December 12th, 2004

[xunker]

Originally Posted by Zuhaib

Anywho, oh to why Ford went with the Live Axle, the only reason i can think is because they wanted to keep the GT from stealing SVT owners.

The best reason is nostalgia. A far as I know, all Mustangs of previous generations were live axle and Ford almost certainly took stylistic caution over engineering because A lot of people that will buy this car are going to want the spirit and look of the old car, and part of that spirit is pulling up behind a 'Stang and seeing a big axle casting connected to a huge diff case.

Ford undoubtablely learned a lesson from when Porsche water-cooled the 911 andactually had some buyers cancel their deposits over it. When you mess with an icon people will get mad.. that goes double for Mustang since Ford is banking on huge sales and don't want to irritate any potential buyers.

I am going to make a prediction, though: The _next_ generation of Mustang (engineering generation, not facelift/looks) at around 2010 will be IRS through all models and in that case people will be more accepting because bu then they won't see it as changing a icon, but instead of taking technology fron the "suped up" Mustang SVT and putting in to the "common" car. Sort of turing the heat up slowly so the frog doesn't jump out of the pot, as it were

I do have one issue, though: In the "cars of the world" episode with the two dustbins they're were getting down on the Mustang for a live axle ("the same as a Morris Marina") and yet right after that they said they wanted a Hummer H2 which, correct me if I'm wrong, has both front *and* rear live axles.. Going on this you must take both Richards and Jermeys options with a bit of salt.

[Renesis]

reason is simple:

lots of mustang owners take their car to the track and/or tune it and for drag racing it's the best option

[andyhui01]

Originally Posted by xunker

Ford almost certainly took stylistic caution over engineering because A lot of people that will buy this car are going to want the spirit and look of the old car, and part of that spirit is pulling up behind a 'Stang and seeing a big axle casting connected to a huge diff case.

ford has even said it themselves that putting in the solid-rear axle was for cost cutting to keep the price of the car competitive .
I agree with you that JC and hammond are biased... just look at the cool wall... but sometimes a car being good or not is not only about peformance... its the feeling you have when you sit in it or as JC said... the cool wall is judged by "what car you would drive to pick a girl on a date"

[z2so4]

yeah, the rear axle wasn't for nostalgia but for cost cutting. Fortunately the mustang is targeted to a market where it is not as big a deal (drag racers, nostalgia buyers, and hot girls who like v6 convertibles).

[andyhui01]

this has nothing to do with the episode but since we are talking about american cars and how they can't corner... do NASCAR's handle well?... or do they just know how to go round that oval lap

[empowah]

No, they're pathetic handlers. I mean, just look at those 70-series tires.

[xunker]

Well, all right.. if Ford _says_ it's for cost-cutting, I guess I'll believe them *wink-wink*.

Don't mis-undersand me, I _like_ the '05 Mustang and I wouldn't turn one down if someone wanted to give me one -- though I couldn't justify buying one with my own money as it's a bit too "indulgent" if you know what I mean

Honestly, though <<Clarkson voice>> If I had to nitpick and obviously I do I really don't think this axle fiasco is really that big a deal. No one ever accused the Mustang of being a car designed for perfect handling; it's a car that is built to give you a tingle up the back of your neck when you mash the gas.

I hope this new Mustang will do for the lineage the same thing the new GTI is trying to do, to get back to its roots. After all, any Mustang that isn't a repeat of the wretched four-cylinder "Mustang" of the mid '80s is an improvement

[Caveman]

I rather like that mustang, despite the live axle thingy.
But you guys are missing the point of this car. I mean, it got 125 colors for the dials ! ive never seen anything like that !

And as for the EVO. I really do think that was a bit "fake" or so. I mean, yes the Lambo is a bit heavier, but it has 555bhp and that's A LOT. There is no way the EVO could keep up the pace if they were running them on a nice straightt and not in corners... Being a rally car the EVO may have the upper hand in the curves, but the Lambo is so much faster on the straights and more aerodynamic aswell...

[Oman4x4]

Originally Posted by andyhui01

ford has even said it themselves that putting in the solid-rear axle was for cost cutting to keep the price of the car competitive .
I agree with you that JC and hammond are biased... just look at the cool wall... but sometimes a car being good or not is not only about peformance... its the feeling you have when you sit in it or as JC said... the cool wall is judged by "what car you would drive to pick a girl on a date"

Budget definitely works in favour of the solid rear axle, and for good reason. The Mustang is all about cheap strength and power. The solid rear axle is far simpler, and therefore far easier to make it strong. This makes it cheaper for Ford. Independent suspension with all those U-joints is more expensive to make it as strong.

This also keeps the enthusiasts happy, which is another big plus for the solid rear axle. On a drag-strip, you don't need IRS. You need a big strong axle, and a torque-arm keeping it under control. As some of the very highly tuned drag cars produce enough torque that the body actually leans to one side, it's actually better to have a solid axle that is going to keep both tires planted squarely on the ground. With independent, if the body leans, generally the tires lean too. You'll often see drag cars lifting one tire on the launch, or if both come up, one might be higher.

Enthusiasts can be quite vocal when you mess with something they like and it's important to keep them happy. A lot of people got quite upset at Jeep when the Cherokee and Grand Cherokee lost the solid front axles, and so far it seems the next Wrangler will be keeping the solid front as like the Mustang, it's Jeep's icon. It's the figure-head vehicle that helps sell the more normal ones.

I would love to see a track version or "handling pack" for the Mustang with a rear mounted gearbox and a transaxle IRS setup... this would help it get 50-50 weight distribution and reap the IRS benefits for better handling. The Corvette is set up this way... but it will increase the price a lot and the vast majority of Mustang buyers won't care, won't know the difference, or will be pissed off that the solid axle isn't there. Remember the Mustang is a high-volume car selling to a wide audience... the IRS Corvette is not.

Ford didn't go totally cheap on the Mustang though... for example an aluminium block and hood were used to keep the weight down up front and get closer to an even weight distribution. 53-47 isn't that bad for an American V8 RWD coupe.



Anyway... bumping this thread in the hopes more people will seed it... I want to watch it again

[NecroJoe]

"Most people won't notive a difference"

Ahh, they won't until they try to make a turn in the rain and the rear wheels kick out on them and they end up in a ditch.

When the outside wheel spins the same speed as the outside in a turn, one of the tires will have to "jump" a bit to keep an even pace. Not only is this murder on the tires, but causes one of the tires to completely lose contact with the roadway for a split second.

~nj?

[Ianspeed]

Originally Posted by NecroJoe

"Most people won't notive a difference"

Ahh, they won't until they try to make a turn in the rain and the rear wheels kick out on them and they end up in a ditch.

When the outside wheel spins the same speed as the outside in a turn, one of the tires will have to "jump" a bit to keep an even pace. Not only is this murder on the tires, but causes one of the tires to completely lose contact with the roadway for a split second.

~nj?

Woah now. Thats crazy talk.

Both wheels can spin at different rates around corners, nothing has to "jump" when it goes around a corner. Its not a welded dif NecroJoe.

I really dig it. Some day I must just have to build a v6 IRS lightweight version for myself... probably with a turbo or 2. 8)

[Oman4x4]

Originally Posted by NecroJoe

"Most people won't notive a difference"

Ahh, they won't until they try to make a turn in the rain and the rear wheels kick out on them and they end up in a ditch.

When the outside wheel spins the same speed as the outside in a turn, one of the tires will have to "jump" a bit to keep an even pace. Not only is this murder on the tires, but causes one of the tires to completely lose contact with the roadway for a split second.

~nj?

Solid axle has nothing to do with the differential... Independent suspension can have lockers too.

What you are thinking about is a fully locked differential and the only vehicle that springs to mind with that feature is the Alvis Stalwart. A military Amphibian.

Regardless of whether it's a solid axle or independent suspension, you can have a fully open diff, or a limited slip diff, or a selectable locking diff so you can have 100% lock for straight line launches, or now they're starting to do selectable-locking limited slip diffs, so rather than fully unlocked, you have a limited slip too.