Even when they HAD competition from the Camaro, they sold well - better than they do now.
This should be the final nail in the retro styling craze. It's evident the sales drop started after the novelty wore off the retro styled car. Everyone who wanted a Mustang that looked like an updated 60s car bought one when they first came out. Car guys love them, but the general car buying public obviously does not. Classic car people are a very small part of the market.
Also, the lack of a sophisticated suspension hurts the Mustang. For the longest time they were the only game in town when it came to powerful rear wheel drive front engine cars, but now car companies are coming out with their own versions of front engine rear drive - the FRS, Genesis, 370Z - all of which out handle the Mustang hands down. Ford has no choice but to change the design into something people want. Retro is cool but it has a very limited market appeal and that market has been saturated.
Also, the Mustang does not sell well overseas. The economic reality is they have got to have a car that DOES sell overseas, and a big heavy car that lumbers through the turns may be a, American car guy's dream but no one else in the world is really interested in that.
I think the new Mustang looks cool and if they finally give it a rear suspension that didn't come out of a tractor, I would seriously look at one.
Ford has been fighting going to an independent rear setup because of the drag racers that don't like wheelhop and grassroots level Ford road racers that like solid axles.. also, it's probably cheaper to manufacture and has a lot less moving parts than an IRS does.. they've kept the ever reliable 8.8 solid axle around for about as long as they could, but they are about to put it out to pasture in favor of some flavor of independent rear suspension... maybe they'll keep the 8.8 center section like they did in the Thunderbird and Cobra Mustang IRS setups of the 90's..
Yeah I get that part. But again, the rest of the world does things differently. Big hulking solid axle top heavy rear drive cars just don't sell well in the rest of the world. Heck, you can't even get a Mustang in right hand drive.
I'd like to see them move the Mustang in the direction of a poor man's M3. Decent performance both in a straight line and in the curves, but without the snobbiness, high price, shoddy build quality, poor reliability and high repair costs of a typical German car.
They do have to be careful though, lest they end up the same way they did last time they tried to turn the Mustang into a global car. Not that the Probe was a bad car - I almost bought one and wish I had, the GT was a fun car to drive if a little under powered - but it was too radical a departure from the Mustang.
But is the one on the Mustang? I agree, the solid rear axle can be made light and kept in check with a Watt's link, but it goes beyond just the rear axle with the Mustang. You know as well as I do how poorly they handle.
But the bottom line is, there is a reason high end sports cars use IRS, and it's not as a sales point.
Mustangs dominate SCCA F-Stock, and is quite competitive in one of the Street Prepared classes as well (I think it's BSP). I think they could do OK in STX as well, but I don't know of anyone who has prepped one for the class. Nobody seems to like building high-horsepower cars for street tire classes, except Jason Rhoades.
ESP. And Mustangs dominate F-Stock because the cars they compete against aren't much better at handling .
Street Prepared allows quite a bit of latitude for modifications, including those allowed in IT road racing categories provided the car is prepared exclusively for IT (no mix and match of classification rules between club racing and solo). That's why the lack of an interior on my CRX does not throw it into Prepared. But again, the rest of the cars in ESP are similar. Heck, the Subaru Forester is in ESP fer crissake.
When the latest Mustang came out it was competing with and if I recall correctly even beating out the BMW M3.
I wouldn't say they handle too poorly.
But considering the heavy 5th gen Camaros with the 1le suspension package are doing better, there should definitely be room for improvement.
Personally, I would take a solid axle any day of the week over the low budget wheel hopping heavy junk IRS with weak half shafts that typically find their way into American muscle cars.
The IRS from the Ford Cobra was an over 300lb hulk of pure ****.
It's because they're the only game in town, really, for the class they are in. But there is a reason they are in THAT class and not with the M3s, Corvettes, etc.
But I don't care really, since next year it looks like the CRX Si is moving to FSP
Bring that Chevelle on down, we'll make it a party. Jeff can bring his Caddy, Bill can bring that Volvo, and you all can buy the steaks, or I can just steal them from a coworker l
He did that in 2 runs with a car he'd never driven before. (though top level drivers seem to adapt very quickly) Also, prep level is way less than his BMW.
If "street" tires get any stickier, I'd expect the Mustang to be faster as it will be able to use more of its HP advantage.
High end sports cars yes but for the average american car there is nothing in the cost/ease of manufacture range as a solid rear axle.Its interesting that Nissan went back to a solid axle on a couple of their best sellers.IIRC maxima and sentra.
Those are FWD cars, the back end is just along for the ride
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
Team Chevelle
5.1M posts
115.6K members
Since 1998
A forum community dedicated to Chevrolet Chevelle owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about restorations, builds, performance, modifications, classifieds, troubleshooting, maintenance, and more!