There is alot more to car building than the sum of the parts, that only works for bench racing. I sold my Mustang after I left Saleen because the one thing I could not fix on it was the ride quality with my 18" F40 wheels. The 2003 350Z non-track pkg. car I drove was much worse ride comfort

 

Porsche had little or no choice. With ever-tightening mileage and emissions rules, the air-cooled engines had to go. They simply took too long to warm up in cold weather and it was difficult to get even combustion temperatures in each cylinder......both critical for low emissions. Even Porsche enthusiasts don't always enjoy having to drive their cars long distances in the winter to get cabin heat/defrosting, and exhaust gases mixing in with the heat if there is the slightest leak in the system.

 

REPORT: S197 Ford Mustang could have had independent rear suspension for $100 per car

 

That is hard to believe but I respect Angus's columns he seems to know what he is talking about

 

Guys, like I said before, money here was NOT the issue, whether it was $100 per car or not.....at least not production money on the assembly line. It WAS a money issue, though, if you figure that, with an IRS, Ford would probably have been doing a lot more rear-end warranty work, because they knew that a lot of Mustang GT owners would do burn-outs and abuse the drivetrain, but the factory couldn't prove abuse and reject the warrranty claim. With a simple, rugged, soild rear axle, a lot less warranty money would probably be spent on rear-end work.

 

Solid rear axles have been around for years in the mustang. except in the 03 cobra which had independent rear suspension..

 

Yes, we can speculate about the possibility of the Mustang having higher warranty repairs if it didn't have a solid rear axle. Who knows, because the more powerful hemi Chargers and 300's, SRT8's, etc. have not had that problem with IRS setups.

And the last major burnout I saw in 2006 by a high power solid-axle Camaro resulted in a dropped driveshaft and was towed away from my company parking lot. The weakest links are still there, including those driveshaft u-joints.

 

True, but far fewer Dodge muscle cars are sold than Mustangs.....even with a similiar rate of failure, Dodge would not be stuck with the same warranty costs as Ford. The Mustang has enormous appeal among pony/muscle-car enthusiasts, and many of them (fortunately, not all) drive like idiots.

Previous-generation F-bodies had a reputation for worse-than-average reliability......no doubt enhanced by abuse such as this. Mustangs, in general, fared a little better.....but, of course, were still not Toyota or Honda-like in reliability.

And, since you saw that happen in 2006, that Camaro had to have been at least 3-4 years old, since the F-Bodies went out of production in 2002-2003. Who knows what that particular vehicle went through, in the meantime?

 

Yes, agreed the F-bodies had poor reliability, but many of the years of the Mustang were mediocre too. The car in question was owned by a seasoned service manager of a domestic dealership so the history was well known. But the point is that the weak points (universal joints) still exist on the crude solid axle version of the pony car.

Also as I mentioned earlier, the most immature owners of Mustangs tend to be well out of warranty when they acquire the car used and abuse it anyway.

 

Slightly o/t, but I saw a beautiful original '99 Cobra 'stang in the parking lot at my favorite barbecue stand last week. Yes, it was one of the IRS models, but more important, it had a "For Sale" sign on it, and I was sorely tempted. Price was $11,000, and for a short production run coupe (some 4040 built that year) it could be a decent investment as a hobby car.

It appeared to be in great condition, always garaged and carefully maintained. With 84,000 miles on the clock it was well used, but I shuddered a bit when I considered the cost of repairs to this minor classic. Then the owner started the engine for me. Fortunately I was standing slightly to the left of the rear of the car as a puff of oil smoke belched from the exhausts when the engine lit off.

OK, so the valve guides leak . . . uh-oh, the mosquito fogging continues . . . this is more than valve guides . . . here's a hand assembled engine that needs at least a valve and ring job. If I were one of those people who could enjoy polishing my treasure, backing it out of the garage only on nice sunny days, but otherwise keeping it under glass as a museum piece, it might be a great buy. But I'm not wired that way.

I've worked on the restoration of several cars, even a couple of WWII aircraft, and I've found that a mechanical device delivers the most satisfaction when it is used for the purpose for which it was built. It needs to be out there clicking its valve lifters, throbbing its headers, and circulating oil, water, and fuel - flexing its muscles, not sitting in a static display. If I'm going to invest in a classic, even a minor one, it's going to spend Saturdays howling through the trees on my favorite twisty two-lane with me. We're gonna dance.

Sadly, what remaining good sense I have got the better of me and I passed on the deal. I hope that Cobra finds a good home.

 

I agree with this comment, I sold my 350Z Touring because the ride was unbearable. Nissan addressed the complaints in 2005+ by putting in a different suspension.

 

They will cut every penny they can. Look at the interior of the car. Its total garbage. The quality of all of the material, the ergonomics, and overall feel are far worse than anything I have seen in a while.

I had a patient who was a GM engineer and said they had a huge problem with mirrors falling off cars in the winter. He said they reduced the quality of the adhesive to save 2 cents per car. He said that in the engineering dept back in the day praise was given based on how much money you could cut from the production cost. It had nothing to do with actual talent in design. I am not surprised that Ford is guilty of making bad moves chasing lower production costs. Its not like every manufacturer doesnt want to save money on production, but at the cost of the very purpose of that vehicle.



Sports cars need independent suspension ideally. That will not change. Not to sat that a solid rear set up cant be "tuned", but in standard street form it produces poor handling, and poor off the line jump if the car is very powerful

 

Are you referring to the same one as the OP (2005) or the new ones? The quality of the interior is vastly improved over previous iterations of Mustangs. Double stitched leather, perforated leather inserts, solid touchpoints, and good overall feel have all been touted in the new cars. It seems as though you have something against the new Fords based on what I've read here and in the new Taurus thread. I think that they've come miles from what they used to be, and while it's not BMW, Lexus, Mercedes-Benz level, it's not intended to be, nor does it cost like it is or does. Either way, to say the quality of materials is garbage is contrary to everything I've seen, touched, and read. I agree with you about the ergonomics to a certain extent, but not the materials.

Huh? I agree that it may not corner like the new Z, but it definitely has "off the line jump" like you wouldn't believe - provided the tires can handle it. I have several friends with Mustangs that have factory suspensions and they have no problem launching from the line. The GS is not known for having tremendous launch, but it does okay and has an independent suspension. Since both a GT and a GS are similarly powerful, I have to disagree with the idea that a solid axle automatically means bad line starts.

Big Mack

 

The yellow V6 Camaro I saw on my way to dinner today looked great, especially nice without all that SS graphic junk on the body. Really stood out and looked sleek.

And a 300hp direct injected V6 with IRS is nice modern hardware too.

The Camaro is a sports coupe not so much a relic trying to retain the traditional pony car solid rear axle. Because for Ford today, the main reason is probably tradition when it comes to the choice of solid rear axle.

 

hes right