[khell86]

GM went all out with the camaro and it shows. It's a hell of a performer. I do see though that there is a ton of potential left in the 6th gen mustang. Ford held back and reaped the extra money. Here's to hoping they up their game and dont just sit back and let it ride.

[Tr6]

Originally Posted by khell86

GM went all out with the camaro and it shows. It's a hell of a performer. I do see though that there is a ton of potential left in the 6th gen mustang. Ford held back and reaped the extra money. Here's to hoping they up their game and dont just sit back and let it ride.

Oh you know they will. That's why I love all manufacturers... Them "fighting" with each others = customer gets a better bang for the buck so we win.

[SpeedIsLife]

I'm almost wondering if Ford has taken the approach of allowing the first two model years of sales pay for the development of the S550 program and such and squirrel away money so any future performance upgrades (all aluminum body, 10 speed, etc) would be cheaper on the consumer end?

[KMPrenger]

I'm sure can catch up if they want....for sure!

But it will require a new transmission, increases in power, and changes in suspension/chassis geometry to match or just edge out the Camaro. Those are some hefty changes my friends.

Now if Ford is content with just making the Mustang faster, and not worrying about matching the Camaro in driving dynamics, then the transmission/power bump will handle that just fine.

[Bhobbs]

Ford has upgraded power plenty of times with the same engines. I would not expect the 5.0 to stay at 435/400 for long. The trans isn't an issue. The C7 started with the A6 and moved to the A8. The suspension can be easily changed. The 2012 Camaros were ugpraded to the FE4 suspension.

[68fbjjz109]

Originally Posted by SpeedIsLife

I'm almost wondering if Ford has taken the approach of allowing the first two model years of sales pay for the development of the S550 program and such and squirrel away money so any future performance upgrades (all aluminum body, 10 speed, etc) would be cheaper on the consumer end?

I would say it is part of there life cycle. They have thrown that word around alot on autoline. Aside from saving moneys with carry over the first year, makes launching a vehicle much easier.

Dave Pericak has said Ford Performance will be used to advance vehicle platforms. So very similar to taking from the ATS-V Parts bin.

Originally Posted by KMPrenger

I'm sure can catch up if they want....for sure!

But it will require a new transmission, increases in power, and changes in suspension/chassis geometry to match or just edge out the Camaro. Those are some hefty changes my friends.

Now if Ford is content with just making the Mustang faster, and not worrying about matching the Camaro in driving dynamics, then the transmission/power bump will handle that just fine.

The thing is.

There really isn't a huge all around performance gap. There is nothing wrong with the S550 chassis or suspension components. These cars are very fast out of the gate as well. I wish they would use Eagle F1's, as some 6GM members have data logged some very high g's with better tires. But what ever it's a wear item.

I can't saw for sure yet, as we haven't reduced a Camaro to its base components yet. But looking at torn down ATS for a reference. Mustang is very weight competitive in most systems.

This abbreviated chart is really what change the pill's tune some. My weights are from physical cars which have been torn down.

Using the 3680 6GC and the 3730 6GM numbers as a reference, You talking a 50lb delta, If you want to use the 3800 lbs fully loaded number then so be it. What makes the 6GC so lethal is the power bump along with getting the weight down. These cars are essentially peers in terms of weight. Where the 5GM was on an island in comparison to the rest of the segment.

-GT350 Aluminum Bumpers
-Auto Aluminum dif
-Aluminum Closures
This alone would erase that delta and the bumpers and dif have Ford Part numbers.

Then go to
-Aluminum front Cradle,
-lower control arms
-GT350 style front spindle

This would push that weight down even farther. And the Mustang still hasn't reached the percentage of aluminum used in the Camaro. Based on the ATS the 6GC likely enjoys 120 lb Body in white advantage.

I made this point to people bitching about the 6GM, and here not to further the bench racing. But to put things in perspective. The Mustang has no where near the amount of aluminum used in 6GC. There is alot of weight that the 6GM stands to loose. It would swing that power to weight back in favor of the 6GM in just bolt on components, and large decked modules at the plant; with no changes to body structure.

[crysalis_01]

Originally Posted by 68fbjjz109

I would say it is part of there life cycle. They have thrown that word around alot on autoline. Aside from saving moneys with carry over the first year, makes launching a vehicle much easier.

Dave Pericak has said Ford Performance will be used to advance vehicle platforms. So very similar to taking from the ATS-V Parts bin.



The thing is.

There really isn't a huge all around performance gap. There is nothing wrong with the S550 chassis or suspension components. These cars are very fast out of the gate as well. I wish they would use Eagle F1's, as some 6GM members have data logged some very high g's with better tires. But what ever it's a wear item.

I can't saw for sure yet, as we haven't reduced a Camaro to its base components yet. But looking at torn down ATS for a reference. Mustang is very weight competitive in most systems.

This abbreviated chart is really what change the pill's tune some. My weights are from physical cars which have been torn down.

Using the 3680 6GC and the 3730 6GM numbers as a reference, You talking a 50lb delta, If you want to use the 3800 lbs fully loaded number then so be it. What makes the 6GC so lethal is the power bump along with getting the weight down. These cars are essentially peers in terms of weight. Where the 5GM was on an island in comparison to the rest of the segment.

-GT350 Aluminum Bumpers
-Auto Aluminum dif
-Aluminum Closures
This alone would erase that delta and the bumpers and dif have Ford Part numbers.

Then go to
-Aluminum front Cradle,
-lower control arms
-GT350 style front spindle

This would push that weight down even farther. And the Mustang still hasn't reached the percentage of aluminum used in the Camaro. Based on the ATS the 6GC likely enjoys 120 lb Body in white advantage.

I made this point to people bitching about the 6GM, and here not to further the bench racing. But to put things in perspective. The Mustang has no where near the amount of aluminum used in 6GC. There is alot of weight that the 6GM stands to loose. It would swing that power to weight back in favor of the 6GM in just bolt on components, and large decked modules at the plant; with no changes to body structure.

The question quickly becomes, will Ford see the need to make the investment to get this done?

If Mustang continues to sell as well as it is, my guess will be that they won't. Mustang is competative in the sales arena, what Ford wants. Giving the enthusiasts, an admittedly small percentage of buyers, what they want is a secondary concern.

[90503]

As some of you have stated, these changes in engineering, design, etc., take a long time to come to fruition and they gotta start baking them soon to be done in time. Yes the Mustang is a fantastic seller, but it would be a mistake for Ford to rest on their laurels simply because it is selling well.

I think as well as it is selling will be all the more reason they will have the resources and push forward asap with all of the upgrades you guys mentioned.

[rayhawk]

Originally Posted by 68fbjjz109

I would say it is part of there life cycle. They have thrown that word around alot on autoline. Aside from saving moneys with carry over the first year, makes launching a vehicle much easier.

Dave Pericak has said Ford Performance will be used to advance vehicle platforms. So very similar to taking from the ATS-V Parts bin.



The thing is.

There really isn't a huge all around performance gap. There is nothing wrong with the S550 chassis or suspension components. These cars are very fast out of the gate as well. I wish they would use Eagle F1's, as some 6GM members have data logged some very high g's with better tires. But what ever it's a wear item.

I can't saw for sure yet, as we haven't reduced a Camaro to its base components yet. But looking at torn down ATS for a reference. Mustang is very weight competitive in most systems.

This abbreviated chart is really what change the pill's tune some. My weights are from physical cars which have been torn down.

Using the 3680 6GC and the 3730 6GM numbers as a reference, You talking a 50lb delta, If you want to use the 3800 lbs fully loaded number then so be it. What makes the 6GC so lethal is the power bump along with getting the weight down. These cars are essentially peers in terms of weight. Where the 5GM was on an island in comparison to the rest of the segment.

-GT350 Aluminum Bumpers
-Auto Aluminum dif
-Aluminum Closures
This alone would erase that delta and the bumpers and dif have Ford Part numbers.

Then go to
-Aluminum front Cradle,
-lower control arms
-GT350 style front spindle

This would push that weight down even farther. And the Mustang still hasn't reached the percentage of aluminum used in the Camaro. Based on the ATS the 6GC likely enjoys 120 lb Body in white advantage.

I made this point to people bitching about the 6GM, and here not to further the bench racing. But to put things in perspective. The Mustang has no where near the amount of aluminum used in 6GC. There is alot of weight that the 6GM stands to loose. It would swing that power to weight back in favor of the 6GM in just bolt on components, and large decked modules at the plant; with no changes to body structure.

Well if you give the 6th gen Camaro a comparable wheel and brake package to the base model Mustang, you are probably closer to a 100 lb delta. The Camaro also has a 19 gallon tank vs. the Mustang's 16 gallon tank.

[68fbjjz109]

With the new level 4 tanks coming out I imagine GM would want to keep that common from a cost perspective.

I have heard some people say the 15's where bait cars. I think that sounds a little more sinsiter than it is.

I think the front suspension, coupled with other hick ups which happen with new vehicles caused certain things to that may have lightend the car up some to get cut for due to he cost.

The plus side to CAFE is cars have to get lighter if they care going to be powered by the internal combustion engine...

I am not sure how much of this wish list will happen or when. But it makes sense to launch the car, make some money back. Update it and keep the segment tense.

To bad Dodge will never be in the same place :(

[ULTRAZLS1]

Funny how ford needs to update and update and update with hp.

For such an old piece design GM can just put a motor in and leave it. Stay competitive for 5+ years. The ls2 was the only recent exception running from 05-07.

The 5.0 has already had two power bumps in 5 years with a 3rd around the corner.

Wonder which is more cost effective?

[juzefzoozoo]

Ford's strategy alienates loyal customers. I'm still not over buyer's remorse after purchase of the last 4.6L GT (which had a scant 15hp increase over preceeding year) early 2010, only to have the 5.0 announced and in dealerships less than 6months later!!! OUCH

Originally Posted by ULTRAZLS1

Funny how ford needs to update and update and update with hp.

For such an old piece design GM can just put a motor in and leave it. Stay competitive for 5+ years. The ls2 was the only recent exception running from 05-07.

The 5.0 has already had two power bumps in 5 years with a 3rd around the corner.

Wonder which is more cost effective?

[ULTRAZLS1]

Originally Posted by juzefzoozoo

Ford's strategy alienates loyal customers. I'm still not over buyer's remorse after purchase of the last 4.6L GT (which had a scant 15hp increase over preceeding year) early 2010, only to have the 5.0 announced and in dealerships less than 6months later!!! OUCH

At the same time more I think about it would be kinda cool if they did some power bumps for the lt1 this time around. But since 1993 it hasn't really happened. The lt1 went from 275 to 285 from an exhaust difference I believe. The ls1 had some small changes including an ls6 intake and small cam differences different years etc. But the ls2 and 3 remained the same as far as hp pretty much. Even the ls1s all ran pretty close.

Would be kinda cool for them to do something especially if competition gets stiff. The stock lt1 cam is small.

Updates aren't a bad thing really but ford seems to do them a lot lately.

As far as the 2010 to 2011... You should have seen that coming man

I was honestly surprised though. They were underpowered for so long I was and still am impressed at how good they perform compared to the 4.6 days.

[68fbjjz109]

Originally Posted by juzefzoozoo

Ford's strategy alienates loyal customers. I'm still not over buyer's remorse after purchase of the last 4.6L GT (which had a scant 15hp increase over preceeding year) early 2010, only to have the 5.0 announced and in dealerships less than 6months later!!! OUCH

I am inclined to agree with ULTRAZLS1, the coyote was a shock to the segment, but not a secret. If you where relying on dealers to provide information it most certainly would have been a shock, as most don't know anything regarding development.

And as I have said before if you looked ant multiple platforms you will see things scaled in. So it is something that most Ford people have noticed with new vehicle launches.

There are merits and draw backs to this. from a shear odds perspective, the 6GM launches with one new motor, and 6GC launches with two. And we know there have been issues with the new v8's which fall well outside the realm of normal. And buyers of any manufacturers year one cars always have more issues, especially job 1. Unfortunately it's the nature of the beast. Carryover powertrains with slight modifications, help on the quality and cost side .