Bullitt Mustang in Production....

[SuperStalin]

That car is about as reminiscent of the Bullit Mustang
as Brad Pitt is of Steve McQueen.

But, hey, even today's poodles descend from wolves.

 

[gtrietsc]

I know, I made my comment to you, then I added my opinion on the subject.

Ok, I see now.

Carriage return, good sir!

 

[tigger]

And, no, you don't need to be doing anything like 60MPH, nor hit anything like a speedhump to get the rear end moving (and not in a controllable manner).

That was sarcasm, friend. But either you guys have worse roads than Missouri or that Holden had some wonky suspension geometry, because I've never had a live-axle car behave any worse than an IRS one (at least not like what you guys are talking about). And I've owned ... 5 live-axle cars now? Yeesh I need to quit blowing my cars up :?.

But, hey, even today's poodles descend from wolves.

Indeed. Pitt's a pretty good actor imho, but trying to do a roll that McQueen filled so perfectly is impossible.

 

[Elmo187]

And I've owned ... 5 live-axle cars now? Yeesh I need to quit blowing my cars up :?.

didn't you own a Monte or some GM equivalent that went up in flames? didn't those have live-axles also?

 

[Lurch0001]

Oh, and to add insult to injury. The Exige set a course time of .42 seconds. The Mustang GT did the course in .43 seconds and the big Impala did it in .45 seconds.

And before you ask, yes the Exige was being driven very hard, guy did kill 2 cones on his last run. :lol:

So let me get this straight: you're seriously saying that a Mustang GT or an Impala is on a par with an Exige in the handling department? Despite what every motoring journalist says about the handling of the Exige, and what every motoring journalist worth 2 cents says about the abilities of cars with a live rear axle, and despite what I know from my own experience of the handling attributes of live rear axle cars, despite commonly accepted engineering knowledge, despite the fact that so few new cars are made with this dinosaur technology, you're trying to tell me that there's nothing wrong with a live rear axle? Nothing at all!? It's just perfectly dinkum fine and dandy and I don't know why they don't use them in all cars, I mean they're obviously fine, right? I mean, you can tell how hard those drivers are working that wheel in those clips, can't you? You can just see the whole attitude of the car from that tiny clip, can't you?You can see exactly what the suspension's doing (obviously the live rear axle is just glued to the ground and never skips a beat) and you can feel how the car is totally planted on the road, can't you? Because there wouldn't be a chance, even a tiny chance, that those cars might actually benefit from having IRS, could they? I mean, they're perfect, you can just see that from the clip. You know, despite the Mustang GT having, what 500HP versus the Exige's 200HP, the Mustang is only a second slower, so there must be nothing wrong with the live axle, right?

You, my friend, are a tool.

 

[Zuhaib]

Clearly you guys have bought into the Top Gear hype of how bad a live axle is.


Ok, lets take a regular mustang GT straight off the showroom floor, and put it in a Autocross with Lotus Elise's, WRX STi's, and one Lotus Exige.

Now this auto-x was taken in a very neglected parking lot. Potholes and loose Gravel everywhere. A disaster for a car with a Live rear axle you'd say right?

Wrong.

[YOUTUBE]HLOPNcWv9k4[/YOUTUBE]

Wait, how can that be? It didn't spin out or crash into a tree!?! Surely it must be a fluke! Lets see when another Live axle car goes through the course a couple of times...

[YOUTUBE]gf4uXM4-OIQ[/YOUTUBE]

So lets recap, both of your 'truth' on Live axles performace on loose surfaces...equal...

FAIL

Oh, and to add insult to injury. The Exige set a course time of .42 seconds. The Mustang GT did the course in .43 seconds and the big Impala did it in .45 seconds.

And before you ask, yes the Exige was being driven very hard, guy did kill 2 cones on his last run. :lol:

So, Live axle>you two.

Just by posting a video of a Mustang taking on an Auto-X is suppose to make me say a live rear axle is the real deal? Sorry but no. Also I did not see the Exige or the WRX in the video so I am still waiting. I never said its going to spin out and ram in to a wall, i just said if you wanted better handling an IRS solution is way ahead of a live axle for auto-x/racing application. The fact your comparing to a car with less HP then a Mustang shows that this car with a proper setup could do wonders.

The basic physics on a live axle tells you this is not the ideal solution, the fact that anything type of force that is applied to one wheel effects the other, in terms of how much tire it can put to the pavement is going to hurt you on a track.

Take a look at the wiki article i mentioned, it does a pretty good job explaining and has some good photos to illustrate the difference.

 

[Elmo187]

Just by posting a video of a Mustang taking on an Auto-X is suppose to make me say a live rear axle is the real deal? Sorry but no. Also I did not see the Exige or the WRX in the video so I am still waiting. I never said its going to spin out and ram in to a wall, i just said if you wanted better handling an IRS solution is way ahead of a live axle for auto-x/racing application. The fact your comparing to a car with less HP then a Mustang shows that this car with a proper setup could do wonders.

The basic physics on a live axle tells you this is not the ideal solution, the fact that anything type of force that is applied to one wheel effects the other, in terms of how much tire it can put to the pavement is going to hurt you on a track.

Take a look at the wiki article i mentioned, it does a pretty good job explaining and has some good photos to illustrate the difference.

did you just skim through his post and just watch the videos?

......despite the fact that so few new cars are made with this dinosaur technology.........

hmmmm, that seems REALLY familiar.....

OH WAIT!!!!

that's what they say about the Z06's leaf springs.

lets compare the the similarities of both shall we:

they're both the only cars in the market with this "dinosaur" technology.

they're both American icons let alone WELL known names around the world.

they both can keep up or even beat the competition on a road course. whether it be in stock or modified form (IE: Roush, Lingenfelter).

they both have suspension technology that are supposed to be on trucks (or wagons if you wanna get technical).

 

[Zuhaib]

did you just skim through his post and just watch the videos?



hmmmm, that seems REALLY familiar.....

OH WAIT!!!!

that's what they say about the Z06's leaf springs.

lets compare the the similarities of both shall we:

they're both the only cars in the market with this "dinosaur" technology.

they're both American icons let alone WELL known names around the world.

they both can keep up or even beat the competition on a road course. whether it be in stock or modified form (IE: Roush, Lingenfelter).

they both have suspension technology that are supposed to be on trucks (or wagons if you wanna get technical).

No, I did read his whole post, if you read my post in full.

The Z06 Leaf Spring's are track proven old tech (Actually I am not sure on the C6R if they keep them), but when you see what Chevy has done in terms of the Engineering and tech on that suspension you forget that its even leaf spring. In the case of Chevy they jusgt stuck with them more about philosophy then with being cheap. Kind of the same say Porsche sticks with rear engine setup.
The Mustang on the other hand uses a Live Rear Axle because they are cheap and say its for the "Drag Crowed". If Live Rear Axle is so kick ass on the track is why Roush offering IRS on there version of the mustang... Why is that the Mustang with its 300hp gets owned on tracks with less power or equal?

My hate for the Mustang setup is not because its "an American icon", if see I own a proper American Icon, a Harley, which trust me uses VERY OLD TECH. And I would never try to justify my bike on the race track. My hate is they have always held back this car from being the great car it should be.

 

[Lurch0001]

they both can keep up or even beat the competition on a road course.

I could refer you to any number of engineering papers, comparison tests, technical articles and just plain common sense to describe why you're wrong, but I get the feeling that would just go in one ear and out the other, because you've made up your mind and you'll relentlessly attack anyone who says otherwise.

I want you to do one thing: Count to 10, then go back and read what you wrote. If you still agree with that statement and you still seriously think that a live rear axle is better than any type of IRS, then you're beyond hope.

 

[gtrietsc]

I think the Mustang is still live axle because that's more than good enough for 99% of the people out there. Of people who even bother to race theirs, I would also bet the number who only drag race versus those who open track it is also large.

So, if you are a large automaker who is trying to turn things around, do you make a car for the fraction of a percent who want or need IRS, or do you do what works for everyone else? Answer is pretty simple.

I'll also say this - by the time you really need a car with fancy suspension for all the autocrossing and open tracking you are doing, you arent going to be racing your $30k+ car out there, unless you have more money than sense. You will fund a purpose built track car and put the suspension components that you want on it to start with, and eliminate all the creature comforts that go into your everyday grocery getter.

 

[zenkidori]

I could refer you to any number of engineering papers, comparison tests, technical articles and just plain common sense to describe why you're wrong, but I get the feeling that would just go in one ear and out the other, because you've made up your mind and you'll relentlessly attack anyone who says otherwise.

I want you to do one thing: Count to 10, then go back and read what you wrote. If you still agree with that statement and you still seriously think that a live rear axle is better than any type of IRS, then you're beyond hope.

all you would need to do is look at some racing results.

on paper, a solid rear axle isn't that great, but it does work. people are successful in various racing series with it, including autocross and road racing.

 

[BlaRo]

Arguing about live axles in EVERY Mustang discussion...can we get any more cliche? Just because it's old and cheap doesn't always mean it sucks.

 

[Lurch0001]

I never said that live rear axles always suck. I actually started by saying that they're fine for track work, especially on a nice smooth surface, although granted many tracks have a less-than-perfect surface.

My point (and this is something that some people haven't been able to grasp) is that live axles don't match IRS when you're on a bumpy surface, like most roads. I'm not saying that they can't be made to work well, it's just that a reasonable IRS setup would work better.

But Blaro's right, this is getting into the reals of leafspringslol and pushrodslol and I'm just going to carefully walk away from this thread like it never happened.

 

[Ezbok58a]

So let me get this straight: you're seriously saying that a Mustang GT or an Impala is on a par with an Exige in the handling department? Despite what every motoring journalist says about the handling of the Exige, and what every motoring journalist worth 2 cents says about the abilities of cars with a live rear axle, and despite what I know from my own experience of the handling attributes of live rear axle cars, despite commonly accepted engineering knowledge, despite the fact that so few new cars are made with this dinosaur technology, you're trying to tell me that there's nothing wrong with a live rear axle? Nothing at all!? It's just perfectly dinkum fine and dandy and I don't know why they don't use them in all cars, I mean they're obviously fine, right? I mean, you can tell how hard those drivers are working that wheel in those clips, can't you? You can just see the whole attitude of the car from that tiny clip, can't you?You can see exactly what the suspension's doing (obviously the live rear axle is just glued to the ground and never skips a beat) and you can feel how the car is totally planted on the road, can't you? Because there wouldn't be a chance, even a tiny chance, that those cars might actually benefit from having IRS, could they? I mean, they're perfect, you can just see that from the clip. You know, despite the Mustang GT having, what 500HP versus the Exige's 200HP, the Mustang is only a second slower, so there must be nothing wrong with the live axle, right?

You, my friend, are a tool.

So where exactly did I say the Mustang and Impala are absolutely perfect the way they are? Can you point it out because I can't find it.

You sir are the tool.

I never said that Live rear Axles were gods gift to all racing, I was showing you that it works fine, The car's not getting squirrely under braking or turning on loose pavement, if you watched the videos you'd see that.

Back to the bullitt, lets see what's different from the regular GT...

http://www.popularmechanics.com/blogs/automotive_news/4230204.html

 

[Lurch0001]

I never said that Live rear Axles were gods gift to all racing, I was showing you that it works fine, The car's not getting squirrely under braking or turning on loose pavement, if you watched the videos you'd see that.

You can see that from those videos can you? Well you must be telepathic or something because what I can see is a lo-res video of a car doing an auto-cross taken from a distance. And there's no way that you can see the attitude of the car from that distance. Can you see how much opposite lock he's applying? Can you see him having to back off in mid-corner? Cos I can't see jack from that distance, and the only way you're going to see that sort of thing is either being a LOT closer or being in the car. and by the way, it's not under braking or turning that a live axle will bite you, it's trying to put power down coming out of a corner. If you actually knew anything about the subject you'd realise that, but I'm sure you think that ignorance is bliss.

 

[Ezbok58a]

You can see that from those videos can you? Well you must be telepathic or something because what I can see is a lo-res video of a car doing an auto-cross taken from a distance. And there's no way that you can see the attitude of the car from that distance. Can you see how much opposite lock he's applying? Can you see him having to back off in mid-corner? Cos I can't see jack from that distance, and the only way you're going to see that sort of thing is either being a LOT closer or being in the car. and by the way, it's not under braking or turning that a live axle will bite you, it's trying to put power down coming out of a corner. If you actually knew anything about the subject you'd realise that, but I'm sure you think that ignorance is bliss.

Oh please, If I knew anything about the subject? I've owned and raced 3 live axle cars since I got my liscense at 18 (That would be a 95 Z28, a 98 Mercury Grand Marquis, and my Current 04 Crown Vic). I'm fairly confident I know exactly how each live axle car performs when pushed, want some proof?

Yeah, that's me in my Crown Vic going through a autocross. Car has a tendancy to understeer when pushed hard, something most Live axle cars tend to do when pushed. And when you do apply throttle and bring the back end around, it's easily controlable. Having done several Auto-X's and being a ride a long with someone in a New Mustang GT during one. They're never, NEVER sawing on the wheel. Hands are at 3 and 9 through the entire course, they never move other than to move the wheel left or right. Where the hell are you autocrossing that you have to cut the wheel so much? I'd try to find a more legitimate event organizer, 'cause thats just stupid.

And as much as you hate videos that prove how much of a tool you are...





So, I've given you my experience with Live axles and twisty courses. Whats yours? Or are you just making up stuff to try and sound legit?

Oh, and I know you're going to bring up the 'fishtailing' the car and the Lightning did out there as the problem with live axle, But I don't see a IRS RWD vehicle going through the course and not doing that. Christ the S4's and RS4s do it all the time (when applying the throttle on the exit of a fairly sharp corner, believe me I've done it...)

 

[NAIDANAC A]

It is a nice looking car, it has cool history, its nice and discreet.

WHO CARES WHAT IS IN IT, IT LOOKS BETTER THAN OTHER CARS FOR THE SAME PRICE

 

[BlaRo]

Yeah, that's me in my Crown Vic going through a autocross.

So, I've given you my experience with Live axles and twisty courses. Whats yours? Or are you just making up stuff to try and sound legit?

Excuse me sir, I believe the proper term is "owned".

 

[tigger]

didn't you own a Monte or some GM equivalent that went up in flames? didn't those have live-axles also?

Yes sir, '84 Monte Carlo, burst into flames for no apparent reason. Well actually I know why it burst into flames, and let me just say that if you buy a car from a redneck and it's sat for 9 years, replace as much of the wiring as you can, and rebuild the carb. Leaky fuel bowls and wiring shorts are a bad combination! I've also owned an '81 C10, '81 Firebird, '78 Trans Am, and an '85 Camaro. It's amazing I survived driving all those live-axle vehicles! And shit, 3 out of the 5 had leaf springs! :lol:

Anywho, arguing the benefits/detriments of a solid axle versus an independent suspension here seems to be fairly impossible. There's so many holes in the arguments, so many exceptions that it's kind of pointless anyway.

A little more on topic, why doesn't the Mustang have a 6 speed? Was that a typo or does it really just have a 5 speed?

 

[Polly]

It is a nice looking car, it has cool history, its nice and discreet.

WHO CARES WHAT IS IN IT, IT LOOKS BETTER THAN OTHER CARS FOR THE SAME PRICE

Looks > Engineering ?


ARE YOU FAWKING SERIOUS?