"expected" weight gain

[nametoshowothers]

You aren't in the minority. The majority does WANT a lighter mustang, and most of that majority would like to see the size drop a little bit.

Its just that no weight loss or 100lb gain is not a deal breaker for most.

correct - i do not give a @#$$ about the weight, i do care completely about what the package does. All the worrying about specs is the wrong thing. it is what the complete package does.

I do agree it is easier to meet my performance targets if they drop weight. Most of the super cars show they can be heavy and make it work. But lighter makes it easier with out computer controls.

Sponsored

 

[nametoshowothers]

Why is that weird? It was a match box with wheels. No way Ford could build that with today's safety restrictions. It was cheaply put together and not very safe.

I'm going to spend my 35kish on a V8 that's safe and well put together. If you want to drop 35k on a V8 that's unsafe and a rattle trap you're in the minority and aren't Ford's target audience. I wouldn't even consider a GT today if it was built like the fox bodies. Hell my 2004 was crap. It rattled and creaked almost from the showroom. Mine and my friends were so bad I swore to never buy another mustang as long as I lived. Thankfully Ford improved and my 2013 is much better.

The C7 vet has accomplished its weight only because its a 2 seater and its nearly 60k. No way Chevy pulls that off with half the cash and has to add a back seat to the car along with all the extra safety regulations that go with it.

Why anyone thinks Ford could pull hundreds of pounds of weight without increasing the cost and not compromising safety or build quality but has decided not too is beyond me. Yea, they're slaving over how to improve MPG's to meet increasingly strict government standards but they overlooked 300lbs of fat...

You are right, chevy did not - look at the camaro, and the new camaro will likely be heavier than the mustang

 

[SStormtrooPer]

Why is that weird? It was a match box with wheels. No way Ford could build that with today's safety restrictions. It was cheaply put together and not very safe.

I'm going to spend my 35kish on a V8 that's safe and well put together. If you want to drop 35k on a V8 that's unsafe and a rattle trap you're in the minority and aren't Ford's target audience. I wouldn't even consider a GT today if it was built like the fox bodies. Hell my 2004 was crap. It rattled and creaked almost from the showroom. Mine and my friends were so bad I swore to never buy another mustang as long as I lived. Thankfully Ford improved and my 2013 is much better.

The C7 vet has accomplished its weight only because its a 2 seater and its nearly 60k. No way Chevy pulls that off with half the cash and has to add a back seat to the car along with all the extra safety regulations that go with it.

Why anyone thinks Ford could pull hundreds of pounds of weight without increasing the cost and not compromising safety or build quality but has decided not too is beyond me. Yea, they're slaving over how to improve MPG's to meet increasingly strict government standards but they overlooked 300lbs of fat...

Yeah, it definitely was cheaply made matchbox on wheels. So was the Corvette, just slightly less.

And the Corvette ALWAYS had only two seats. You are are arguing your point as if they HAD 4 seats and met their weight goals by eliminating the back 2.

Seriously, go back and read the thread. No one said it would not cost Ford more money up front to reduce weight.

 

[SStormtrooPer]

You are right, chevy did not - look at the camaro, and the new camaro will likely be heavier than the mustang

The Camaro may or may not be heavier than the Mustang -- it depends on what the Mustangs weight ends up to be.

The Camaro will NOT be as light as or lighter than the Corvette though. Ever. Unless it is some $80k fake Z28 or something.

Chevy has a problem that Ford does not. Ford CAN compete with the Corvette if they so chose. If they did that, Camaro would be in a real predicament, because GM will never offer direct competition to their Halo car for $20k less.

 

[Trackaholic]

The Camaro may or may not be heavier than the Mustang -- it depends on what the Mustangs weight ends up to be.

The Camaro will NOT be as light as or lighter than the Corvette though. Ever. Unless it is some $80k fake Z28 or something.

Chevy has a problem that Ford does not. Ford CAN compete with the Corvette if they so chose. If they did that, Camaro would be in a real predicament, because GM will never offer direct competition to their Halo car for $20k less.

And it's not just that GM won't offer direct competition, but rather that if they can make a 4-seater pony car comparable with their dedicated 2-seat sports car, then the sports-car team has not performed well.

I honestly do not think GM limits the Camaro in any way (other than a token detune on the engines for marketing reasons), it's just the nature of the larger and heavier platform. The Camaro Z28 might be faster on the track than the Vette Z51, but it only achieves that by giving up virtually all streetability (so I don't really count that specific case).

In any event, I'd love to see the Mustang able to cover the price/performance envelope all the way from the FRS to the Camaro to the Vette. I do think the new chassis is a little large for the two end cases, but with the new engines and IRS is creeping ever closer. If they really do pull off a weight loss, that would go a long way towards those two bookends as well.

But I really am trying not to get my hopes up. I don't want to be too disappointed if the weight stays about the same.

-T

 

[Stuntman]

The current chassis is about the same size or smaller than a camaro and the S550 is much shorter...

 

[Grimace427]

The current chassis is about the same size or smaller than a camaro and the S550 is much shorter...

The S550 is much shorter than what? The Camaro is 190", the S197 is 188.1", the S550 is 188.3".

 

[Grimace427]

in the track day circles, porches are considered bullet proof. the instructors i know use porsche 911 as there person track day car as they are so reliable. I am not a porsche fan. Porsche builds very good motors. I am a ford fan.

I'm not going to discount your experience but the Porsche service department that works in the same shop as me in the Mercedes service has at least one engine out of a car at all times. Literally the Porsche guys have a wait list for their engine scissor jack and mount plate. Most of them are the V8 Cayenne engines but they have at least one 911 flat-6 engine out and apart every few weeks. Their GT3 engines have an issue with the plastic intake falling apart and sending shrapnel into the cylinders and the fix is installing an aluminum intake manifold with a stronger tumble flap system.

 

[SStormtrooPer]

I honestly do not think GM limits the Camaro in any way (other than a token detune on the engines for marketing reasons), it's just the nature of the larger and heavier platform. The Camaro Z28 might be faster on the track than the Vette Z51, but it only achieves that by giving up virtually all streetability (so I don't really count that specific case).

Agreed. The reason the Camaro is so big and heavy is because of the Zeta platform. They just don't have room to take anything out of it(Just like D2C). That will change some with Alpha, and some size could be lost, and weight will most likely be lost, but even then, it wont' get close to the Corvette if it could. Aside from offering factory competition, they also won't offer a Camaro that can have a couple thousand dollars put into it and beat the Corvette.

 

[nametoshowothers]

I'm not going to discount your experience but the Porsche service department that works in the same shop as me in the Mercedes service has at least one engine out of a car at all times. Literally the Porsche guys have a wait list for their engine scissor jack and mount plate. Most of them are the V8 Cayenne engines but they have at least one 911 flat-6 engine out and apart every few weeks. Their GT3 engines have an issue with the plastic intake falling apart and sending shrapnel into the cylinders and the fix is installing an aluminum intake manifold with a stronger tumble flap system.

Most of my experience is with older Porsches. So also not to discount your experience, also the Porsche engines are pulled out for more maintenance activities than ford engines, nature of the the design and engine location. Also Porsche is bulletproof compared to Ferrari, Lamborghini, Aston

Just shows how good the coyote and trinity are

 

[Grimace427]

Most of my experience is with older Porsches. So also not to discount your experience, also the Porsche engines are pulled out for more maintenance activities than ford engines, nature of the the design and engine location. Also Porsche is bulletproof compared to Ferrari, Lamborghini, Aston

Just shows how good the coyote and trinity are

Oh I know their maintenance 'challenges' whenever I chat with the Porsche techs. The current 991 chassis requires the rear bumper and powered rear wing module be removed for damn nearly any kind of work. Popping the 'hood' on the engine literally only reveals the fill tubes for the oil, coolant, and either washer fluid or something(didn't look too close).

On a cool note we have a lot of serious racers as customers bringing in their GT3's with full sponsor liveries buying new $600 Mich Cup tires once a month or so.





Sorry for the off topic!

 

[Taneras]

And the Corvette ALWAYS had only two seats. You are are arguing your point as if they HAD 4 seats and met their weight goals by eliminating the back 2.

Not at all, I'm arguing that there were no standards back at that time. Ford could put out a match box with wheels and sell it, thus a 4 seater weighing less than a 2 seater corvette would certainly be doable. Can you find crash ratings for 80's automobiles to compare the Fox Bodies to the C4 vets? I'm not even sure if your car had airbags. What were the child restrictions at that time? I was brought home in a Nissan 240z with my dad driving and my mom holding me in the passenger seat - and I don't think they were breaking the law.

With the standards we have today no automaker can put out cars like that and hit a good price. The C7, rightfully so, is a good bit lighter than these new Mustangs. Pointing to your 1988 death trap as evidence that Ford can make a ultra light 4 seater mustang isn't very convincing. We actually have standards today and the C7 can get out of some of those standards because it doesn't have a back seat.

Seriously, go back and read the thread. No one said it would not cost Ford more money up front to reduce weight.

Yea I understand, but no amount of napkin math is going to convince Ford (or me) differently. They have a target audience who, on average, makes x amount of dollars and they need to come in at a specific price range. If you think differently, feel free to write Ford and see if you can change their minds.

But you'd lose me as a customer if you went up too high. I'm willing to pay up to around 34-35k, anything beyond that and I'm done. And I'm not paying that for a base model either. I've noticed a lot of posters here are worried about whether or not the upcoming price jump will allow them to get a V8 or force them to get the eco4.

 

[Trackaholic]

I've noticed a lot of posters here are worried about whether or not the upcoming price jump will allow them to get a V8 or force them to get the eco4.

This is an interesting point for a hypothetical question:

Let's say the GT was 3600 lbs, but the EB4 was 3300 lbs. Which would you choose? Is the weight difference enough to drive you from the V8 version to the 4-cylinder?

I personally would rather have the V8 saddled with the extra 300 lbs (at least, that's my choice without actually feeling the difference between these theoretical choices).

-T

 

[VIN666]

Interesting question.
Let's look at both ends of the possible spectrum.
As in - best possible GT / EB, worst possible GT / EB

GT - 420 hp - 3600 lbs - 37k$
EB - 330 hp - 3300 lbs - 28k$

GT - 450 hp - 3400 lbs - 35k$
EB - 305 hp - 3350 lbs - 30k$

See what I mean?
Could very well be possible that the EB could be the better bang for the buck track car...

 

[MadMoose]

If I couldn't afford the V8 I wouldn't get a mustang. That's just me though.

Sponsored