Red Mule has an IRS

[jwfisher]

I wasn't asking for your driving history. You could be Michael Schumacher, but if you haven't driven the particular car, you have no frame of reference. That was my point.

I HAVE driven it, several hundred miles. It doesn't suck, but it is very poor and dissappointing. It is one of several cost-cutting aspects of the car, and certainly the worst of them.

This rear suspension is not a best effort job by the company. You won't see it's engineers talking about their pride in it's design - knowing it's the best thing they could have done. There isn't any pride in a task done to the lowest price point. This is not a highlight of their engineering careers. This is not something that can be presented at SAE. This is not something that further's one own engineering skills. Nor is it somehting that one can take to another company or even another department in the same company and leverage for a career move.

And I as a potential consumer, I won't be discussing the suspension with pride of ownership at car meetings. There aren't any features to brag about. I won't be inviting people to look underneath the car at a suspension that is about as interesting (and dated) as a cast-iron pushrod engine would be. I won't be comparing my car to the one parked next to it at a sports car show because that other car doesn't have pig iron parts underneath the back end.

As an owner of 14 FOX and SN95 Mustangs (4 STVs), I do not buy into their weak arguement. I know a lessor effort when I see one. And the amount of ostentatious flash on this car troubles me... this is not the SVT philosophy. It's more of an SRT type effort, minus the sophisticated suspension underneath.

 

[00 Aggie]

I know a lessor effort when I see one. And the amount of ostentatious flash on this car troubles me... this is not the SVT philosophy. It's more of an SRT type effort, minus the sophisticated suspension underneath.

:rockon: I couldn't agree more!

 

[RossSVT]

JW you are right. The SVT Mustang has not been released.

 

[Dave07997S]

I HAVE driven it, several hundred miles. It doesn't suck, but it is very poor and dissappointing. It is one of several cost-cutting aspects of the car, and certainly the worst of them.

This rear suspension is not a best effort job by the company. You won't see it's engineers talking about their pride in it's design - knowing it's the best thing they could have done. There isn't any pride in a task done to the lowest price point. This is not a highlight of their engineering careers. This is not something that can be presented at SAE. This is not something that further's one own engineering skills. Nor is it somehting that one can take to another company or even another department in the same company and leverage for a career move.

And I as a potential consumer, I won't be discussing the suspension with pride of ownership at car meetings. There aren't any features to brag about. I won't be inviting people to look underneath the car at a suspension that is about as interesting (and dated) as a cast-iron pushrod engine would be. I won't be comparing my car to the one parked next to it at a sports car show because that other car doesn't have pig iron parts underneath the back end.

As an owner of 14 FOX and SN95 Mustangs (4 STVs), I do not buy into their weak arguement. I know a lessor effort when I see one. And the amount of ostentatious flash on this car troubles me... this is not the SVT philosophy. It's more of an SRT type effort, minus the sophisticated suspension underneath.

Agreed 100%....leave the live axle for the Mustang GT, the SVT should have a proper IRS. Dave

 

[E. Green Cobra]

They never said the live axle in the 05 GT/GT500 had better results than the IRS, they just felt it wasn't worth the weight and cost penalty.

HAHA :bash:, yep they save ~80lbs in the rear with a stick (based off 99-04 irs) then stick 100 lbs not counting blower/intercooler on the nose with that D#mn iron block (compared to 96-99 AL blocks) :kaboom: and since its a 5.4 its still gonna be heavier than the 03/04 combo doh :bash: what other HiPo car today uses an iron block- why des ford continue to go backwards under the guise of going forward. :shrug:

 

[jwfisher]

Well over 200 more pounds up front, if not 250.

With skinny tires and terrible gearing, this is yet another SVT product you have to re-engineer before it will fulfill it's promise.

And that re-work is not counting the apparently inevitable dealer fixes (once they come out a year later) that will be necessary just to make the car roll down the road without over-heating, having the battery drain to dead, vibrating, or dripping oil all over.

 

[01L2Cobra]

I am not happy with what is under the hood or in the rear of the car. I think what SVT should have done was to put the Cammer in the car. The NA version makes almost the same amount of HP as what’s in there. The Cammer is a lot lighter and if you add the supercharger (still waiting on FRPP to do this) then you have something that would have more HP than the new Z06. For all of you that are going to say well the 5.4 makes more power. My statement to you is you claim the live axle has been proven on the track well so has the Cammer. I think that until the official release of what the new Cobra will be I will stick with my 01. It may not be as fast as a 03 but its lighter, has better front/rear weight ratio, and still has an IRS. If Ford still decides to only produce a live axle version then I will still stick with what I have and end up ordering parts from FRPP in order to build my own Cammer!

 

[ON D BIT]

The road manners around bends are not as good as an IRS Cobra, even if they have spent some time tuning springs, shocks, and bushings (and I've yet to see a Ford bushing that is worth anything after 15k or so miles). The base car is rediculously stiff, over-sprung, and a bit under-damped.

road manners around bends are not as good as the 03? what do you mean by this statement? the 05 gt gets through the slalom faster than the irs svt. is this not the gauge of the cars roadholding manner.

i would think that a live axle with a slalom speed of 70mph(equivilent to the m series, and vettes) would be much better than an irs with the slalom speed of only 65mph. i am wrong on this?
yes i do agree that irs is a much better suspension capable to through the at 72mph slalom(such as the 05 boxter 73+). but svt has yet to produce this type of handling on any of there vehicles.

 

[Whitten]

I hate to but in here while a perfectly good argument was going on, but I am wondering how many of you actually know the exact weight of the cast iron block of the 5.4 and the 4.6? Everyone seems to be in this huge quandry about how much more metal there is in the 5.4, but in actuallity if you set the two blocks next to each other I doubt many would be able to tell which was which with out looking at the casting numbers. There really is very little difference in size between the two engines. Granted I have never looked at the exact block that will be in the up comming Cobra, I have seen my fair shair of Navi Motors, F-150 Motors, 03 Cobra Motors, and even GT motors. Every single one of them looks almost identical when in bare block form save for small unique ques here and there. The difference between the 4.6 and the 5.4 is almost literally 7/8" of extra deck heigth and a larger bore and stroke.

I will try and get more hard numbers on the block that is in the Cobra itself but don't worry too much about that 5.4 being so much heavier. Really and truely the largest difference between motors will definately go to the difference between the Aluminum and Cast block.

 

[01L2Cobra]

block weights (I am not 100% sure on these numbers, i found a lot of sites listing different weights)
01 Cobra - 86Lbs
03 Cobra - 154Lbs
Cammer - 120Lbs
5.4 Iron - 184Lbs

If these numbers are correct I would rather sacrifice 25Hp than add around 60lbs just in the block, now add the additional weight of the supercharger and all of the associated equipment. To me the Cammer would have really been a better decision than what’s in it.

 

[Cobra03]

Before I buy another Cobra I will be wanting:
An aluminum block
IRS
Wider rear fenders with bigger tires and functional scoops
A convertible with some sort of roll system

I am willing to wait, and to pay more for these items. Otherwise my next car will be a used M3 or a Corvette.

Come on SVT, you can do it!

 

[Dave07997S]

Before I buy another Cobra I will be wanting:
An aluminum block
IRS
Wider rear fenders with bigger tires and functional scoops
A convertible with some sort of roll system

I am willing to wait, and to pay more for these items. Otherwise my next car will be a used M3 or a Corvette.

Come on SVT, you can do it!

I agree with you..the Al. block I can live without. Even the E46 M3 has an iron block. The IRS the car has to have. Not to mention there better be some creature options available as well such as: moonroof, navigation and such. I am really hoping these will at least be an option, as I love my M3 and wouldn't want to step down. I would pay 45K for a properly equipped Mustang Cobra. Dave

 

[01L2Cobra]

I agree with you..the Al. block I can live without. Even the E46 M3 has an iron block. The IRS the car has to have. Not to mention there better be some creature options available as well such as: moonroof, navigation and such. I am really hoping these will at least be an option, as I love my M3 and wouldn't want to step down. I would pay 45K for a properly equipped Mustang Cobra. Dave

An aluminum block is necessary for proper weight distribution of the car. A cast iron block is way way way too heavy for this car! If they do have a moonroof it should be optional. There is a reason that I got a coup and a moonroof would weaken the structural integrity of the top. As far and a Nav. system goes I could live with out one since all I do all day long is read maps.