IRS and drag racing

[DHG1078]

Oh I forgot, I was going to comment on the ride quality of the corvette. The corvette is an unfair comparison. Just because the corvette has a stiff, and fairly unforgiving ride does not mean the mustang with an IRS will not ride better. First, the suspension design is incredibly different on just about every level. It uses a transverse leaf spring setup, which we all know the mustang does not. The corvette was also designed to be performance oriented, far more so than the mustang. The corvette is a track car you can drive to work and back, not an affordable family friendly car like the mustang. The chassis is incredibly stiff as well compared to the mustang. They are targeting two completely different audiences.

Sponsored

 

[Grimace427]

Stock rubber bushings vs. stock rubber bushings, I'd bet the new IRS would outperform the SRA from the S197 at the drag strip as well. The S197 wheelhops like a bitch if you haven't upgraded the rear control arms at minimum.

 

[Rob WH]

While I love a good debate on the finer points of IRS and live axle, I do think this topic boils down to 3 things -

1) if you have $$, time, and desire, you can tune a suspension to fit your use case
2) the current car has been optimized with IRS and a live axle retrofit is going to take some liquid dollars to do
3) Ford's market research and product planning have taken us into a new era as far as the appeal of this car for the "standard" consumer, who would seem less likely to squeeze out every last ounce of high performance capability

:clap2: Pretty much... Of course, the standard consumer, were it not for unending advertisement, wouldn't be the least bit aware what type of suspension the car has, just like now.

A properly designed IRS will be better than a solid rear in pretty much every way, except for WOT straight line runs from a dig on smooth ground. It will give a much more refined, smooth, responsive feel around corners, pot holes, train tracks, uneven surfaces, etc. Yes and IRS is inherently more complex and can be heavier, but a well designed one with a solid material selection can come close to the weight, if not match that of a solid rear setup.

Have you had multiple vehicles with SLA and with IRS? I have. I've driven literally hundreds of cars too, and will tell you that it's a reality, not a guess, that most people simply have no clue which suspension their own vehicles have, except truck owners. That's not only because they don't care or understand, but also because they never notice a difference between their own car and those of their friends who drive similar vehicles with another type of suspension.

Most people don't realize, for example, a longer and wider(or either) car inherently rides more smoothly... they just don't know or care. That's why I took people for rides in both my Explorer w/ IRS and my brothers w/o, then asked how they felt different... EVERYONE said they felt the same and we all went on the same short trip which included going through a ditch, angling the vehicle enough to pull a front, then rear wheel off the ground. Most people simply don't get it and don't care enough to try because it never affects them personally.

Rob,

I would seriously like to know where you're getting these 1 in 50,000 people road race, 1 in 5000 drag race numbers. Then you went from saying it's 10 times more people to 1,000 times more. Were talking a difference of 2 orders of magnitude here. It really sounds like you are just making numbers up to prove your argument, and until I see anything supporting your statements I will believe you made those numbers up.

As I said, the numbers are simply representative and not meant as factual. The bigger point is, hundreds of thousands more drag race than any other type of racing in America. That's NOT a guess.

Do more people drag race? probably, it is incredibly cheap to do compared to road racing, and lets face it, a lot of people don't have the disposable income to do much road racing. But lets not pretend that because people can more readily afford the $20 admission onto a drag strip that they don't care about handling. That is a very short sighted and dangerous assumption.

Probably? No, the answer is absolutely without a shred of doubt, yes. Most people simply never take their car, even a Mustang, Camaro, Challenger, Corvette... CHEVETTE for that matter... to its handling limits... unless they crash.

Most also just don't care about handling... They just don't. Instead, they care about looks, fuel economy, overall cost of ownership. Handling is typically WAY down the list.

No one can say at this point how strong or weak the IRS will be, or how well it will work at the drag strip. Obviously Ford has taken drag racing into consideration since they included line lock as a feature. Plus they have their cobra jet mustangs they design and build. They know people will use it for drag racing and designed the IRS to include that. I am sure the IRS will be strong enough to hold up to a good amount of abuse. Hell, my dad has a 500+rwhp cobra that still has the stock IRS, and it has seen some serious abuse.

Bottom line is Ford is a business out to make money like everyone else. The engineers would love to build a car strictly for the enthusiasts who race the cars, but that isn't what makes money. Every performance aspect of the car will be compromised in some way as to make the car appealing to the non-enthusiast and adhere to the ever tightening federal standards.

I don't disagree with you here, except to point out, most buyers who happen to be non-enthusiasts not only don't care what suspension is underneath their car, but don't have any earthly idea that IRS or SLA exists, let alone what those terms mean.

That's where "my take" has been so confusing, from the looks... You guys seem to think I'm talking about myself and I'm not and that I think the masses prefer one or the other and I don't... As stated, most people simply have no clue or concern on the matter. It seems, but tell me if I'm wrong, that you and a couple others are looking at this from the direct perspective that people DO know which suspension their cars have, but after 28yrs in the industry, I can tell you they just don't generally know. Most people have a hard time with their vehicle name or model, let alone which engine and transmission it has and... suspension simply isn't in their realm of thought, ever. Even when it breaks, most people have that deer in the headlights stare and await repair. You could say, "You have a broken ball joint." or "Your A-arm cracked and caused all this to fall apart." and you'll get the same basic response... "Can you fix it today?"

Their cars handling limits are so far from their own consideration and knowledge base, you could ask the typical person and they'd have ZERO IDEA what the limits happen to be... That's the point I've been making... people just do not know or care. MEDIA and racers or would be racers tend to know something which, even if they don't understand, is a small overall percentage of vehicle owners.

As for the differences between Mustang and Corvette IRS, that's not related to what I was saying. Simply put, the ride isn't smooth and it isn't like the C7 couldn't have been updated if GM thought it worth the cost... if it ain't broke...

Regardless, the Mustang will ride differently based on size alone, so the two aren't being compared. I was merely making the point that not all IRS is smooth and comfy. If ya really think that Mustang IRS wasn't developed with REAL performance in mind... well, I don't think you've been paying attention to all the press.

Stock rubber bushings vs. stock rubber bushings, I'd bet the new IRS would outperform the SRA from the S197 at the drag strip as well. The S197 wheelhops like a bitch if you haven't upgraded the rear control arms at minimum.

Stock to stock, you may be exactly correct... We'll see. It's a given we expect better handling. We already know that Ford has done EXTENSIVE testing and even taken this new car to race tracks in Europe and that it has produced the numbers they were seeking... I have no concerns there. However, I think they could've done it with SLA anyway and kept the cost lower in the process. That's just my opinion and BOY, am I being kicked around for daring to have my own!

My point was, ultimately, IRS simply cannot do what SLA does in drag racing. It's not even that I care, just that IRS isn't absolutely necessary because SLA works and... SLA is better overall in drag racing.

 

[DHG1078]

Rob,

I agree with you on a lot of things actually. I believe most people have no clue what a dipstick is lol. I am not looking at it with the assumption that people know what the components are, but rather there are end "performance" goals that need to be improved upon over the current model.

I also agree that most people out there will never see the limits of what their car can do regardless of what components are on the car. Ford has a plan for the mustang however, a budget, and lots of market research that shows them what the masses want from their car. IRS just happened to fit the bill perfectly, apparently. Unfortunately, what the masses want isn't always what we want.

My wife and I both have daily drivers with IRS and then we have two mustangs. But the cars differ so much in size, design, and purpose I have never tried to compare them to each other. I must say my daily is a much softer ride, but it is not performance oriented.

I read through some of these posts again and I actually think we are all trying to say basically the same thing, just from a different view point lol.

 

[Rob WH]

I read through some of these posts again and I actually think we are all trying to say basically the same thing, just from a different view point lol.

Yup... that's part of what I was saying!

Again, I don't care that Ford is using IRS. I just know that it's not as great as people think it is and feelings are bound to be hurt when people realize just how good the old "archaic" SLA really is... More than a few, I think, will have a renewed respect for that "old junk" Ford made work so well and it will only get worse when they have to start replacing exceedingly expensive parts.

IRS is awesome at it's limits, but as we agree, most people will simply never know those limits, including many people who race. Cars like your DD and my old Explorer were made more for comfort than performance. Still, since my brother happened to have the same vehicle w/o IRS, it was a great way to tell if people noticed and nobody every did. He used to laugh at me for bringing people over just for this "test" and I admit, it was ALL in fun. Our friends were laughing with us, as if I'd played a joke on 'em. All I was doing is "educating" them to a small degree. Mind you, these are performance nuts who, like many here, are simply convinced of the outright superiority of IRS. They all left feeling a tad different, guaranteed. :lol:

Ultimately, it won't be long and we'll all know some real information on the new Mustang and I'm really interested because my Escape will be traded on one at some point... or an F-150 if the Mustang isn't up to snuff... a 2015 model in all likelihood, but late enough in the yr that it may be a '16. Either way, I plan on owning another Ford... a quick count tells me I can remember having 13 so far... a majority being Mustangs.

 

[scottpe]

A properly designed IRS will be better than a solid rear in pretty much every way, except for WOT straight line runs from a dig on smooth ground. It will give a much more refined, smooth, responsive feel around corners, pot holes, train tracks, uneven surfaces, etc. Yes and IRS is inherently more complex and can be heavier, but a well designed one with a solid material selection can come close to the weight, if not match that of a solid rear setup.

^^This

Anyone that believes that on a performance car like the Mustang, the difference between a well designed IRS (past iterations were hacks and do not really do not qualify IMO) and the current SRA will not be noticeable anywhere other than at the limits is fooling themselves. I experience handling 'quirks' every single day that I know are attributable to the SRA and would be improved by the IRS. Every day. I'd be willing to bet they are the same sensations the 'average person' would notice too when driving the current gen vs the 2015 on their daily commute.

The idea that almost nobody knows what kind of suspension their car has, nor can they tell the difference is too much of a generality to use in this conversation. Maybe for the soccer mom that's hauling her kids around in a mini-van or sedan that's true. The handling in average commuter cars and especially big SUVs (as was used in an example by a previous poster) is so soft and vague anyway that I don't think it's a very valid way to compare. But I guarantee a far higher percentage of people that are in the market for a 5.0L 400+HP Mustang, for instance, have at least a layman's understanding of the differences between the two technologies and could recognize them on their daily commute in such a car.

And on the topic of drag racing... of these huge numbers of people that drag race their new Mustangs, how many realistically do so at such a competitive level that they demand an SRA? The percentage is small. Very small. Most Mustang owners are of the type that throw a few bolt-ons on the car and hit the track maybe once or twice a year to see what it can do. Most of THOSE owners aren't going to notice an obvious difference at the strip, unless the IRS fixes wheel hop as is predicted by some. That will be a pretty blatantly obvious difference to the casual drag racer... a difference in the IRS's favor. And those casual drag racers will probably have some appreciation of the superior ride and handling characteristics of the IRS for the other 99.9% of the time they are driving their car. I know I will. For those that are such serious drag racers that an SRA is mandatory, I'm pretty sure there's going to be aftermarket options to allow for such.

Anyway, the reality is, despite the fact that Ford has done a remarkable job of squeezing every ounce of potential out of the SRA, and really took it further than most thought they could, they have simply reached a ceiling with what additional performance they can achieve while still maintaining the kind of ride characteristics that the average consumer demands. The SRA simply cannot achieve the same performance levels that the IRS does AND match the ride quality and refinement at the same time.

Their primary competitor for this car isn't just Camaro anymore. It's lots of other cars too... cars that offer outstanding performance and refinement... cars that are in a market segment that Ford needs to steal a piece of to grow its overall market share. This change to IRS is one that a 'World Car' demands to compete with those other cars, not only with real world numbers, but with public perception. Not that anyone was arguing this particular point. But it's the bottom line reality that we're all going to have to deal with regardless of which suspension you champion. It's a reality that I personally welcome with open arms when I purchase what will be my 4th Mustang in a few months... a car that I have little doubt will be the best Mustang ever made. To me that's all that matters.

And I'll make it to the strip in my 2015 at some point. Something tells me I'm not going to be disappointed when I do... and I bet I'll enjoy the drive there and back a little more too. :ford:

 

[Fenderaddict2]

^^This

Anyone that believes that on a performance car like the Mustang, the difference between a well designed IRS (past iterations were hacks and do not really do not qualify IMO) and the current SRA will not be noticeable anywhere other than at the limits is fooling themselves. I experience handling 'quirks' every single day that I know are attributable to the SRA and would be improved by the IRS. Every day. I'd be willing to bet they are the same sensations the 'average person' would notice too when driving the current gen vs the 2015 on their daily commute.

The idea that almost nobody knows what kind of suspension their car has, nor can they tell the difference is too much of a generality to use in this conversation. Maybe for the soccer mom that's hauling her kids around in a mini-van or sedan that's true. The handling in average commuter cars and especially big SUVs (as was used in an example by a previous poster) is so soft and vague anyway that I don't think it's a very valid way to compare. But I guarantee a far higher percentage of people that are in the market for a 5.0L 400+HP Mustang, for instance, have at least a layman's understanding of the differences between the two technologies and could recognize them on their daily commute in such a car.

And on the topic of drag racing... of these huge numbers of people that drag race their new Mustangs, how many realistically do so at such a competitive level that they demand an SRA? The percentage is small. Very small. Most Mustang owners are of the type that throw a few bolt-ons on the car and hit the track maybe once or twice a year to see what it can do. Most of THOSE owners aren't going to notice an obvious difference at the strip, unless the IRS fixes wheel hop as is predicted by some. That will be a pretty blatantly obvious difference to the casual drag racer... a difference in the IRS's favor. And those casual drag racers will probably have some appreciation of the superior ride and handling characteristics of the IRS for the other 99.9% of the time they are driving their car. I know I will. For those that are such serious drag racers that an SRA is mandatory, I'm pretty sure there's going to be aftermarket options to allow for such.

Anyway, the reality is, despite the fact that Ford has done a remarkable job of squeezing every ounce of potential out of the SRA, and really took it further than most thought they could, they have simply reached a ceiling with what additional performance they can achieve while still maintaining the kind of ride characteristics that the average consumer demands. The SRA simply cannot achieve the same performance levels that the IRS does AND match the ride quality and refinement at the same time.

Their primary competitor for this car isn't just Camaro anymore. It's lots of other cars too... cars that offer outstanding performance and refinement... cars that are in a market segment that Ford needs to steal a piece of to grow its overall market share. This change to IRS is one that a 'World Car' demands to compete with those other cars, not only with real world numbers, but with public perception. Not that anyone was arguing this particular point. But it's the bottom line reality that we're all going to have to deal with regardless of which suspension you champion. It's a reality that I personally welcome with open arms when I purchase what will be my 4th Mustang in a few months... a car that I have little doubt will be the best Mustang ever made. To me that's all that matters.

And I'll make it to the strip in my 2015 at some point. Something tells me I'm not going to be disappointed when I do... and I bet I'll enjoy the drive there and back a little more too. :ford:

What he says. As an example, I knew my Boss could outrun my last BMW on the track, but it took a while to do so. The limiting factor, driver confidence with the chassis feedback via the SRA. I bought the Boss thinking I'd hold on to it forever. But track days, while fun, have simply made me want more. And Ford (bless Dave P) is delivering.

 

[Trackaholic]

I liked the old Boss 302, but would not buy it due to the live axle. I'm a road course guy and want a car with a suspension appropriate to that application.

One of the reasons I am strongly considering the new Mustang is due to the IRS, as well as the other improvements (lower, wider, interesting interior, great looking exterior, etc).

The IRS has several benefits over the live axle for all types of driving, including better anti-dive/squat characteristics, the ability to control camber and toe over the suspension travel, and a stiffer connection to the chassis. I think a big part in making the Mustang feel more like a sports car and less like a truck will be the anti-dive/squat benefits, and the stiffer connection to the chassis.

Of course time will tell how well Ford executed the IRS architecture, and how well it holds up to abuse at the drag strip. One thing to consider however is that pretty much every high horsepower sports car and exotic car has an IRS. Some of these cars (Porsche 918 and 911 Turbos, Veyron, McLaren P1) are approaching the 9s in the 1/4 mile, which isn't what a full-on drag car can do but which is going to be way more than what all these hundreds of thousands of weekend drag racers will be doing.

So, from that perspective the argument isn't that Ford should have kept the live axle because nobody can tell that it's worse than an IRS except in limited situations and it's actually better at drag racing. Instead the argument is that the IRS is better for road racers, daily drivers, AND essentially all drag racers as well.

Unless Ford really screwed up the design.

-T

 

[Rob WH]

Rather than spend the next few months in debate over it, I'll hide and watch... My true hope is the same in that I merely hope all you guys who think you're experts about an item we've never even seen tested, aren't also very disappointed in terms of performance gains. To believe what many here are saying is to expect the new Mustang GT to smack a Corvette around while running alongside a ZO6... DO NOT expect that to happen! It will be UNREAL if that happens and I'll buy mine sooner than I have planned just because. Just sayin'... don't hold your collective breath.

Having been in this industry(retired now) for 28yrs, I see people setting themselves up for high disappointment, unknowingly. The current car is SO GOOD that the next simply should not be expected to run all over it. It looks like many are expecting far too much from a 1st yr replacement we've not even gotten so much as the weight of yet.

BTW... How many Mustangs won an SCCA championship last year? How many Corvettes? How many Camaros? How many Challengers. The 1st two matched and the 2nd two also matched... just food for thought.

 

[Trackaholic]

Yeah, I also highly doubt the GT will compare to the vette in terms of lap times at a track or in the 1/4 mile. Maybe it will be close to the new M3 on the road course though.

Ford did thing right with the handling of the Ford GT, so hopefully they gat some of that tuning into the Mustang. If GM can get the 1LE Camaro to be so good, Ford should be able to do better with this new Mustang. Let's hope they did this right.

-T

 

[Whiskey11]

I liked the old Boss 302, but would not buy it due to the live axle. I'm a road course guy and want a car with a suspension appropriate to that application.

One of the reasons I am strongly considering the new Mustang is due to the IRS, as well as the other improvements (lower, wider, interesting interior, great looking exterior, etc).

The IRS has several benefits over the live axle for all types of driving, including better anti-dive/squat characteristics, the ability to control camber and toe over the suspension travel, and a stiffer connection to the chassis. I think a big part in making the Mustang feel more like a sports car and less like a truck will be the anti-dive/squat benefits, and the stiffer connection to the chassis.

Of course time will tell how well Ford executed the IRS architecture, and how well it holds up to abuse at the drag strip. One thing to consider however is that pretty much every high horsepower sports car and exotic car has an IRS. Some of these cars (Porsche 918 and 911 Turbos, Veyron, McLaren P1) are approaching the 9s in the 1/4 mile, which isn't what a full-on drag car can do but which is going to be way more than what all these hundreds of thousands of weekend drag racers will be doing.

So, from that perspective the argument isn't that Ford should have kept the live axle because nobody can tell that it's worse than an IRS except in limited situations and it's actually better at drag racing. Instead the argument is that the IRS is better for road racers, daily drivers, AND essentially all drag racers as well.

Unless Ford really screwed up the design.

-T

The only problem with an IRS from a anti-squat/anti-dive perspective is that changing it requires a suspension analyzer and a lot of time tweaking on a computer before you ever start actually tweaking the IRS itself. Then once you start tweaking the IRS you now start cutting factory welds and rewelding stuff and praying it doesn't cool all the same. If you don't have those abilities then you are left with whatever the factory gives you for those values until you have those abilities or cash outlay to pay someone who does. Maybe I don't want 80% anti-squat on my autocross car?

Any newb to the S197 platform can read a 3 paragraph post on the effects of a set of bolt on relocation brackets on ALL forms of motorsport and know where to put his LCA's at to minimize undesirable effects. This is a one reason a Live Axle can be a lot of fun to "build" around. I can tweak a lot of variables relatively independently of each other. IC location can be tweaked without ever significantly messing with the roll steer characteristics of the rear suspension (lowering Upper Control Arm chassis side, Torque Arm, ladder bars for the drag racers, etc). I can tweak roll steer settings (LCA relocation brackets) and if there is enough adjustability in the UCA mount, I can do it without impacting IC location a whole lot. I can't do that as easily with an IRS where changing the angle of one of the control arms results in huge changes in alignment, bumpsteer, roll steer, etc.

Yeah, I also highly doubt the GT will compare to the vette in terms of lap times at a track or in the 1/4 mile. Maybe it will be close to the new M3 on the road course though.

Ford did thing right with the handling of the Ford GT, so hopefully they gat some of that tuning into the Mustang. If GM can get the 1LE Camaro to be so good, Ford should be able to do better with this new Mustang. Let's hope they did this right.

-T

The current Brembo GT was nearly able to best an E92 M3 w/ Competition Package at Streets of Willow which is a particularly unfriendly course for heavy cars with suspension that can't soak up bumps. The time split was .09 seconds with Randy Pobst behind the wheel of both. BMW has a tendency to send their cars out with real tires and real rear differentials and real dampers. Ford struggles in that regard, a lot, so that time is pretty damn telling. I'd be willing to bet that the Track Pack GT's out perform an E92 M3 w/ Comp Pack there quite handily. While I wont say the stock GT's are good handlers out of the box, they certainly aren't awful either. It's also an extremely capable and inexpensive platform. Sure, it's no M3 out of the box with the "love you and massage you into awesomeness", but I can build a pretty damn good track car for the price of an M3 or I can make a pretty good DD for a lot less too.

Here is the video in case you haven't seen it:
[ame]

Now the new F80 M3 I have no idea about, possibly. I think Ford had this car and the M4 firmly in their sights when designing the new Mustang along with some much more expensive cars.

If there is one thing that I like about that video it's that Randy really summarizes my disdain for BMW's ine one very quick phrase. "The BMW's are too easy to drive, it just isn't as much fun." I've commented a lot about how boring BMW's have become to drive and how little character they have. I've driven an STX prepped 328i and it was fast, way faster than my Mustang, but it was unbelievably boring to drive. Zero bad habbits. No reward for driving it well because it drives so well and has no bad habits it is hard to get punished by it because it doesn't punish you.

 

[MustangSteve]

We're rather off course here, no pun intended. I have read plenty about the possibility of a bolt in SLA and would be great with that as an upgrade for drag racing(at a reasonable cost).

Suffice to say, IRS is great stuff, for the 2 days per yr it's needed. It's also expensive to build, expensive to repair and hurtful to the 1 thing Mustang is most famous for(besides it's impressive sales)... drag racing. Mustang, perhaps more than any car in history, has proven that SLA, LIVE AXLES, whatever one would call it, can be quite competitive on any track. In drag racing, it's untouchable. In road racing, it's not as good as IRS. That said, about 1 in 50,000 owners(if that) ever road race their Mustang while about 1 in 5,000 drag races at some point. Besides, look how close to Camaro and Challenger, the Mustang SLA has remained? It beats even the best rendition in Challenger, right? The best reason I can think of to use IRS in Mustang(aside from Ford making a profit over time) is because they finally know what will hold up to a great degree. I definitely like IRS and have had it on more than 1 vehicle myself(including my current FWD DD), but it's not the end all that many seem to think it is.

Finally, I will believe the IRS is lighter after someone pulls the system apart and weighs every component. It uses SO MANY more parts, it's hard to believe it can be lighter. The drawing of the components is telling... compare that to the ultra-simple SLA and ask yourself which is most likely lighter. That's not even considering the sub-frame brackets which are now much larger than before. Bottom line: Sacrifices must be made for everything automotive.

While Mustangs are known for drag racing, the reality is that the vast majority will never get anywhere near a strip during their lifetime. For most Mustang owners, the benefits of IRS in terms of ride quality and being able to keep the tires planted while accelerating out of a turn or hitting a bump or pothole mid-corner will manifest themselves virtually every day of the year.

Having IRS for everyone that uses a Mustang as a daily driver and Ford Racing live axle kit for the few that actually do go drag racing seems like a much more sensible balance than the other way around.

Dave Pericak, Tom Barnes and the rest of the Mustang team have done a remarkable job of keeping the live axle Mustang in the hunt, but they readily acknowledge that the Boss was really the limit of what they could achieve with that setup. In order to move Mustang forward and stay competitive, they had to go with IRS.

As for the weight, there is no way an IRS setup is ever going to be lighter overall than a live axle because of the extra components and complexity. That said, IRS does offer the advantage of reduced unsprung mass so there is less inertia at each wheel. When a wheel hits a bump, only that wheel has to move rather then entire axle. That means you can use lower spring rates while keeping the rubber on the road for better grip.

 

[scottpe]

As for the weight, there is no way an IRS setup is ever going to be lighter overall than a live axle because of the extra components and complexity. That said, IRS does offer the advantage of reduced unsprung mass so there is less inertia at each wheel. When a wheel hits a bump, only that wheel has to move rather then entire axle. That means you can use lower spring rates while keeping the rubber on the road for better grip.

Yes, and though added weight is almost never a good thing, WHERE that weight is located with the IRS does have some side benefits: it's very low and to the rear of the car, which can help the CG and overall balance.

 

[TungstenGT]

I've got a 2015 GT with PP on the way, and I live in Wisconsin. Does anyone know if IRS is better than SLA in the snow? My '06 GT isn't too bad with snow tires and couple bags of salt in the trunk, but I'm hoping with IRS and the new "Snow" setting, the '15 will be even better.

 

[Rob WH]

I've got a 2015 GT with PP on the way, and I live in Wisconsin. Does anyone know if IRS is better than SLA in the snow? My '06 GT isn't too bad with snow tires and couple bags of salt in the trunk, but I'm hoping with IRS and the new "Snow" setting, the '15 will be even better.

IRS vs SLA in snow isn't really a question for you, considering the whole car.

Your car will come with a "wet/snow mode" setting if I read correctly. With that it's going to be better than the 06 regardless. That said, if the system works as expected, you'll have MORE TRACTION at slow speeds, typical of snow driving.

In general, IRS would likely be better than SRA in any adverse conditions such as snow, rain, holes or big bumps in the road... Ultimately, I would suggest you DON'T DRIVE IT IN THE SNOW!

Sponsored