Quote:
Originally Posted by AngryAmish
I'll tell you why. At least in GM's case. GM has been spending a pretty penny developing some interesting products. Count the Volt among them. The Spoils of that will play out shortly, but not short enough that fans of GM don't have to worry.
Ford on the other hand has been putting a bunch of new lipstick on old pigs.
Its a cost effective way to do short term business. In the long term it will lose you customers.
Aside from the Taurus SHO and the new Mustang, not alot is going on over there. At least not alot thats exciting me. As impressive as the 2010 Mustang's handling was, there is not alot more you can do with this car. Sooner or later they need a redesign, and then they will be wishing they took that money. It is afterall a three car market now. They can't sit on their hands and rake in cash anymore.
Enough of that though. I was mostly posting to say how impressed I was with the handling of the Mustang with the track pack. Very impressed with what they are doing with their live axle.
I was kind of wondering...how much if any of the Mustangs weight advantage is gained by using a live axle instead of an IRS? I'm just sayin', it might be this car performs BETTER with a live axle because of the engine-- if an IRS adds a significant amount of weight.
I know alot of you are completely against a live axle, and I'm not here to convince you otherwise. I'm just saying it might have its benefits as well. It probably kept them in this race until they have a motor to compete with the LS3.
|
I've heard that IRS adds 200lbs. The S197 chassis was originally designed for an IRS but at the last minute the decided to stick with the live axle. I think it had to do with production costs and weight.