Bring back the Probe!!!:mj:
AAAAAAAAAAnd here we go (weight)
- Thread starter svt 500
- Start date
I have scaled a 2011 Base GT, with only Brembo brakes/wheels, and it was 3605lbs with a 1/3 tank of fuel.
Of course, I have scaled others, like our 2011 GT base auto....and it was very close to the OEM claim of 3675. If I remember correctly, it was 3655 with a 1/4 tank.
We have to do this, for developing suspension. We use the "best of the best" equipment, for what it's worth.
Here is Vorshlags scaled 2011 GT with Brembos, and no trunk material, and no fuel:
BMR....am a BIG fan of the 11-14 5.0 Mustangs. A 2014 no-option GT would be my choice of new cars if I had to go out and buy one today. Like I said....just disappointed that Mustang continues to get heavier instead of lighter, despite all the hype. Perhaps we still don't have the full story? I'd love to eat some crow on this one, but I'm doubting it. The good news is that by the end of the year (or first of next year), left-over 14's will be GREAT deals. Who knows....might jump to one of those....though It will be hard to get rid of a 3200 lb car that makes 470 RWHP and gets 29+ mpg highway........
BTW...in my day....my F/S car was running 11.4s on DRs. A GT with tune, mufflers, and tires would have had its hands full!
Bob
LOL! I agree Bob.
Actually, I almost - just almost pulled the trigger on a base model '14 a while back.
I think you should get a '14. :rockon:
I can relate. I had an 07 GT500 in 2008. I thought I'd be able to get over the weight. I never did. Had a 2007 Z06 next, pretty much the perfect car- light and 427 cubes. Later, I had a 2011 GT, great car, again heavy but 'felt' light compared to the Shelby. Finally, my last modern mustang was a Boss 302. Phenomenal car, a great driver's car. On the road, it felt light, at the track, not so much. I ended up in a lighter platform, a 911 Carrera S.
I wanted another Stang but was sick of the heavy cars, so I now have an 87 GT with HCI and an S trim. 509 rwhp feels fun in a 3,075 lb car. Soon, 600 will feel even better and hopefully hang with tue heavier, more powerful new cars, lol.
Point is, weight matters to me. I'd rather deal with an old, creaky but light Fox jan a new heavy car, but that's just me. Had the 2015 lost weight over the 2014, I'd be all over it.
I wanted another Stang but was sick of the heavy cars, so I now have an 87 GT with HCI and an S trim. 509 rwhp feels fun in a 3,075 lb car. Soon, 600 will feel even better and hopefully hang with tue heavier, more powerful new cars, lol.
Point is, weight matters to me. I'd rather deal with an old, creaky but light Fox jan a new heavy car, but that's just me. Had the 2015 lost weight over the 2014, I'd be all over it.
Ditto on Bob Cosby's last post about weight and how little whp it took to get Foxes into the 11s or 12s, I know weight isn't all the issue (likely gearing and some other stuff too) but I think it is telling that prior to the Trinity '13-'14 GT500s, having 540-550 bhp only got you into the low-mid 12-second range ('10-'12 GT500 models). Heck, even 595 whp that the 5.8L in the '13-'14 GT500s make and only to run mid to high 11s at best is kind of nuts when you consider it took almost just half of that power to get a Fox Mustang into similar times (albeit at lower trap speeds). A Fox body that is making close to 600 whp is a rocket on the drag strip and will likely run faster then high 11s.
Considering the addition of IRS and new safety regs, this increase isn't that terrible. Those who want to see lower weight would be the first to complain about the rise in price exotic materials would bring. Sure they could have done single piece aluminum drive shafts, carbon fiber fenders / hood / roof panel, and titanium exhaust... but then you would end up with a $37K base GT...
And all this talk of the GM alpha platform.... malarky... with a v8 and it's beefier transmission and beefed up irs center section I would put money on the Camaro not loosing any weight. I mean a low option v6 ATS sits at 3516lbs. bigger engine and beefier parts to take the power... I can see a v8 auto ats camaro coming in over 3800lbs...
But I do expect the SVT to under cut this weight by a healthy margin. I could see them nixing the vert for the SVT variant as well. However the Ecoboost looks more and more interesting. I'd love to see a non-ac, base stereo, cloth recaros, less sound deadening, PP, Ecoboost powered SVO revival as a SE. Get the weight down to 3300 and I'd bet that sumbitch would sell like hot cakes.
And all this talk of the GM alpha platform.... malarky... with a v8 and it's beefier transmission and beefed up irs center section I would put money on the Camaro not loosing any weight. I mean a low option v6 ATS sits at 3516lbs. bigger engine and beefier parts to take the power... I can see a v8 auto ats camaro coming in over 3800lbs...
But I do expect the SVT to under cut this weight by a healthy margin. I could see them nixing the vert for the SVT variant as well. However the Ecoboost looks more and more interesting. I'd love to see a non-ac, base stereo, cloth recaros, less sound deadening, PP, Ecoboost powered SVO revival as a SE. Get the weight down to 3300 and I'd bet that sumbitch would sell like hot cakes.
What SVT Mustang has EVER been lighter than the same year Mustang GT?
And I, for one, would pay more for less....weight, that is.
And I, for one, would pay more for less....weight, that is.
Exactly. Even if they lighten the car, the added performance content will mitigate the weight savings and bring it back to 3700+ lbs anyway. Here's to hoping the SVT engineers are reading this snickering right now! :beer:
Cobra R's were always the lighter variant.
Uh....go look up the weight of the 2000 Cobra R and compare it to the 99/01 Cobra. Ditto the 95. Get back to me on that one, please.
Uh....go look up the weight of the 2000 Cobra R and compare it to the 99/01 Cobra. Ditto the 95. Get back to me on that one, please.
http://www.muscularmustangs.com/2005/svtcobraspec95.php
I had the 95 in mind.
No, it's not 250 lbs heavier than a 14. Your comparing apples to oranges.
Ok, the 95 was a few lbs lighter. 1 out of 3 ain't bad....
Then again, the 93 may have been a bit lighter too...dunno. The 2000 though....MUCH, MUCH heavier.
Ok, the 95 was a few lbs lighter. 1 out of 3 ain't bad....
I read on one of your previous post that you have the 99 stiil. I still have my little white 2v car as well. Just no motor
A change in philosophy is the only thing needed for them go achieve this. The SVTs have always used a larger, heavier engine which was where most the weight came from. Now we're looking at the SVT potentially using the same engine although reworked to either an NA 5.2 or some sort of SC variant of the 5.0 or 5.2. So instead of a big, heavy 5.4/5.8 they are only adding weight with a blower. Both cars will have IRS but then the SVT will most likely utilize aluminum and carbon fiber extensively. I would also anticipate a model that's similar to a Laguna Secs further reducing the curb weight. Ford will be saving money by using the Coyote across the line and not having a separate line for the Trinity. Also, is the GTs Coyote block Iron or Aluminum this go around? If it's still iron then expect big weight savings as I'm sure they'll stick with Aluminum for the SVTs.
When Ford went from the 04 to the 05 the car got bigger and heavier yet interior wise it felt like it was the same size. Why create a bigger car and keep the interior of that car the same? Now Ford with the 15 has kept the size the same increased wieght(presumably because of new regulations) and will the interior be bigger?
If they are gong to continue with the same size interior space why not use the same 15 design but with the 04 and earlier proportions to save weight?
The lines of the 15 and the size of the 03/04 mustang at 3400/3500lbs would have been sweet!
If they are gong to continue with the same size interior space why not use the same 15 design but with the 04 and earlier proportions to save weight?
The lines of the 15 and the size of the 03/04 mustang at 3400/3500lbs would have been sweet!
Last edited:
All things are possible, and while I won't hold my breath, I do hope you are correct.
Yup....no engine or transmission either....lol
:lol:
My previous post from 6/6/14 in the 300lbs weight gain thread:
Formula51 said:
I win;-)
I ain't happy about 'only' gaining 100 lbs.
Nope....you still lose.....
Nope....you still lose.....
I ain't happy about 'only' gaining 100 lbs.
Nope....you still lose.....
This, I would have been happy with it "only" losing 100 lbs...
Users who are viewing this thread
