A theory

[Oakley]

I think the next mustang, not the S650 camarostain, will have a transaxle. it would solve many of the problems with the current IRS. weak diff bushings, weak IRS subframe bushings, more weight back there to absorb nvh, shifting weight to the rear to make things more balanced etc.

GTD stuff will make it to lesser production cars, its just a matter of time.

Sponsored

 

[paulm1]

The "weak" parts you describe are "weaK" so people don't complain about NVH. Can't tell you how many times i read someone come on here after changing out some of those parts and complaining about NVH. Even if they change the drivetrain config the bushings will still be "weak" so dealers can sell cars to seniors looking for a soft ride. PS, I'll be senior next year, and I love NVH.

 

[KingKona]

Like paulm1 wrote, there's nothing "weak" about the IRS. Those are deliberate (if misguided) engineering decisions that are easily rectified. Steeda and BMR got it covered.

The next Mustang (if there is one) wont have anything to do with the GTD. There's exorbitant costs that Ford isn't going to spend to transfer any of that engineering into a production Mustang.

 

[junits15]

I think you’re not insane to think that GTD parts will flow down.

I am doubtful that whatever we see after the s650 will have a transaxle but there’s maybe room for a higher trim/model with one. A mid front engine GT500 comes to mind.

I wouldn’t hold my breath though, I think whatever is after the s650 isn’t going to be anything like what most people are used to.

 

[KingKona]

I think you’re not insane to think that GTD parts will flow down.

I am doubtful that whatever we see after the s650 will have a transaxle but there’s maybe room for a higher trim/model with one. A mid front engine GT500 comes to mind.

I wouldn’t hold my breath though, I think whatever is after the s650 isn’t going to be anything like what most people are used to.

Well, the GTD (as discovered) isn't a front-mid engine car, so there's nothing to flow down there.

The Mustang is a CHEAP car. Ford makes CHEAP vehicles. The GTD is NOT a Ford, it's a Multimatic.

Nothing from the Last GT made it into any other Ford vehicle, and that's going to continue. Hell, if anything, bits/pieces/parts from Ford production vehicles make it into their halo cars (S650 body in white for GTD, engine for GT), rather than the other way around.

Because Ford is just that cheap.

 

[Oakley]

did you guys even read my post or do you just not get why a transaxle in the rear would simultaneously absorb all the NVH and shock currently being transferred to just a IRS pumpkin (which tears WEAK factory bushings under stock power) which induces an ungodly amount of wheel hop whilst also moving a ton of weight to the rear of the car?

think of all the big goofy rubber vibration absorbing weights on modern cars.
now imagine a transaxle, bolted to a diff, doing that. This means the bigger heavier mass can't be shocked as easily as the smaller pumpkin which means A. the smaller vibrations just get absorbed and B since it needs bigger bushings for the larger unit and the whole unit must be moved before the bushings take more load.... you're using physics to decrease NVH instead of just pretending like the shit job ford did on these bushings is fine.

there's a reason serious performance luxury cars use transaxles even when the engine is in the front.

 

[Jasonb543]

Nah, I think it’s over, the next gen will be fully electric, totally different setup for suspension, battery, frame etc.

this is it.

 

[Oakley]

Nah, I think it’s over, the next gen will be fully electric, totally different setup for suspension, battery, frame etc.

this is it.

i bet you a thousand dollars that is false.

 

[Jasonb543]

No need to bet, just let time unfold.

 

[KingKona]

did you guys even read my post or do you just not get why a transaxle in the rear would simultaneously absorb all the NVH and shock currently being transferred to just a IRS pumpkin (which tears WEAK factory bushings under stock power) which induces an ungodly amount of wheel hop whilst also moving a ton of weight to the rear of the car?

think of all the big goofy rubber vibration absorbing weights on modern cars.
now imagine a transaxle, bolted to a diff, doing that. This means the bigger heavier mass can't be shocked as easily as the smaller pumpkin which means A. the smaller vibrations just get absorbed and B since it needs bigger bushings for the larger unit and the whole unit must be moved before the bushings take more load.... you're using physics to decrease NVH instead of just pretending like the shit job ford did on these bushings is fine.

there's a reason serious performance luxury cars use transaxles even when the engine is in the front.

You're lacking in understanding of physics and the packaging in the S550/S650 body.

Vibrations don't "just get absorbed", they transfer through materials. There aren't "big goofy rubber vibration absorbing weights on modern cars." That's not a thing. And if you add a ton more weight to that area of the car, every issue you believe currently exists, would be made much, much worse.

But that point is moot, because the entire structure of the car has to change to wedge a transaxle in there.

And what's been explained twice now; the IRS subframe bushings are a specific engineering choice, and are easily changed/fixed.

Yes, there are a few reasons why "performance luxury cars use transaxles even when the engine is in the front.", and it has almost nothing to do with NVH.

 

[Oakley]

You're lacking in understanding of physics and the packaging in the S550/S650 body.

nope, i'll prove it.

Vibrations don't "just get absorbed", they transfer through materials.

ab·sorb
/əbˈzôrb/
verb: absorb;
1. take in or soak up (energy or a liquid or other substance) by chemical or physical action.

There aren't "big goofy rubber vibration absorbing weights on modern cars." That's not a thing.

you're wrong. here's evidence of you being wrong.

And if you add a ton more weight to that area of the car, every issue you believe currently exists, would be made much, much worse.

oh so that must be why they did it on the GTD, because it made the car much much worse.
be sure you let ferrari, corvette, porsche, alfa romeo, and everybody else know its a terrible idea so they can stop doing it.

But that point is moot, because the entire structure of the car has to change to wedge a transaxle in there.

no shit.

And what's been explained twice now; the IRS subframe bushings are a specific engineering choice, and are easily changed/fixed.

why are you defending shitty engineering choices? i've got torn diff bushings in a stock performance pack car because they were not suitable for the application to begin with.

what you don't seem to understand is there is this thing called "inertia" which is this concept explained in elementary science class. the more mass a thing has the harder it is for it to move which means it requires more energy to move it which means it can absorb more energy before being moved which means the threshold for movement is raised which means smaller actions upon it are transferred into the mass and dissipated while things beyond that threshold actually move the object.

so you take a 80lb diff and make it a 250lb transaxle, shifting a bunch of weight to the rear, now you've got a huge mass which can much more easily receive and dissipate energy transferred into it.

yes this needs a new platform which is also addressed in my OP.

Which is all shit you'd know if you read and thought it through before going ham on your keyboard.

Yes, there are a few reasons why "performance luxury cars use transaxles even when the engine is in the front.", and it has almost nothing to do with NVH.

thank you for conceding that it helps with NVH.

i appreciate your cooperation.

 

[Balr14]

I believe a transaxle would help. But, I also believe it is unlikely. Who would Ford buy it from?

 

[IPOGT]

https://www.sorbothane.com/

 

[KingKona]

nope, i'll prove it.

ab·sorb
/əbˈzôrb/
verb: absorb;
1. take in or soak up (energy or a liquid or other substance) by chemical or physical action.

That's not how it works in this situation, because the (larger trans-axel) mass isn't stationary. And mass x velocity = energy, in rough terms. When you add mass, you'll have MORE NVH to deal with. Need bigger and stronger/more bushings. Plus, there's tons more moving parts making more NVH inside a trans-axel versus a diff.

you're wrong. here's evidence of you being wrong.

I see one. Congratulations. Never seen one on a Mustang.

oh so that must be why they did it on the GTD, because it made the car much much worse.
be sure you let ferrari, corvette, porsche, alfa romeo, and everybody else know its a terrible idea so they can stop doing it.

NVH is not why Multimatic did it on the GTD, nor why Ferrari, Porsche or Alfa use transaxels. Again, it has NOTHING to do with NVH. It's about physics.....something you're not too clear about.

why are you defending shitty engineering choices? i've got torn diff bushings in a stock performance pack car because they were not suitable for the application to begin with.

My PP car's bushings are just fine. I just must be a better driver then. Or my car is better. Whatever, me and my car...we're better.

what you don't seem to understand is there is this thing called "inertia" which is this concept explained in elementary science class. the more mass a thing has the harder it is for it to move which means it requires more energy to move it which means it can absorb more energy before being moved which means the threshold for movement is raised which means smaller actions upon it are transferred into the mass and dissipated while things beyond that threshold actually move the object.

Yes.....intertia is a main point; Add a shit ton more weight by going to a transaxle, and you're going to have MORE NVH to deal with. Not less.

...so you take a 80lb diff and make it a 250lb transaxle, shifting a bunch of weight to the rear, now you've got a huge mass which can much more easily receive and dissipate energy transferred into it.

No, it's doesn't. The added mass x velocity (from movement) means you're going to have MORE energy (and NVH) to deal with, NOT LESS. Everything you're crying about now would be WORSE, beause you've got the physics completely bassakwards in your head. That's not even taking into account the added NVH of a trans-axel versus a diff in mechanicals alone.

yes this needs a new platform which is also addressed in my OP.

Which is all shit you'd know if you read and thought it through before going ham on your keyboard.

Your OP is stupid, and completely ignores cost, packaging, and mistakenly assumes decreased NVH, when the opposite would be true.

...thank you for conceding that it helps with NVH.

I didn't. I'm categorically stating it doesn't. In fact, it makes it worse.

Go look and see if Ferrari, Porsche, Alfa and others solid-mount their rear transaxels to their cars, or if they use rubber bushings to isolate them from the rest of the body.

Then maybe you'll grasp all of this.

 

[KingKona]

944 transaxle mount;

It's basically one big rubber bushing.

928 transaxel mount;

Sponsored