needed" it, I am FORCED to have it.

Its not quite, but almost the same as the solid axle debate -- all the magazines/media piss and moan about how antiquated it is, yet they can go test it against, and BEAT M3's, Camaros, Challengers, Zs, Genesis Coupes, and other IRS cars. Can it really be THAT crappy? That's completely subjective. It is past the end of its useful life in a LOT of applications, but not all. Regardless, they have everyone convinced Ford needs to get rid of it or face the slaughterhouse. The difference here is the platform is going to eliminate a feasible solid axle option.

That is why I don't give 2 shits about what a magazine says -- and think most "enthusiasts" don't. They are biased, run subjective tests, and usually don't represent opinions of the consumer or accurately depict real world results.

I guess in reality, they were part of the cause -- but what they really did was help perpetuate the issue.

 

[Oblivion/2]

Yea you can't have it both ways HGFire. If things like heated seats are more important to you than light weight then you should be looking at a different type of vehicle because the two can't coexist. Pony cars are about cheap muscle and should be as light and affordable as possible. Now I'm fine with them offering it as options if people want to add them but in this day and age of limited customization they will just shove it down the throats of everybody else.

 

[stangray11]

I am not saying you shouldn't have the option to add all the tech or amenities that you want -- I am saying the magazines/media and outfits like Consumer Reports, for the most part, started the chain reaction and brainwashed non-enthusiasts who are the majority of buyers, into believing the measure of ANYTHING, not just cars, is how much "stuff" it has.

The magazines/media changed how people buy things. I would be willing to bet money that at least half of all drivers with cars less than 8 years old or so don't even know what some of the features are that their car has, let alone have any clue how to use them. Just think about how less complex cars would be if you removed just those items/features. Hell, some people can't even figure out how to use the 50 buttons that control the HVAC and the radio on new cars. So becasue the media told them they "needed" it, I am FORCED to have it.

Its not quite, but almost the same as the solid axle debate -- all the magazines/media piss and moan about how antiquated it is, yet they can go test it against, and BEAT M3's, Camaros, Challengers, Zs, Genesis Coupes, and other IRS cars. Can it really be THAT crappy? That's completely subjective. It is past the end of its useful life in a LOT of applications, but not all. Regardless, they have everyone convinced Ford needs to get rid of it or face the slaughterhouse. The difference here is the platform is going to eliminate a feasible solid axle option.

That is why I don't give 2 sh*ts about what a magazine says -- and think most "enthusiasts" don't. They are biased, run subjective tests, and usually don't represent opinions of the consumer or accurately depict real world results.

I guess in reality, they were part of the cause -- but what they really did was help perpetuate the issue.

Bit of the tail wagging the dog. Convince enough people that more features, amenities and IRS are can't-live-withouts and it becomes true and Ford has no choice but to keep up with the joneses. In this day of everything but the kitchen sink Gen Y cares more about bullet points under a features spec sheet. Case in point, I have the 2013 brochure here and page 15 says "Win the Feature Race" with a list of things I bet most '13-14 owners dint know they have. So we end up with half baked "features" like the MFT rollout. The pony car used to stand apart from all that but homogeneity has bled over to all segment of cars unfortunately.

 

[SStormtrooPer]

Bit of the tail wagging the dog. Convince enough people that more features, amenities and IRS are can't-live-withouts and it becomes true and Ford has no choice but to keep up with the joneses. In this day of everything but the kitchen sink Gen Y cares more about bullet points under a features spec sheet. Case in point, I have the 2013 brochure here and page 15 says "Win the Feature Race" with a list of things I bet most '13-14 owners dint know they have. So we end up with half baked "features" like the MFT rollout. The pony car used to stand apart from all that but homogeneity has bled over to all segment of cars unfortunately.

Indeed -- if I was the big guy up at Ford, I would do the same thing. They have to.

It is just unfortunate when looking at what caused the dynamic in the first place -- now you basically have every major publication telling 18 year old girls she is going to die a miserable old lady if she can't go online in her car and tweet a selfie while putting on eyeliner while she watches Miley Cyrus fake twerk on Ropin Thicke at the VMAs all while cruising down the interstate with countless other drivers braindead due to distractions.

 

[Prodigy]

Let me just say if the Mustang doesn't lose weight, the pressure will be off GM to really shed the 400 or so LBS that some people are expecting.... all will lose out. If Ford can get at least the I4 trim down to 3200, GM will have to get aggressive. Everyone wins.

 

[HTownStang]

I know very few people, short of those who outright can't afford it, who wouldn't shell out an extra 10% for a 2-300+ pound lighter Mustang. It would have been a winning investment in the long run for Ford if it builds THAT Mustang.

 

[SStormtrooPer]

Let me just say if the Mustang doesn't lose weight, the pressure will be off GM to really shed the 400 or so LBS that some people are expecting.... all will lose out. If Ford can get at least the I4 trim down to 3200, GM will have to get aggressive. Everyone wins.

Agreed -- everyone wins with competition. The problem with a heavier Mustang would be that GM is not making a lighter Camaro because the Mustang is lighter...

Camaro is getting lighter because GM knows it is too bloated and too heavy right now. The slimming is inherent with the smaller and lighter mid-size Alpha platform vs. the heavier, full-size Zeta platform which it rides on now. So GM fans will win in that aspect regardless of what Ford does.

 

[HGFireHazard]

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.

Yea you can't have it both ways HGFire. If things like heated seats are more important to you than light weight then you should be looking at a different type of vehicle because the two can't coexist. Pony cars are about cheap muscle and should be as light and affordable as possible. Now I'm fine with them offering it as options if people want to add them but in this day and age of limited customization they will just shove it down the throats of everybody else.

You both didn't understand me quite correctly.

I want the base car, compared to the current car, lighter overall. I would like to see it (the GT) 200 pounds lighter. I ask for this to benefit all of us.

What I am saying is that I want a car that is relatively feature heavy and comfortable, but also performs. With that, I am prepared for the additional weight my choices will tack on. As a result I am okay with the slightly less performance I will see compared to a lesser optioned car.

At the end of the day, ultimately, if the S550 doesn't offer quite a notable increase in performance over the outgoing car, I won't buy it.

I'm not a loon assuming I'm going to get a full loaded car that weighs 3,400 pounds.

 

[Prodigy]

Agreed -- everyone wins with competition. The problem with a heavier Mustang would be that GM is not making a lighter Camaro because the Mustang is lighter...

Camaro is getting lighter because GM knows it is too bloated and too heavy right now. The slimming is inherent with the smaller and lighter mid-size Alpha platform vs. the heavier, full-size Zeta platform which it rides on now. So GM fans will win in that aspect regardless of what Ford does.

True, it will lose weight regardless, but just how aggressive they really want to get to dial in that weight number will also depend on the pressure applied by competitors. They have last slicks here with the advantage being able to see the 2015 Ford offering first. It's all a cat and mouse game between them, like how Ford made sure to best the 2010 V6 Camaro by 1hp and 1mpg with the 2011 V6 Mustang.

So even Chevy fans should be rooting for the S550 to have some great specs.

 

[Overboost]

The fact Consumer Reports has as much influence on the auto industry as it does scares me. They should stick to reviewing toasters and vacuum cleaners, not cars.

 

[Falc'man]

When Holden released the VT Commodore in 1997, Ford laughed about how heavy it was, so Holden puts it on a diet. Then Ford releases the AU in 1998 and it turns out to be a touch heavier than the VT. Moral is, Ford should keep their mouths shut about some things.

 

[SStormtrooPer]

The fact Consumer Reports has as much influence on the auto industry as it does scares me. They should stick to reviewing toasters and vacuum cleaners, not cars.

That would be a start, but quite honestly, they shouldn't even do toasters or vacuums. We would all be better off in a world where consumers made their own decisions -- not decisions <insert companies like Toyota here> pays for them to make.

 

[Unchained]

You both didn't understand me quite correctly.

I want the base car, compared to the current car, lighter overall. I would like to see it (the GT) 200 pounds lighter. I ask for this to benefit all of us.

What I am saying is that I want a car that is relatively feature heavy and comfortable, but also performs. With that, I am prepared for the additional weight my choices will tack on. As a result I am okay with the slightly less performance I will see compared to a lesser optioned car.

At the end of the day, ultimately, if the S550 doesn't offer quite a notable increase in performance over the outgoing car, I won't buy it.

I'm not a loon assuming I'm going to get a full loaded car that weighs 3,400 pounds.

Problem is - a certain amount of weight gets added to the stock/base Mustang just to allow for the possibility of some of those options on higher trims or a better optioned car. These aren't just play and plug jammies.

 

[fastback69]

I know very few people, short of those who outright can't afford it, who wouldn't shell out an extra 10% for a 2-300+ pound lighter Mustang. It would have been a winning investment in the long run for Ford if it builds THAT Mustang.

Given that fewer than half of buyers are enthusiasts and we'll likely see that margin increase with the added trim and more mainstream buyers, I'm not sure your regular Joe buying this wlll be willing to pay 10% extra for the base model for a few hundred pounds lighter car (which probably makes very little difference to him going from point A to point B).

10% increase on the GT or halo car may go down better but I suspect a very marginal increase in the base and a 10% or more increase for performance models isn't quite the "winning investment" that Ford would hope for for that kind of platform development.

In the end engineering a lighter car will benefit all trims but the enthusiasts are the ones that really care and may be the ones left to foot most of the bill for it.

Sponsored