IRS poll

[Stangbang]

I was hoping for a control blade IRS like the one in the Aussie Falcon.

It is cheap, light, and works amazingly well, my stock Focus handles incredibly well thanks to the use of it. Hopefully the special editions whether it's a Mach or a Boss will use it.

But I wouldn't damn the solid axle just yet, when I first heard about it I thought it was a mistake too, but after seeing that it is a proper torque arm/Panhard bar design I think it will work out just fine for the GT.

Remember who started selling aftermarket torque arm/Panhard bar rear suspensions for the Mustang? That's right, Griggs, and those cars handle right with some of the best handling cars in the world. And the set-up supposedly gives a better ride quality than stock Fox cars too. Getting rid of the bind inducing 4 link system and stiff springs needed to keep body roll in check.

So it looks like the 05 Gt will handle great, and ride better at the same time, making the IRS not as important for the GT imo. Also notice the springs ride directly on the axle, eliminating the leverage effect a control arm has on the spring, allowing Ford to use a lower rate spring to achieve the same stiffness as a heavier spring mounted on the control arms, which also contributes to a smoother ride.

And the front suspension finally uses coil over springs, and from what I've read, they copied the strut suspension from the M3. Fixing the nasty geometry problems of the 79-04 cars.

I just can't wait to go out and test drive one once they hit the lots next fall, should ride and handle incredibly well..

 

[UNVMATT]

If I had the option I wouldnt get it.

Some of you wine and cheesers are killing me! If you want IRS get a Cobra or a Lincoln. If you want a 6 speed call D&D and pay the 3K to get one.

At this rate some of you will be complaining because the Mustang isnt All-Wheel drive.

 

[rhumbline]

If I had the option I wouldnt get it.

Some of you wine and cheesers are killing me! If you want IRS get a Cobra or a Lincoln. If you want a 6 speed call D&D and pay the 3K to get one.

At this rate some of you will be complaining because the Mustang isnt All-Wheel drive.

"Wine and cheesers"???? Not sure what that's supposed to mean, desire for excellent handling creates a desire for certain food groups??? Now that you mention it, I have noticed a sudden urge for a salami sandwich and root beer whenever I hit the brakes real hard...

I'd love a Cobra, mind lending me the $10-15K price premium it will likely have over an IRS equiped GT?

As for AWD, I'd be quite content with RWD as long as the wheels stay in contact with terra firma rather than some lumbering ox-cart axle bounding all through the air over all but the tiniest road imperfections.

 

[(&)]

I think there is enough demand for IRS to start writing letters to Ford demanding it as optional equipment on the GT. Anyone with good writing skills willing to organize a petition? I bet Ford could make it happen by mid-year 2005. The chassis was designed for IRS and they probably already have a design for the Cobra nearly finished. There will still be plenty of ways to make the Cobra outshine the GT.

 

[007]

Irs

 

[mk2001c]

I'm glad the GT will have a solid rear axle, mainly beacause it seems like Ford doesn't do a good job with their IRS. I have a GT and an 01 Cobra, and I prefer the way the GT feels with regard to the drivetrain. The IRS has too much slack, causing clunking noises when going from braking to accelerating. It also vibrates when cruising at higher speeds. It's heavy & needs aluminum halfshafts. I know these problems could be addressed, but considering Ford did not over the five year span since the 99 Cobras got them, I'm sceptical it would improve at all. Assuming you don't drive much over lousy roads, the solid is a much better option.

 

[Omegalock]

"The few that want IRS."

Last I checked, it was the few that wanted the ox-cart axle: 63% to 37%.

You are basing that statement of the poll results of this thread? Of which all of 44 people have responded to? Ford asked the customer base and straight from their mouths 30% said they wanted a live axle. I highly doubt the other 70% wants an IRS. So yes the FEW that want the IRS would be the minority and I don't want to have another 1000 or so bucks and another 100 lbs tacked onto my car because somebody wants a cushier ride or whatever.

But yeah, an IRS as an option would be fine, and leave the truck axle for the flatlanders and drag racers. I don't think it would increase the weight to 3700, maybe increasing it 100 lbs max over the live axle. And while no telling how Ford may jack the price, but I imagine it could come in around $500-750.

Key word there is could. Likely it wouldn't.

And properly designed IRS can do well on the strip as I think legions of Vettes and Vipers will attest to. Is it optimal for the Nth degree hard core drag racers, which probably represent a small part of one percent of Mustangs driven? Probably not, but they can be made to work quite well and durably, presuming proper engineering.

And you are talking money. A durable IRS setup is NOT going to cost you just 500 bucks. Here's the trade off with the IRS thing. You can get an IRS that will please most everyone fairly light,durable,and well made but it's going to be expensive. To get it for less cash you have to make consessions and the first thing to go will be durability and I'm sorry I don't want to deal with a busted halfshaft.

 

[Omegalock]

You are correct Rumb, however since it appears that the public wants IRS 2:1 over solid, I think that IRS should be standard on the GT with solid axle and option for those hard core drag types. On the V6 the solid should be standard to have a low entry price but IRS should be optional.

But I really don't care which way Ford does it, as long as I can buy IRS on a Mustang GT and its less than a $1,000 option at invoice price I'll be satisfied. But if IRS cost me $500 or less I'll be jumping for joy.

I hope Ford is seeing this poll. If not its time that we start writing & e-mailing Ford to tell them we want IRS and don't want to have to buy a SVT model to get IRS.

Sorry but a few people on Stangnet hardly make a good representation of what the "public" wants. And if Ford was stupid enough to put IRS on the GT standard and then tries to force me to pay extra for the live axle then I'm out. And I think if you asked the average person that would buy a GT this question...."Would you rather have a GT and pay an extra 1000 bucks for a smoother ride and a rear end you'll have to replace when you really get ready to put down some power thusly costing you even more money or would you rather have a GT with not as smooth a ride but still manageable but you won't have to pay anythinge extra unless you later want to go through the 'twisties'" I promise you more would tell take the cheaper but still capable car.

 

[63_Fairlane]

This is a tough question to answer, but i think that the long term answer is IRS. Engineering and producing a single design is always cheaper. The car would gain broader appeal, possibly swaying some import buyers with the more modern system.

IRS would also make it a better road car, which is what it is intended to be.
Or at least that is the perception. The reality is, no one knows how good the three link is. After a few of the mags have tested it, and we get a few test drives, then we will know if it was the right decision

 

[351CJ]

It takes an incredibly small sample to get a meaningful poll result. IIRC they predict the presidental election vote with something like a .001% sample.

So, I just logged into StangNet and it said 103 people are viewing the 2005 Mustang section. It also says there have been 49 votes. This tells me:

30% of people want IRS
18% want a solid axle
52% Either don't care whether they have IRS or a live axle
...... or 52% don't even know what IRS and live axles are.

 

[ttown]

It takes an incredibly small sample to get a meaningful poll result. IIRC they predict the presidental election vote with something like a .001% sample.

So, I just logged into StangNet and it said 103 people are viewing the 2005 Mustang section. It also says there have been 49 votes. This tells me:

30% of people want IRS
18% want a solid axle
52% Either don't care whether they have IRS or a live axle
...... or 52% don't even know what IRS and live axles are.

your 103 views wouldn't be valid since most of us that have been replying have probally looked at this 4 or 5 times each. I don't think 50 people and those people being hardcore performance types which are probally 1% of the mustang buying public tells you much.

They are selling 200k of these a year and that about .00025 percent for 1 year of build. I think your streaching this as being a valid poll just a little

 

[shatner saves]

Maybe they could do a drag option code that deducts $200 form the base price and puts 4 wheel drums brakes on...

 

[JaysGreenLX]

Cheaper, yeah, though I wonder what Ford's overall development and tooling expenditure will be for two rear suspension designs, money that will all have to be recouped with higher sales prices for all Stangs. I think the real reason was expediency, the current DEW IRS was itself too expensive and compromised rear seating, though why that's very important in a 2+2 Mustang is beyond me. I suspect, given a true clean sheet of paper, developing and tooling for only an IRS would have been the best investment overall.

As for durability, sure, to paraphrase a certain quote, if you plan to push your car to the limits on the strip, a live axle does have a somewhat lower part count, but durability is far more a factor of good materials, engineering and assembly.

I certainly am an American car enthusiast, though I gave up knuckle-dragging about 5 million years ago. And yes, I do plan on pushing my car in the twisties, and why not, being a performance car enthusiast (good performance is NOT only staight line, there are another 359 degrees to the performance envelope beyond dead ahead.) And I also enjoy a degree of ride compliance TOO. I prefer to indulge of my car's performance far more than for just the occasional 13 second spurt on a narrow range of streets or artificial confines of a strip. And no, I'm not a bad-backed geezer looking for a marshmallow ride. Quite to the contrary, I would like a firm yet supple suspension with the sophistication and compliance to maintain a high level of lateral performance over more than billiards smooth roads and/or tracks.

The $500-1500 dollars I'd save with a truck axle would quickly be exhausted and then some trying to fit an aftermarket IRS to enjoy the very real ride AND handling benefits offered by an IRS over a buggy axle, leaving little for gas or beer.

I couldn't agree more.

 

[rhumbline]

I highly doubt the other 70% wants an IRS. So yes the FEW that want the IRS would be the minority and I don't want to have another 1000 or so bucks and another 100 lbs tacked onto my car because somebody wants a cushier ride or whatever.

I wouldn't necessarily draw that conclusion, quite to the contrary, the poll explicitly stated IRS or Live Axle, so that 70% actively voted FOR an IRS, though for disclosure, its down to 62% at last check.

And you are talking money. A durable IRS setup is NOT going to cost you just 500 bucks. Here's the trade off with the IRS thing. You can get an IRS that will please most everyone fairly light,durable,and well made but it's going to be expensive. To get it for less cash you have to make consessions and the first thing to go will be durability and I'm sorry I don't want to deal with a busted halfshaft.

Maybe a bit more than $500, but the Aussie Ford's excellent Control Blade IRS is running proof that an excellent and rugged IRS can be made for a very reasonable cost. I think too many are basing their negative views on an IRS on that cobbled system shoehorned into the '03 Cobra, which isn't at all representative what can be done with a clean sheet design in terms of cost, durability or weight.

Sorry but a few people on Stangnet hardly make a good representation of what the "public" wants.

My guess is that if anything, any poll on this site would grossly overrepresent the desire for a live axle given the narrow dragstrip myopic view of performance many, though by no means all, have.

IRS would also make it a better road car, which is what it is intended to be.

I think this hits the nail on the head. Should the Mustang's suspension be compromised for the very small minority of hard core drag racers who would reap a benefit from a live axle or rather, should it have a suspension, IRS, the vast majority of buyers, enthusiast or otherwise, who use their cars in the real world on real roads with real lumps and bumps?

Even though they neither know nor care what technology accomplishes it, non-enthusiasts would certainly appreciate a better, more sophisticated ride and overall handling.

Enthusiasts who prefer an IRS prefer it not for some cushy ride like some may intimate, but rather, as part of a firm, supple and sophisticated suspension delivering far better handling and dynamic performance over a far wider range of the millions of miles of real world roads far from the artificial confines of a few 1/4 mile drag strips. I would like to actually be able to put down the Mustang's formidable power on more than just the most buttery smooth of surfaces in the artificial confines of a drag strip.

Vastly more people will see twists and turns and lumps and bumps with their Mustang than will ever come near a drag strip, the one excedingly narrow arena where a live axle would be a better compromise. And this vast majority would reap far more benefits from an IRS, whether they were aware of the technology delivering that benefit, than the few who would benefit more from a live axle.

Thus I would think an IRS should at least be offered as an option, which it may well be, if not as standard.

 

[Mach460]

Ok...hopefully this won't get me into trouble with the admins around here...but I started a petition here. If you want Ford to make IRS standard on the GT...just sign it and spread the word.

Petition to ask Ford to make IRS Standard on the Mustang GT

 

[Mach460]

I'm glad the GT will have a solid rear axle, mainly beacause it seems like Ford doesn't do a good job with their IRS. I have a GT and an 01 Cobra, and I prefer the way the GT feels with regard to the drivetrain. The IRS has too much slack, causing clunking noises when going from braking to accelerating. It also vibrates when cruising at higher speeds. It's heavy & needs aluminum halfshafts. I know these problems could be addressed, but considering Ford did not over the five year span since the 99 Cobras got them, I'm sceptical it would improve at all. Assuming you don't drive much over lousy roads, the solid is a much better option.

Have you ever driven a Lincoln LS or a Jaguar S-Type. The Lincoln LS especially gives the 5 Series a real run for it's money for handling. Why? Because those cars were designed from the outset to have IRS, and thus e their suspensions are optimise for it.

You have to remember that the Fox chassis that current Cobra rides on wasn't designed for the IRS. It's a compromised set-up, so it not's going to be able to take full advantage of what an IRS can offer. It also didn't help that the chassis was for the most part as rigid as a slice os swiss cheese.

The new chassis was designed based on the Lincoln LS (DEW98) chassis, so there would not have been any compromises needed for IRS. In real world driving, and IRS (in a car that was designed for it) is untouchable compared to a live axle.

 

[(&)]

If IRS would be standard on the GT, they would have to introduce another model with a live axle for the drag race crowd. Probably called Mach I. But until that happens, I don't think it should be standard, just optional.

 

[351CJ]

your 103 views wouldn't be valid since most of us that have been replying have probally looked at this 4 or 5 times each

Why to I even bother?

I said there were 103 people viewing the 2005 Mustang section NOT the IRS poll topic. If you look at the IRS poll topic you will see that there have been 432 views of this topic.

 

[Mach460]

If IRS would be standard on the GT, they would have to introduce another model with a live axle for the drag race crowd. Probably called Mach I. But until that happens, I don't think it should be standard, just optional.

Why? I mean I hear a whole lot of people saying here that those of us that want IRS go spend the 2 or 3K and find an IRS supension for our GT'. Conversely, why not make that samll 30% that want to drag race go to the junkyad, find a 9" for less than 500 bucks and fit it into the a GT with standard IRS.

Eventually, the serious drag racers end up ditching their live axles anyways for something stronger...or God forbid they tub their cars.

 

[NicksGT]

You left out cheaper and more durable. You don't have to go to the track to appreciate those two advantages. Sure, if you plan to push your car to the limits in the twisties, or you're an old guy with a bad back, IRS is better. But if you're a knuckle dragging American car enthusiast you might apprecaite having the extra $1500 for mods or gas or beer.

Read this http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/autos/reviews/ford/story/1601072p-1883794c.html

Nonetheless, it's worth noting that, according to Thai-Tang, engineering an independent rear system would have cost about $300 US

A whopping $300. I would rather have IRS than dash lights that change color I think there are three possible reasons why we didn't get IRS. 1. It made the car too heavy, which made the car slower 2. They wanted to make it only Cobra specific 3. It was too heavy, but the power in next generation Cobra will make up for the added weight, an therefore it will have IRS.

It should at least be an option.