2015 Mustang to Shed 400lbs (Edmunds)

[Stew]

Originally Posted by GroundPilot

OK am I the only one NOT caught up in "drag this", "track that", HP, weight, etc. and instead sitting with a WTF look going "Smaller than it is today?".

Why the hell would I want a smaller car, almost 370Z size? Damn what is it with the Euro mindset lately...I do not WANT a smaller "muscle" car. Big, bad, beefy....please GM do not turn the Camaro into a Euro-wannabe to compete if that is the direction Ford is going.

It's not a muscle car, it is a pony car. The point of a pony car is small, light, and quick. The original mustang was way smaller than the current one, and only about 5 inches longer than the estimate here for the new one. It is about time the Pnies got back to their roots.

[oklapike]

Originally Posted by Stew

Why not? BRZ and FR-S did it for a 2700 pound curb weight with IRS and start around 25k. You add the extra weight for the mustangs slightly larger size and beefier engines and bam.

Even if this is all true, the next Mustang is still not reducing to BRZ/FR-S size.

[SS 376]

Originally Posted by GroundPilot

OK am I the only one NOT caught up in "drag this", "track that", HP, weight, etc. and instead sitting with a WTF look going "Smaller than it is today?".

Why the hell would I want a smaller car, almost 370Z size? Damn what is it with the Euro mindset lately...I do not WANT a smaller "muscle" car. Big, bad, beefy....please GM do not turn the Camaro into a Euro-wannabe to compete if that is the direction Ford is going.

Lighter cars do everything better. For the same HP, they accelerate faster, they stop harder, and handle better. If you care about performance, lighter is always better.

[Stew]

Originally Posted by oklapike

Even if this is all true, the next Mustang is still not reducing to BRZ/FR-S size.

And that is why the mustang would still be 400-500 pounds MORE than the twins.......

[Stew]

Originally Posted by five-oh

don't worry people! Remember the last time they shrunk the Mustang? Think 1974 Mustang II. I had one, it was my first car, it almost destroyed the Mustang.

I'm sure they new one will be equally as bad as the 1974. lol

And what about them 2003-2009 Camaros....... oh......... wait......

[72MachOne99GT]

Originally Posted by five-oh

don't worry people! Remember the last time they shrunk the Mustang? Think 1974 Mustang II. I had one, it was my first car, it almost destroyed the Mustang.

I'm sure they new one will be equally as bad as the 1974. lol

Almost killed it? I thought it saved it from extinction.

yes, the new mustang will be as bad as the '74

[ssrs2lt]

Funny how mustnottang news got us comparing it to vettes. Wow that car will be a beast. They didn't talk about a stripped down version ala z28.. it must be a canoe on wheels ha.

[Bhobbs]

Originally Posted by five-oh

don't worry people! Remember the last time they shrunk the Mustang? Think 1974 Mustang II. I had one, it was my first car, it almost destroyed the Mustang.

I'm sure they new one will be equally as bad as the 1974. lol

I wouldn't underestimate the next Mustang. It will be smaller, lighter and more powerful. Not only that but with IRS and I'm sure what will be good tire, it will move pretty quick.

[Q'smuscle]

Originally Posted by GroundPilot

OK am I the only one NOT caught up in "drag this", "track that", HP, weight, etc. and instead sitting with a WTF look going "Smaller than it is today?".

Why the hell would I want a smaller car, almost 370Z size? Damn what is it with the Euro mindset lately...I do not WANT a smaller "muscle" car. Big, bad, beefy....please GM do not turn the Camaro into a Euro-wannabe to compete if that is the direction Ford is going.

[BaylorCamaro]

Originally Posted by GroundPilot

OK am I the only one NOT caught up in "drag this", "track that", HP, weight, etc. and instead sitting with a WTF look going "Smaller than it is today?".

Why the hell would I want a smaller car, almost 370Z size? Damn what is it with the Euro mindset lately...I do not WANT a smaller "muscle" car. Big, bad, beefy....please GM do not turn the Camaro into a Euro-wannabe to compete if that is the direction Ford is going.

Because of this.....

Originally Posted by SS 376

Lighter cars do everything better. For the same HP, they accelerate faster, they stop harder, and handle better. If you care about performance, lighter is always better.

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by Bhobbs

Exactly. If the 5.0 is bumped to 450 HP, that puts it right at Stingray numbers but for half the price.

I didn't realize you could even get today's GT for $27,500. Interesting if that is the case.

Originally Posted by Stew

Definitely will not be a 2 seater, but I can't imagine the back seats being much use.

You mean they are today?

Originally Posted by Stew

And that is why the mustang would still be 400-500 pounds MORE than the twins.......

And we haven't seen the STi version yet.



First if they are even talking aluminium, get the check book out. Any material choices will only drive up cost.

Two, if it's 15 inches shorter and 6.5 inches narrower....................that's a tiny car. Seems more 1 series size now not 3 series.

Have to wait til January now, but I'm guessing that a 400 pound weight reduction comes from going down in size more than real light weight materials. And I would guess this includes going from a V6 base car to a 4 cylinder base car as well.

We shall see, but I think the Mustang is already small and has no trunk compared to the Camaro.

All GM has to do now is make an outstanding and usable Gen 6 and they destroy this rumored Mustang.

JMO

[cbass]

We shall see, but I think the Mustang is already small and has no trunk compared to the Camaro

The mustang has a bigger trunk than the camaro by like 2 cu ft.

[fielderLS3]

Sweet. 400 lbs weight reduction would be awesome for performance. 370 lb reduction, with an extra 30 put back into the transmission would be even better.

450hp is almost a certainty with the 2015 5.0. The engine was engineered with direct injection and will have it this time around. (you can actually see where they should have gone in 2011 if you look at pictures of the heads).

[Q'smuscle]

Originally Posted by nester7929

CAFE standards. Auto manufacturers know that no muscle owner is going to want to go backwards in terms of HP, so weight reduction is really the best option to satisfy both the customers and the feds.

Fine with me too. Pony cars used to be a lot smaller anyway, so a reduction in length wouldn't be the end of the world.

well , length wise the current camaro isn't that much longer than the 60's camaro. Width not nothing there to say and height not that much neither. I don't want all of these reminder sensors. That's whats costing us a lot in money and weight . So, I can save and remind myself.