Stuntman
Well-Known Member
The rear lower control arms are aluminum as are the uprights IIRC. The double balljoint front lower control arms are probably a bit lighter than the single piece LCA on the S197.
Sponsored
Sponsored
Grimace427
Well-Known Member
The S197 front lower control arms were around 15lbs each so expect maybe a 10lb total weight savings with the S550 setup. Since the S197 didn't have an IRS it's impossible to say if the rear LCA's being aluminum amount to any weight savings over the previous model, it is nice though.
The F150's frame will still be steel, trust me.
We will see. There are a lot of rumors floating around about what it will be, just like this Mustang. I had no intent of derailing the thread with talk of trucks, so back on topic:
What are some other ideas as far as where they could be saving some weight? Smaller fuel tank? That is cheating IMO, but who knows how they want to fudge the numbers....few pounds here and there.
JohnZiraldo
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 22, 2013
- Threads
- 30
- Messages
- 926
- Reaction score
- 156
- Location
- Toronto, ON
- Vehicle(s)
- 86 Mustang GT Conv., 11 Edge Sport
Remember this quote from one of the most trusted 'insiders' way back in this forum?
Could an aluminum roof capable of rollover protection be the reason?
Sponsored
SaudiMustang
Member
I really hope if it is not at least 100 pounds lighter that they increase the hp and torque numbers or just add direct injection and that will make everybody smile .
RIParker
Guest
That is definitely the wrong way to lose weight. It's not just cheating, it's going backwards and cheating. I can't believe AM is still pushing that 400 pound rumor even after we have seen the car and it is the same basic size. Removing 10-15% of the weight while keeping the same footprint can be done, but we would be looking at a MUCH more $$$ car. This is the most expensive way to reduce weight.
Further, keep in mind that better quality interior (less cheap hard plastics, better leather etc) actually adds to weight. We also know engines are carried over so it aint coming out of there. The only x factor is the chassis itself but I haven't heard it suggested that the new platform used a ton of different lighter materials. This platform is also said to be shared with a future Lincoln so the bones really don't need to be lighter from a platform sharing perspective.
RIParker
Guest
I'd feel a lot better about the prospect of Ford investing heavily into the S550 platform if it weren't going to share it with a struggling Lincoln brand and a car that we probably won't see for another 3+ years. That's what sucks about being the only RWD Ford, not much trickle down.
Despite my pessimism, i really hope they do, especially if they're serious about competing with the upcoming ATS coupe (and the Alpha based Camaro).
WestRace
Well-Known Member
Other than total weight loss, I think it is as critical if not more is the weight distribution. Based on the pictures, it seems to me the overhang seems to be a touch more than compared to say a M3. But having heard some of the comments from Ford, it appears that they are concerned about the weight over the front of the car so with my fingers crossed, I really hope it at least will have at most 52/48 or hopefully more like 51/49.
Sponsored
Grimace427
Well-Known Member
The front fenders are now aluminum so that is weight saved in a key area.
Whiskey11
Kill ALL the Cones!
There certainly are ways in which the S197 chassis can lose substantial weight without going "extreme" in the cost department. I really think Ford's new prototyping capabilities and a heavy abuse of Mazda's Gram Strategy could save quite a good bit of weight.
If Ford has indeed set "aggressive weight goals" and "met them" then I suspect that heavy use of the Gram Strategy could indeed yield quite a lot of weight removal and it wouldn't shock me considering how close Mazda and Ford have been in the past. The use of higher strength steels results in thinner materials to achieve the same strength as the outgoing chassis with heavier gauge, weaker, materials and that doesn't include the use of aluminum body paneling or aluminum control arms and uprights.
I for one, would like Ford to release what those weight goals were so we can stop bitching about not having the weight, and start bitching about not going far enough or whatever!
If Ford has indeed set "aggressive weight goals" and "met them" then I suspect that heavy use of the Gram Strategy could indeed yield quite a lot of weight removal and it wouldn't shock me considering how close Mazda and Ford have been in the past. The use of higher strength steels results in thinner materials to achieve the same strength as the outgoing chassis with heavier gauge, weaker, materials and that doesn't include the use of aluminum body paneling or aluminum control arms and uprights.
I for one, would like Ford to release what those weight goals were so we can stop bitching about not having the weight, and start bitching about not going far enough or whatever!
nametoshowothers
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2013
- Threads
- 7
- Messages
- 549
- Reaction score
- 111
- Location
- north america
- Vehicle(s)
- description of cars
Also rumours of carbon fibre in the svt and SE cars, who knows where the delta shows up, does the GT350 end up lighter than a GT with a NA engine, wild ass guess of 3500lbs puts it about 400lbs lighter than the current gt500. Just guessing, so agree with last poster would be good to get actual weights and distribution %
Gman11Gt
Well-Known Member
I would cream my jeans if the 15 GT came in at about 3300lbs. Power to weight ratio would be spectacular along with handling if it is indeed balanced. For comparison sake, that is only about 100lbs more then the new 911 and not to far off the C7 and M3.
I am hoping and praying, but this could be the deal breaker for me. I have always wanted a modern Stang to be near 3k pounds but also be liveable and not a one trick Pony....lol like an FRS or Miata of sorts or a bloated Challenger.
Sponsored
