"expected" weight gain

[C00KIE M0NSTER]

Ford claims they met their weight target. Anyone know what said target was?

I can't remember if it was in 2010 or 2011, but Pericak said they thought 200 lbs was doable.

Sponsored

 

[VIN666]

So that would mean a 3400 lbs GT?
That's still pretty porky...

 

[scottpe]

So that would mean a 3400 lbs GT?
That's still pretty porky...

Porky? That's 200lbs less than my 2012. If they get it down to that weight I'd be ecstatic considering the IRS and other upgrades!

 

[VIN666]

Well, not by today's standards I suppose, but I remember reading something about 3000 lbs even, which got me excited

 

[Hemisedan]

Ok, Ford has a much lighter platform for starters, put to use aluminum thru out the car, even in the hood and front fenders. Sure they've gone to the IRS that is usually heavier, but thru the use of aluminum again, I doubt that it weighs any more than the outgoing rear end. There's a lot more too, but just look at the two cars mass. The 2015 even looks lighter/smaller. I'd be very surprised if this car gained weight, but in saying all that, if there's ANY weight gain after all the 400 lbs loss they all claimed, Mustang will go off my short list and I'll go back to my roots.

 

[jjw]

Some weight was definitely gained with the IRS unit itself, but its "good" weight because of the effect on weight distribution.
I know the platform (minus the IRS) has also lost weight.
NET… no clue.
-200 on the GT would make me quite happy.

 

[m4a1mustang]

3400lbs is a lot better than 3600. Curb weight of a fully-optioned Nissan 370Z Touring+Sport coupe with manual transmission is just shy of 3,400lbs.

 

[Dirk McGurck]

3400lbs would make me a very happy man. Man child.

 

[m4a1mustang]

3400lbs would make me a very happy man. Man child.

:amen:

3400 lbs and those toggle switches. Oh my god I'd be in heaven.

 

[All-Or-Nothing]

Meh.......weight won't bother me one bit.

As long as it's faster and handles better I don't care one bit about the weight.

 

[VIN666]

In all honesty, one of the main reasons why weight is so important for a track car, is simply tire wear...

 

[MARZ]

In all honesty, one of the main reasons why weight is so important for a track car, is simply tire wear...

You know, that's a good point and one I had never thought of.

 

[VIN666]

Seriously, you will eat up rubber twice as fast in a 3400 lbs car than in a 3000 lbs car.
Not to mention, you need a lot bigger, pricier rubber to make it turn to begin with.

 

[eurospeed]

Seriously, you will eat up rubber twice as fast in a 3400 lbs car than in a 3000 lbs car.
Not to mention, you need a lot bigger, pricier rubber to make it turn to begin with.

Now add to that significantly increased brake and fuel usage. 400 lb is a massive difference in performance and efficiency to those who don't care about weight.

 

[Trackaholic]

Now add to that significantly increased brake and fuel usage. 400 lb is a massive difference in performance and efficiency to those who don't care about weight.

Disagree about fuel, but agree on brake and tires.

I believe fuel usage will be determined by the power output, and no matter the weight you'll be using full power almost all the time on the track. There are not too many cases where you'd be full throttle in a heavy car (making full power), yet be at partial throttle in a lighter car (making less power, and therefore saving gas).

I guess if you argued that the lighter car could get away with less power the the point is true, but then you are comparing different things.

Definitely would like a lighter car for track purposes, though, and hope the Mustang is able to loose weight as originally rumored.

-T

Sponsored