Some lovely 2005 Mustang bashing for you guys to comment on...

One of the best parts about the solid rear axle is that it's strong... very strong. An independent rear suspension setup is sometimes a weak point when you consider the car's horsepower potential. So, when Ford was doing research as they were developing the '05, they asked some devout followers of the Mustang if they wanted IRS or a solid rear axle. The response was a solid rear axle. It's in the Mustang's heritage, it has benefits at the drag strip, it responds well to highly modified motors making crazy horsepower. On top of that, it is cheaper to manufacture, and there are less things to break on the car compared to an IRS.

Oh... by the way, the comment they made about Kia's and Hyundai's having IRS is truly a newbie thought. Hyundai's and Kia's are FWD. It's much easier to make an independent rear suspension when there is no driven axle in the rear! For that reason, every FWD car being produced today has an IRS.

And to Ford's defense, they have made some big improvements to the chassis and suspension design. So we'll see just how 'ancient' it feels when you take it for a drive.

EDIT -- I understand the benefits of IRS. If you care about ride & handling, then you'd want a car with IRS. And I love cars with excellent handling. But there's a side of me that agrees with Ford's decision because while I'd like to have the ultimate sports car, I don't really want to pay for it. Anything they can do to bring costs down is good. And since the Mustang has fared pretty well in the past with a solid rear axle, I think it'll be OK for anyone who appreciates the awesomeness of a musclecar.

Who really cares? He is not special in any way, shape, or form. He is simply stating the exact same rehashed, whine-fest that has been beaten to death on this forum 6 months ago.

He is not original, his thought are not provoking in any way, and judging by most of his comments, he is nothing but a troll.

Whooptie flippin do.

tylers65 said:

Who really cares? He is not special in any way, shape, or form. He is simply stating the exact same rehashed, whine-fest that has been beaten to death on this forum 6 months ago.

He is not original, his thought are not provoking in any way, and judging by most of his comments, he is nothing but a troll.

Whooptie flippin do.

Click to expand...

Seriously, that guy is just another dumb troll, and probably drives one of the Hyundai's he admires..

This is nothing terribly new. Why were these guys going on and on about drum brakes?

I was disappointed when I found out that IRS wasn't available as an option, but I'm not going to pass judgement on the new car until I drive it. Besides, The sum of all other improvements to chassis stiffness, front suspension geometry, weight distribution and rear suspension setup will far outweigh any potential benefits of IRS IMO. I'm looking forward to seeing how the new mustang will ride and handle.

If he no like the stang, he no have to buy the stang.

i just wonder why the v6 doesnt come with irs. if it is supposed to be the economy model, and has a weak engine, then y go with a solid axle

I would love to comment, but for some reason the link isn't working for me. In any event, send this guy the link for this forum and let him look through it. Hopefully that will answer his questions or at least shut him up.

SWortham said:

For that reason, every FWD car being produced today has an IRS.

Click to expand...

I think j-bodies a dead axle, even the cobalt that's gonna come out is. Chysler Minivans also have dead rear axles. They of course are not cars though.

The 95-03 maximas basically had a live axle setup as well, and they were FWD. If i am not mistaken, the sentra spec V even has the same setup. Two old roomates of mine have these exact cars, and underneath are just one big rectangular type bar connecting the shocks/struts (whatever). So the stang is not the only car still using "archaic" setups.

ryanrule said:

i just wonder why the v6 doesnt come with irs. if it is supposed to be the economy model, and has a weak engine, then y go with a solid axle

Click to expand...

Cost. Ford knows it will sell tons of these even without the IRS. Ford likes to cut costs where they can. (Well, every company does)

i think it would sell better with irs. its something people would look at in comparing it to other cars like it

What was he knocking it because it had a solid rear axle?

Ford has a solid rear axle in the GT for a couple reasons...
1) Cost is the biggest reason-
The solid rear axle setup cost less than the IRS.
That is why it is in the V6 model. As for the GT...If they keep the the Solid rear end along with the V6 model they can share in the volume on parts to keep the cost down. I read somewhere that the IRS would cost an additional 2500. Well that would push the cost of a GT with IRS upto around 29000...fairly expensive. Fords not putting on all of the side and hood scoops on the new GT for the very same reason, they are trying to keep there costs down and their doing by cutting the corners where they think it won't matter. One of the magazines had a little insight into this...they were asking people what kind of rear axle config they wanted, and alot people didn't even know what they currently had! -disgusting I know but true.

2) Product differentiation... and by this I mean it would eat into their special edition sales. I bet that at least one of the special eddition cars will come out with the IRS along with all the scoops, etc. This car would will target the enthusiasts market (basically anyone out here on these message boards) where Ford knows people would be willing to pay a premium for it.