:bowrofl:

that was the ford gt, which is a legitimate supercar. there are light years between the gt and the mustang.

:icon18: funny cuz most people would say the mustang is lagging in technology compared to other cars

Yes and no! Carroll Shelby won the 24 hours of LeMans in the late 50's. Beating Ferrari , I believe he drove an Aston Healey , or Aston Martin, which was considered an underdog!

internet

If your going to get technical, the Ford GT was made between 2002-2005. The one racing in the 60s was the GT40.

And If you want to say its lagging in technology, thats your opinion and you can say that. Im sorry if you have to have an IRS to feel competent. Last I checked thats the only old technology on the car, considering most muscle cars still use pushrod motors, and this is a modular motor. They made a ton of advancements on the new GT500, such as a new cylinder liner that won Ford the Inventor of the Year award. It replaces iron sleeves in an aluminum block. Saves 8.5 lbs off the engine, and reduces friction greatly. But thats right, its lagging in technology. Fords newly redesigned live axle can do anything your IRS can do, any day. Ford asked its Mustang crowd what it wanted for 2005, a new IRS or new live axle. Well its quite obvious what won out. You and a ton others think its "old and outdated", but last I checked it still works.

So are you gonna go tell GM that they need to change the Vette because Pushrods were made in the 60's? Didnt think so. So leave Ford alone about the live rear axle.

He's just being an elitest jerkoff. We should ignore it.

Good post, though. :tiphat:

Thanks. I mostly look around and read whats going on with people and their Zs, but decided a post needed to be made. I love all kinds of vehicles, lean more towards the muscle car side because thats how I grew up, but hey what wouldn't get you going about a 427 BBF?

I'm the same way -- I am a car guy first and foremost.

? If a live axle is so great then why don't other euro car builders use it, let's not forget BMW, Porsche, ferreri, jaguar, Aston Martin etc .. Have been racing for years there must some reason these companys don't use live axles, it's cheaper, some of you say it's no different. And let's not forget only reason ford beat Ferrari in lemans in the 60s is with British help all ford did was supply the finances and and the engines, plus they had some talented drivers, every time this topic comes up nobody gives the drivers any credit you can have all the power in the world don't mean **** if don't have driver who can control it.

It's pretty obvious why they use the live axle.

Quote where I said it was "so great". I said it has worked and still works for Ford, and thats what the general group of Mustang owners/ drivers wanted, which is why Ford went with it. If it aint broke dont fix it. And as far as the group of car makers you named goes, they are all higher end luxury cars. An IRS is quite essential to a smooth ride in a sporty car, which is exactly what those owners want.

When a car manufacturer asks its "life time buyers" what they want, and they get the answer, why would they ignore it?

They keep the live axle to keep cost down. It's already a $50 grand mustang so I guess they didn't want to make it more expensive. Atleast they found a way to drop some weight and it looks pretty good. However, even Ford acknowledges that the live axle is inferior and stated that the next mustang will have an IRS. The best mustang cobra ever produced (03-04) were IRS and given the right mods with still run better than the GT500's.

That is still a rumor.
Ford has stated they want the Mustang to be a global platform, what that means is up to Ford. IRS, new frame, more body style changes, etc.?

It has nothing to do with cost and everything to do with what the owners want. 2 out of 3 enthusiast owners prefer the drag strip over the road track...

Lots of the 03-04 owners were not happy with the IRS... it sucked with big power. Many swapped live axles back in.

I can agree with that. It runs fine with 5-600 hp, which I might add is very easy to get out of those cars, but anything over that and it cost a great bit to "beef" up the rear end. There are a lot of 99-04 Mustang GT with IRS from the Cobra guys that got rid of them...

Look, dont get me wrong, I think a properly built IRS is the way to go. I may not handle quite as well, and my ride is rougher, but a Ford Racing susp package makes things a ton different, trust me. But Ford never built one from the ground up because the owners wanted the LRA. The 03-04 Cobra was a half a** IRS build, and if they set their mind to it Im sure they would build a great IRS. But calling the Mustang "old in technology" because of the rear end, and the rear end alone, is a pretty sad thing, and thats all I was arguing about.