TTV6+AWD or FI-V8

[Flat Plane Drifter]

This AWD talk is blasphemous. Indefensible on a Mustang forum.

Someone who worked at Ford said it wouldn't fit.

Sponsored

 

[Hack]

Someone who worked at Ford said it wouldn't fit.

Bummer. Well I for one hope Ford does something to address launching the GT500 and doesn't just default to making big numbers on the dyno and generating lots of smoke everywhere else.

 

[9secondko]

This AWD talk is blasphemous. Indefensible on a Mustang forum.

This is exactly the type of Luddite thinking that holds Musyangbadvancement back.

Ridiculous.

 

[FordBlueHeart]

This is exactly the type of Luddite thinking that holds Musyangbadvancement back.

Ridiculous.

This is exactly the kind of bullying based on the theory that anything that comes out of the posters mouth is correct and indisputable based on the fact they said it.
Ridiculous. :headbonk::headbonk:





opcorn:

 

[9secondko]

This is exactly the kind of bullying based on the theory that anything that comes out of the posters mouth is correct and indisputable based on the fact they said it.
Ridiculous. :headbonk::headbonk:





opcorn:

And that is the kind of meaningless cop out retort that does nothing to fix the original problem of luddite thinking.

AWD is quite simply a BETTER way to fully utilize power.

If the Mustang gets it, it will be an ADVANCEMENT.

Period.

All Mustangs won't get it. But a version that approaches 800-1,000 HP had better dang well consider it at the very least.

We aren't in the 60's or 70's. the mustang shouldn't be constrained by what was available then.

It's 2016. Guess what? PROGRESS is OK.

 

[minjitta]

In today world if Ford dont take advantage of awd, GT500 will not draw other crowds that never consider Ford to come to their dealers. GT500 TTT AWD will leave a few old school guys upset, but in return it will draw tons of other to GT500 TT AWD, just like S550 draw alot of first time Mustang buyers.

 

[FordBlueHeart]

And that is the kind of meaningless cop out retort that does nothing to fix the original problem of luddite thinking.

AWD is quite simply a BETTER way to fully utilize power.

If the Mustang gets it, it will be an ADVANCEMENT.

Period.

All Mustangs won't get it. But a version that approaches 800-1,000 HP had better dang well consider it at the very least.

We aren't in the 60's or 70's. the mustang shouldn't be constrained by what was available then.

It's 2016. Guess what? PROGRESS is OK.

It's not progress. It's a fundamental change of the Mustang's core ethos. Once you start diluting the successful characteristics, you will also lose the emotional influence on purchase decisions.
Advancements are good and should be utilized to keep the model current and relevant. As a manufacturer, it's a fine line between being "current or groundbreaking" and alienating your core customers. Economies of scale can play a role in how quickly change can take place too. I don't see the addition of awd being economically feasible to a niche sub model like the GT 500 without needing to re-engineer the whole platform. I think the possibility of awd increases if the Mustang were to share the platform with another like vehicle and spread the costs. Maybe this will happen with the S650? I doubt it since people are saying the S650 is an evolution of the S550.
A good example of needing to balance being current and appealing to your core customers while attracting new ones is Harley Davidson and the liquid cooled V Rod introduction in 2001. It was a huge departure from H-Ds offerings at the time. A lot of the core customers wouldn't accept it. A lot still don't, but here it is 2016 and they're still in production but marketed different from the main line of bikes. What if H-D had simply put that motor into a Screamin' Eagle Dyna Wide Glide? I think it's acceptance would have been abysmal, even though the Screamin Eagle line was the high performance offering at the time. What about fuel injection on H-Ds main line of bikes? Their hand was forced due to EPA emissions and noise requirements. H-D designed (or had it designed)to operate in a manner consistent with the carbs ability to enhance the "potato potato" sound contributions while decreasing engine noise and emissions. It didn't happen overnight on all models either. Maybe this was a "de-sensitizing" tactic for the inevitable mandate?
My point is that awd may be better for traction for a model equipped with 800-1000 hp, but the argument that it has to be done is not a strong one at this time. With gradual desensitization I can see it becoming a reality, but not for the S550.
One point about desensitization. It's happening every day in society. People repeat what they believe to be true over and over. They talk in absolutes like "period." When they encounter a differing opinion,they shout over the other person or they write IN ALL CAPITAL LETTERS and use words like BETTER and ADVANCEMENT or PROGRESS like it proves their opinion to be correct and indisputable. They also like to call those who disagree with them names like LUDDITE.:ban:
While many people can see through words and make an informed decision based upon their own research, many simply accept their opinion as truth due to hearing it over and over. Don't be a sheep. Do your own research. We're all entitled to our own opinions. :clap2:

 

[Glenn G]

In today world if Ford dont take advantage of awd, GT500 will not draw other crowds that never consider Ford to come to their dealers. GT500 TTT AWD will leave a few old school guys upset, but in return it will draw tons of other to GT500 TT AWD, just like S550 draw alot of first time Mustang buyers.

:amen:
Just like all the purists were talking about the Ecoboost was going to be a failure, "no one wants a 4cyl mustang" bla, bla bla.

Turns out lots of people did.

Camaro sales are an example of what happens when you listen to interweb forums, and they are lagging

Mustang sales are an example of what happens when the company looks at the market and common sense instead of purists.

A 600hp ttv6 awd $60k mustang would be a holy terror on the street, strip, and track putting all of the current Super cars on notice.

Ford might lose like 10 sales from the guys who swear that a Mustang should only have a V8, not be good at anything outside the 1/4 and barely turn a corner.

5 of those guys would come around when they started getting ahnhilated at the strip.

 

[Grimace427]

A good example of needing to balance being current and appealing to your core customers while attracting new ones is Harley Davidson....

Imagine Harley Davidson putting a 4-cylinder 14,000rpm engine into one of their cruisers. Those are the people thinking about AWD in a Mustang.

 

[LHousePhoto]

Imagine Harley Davidson putting a 4-cylinder 14,000rpm engine into one of their cruisers. Those are the people thinking about AWD in a Mustang.

I disagree. It is the equivalent of Porsche putting in smaller displacement turbocharged engines in their entire model range.

Harley and the Motorcycle industry is different than Ford and the Automotive industry. Where people will continue to buy slow and heavy cruisers for the "Harley sound" the automotive industry has to, and has been moving to smaller displacement forced induction engines.

It is the reason the Ferrari California became the California T, and picked up 100 horsepower and 200 pound feet of torque. The Ferrari 458 Italia became the 488 GTB which again, picked up 100 horsepower and 200 torque.

All from switching from a 4.3 liter or 4.5 liter V8 to smaller 3.8/3.9 liter twin turbocharged V8's.

Ford can not remain a dinosaur, they can not be Harley, the Mustang must evolve, they have already proved that the Ecoboost (which makes more power than the 4.6 2V/3V engines from the previous GT's) is a way to make power AND fuel efficiency in the Mustang. That same Ecoboost so many people hated on because it "wasn't a Mustang" seemingly ignoring the (more powerful than the contemporary GT) SVO which had a similar 2.3 liter turbocharged 4-cylinder power plant.

A Twin Turbocharged 'Ecoboost' V6 in the top range Mustang producing over 600 horsepower and returning 20+ average fuel economy is a really good thing. And I think even the most diehard "V8 or death" fanatics will agree, it's better than no Mustang because it can not meet the ever increasing CAFE requirements.

 

[FordBlueHeart]

I disagree. It is the equivalent of Porsche putting in smaller displacement turbocharged engines in their entire model range.

Harley and the Motorcycle industry is different than Ford and the Automotive industry. Where people will continue to buy slow and heavy cruisers for the "Harley sound" the automotive industry has to, and has been moving to smaller displacement forced induction engines.

It is the reason the Ferrari California became the California T, and picked up 100 horsepower and 200 pound feet of torque. The Ferrari 458 Italia became the 488 GTB which again, picked up 100 horsepower and 200 torque.

All from switching from a 4.3 liter or 4.5 liter V8 to smaller 3.8/3.9 liter twin turbocharged V8's.

Ford can not remain a dinosaur, they can not be Harley, the Mustang must evolve, they have already proved that the Ecoboost (which makes more power than the 4.6 2V/3V engines from the previous GT's) is a way to make power AND fuel efficiency in the Mustang. That same Ecoboost so many people hated on because it "wasn't a Mustang" seemingly ignoring the (more powerful than the contemporary GT) SVO which had a similar 2.3 liter turbocharged 4-cylinder power plant.

A Twin Turbocharged 'Ecoboost' V6 in the top range Mustang producing over 600 horsepower and returning 20+ average fuel economy is a really good thing. And I think even the most diehard "V8 or death" fanatics will agree, it's better than no Mustang because it can not meet the ever increasing CAFE requirements.

I see where you're coming from and I agree to an extent. I think we will continue to see V8s for quite a while and they will get smaller and smaller. The thing that you don't seem to understand is CAFE requirements. It is based on Fleet averages. Hence Ford's commitment to building small cars and electric or hybrid vehicles that currently the public isn't buying in quantities large enough to justify production. The mustang as a whole is a niche vehicle. The GT 500 is even more specific. Unfortunately we will see a proliferation of the small displacement non-V8 engines throughout the mustang lineup with the special editions being the last ones to give up the V8.

 

[Grimace427]

I disagree. It is the equivalent of Porsche putting in smaller displacement turbocharged engines in their entire model range.

Harley and the Motorcycle industry is different than Ford and the Automotive industry. Where people will continue to buy slow and heavy cruisers for the "Harley sound" the automotive industry has to, and has been moving to smaller displacement forced induction engines.

It is the reason the Ferrari California became the California T, and picked up 100 horsepower and 200 pound feet of torque. The Ferrari 458 Italia became the 488 GTB which again, picked up 100 horsepower and 200 torque.

All from switching from a 4.3 liter or 4.5 liter V8 to smaller 3.8/3.9 liter twin turbocharged V8's.

Ford can not remain a dinosaur, they can not be Harley, the Mustang must evolve, they have already proved that the Ecoboost (which makes more power than the 4.6 2V/3V engines from the previous GT's) is a way to make power AND fuel efficiency in the Mustang. That same Ecoboost so many people hated on because it "wasn't a Mustang" seemingly ignoring the (more powerful than the contemporary GT) SVO which had a similar 2.3 liter turbocharged 4-cylinder power plant.

A Twin Turbocharged 'Ecoboost' V6 in the top range Mustang producing over 600 horsepower and returning 20+ average fuel economy is a really good thing. And I think even the most diehard "V8 or death" fanatics will agree, it's better than no Mustang because it can not meet the ever increasing CAFE requirements.

You missed my point, in the argument of AWD in the Mustang not a smaller displacement engine. I have no qualms with smaller turbo engines. Putting AWD in a Mustang is a change so drastic as to completely negate what makes a Mustang, a Mustang.

 

[Glenn G]

You missed my point, in the argument of AWD in the Mustang not a smaller displacement engine. I have no qualms with smaller turbo engines. Putting AWD in a Mustang is a change so drastic as to completely negate what makes a Mustang, a Mustang.

So what Makes a mustang a Mustang?

The first Mustangs had an I6 carburated engine, solid axle and drum brakes,
So changing the engines to v6s and v8s adding superchargers, Turbo 4s, disc brakes, fuel injection and IRS were not drastic enough changes.....but awd is just too far? Really? the RWD version will not go away, that will be the base spec.

 

[FordBlueHeart]

So what Makes a mustang a Mustang?

The first Mustangs had an I6 carburated engine, solid axle and drum brakes,
So changing the engines to v6s and v8s adding superchargers, Turbo 4s, disc brakes, fuel injection and IRS were not drastic enough changes.....but awd is just too far? Really? the RWD version will not go away, that will be the base spec.

Economies of scale is the biggest reason. Disc brakes, fuel injection, IRS are all improvements of driveability. You forgot power brakes and power steering too. FM radio, CD players and Bluetooth. All things driven by consumer need or desire. To equate awd to any of those is just for argument's sake. I think the people who want awd are a vocal few at this time. Public perception may change, but I don't think we're even close to that point. The 4 cylinder was born out of necessity. Nothing wrong with that. It serves it's purpose. I just don't see the feasibility of awd at this time. Maybe 10 years from now but none of us will be driving cars by then possibly. The government will tell you that a self driving vehicle is safer therefore eliminating the need for fun vehicles. How's that for going off the deep end?

 

[Grimace427]

So what Makes a mustang a Mustang?

Front engine, RWD, two doors, 2+2 seating, relatively affordable fun car meant to be the rolling reflection of its owner.

If you need to sway from that formula why bother calling it a Mustang?

Sponsored