"Paul, Man of Mustangs" (stangmanpaul)
08/20/2013 at 12:28 • Filed to: None
0
10|
"Paul, Man of Mustangs" (stangmanpaul)
08/20/2013 at 12:28 • Filed to: None | 0
| 10 |
I imagine this means that it will carry forward to the production model. This late in the game and it hasn't switched back to a solid axle is a pretty good indication of what's going to be in the car.
William Byrd
> Paul, Man of Mustangs
08/20/2013 at 12:31 |
|
I used to autocross a 2003 GT, which was obviously sans IRS, and it (I?) did quite well. Looking all the 2011+ comparos between the 5.0 and M3s, etc. and how close (or better) they were on the track, this could be even more fantastic.
/fanboy
Xander, Proud of BOXER
> William Byrd
08/20/2013 at 12:33 |
|
IRS on smooth vs. bumpy surfaces is very different than solid axle on smooth vs bumpy surfaces.
|
Paul, Man of Mustangs
> William Byrd
08/20/2013 at 12:37 |
|
I autocrossed a '94 GT myself. While it was fun, it wasn't terribly controllable in the wet. Once the rear started letting go, it just went and that was it. There was no happy middle. It was either stepping all the way out or back in.
Watching the Mustangs in Grand Am has been sort of painful. They're all middle pack or so. Hopefully, they've sorted out the suspension so they can be properly competitive with the Porsches and BMWs. The LRA did have room to improve through better control arm angles and consistent geometry through travel, but I'm sure the IRS is just to shut up the haters, although I've heard that this one is actually lighter than a comparable LRA overall, and cheaper to produce. If that's true, it will be an interesting advancement.
|
William Byrd
> Xander, Proud of BOXER
08/20/2013 at 12:37 |
|
I autocrossed on both (unfortunately). Solid axle isn't nearly as bad as most people think.
|
Xander, Proud of BOXER
> William Byrd
08/20/2013 at 12:38 |
|
It's not, it's very light and can be made to have good dynamics but it too has its shortcomings.
|
William Byrd
> Paul, Man of Mustangs
08/20/2013 at 12:40 |
|
You are probably right. There has been a running "But it has a LRA, how archaic. Wait... it's as fast as an M3 ? Oh...well still, it's old technology" in most magazines, forums, blogs, etc. This should ideally shut them up.
Iwishicoulddrive
> William Byrd
08/20/2013 at 15:57 |
|
I know its pedantic but that motor trend article said the difference in power to weight ratio was 0.2 and then told us the weight to power ratio.
|
William Byrd
> Iwishicoulddrive
08/20/2013 at 16:01 |
|
I was just looking at track times, figure 8, braking, etc. Pretty impressive considering the price (and I want a new M3).
KillerRaccoon - Group J's Sébastien Loeb
> William Byrd
08/20/2013 at 21:01 |
|
Of course it could do well on autocross. You're missing his point that its shortcoming is on roughish surfaces, which a parking lot isn't. On a backroad they just fall a little short.
/fan
|
William Byrd
> KillerRaccoon - Group J's Sébastien Loeb
08/21/2013 at 08:30 |
|
You missed the "both" reference. I've autocrossed on some amazingly awful and bumpy surfaces. And still won.
I'm not disagreeing that IRS is better than LRA, it was just a go-to critical point that most mags/blogs/etc. pointed to as to why the previous Mustangs were inferior to other cars. Track times don't really agree with that.