Live axel saves $300 on 2005 Stang

SVTdriver · Feb 12, 2004

Z28x said:
A lot of people, not just the mustang fans, but other cars like camaro and GTO fans are like, well back in 1964 the "insert car" had "feature X" so the 2004 car should have it. Things change in 40 years, you can't live in the past. Since it is a modern car it should have modern features, who cars what the Mustang or GTO had 40 years ago as long as the current car is 2 door RWD with a V8. If the Mustang was around back it the 1910's would people today want the crank start becuase back in day one it had a crank start, and electic starters add too much unwanted costs?

However the post you responded to said nothing about keeping it like the 60's. It merely stated it has been doing fine without it for 40 years. And you cannot argue with that. The mustang has been selling just fine without IRS. The likely reality is that very few of the V6 mustangs are ever going to have a driver that truly needs IRS. And likely most of the gt's will be driven by the same type of driver. The crank starter were replaced because people were getting hurt using them. They could snap back and break your arm. I don't think IRS is going to break your arm.

RICKS · Feb 12, 2004

The crank starter were replaced because people were getting hurt using them. They could snap back and break your arm. I don't think IRS is going to break your arm.

?? You mean that the live axle won't break an arm?? Whatever, my experience is that IRS takes bumps better, both in corners and just hitting potholes. Only one corner of the car gets upset instead of the entire tail end. I don't understand this "people won't USE the IRS" argument. IRS improves everyday driving, not just ragged-edge performance driving.

SVTdriver · Feb 12, 2004

And my live axle takes potholes and bumps just fine. Sure IRS improves everday handling. I'm not doubting that. But I have yet to encounter a situation where IRS (or anything for better handling) would have been any help. My problems has been more with crappy front tires. Of course maybe I know how to control my car better. And don't need IRS to mask my bad driving skills.

shatner saves · Feb 12, 2004

Could a good IRS, with less unsprung weight and better tire placment, offer an advantage in tire wear?

mp67 · Feb 12, 2004

Omegalock said:
God... does this crap ever end? When they are throwing the party to retire this car in 7 years I bet there will be fist fights at the punch bowl because no IRS was offered in 05.

Amen bro. If I did not know better, I would think this was a chevy board with all the cutting down of the stang.

shatner saves · Feb 12, 2004

mp67 said:
Amen bro. If I did not know better, I would think this was a chevy board with all the cutting down of the stang.

Oh, brother.

mp67 · Feb 12, 2004

shatner saves said:
Oh, brother.

mp67 · Feb 12, 2004

I'll do one more post on this topic and that's all I'll have to say about that.
Straight out of Muscle Mustangs & Fast Fords.

When it came time to decide on the rear axle, the team spent an inordinate amount of time at media events, Fun Ford Weekends and talking to its customers. As you might imagine, a very vocal majority told them they needed to keep a solid rear axle in the car. Others did not know what kind of axle their car had, nor did they care to as long as it worked. " From a customization, durability and reliability standpoint, there are inherent advantages to a solid rear axle for drag racing, for camber, all those things and the core customes really wanted that,"noted Thai-Tang. "Whats worked in the past is giving the customers the option. We do that today with the IRS on the Cobra and we'll take the same approach on the new car. In the future with some dirivitive products we'll make that available." The 05 setup has two lower control arms, one upper and a Panhard rod. Technically, it's four links, but only three fore-aft. It's very weight efficient and doesn't have the problems with bind that the 04-earlier cars have. "We were able to de-couple the fore-aft load path from the lateral load path and minimize any sort of over-constraints," said Thai-Tang. We've designed a world class solid rear axle suspension that will deliver very good driving dynamics, and great control for things like axle hop."

Ron Jeremy · Feb 12, 2004

$1,000-$1,200 extra for IRS IS a big deal to me. I want to save this money and do other things better things with it like modding my Mustang or hiring a female escort for myself to play with for a few hours.

351CJ · Feb 12, 2004

mp67 said:
I'll do one more post on this topic and that's all I'll have to say about that.
Straight out of Muscle Mustangs & Fast Fords.

When it came time to decide on the rear axle, the team spent an inordinate amount of time at media events, Fun Ford Weekends and talking to its customers. As you might imagine, a very vocal majority told them they needed to keep a solid rear axle in the car. Others did not know what kind of axle their car had, nor did they care to as long as it worked. " From a customization, durability and reliability standpoint, there are inherent advantages to a solid rear axle for drag racing, for camber, all those things and the core customes really wanted that,"noted Thai-Tang. "Whats worked in the past is giving the customers the option. We do that today with the IRS on the Cobra and we'll take the same approach on the new car. In the future with some dirivitive products we'll make that available."

This is total BS. If they really were taking customer opinions at Fun Ford Weekends, they would have gotten an earful from Mustang Cobra owners who want solid rear axles. But he's daying the next SVT Mustang will have IRS.

Plain and simple. The 2005 Mustang was going to have IRS until Phil Martens came into the picture and started cost cutting. That's the only reason why the V6 & GT have a solid rear axle.

SVTdriver · Feb 12, 2004

Ok I have a good question. How many of the people that are here complaining went to any of the fun ford weekends?

Ray III · Feb 12, 2004

These cars do NOT have a solid rear axle. A solid axle is like what you find in a one-wheel-drive gokart. The correct term for a rotating power driven axle inside a housing is "live axle". [/bitch]

I have a question. If everyone wants to load up their car with this kind of stuff and is willing to pay the extra money for it all, why didn't you just go buy a Corvette to begin with? And "brand loyalty" isn't an answer because you know the Vette is a better sports car than what the Mustang will ever be, and I'm sure that few of you are going to take the option of buying a Ford GT...

SVTdriver · Feb 12, 2004

Your right the corvette is a better sportscar than a stang. But that's because the stang is not a sportscar. Since the definition of a sportscar is a 2 seater. And the Cobra does come close to corvette levels of performance. Without the cost.

shatner saves · Feb 12, 2004

Ray III said:
These cars do NOT have a solid rear axle. A solid axle is like what you find in a one-wheel-drive gokart. The correct term for a rotating power driven axle inside a housing is "live axle". [/bitch]

I have a question. If everyone wants to load up their car with this kind of stuff and is willing to pay the extra money for it all, why didn't you just go buy a Corvette to begin with? And "brand loyalty" isn't an answer because you know the Vette is a better sports car than what the Mustang will ever be, and I'm sure that few of you are going to take the option of buying a Ford GT...

Gosh, Let me see. Could it be that the vette cost as much as a GT and V6 mustang combined? Are you serious? No one is saying the base GT needs to be loaded up to $40k. We are saying that a $(insert dollar value here) premium over the base GT to get a car with IRS is worth it to some of us.

If chevrolet built a $25k vette, I'd be on that like a hobo picking dumpster chow out of his beard.

SVTdriver · Feb 12, 2004

shatner saves said:
If chevrolet built a $25k vette, I'd be on that like a hobo picking dumpster chow out of his beard.

They did. But it wasn't in this decade.

Sorry had a moment there.

shatner saves · Feb 12, 2004

I understand

mp67 · Feb 13, 2004

351CJ said:
This is total BS. If they really were taking customer opinions at Fun Ford Weekends, they would have gotten an earful from Mustang Cobra owners who want solid rear axles. But he's daying the next SVT Mustang will have IRS.

Plain and simple. The 2005 Mustang was going to have IRS until Phil Martens came into the picture and started cost cutting. That's the only reason why the V6 & GT have a solid rear axle.

I guess you were at every fun ford weekend so you know they did not ask any customers their opinion.

And maybe you just don't read well, because:
1. The decision they were making was wether to put IRS or live axle into the GT. The cobra is already IRS.
2. He said they were listening to the core customers. That is the GT and V6 buyers. Cobra buyers make up a very small percentage of mustang buyers. Please the masses. Thats what sells cars.

I don't see what the big argument is about here. Ron is screaming about how the mustang does not need IRS. If they make it an option, and people are willing to pay for it, why would that bother you as long as you could still buy the standard live axle car. And why would you IRS guys want to equip the IRS as standard and drive up the prices for the majority includinig the V6 buyers, which far outweigh the GT buyers, when you could just buy the optional IRS. And don't say money, cause if it was standard, it would still reflect in the sticker price. If Ford is so stupid as alot of you say, how come they managed to keep the mustang around for 40 years. This place is full of crybabies. The only way to please most people here is if Ford sent you a blank build sheet and let you fill it out.

RICKS · Feb 13, 2004

I don't see what the big argument is about here. Ron is screaming about how the mustang does not need IRS. If they make it an option, and people are willing to pay for it, why would that bother you as long as you could still buy the standard live axle car. And why would you IRS guys want to equip the IRS as standard and drive up the prices for the majority includinig the V6 buyers, which far outweigh the GT buyers, when you could just buy the optional IRS. And don't say money, cause if it was standard, it would still reflect in the sticker price. If Ford is so stupid as alot of you say, how come they managed to keep the mustang around for 40 years. This place is full of crybabies. The only way to please most people here is if Ford sent you a blank build sheet and let you fill it out.

Can I get an "amen"??? I'm fine with the live axle, but would pay extra for an optional IRS. SVTDriver, I know that the old live-axle Mustangs go over bumps "fine", and maybe you never hit the corners fast enough where the live axle steps-out on you when you hit a rut. You're the reason why I say the live axle makes perfect sense as standard-issue. But I'm not fine with "fine", when/if there's affordable upgrades on the option list. When a blower kit usually costs upwards of 4 grand, I think around 1 grand for optional IRS would be a friggin bargain, apples-to-oranges. There's alot of folks out there who mod the daylights out of their motor, and never invest squat into the chassis. Makes for a scary-fast straight-line car that gets embarrassed on country roads by nerds in buzzy little Porsche Boxsters. It's all in what your standards are, what you would like to expect out of your car for the money spent. Some guys are "fine" with a Maaco paint job; "looks great, shiny, I don't need no fancy-schmancy $3000 paint job". And other's would sooner drive around in primer than go with a compromise. That's why I hope the option list is long and strong on the new GT, so that those who have the desire for a higher standard, can get it if they want to pay for it.

Ray III · Feb 13, 2004

shatner saves said:
Gosh, Let me see. Could it be that the vette cost as much as a GT and V6 mustang combined? Are you serious? No one is saying the base GT needs to be loaded up to $40k. We are saying that a $(insert dollar value here) premium over the base GT to get a car with IRS is worth it to some of us.

If chevrolet built a $25k vette, I'd be on that like a hobo picking dumpster chow out of his beard.

Well, that's my whole point. The Vette is a better car performance-wise because more was invested in it. The first Mustang could be had for under $4,000. Granted, these are '65 dollars, but if we account for the inflation, the current Mustang should be available for around $10-15,000. Doesn't look like it to me. On top of overpaid labor and excessive corporate spending, people who like to throw money away on a poor man's street machine are trying to get Ford to transform the Mustang, bit by bit, into a true sports car, and then it will no longer really be the Mustang.

I don't see an option on today's ponycar to delete the rear discs and save some money. It didn't end there, and it won't end with IRS.

SVTdriver · Feb 13, 2004

RICKS said:
Can I get an "amen"??? I'm fine with the live axle, but would pay extra for an optional IRS. SVTDriver, I know that the old live-axle Mustangs go over bumps "fine", and maybe you never hit the corners fast enough where the live axle steps-out on you when you hit a rut. You're the reason why I say the live axle makes perfect sense as standard-issue. But I'm not fine with "fine", when/if there's affordable upgrades on the option list. When a blower kit usually costs upwards of 4 grand, I think around 1 grand for optional IRS would be a friggin bargain, apples-to-oranges. There's alot of folks out there who mod the daylights out of their motor, and never invest squat into the chassis. Makes for a scary-fast straight-line car that gets embarrassed on country roads by nerds in buzzy little Porsche Boxsters. It's all in what your standards are, what you would like to expect out of your car for the money spent. Some guys are "fine" with a Maaco paint job; "looks great, shiny, I don't need no fancy-schmancy $3000 paint job". And other's would sooner drive around in primer than go with a compromise. That's why I hope the option list is long and strong on the new GT, so that those who have the desire for a higher standard, can get it if they want to pay for it.

Actually I generally dive into corners too fast. That's why my original tires had the rubber worn all the way down into the lettering on the sidewalls. But here is my position for clarification. Do I need IRS? Probably not. Would I pay for it if it were an option? Possibly yes. So should it be an option. Hell yeah. But before we bash on Ford for deciding to go with a live axle. Shouldn't we at least hear from somebody who has driven one? Doesn't that make more sense? I go to the mustang shows and talk to Ford people (though mainly only SVT reps). But I am active in being around mustangs. And while maybe my opinion didn't makethat much of a difference. I am at least out there talking. While you will notice. That when I asked how many people went to the fast ford weekend events. Nobody answered that they had. And if you don't go out and get involved. Then quite honestly. Why should your opinion count?

As for the corvette being a better car. It was over priced from the very beginning. The 1953 MSRP was $3498. It's always been overpriced. And since your such a stickler for accurate info. The base mustang vert in 64 was $2557. By the way you aren'trelated to Ron are you?

Live axel saves $300 on 2005 Stang

Would you by IRS if it was offered for $300 on the '05 Mustang

Yes, I'd buy IRS for $300

No, I'd rather spend the $300 on another option

SVTdriver

RICKS

New Member

SVTdriver

shatner saves

New Member

mp67

shatner saves

New Member

mp67

mp67

Ron Jeremy

New Member

351CJ

New Member

SVTdriver

Ray III

New Member

SVTdriver

shatner saves

New Member

SVTdriver

shatner saves

New Member

mp67

RICKS

New Member

Ray III

New Member

SVTdriver

Similar threads

Live axel saves $300 on 2005 Stang

Would you by IRS if it was offered for $300 on the '05 Mustang

Yes, I'd buy IRS for $300

No, I'd rather spend the $300 on another option

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency