Is this really a Mustang?

"Spanfeller is a twat" (theaspiringengineer)
01/08/2018 at 23:13 • Filed to: None

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

It sort of looks like a Fox body but... it also doesn’t look like a fox body...

wikipedia claims that Mexico got a special Mustang design with the Capri bumpers

DISCUSSION (28)

interstate366, now In The Industry > Spanfeller is a twat
01/08/2018 at 23:19

Yes, but it looks like it’s as much Capri as it is Mustang.

Berang > Spanfeller is a twat
01/08/2018 at 23:19

I’m not sure it’s ugly enough to be a fox body.

If only EssExTee could be so grossly incandescent > Spanfeller is a twat
01/08/2018 at 23:21

Kinja'd!!!

That’s totally the front end of a Fox body Mercury Capri, but I think those only came as a hatchback. That one you posted could be a custom job, or perhaps some weird Mexican market special edition. That interior and the chrome exterior trim makes it looks like it’s supposed to be more upscale than a normal Mustang.

Spanfeller is a twat > Berang
01/08/2018 at 23:23

I really like it actually, it strikes me as how the fox body should´ve looked in the first place. But at 15,600 dollars I´m not sure it´s worth what it sold for!

Spanfeller is a twat > interstate366, now In The Industry
01/08/2018 at 23:24

oh, but this one is actually pretty!

Spanfeller is a twat > If only EssExTee could be so grossly incandescent
01/08/2018 at 23:25

It´s really, really good looking in my perspective!

Wagon Guy drives a Boostang > Spanfeller is a twat
01/08/2018 at 23:28

yeah, looks like a fox mustang with the capri nose. Lot of money for a mediocre car.

interstate366, now In The Industry > Spanfeller is a twat
01/08/2018 at 23:31

It is very interesting. There’s a Fox Capri near me with those exact wheels.

Boxer_4 > If only EssExTee could be so grossly incandescent
01/08/2018 at 23:32

Apparently, the Mexican market car from ‘81-’84 used a few Capri parts .

Spanfeller is a twat > Wagon Guy drives a Boostang
01/08/2018 at 23:33

Indeed, crack pipe all the way!

But its funny because they ask for that much money even for the SN95s... which I find amusing. there´s another crapi nosed fox body listed in the website and it costs 5,000 dollars more!

Since Mustangs aren´t as common here, they ask for way more money for them! Specially the ones from the sixties, those I think need to be imported from the US....

Spanfeller is a twat > interstate366, now In The Industry
01/08/2018 at 23:34

thats an interesting coincidence.

I don´t know why I like the SN95s and the fox bodies so much... it might be RCR making me addicted to regular cars...

interstate366, now In The Industry > Spanfeller is a twat
01/08/2018 at 23:42

I have a friend with a Fox GT convertible. It’s pretty cool, but in a straight line it’s no faster than my Prelude. You have to wake up those engines to get them to move.

Spanfeller is a twat > interstate366, now In The Industry
01/08/2018 at 23:46

Yeah, its a cool car but it needs a lot of love.

I used to discard American cars because for some reason you like putting solid rear axles on sport cars, but regardless of that I can appreciate it now.. if I ever have enough space, time, and money for a classic car I´d probably try to get one of those Capri faced mustangs and a 300zx. again, by the time I have enough money to buy them they´ll probably be classic cars.

Can´t forget about an e39 m5 too!

415s30 W123TSXWaggoIIIIIIo ( •_•))°) > Spanfeller is a twat
01/09/2018 at 01:58

Yeah that’s just a shit Mustang you can find street parked or on a lawn across the USA.

interstate366, now In The Industry > Spanfeller is a twat
01/09/2018 at 07:17

Yeah, definitely. Solid rear axles negate the handling advantages of RWD. Most Foxes and SN95s will get beaten up on by a 90s Honda in the twisties. 300ZXs and M5s are cool, but maintenance nightmares. I’m looking at 3rd generation Supras.

RT > Spanfeller is a twat
01/09/2018 at 07:53

I still get weirded out every time someone mentions the Mercury Capri though.

Kinja'd!!!

This is what I think of when someone says Capri.

CobraJoe > interstate366, now In The Industry
01/09/2018 at 09:20

Solid rear axles negate the handling advantages of RWD

You can make a solid axle handle well. Ford proved that themselves with a Mustang GT that could keep up with an M3 right before they switched over to IRS.

The problem is the Foxbody has a suspension that tends to bind in corners when the body leans. There are several solutions available to help solve this problem, including replacing several parts with a “3 link” kit that will absolutely remove the possibility of binding and give you full control over how the axle moves through its travel.

But personally, I rather enjoy the tail happy nature of the foxbody. Sure, it can take you by surprise sometimes, but on all season tires you’re never going that fast when you lose traction.

Spanfeller is a twat > CobraJoe
01/09/2018 at 10:40

don´t solid axles cause snap oversteer?

I mean... I understand why solid axles were used (cheaper and stronger than other setups) but I think that Ford should´ve used independent rears from the fox bodies onwards because solid axles are just downright archaic in many ways, sure, you can make a solid axle handle, but its harder than making an independent rear handle.

like, running a marathon with boots, sure... its possible, but, is it ideal?

CobraJoe > Spanfeller is a twat
01/09/2018 at 11:01

It’s the “Triangulated 4 link” suspension that caused the snap oversteer (and it’s completely controllable if you’re quick with the steering wheel. Granted, I did spin a bit too much when I hit a patch of water or ice or something unexpected a couple of times, but I’m sure that can happen in any relatively light RWD car).

There are really only a few real disadvantages of the solid axle. There is no camber adjustment or camber curve, there is more unsprung weight, and you can lose traction easier over bumps.

Granted, those disadvantages are noticeable in a sports car, but there are advantages as well. Solid axles are cheaper, simpler, stronger, potentially more efficient (no additional CV joints, though they do not add much friction to the system), and a solid axle keeps the tires at exactly parallel and exactly the same distance apart throughout the movement of the rear suspension (which is ideal for traction, especially in a drag racing scenario).

The Mustang was only recently turned into a sports car. Before that, it was a pony car. Pony cars are pretty much defined as being affordable small but usable cars with as much power as the expensive sports cars. Cheapness and simple strength mattered more than pure performance.

interstate366, now In The Industry > Spanfeller is a twat
01/09/2018 at 11:23

There have been a few pre-S550 IRS Mustangs, but they’re few and far between. Drag racing is by far the most common motorsport a Mustang participates in, and SRA is fine for that.

Spanfeller is a twat > CobraJoe
01/09/2018 at 11:42

You sir are absolutely right about solid axles....let me just say that.

Yeah... I get the jist of it... I understand their appeal and their application. But I can’t see a real application for solid axles outside off roaders and cargo trucks because of the considerably dangerous downsides you speak of. I wouldn’t want an everyday driver handling a car with as much power as a mustang and as little relative control over the back half of the car. I am glad for once that they changed it and well... The mustang isn’t a pony car anymore.. its expensive and luxurious and tremendously quick and controlable.

Spanfeller is a twat > interstate366, now In The Industry
01/09/2018 at 12:10

Factory set up irs? I’m thinking maybe a modded car... But not factory or stock

interstate366, now In The Industry > Spanfeller is a twat
01/09/2018 at 12:12

Yeah. The 03-04 Cobra was one of them.

CobraJoe > Spanfeller is a twat
01/09/2018 at 12:47

I wouldn’t want an everyday driver handling a car with as much power as a mustang and as little relative control over the back half of the car.

Let me just say, you are severely overestimating the disadvantages of a solid axle. I’ve owned several solid axle vehicles, most of them with that triangulated 4 link that causes the handling problems. It’s not dangerous. In normal driving, you can feel a little more “jiggle” in the rear end over bumps, and that’s it. In spirited driving, bumps can unsettle the rear, but it still takes some massive bumps 9/10ths to cause the rear to come loose.

That “snap oversteer” that the Foxbody is famous for doesn’t happen out of the blue, you have to be driving like an idiot, and you can still correct the slide if you react quick enough. What’s more, I believe that the light weight and short wheelbase of the Mustang is what made it so “snappy”. The Foxbody Thunderbird I owned for a long time never surprised me with oversteer and was a lot more forgiving; while the CVPI with a very similar “triangulated 4 link” suspended solid axle rotated so slowly that it was downright relaxing to drift (though it did require slick roads to get the rear end loose).

I can understand the preference for the planted and unshakable feel of a performance IRS, but please don’t assume that a solid axle is dangerous.

I am glad for once that they changed it and well... The mustang isn’t a pony car anymore.. its expensive and luxurious and tremendously quick and controlable.

I completely disagree, and I’m annoyed with what the Mustang has become. The Foxbody was a simple, fun, and extremely usable little car, and the GT could be had for $27k in today’s money. The new Mustang is no longer simple or inexpensive or usable and it has gotten far to serious in chasing performance stats. Basically, you have to look at the Focus ST to get what the Foxbody used to be, and it’s a FWD turbo hatch instead of an RWD car with a responsive NA V8.

Spanfeller is a twat > CobraJoe
01/09/2018 at 16:32

I think SRAs are dangerous when used by the (underprepared) wrong drivers. I see their use for cargo and offroad vehicles with trained drivers.

Or making driver’s ed better...

And like, I feel that if you want a ver efficient car that is lighter and can carry a large load, sure... Use SRAs... But in my perspective they fall under the “low rolling resistance tyres” category; you use them as a compromise, I feel that a car that can accelerate from 0-60 in under 5 seconds and can hold 150mph or more shouldn’t be compromised in its handling capabilities.

I think the mustang had to evolve into another cost bracket; I like the focus ST as the spiritual replacement of the fox bodies but I too miss affordable rwd vehicles.

But we’re disagreeing over opinions... I feel like in factual nature we stand in the same position, on the concern with thr capabilities of each system...

I understand how you feel, I really do and I also respect it.

CobraJoe > Spanfeller is a twat
01/09/2018 at 17:24

I think SRAs are dangerous when used by the (underprepared) wrong drivers. I see their use for cargo and offroad vehicles with trained drivers.

Again, you are severely overestimating the disadvantages of a solid rear axle.

Solid rear axles are not dangerous. Get that thought out of your head. (They were the most common rear suspension for American cars for over 50 years and are still used exclusively on pickups, which are becoming more and more car like.)

It’s true that they are not ideal for corner carving, but that does not mean they are unsafe in a corner. There is practically no difference in technique for driving a RWD IRS car vs a RWD SRA car at the limit - if you oversteer, let off the gas and turn into the slide.

The Foxbody’s eagerness to oversteer is a problem with the Foxbody, not endemic to the entire world of solid axle equipped cars.

Sorry for the rant, but I honestly think that most of the hate for solid axles is unfounded. (Too much repetition of “Archaic covered wagon axles” type comparisons in popular British car shows)

I have a feeling that pointless stats comparison between cars is part of the reason why the Mustang had to move up to the sports car arena. The whole “It has 5.0L displacement but less power than a 2.0L Honda!” argument for example. Bump up the power (and the cost) to be competitive with euro sports cars, and then people start complaining that the interior isn’t as nice. Make the interior nicer (and more expensive), and then people complain that it doesn’t handle as well as the Euro cars. Make it handle well, and people still complain that it still has pushrods or a solid axle or some other “old tech”.

Spanfeller is a twat > CobraJoe
01/09/2018 at 19:24

Perhaps I did overestimate the danger. But I just like being cautious with that sort of stuff, I daily drove a gmt900 3/4ton suburban for a few months and boy did I distrust the rear axle.

Focusing on the price of the mustang, well... marketing moves the world, and I can totally understand why it had to go upmarket; Because people who clearly shouldn’t be talking about cars shamed the v8 for not being as powerful as a boosted-to-death four banger import engine. It also had to move upmarket because the general public began to see a disinterest in two door cars, couldn’t see them as practical, so it went to working class hero to mutual-fund-funded toy because instead of making the range more varied they limited themselves to coupe and convertible.

You might want to blame the Germans, but I think it was actually Ford seeing the winds of change and realizing that the two door sedan was dead; the mustang had to be focused and given more luxurious touches, more sporty touches, and a more niche appeal, this way they could sell the mustang to someone unwilling to compromise... a client willing to shell out 35, or 40,000 dollars into a car, and give the rest of the car hating commuters a 2.0 cylinder focus or Taurus.

was this a mistake? Perhaps it was, but we can never know... had the mustang 5.0 stayed in the 18-23,000 range today it´d be competing with the GT86 rather than being relatively compared to a BMW or a mercedes and I think it´s good that it was given some breathing room to become a more advanced car.

it was killed by a Hipster from NYU that had an alternative lifestyle blog... and we cannot change anything about that.

and let me quote you here:

(They were the most common rear suspension for American cars for over 50 years and are still used exclusively on pickups, which are becoming more and more car like.)

Well, engineers aren´t as easily swayed as the rest of the population, the Mustang had to change to IRS primarily because of safety and performance and engineers decided it and beancounters approved it.

Hondabros shaming the mustang for being archaic and what Top Gear thought of it went on second thought.

and you said it yourself “were”; as technology advances and production methods become more advanced, more technological systems can be manufactured, if IRSs remained as expensive to make and design and tune as they were fifty or even ten years ago then the mustang would still use SRA because of how engineers need to contrast with beancounters.

and talking about pickups, the RAM 1500 has a five link system already wrestling with the solid axle... If engineers deem an IRS more useful for the next gen and beancounters approve it, it will change over. As long as that doesn’t happen they´ll stay on SRAs.

CobraJoe > Spanfeller is a twat
01/10/2018 at 12:10

Hey, if you were hustling a suburban around corners fast enough on a bumpy road to unsettle it’s live axle, I’d be impressed with your bravery. Oversteer is the last thing you have to worry about in an SUV that heavy and tall. (Seriously, your fear of a solid axle is completely unfounded).

Safety was not even a consideration (Solid axles are not dangerous! Don’t get me started on that again.). Performance was not a problem either.

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

- Randy Probst, in a Motor Trend article comparing a 2011 Mustang GT to a 2011 BMW M3, ultimately getting almost exactly the same lap times at Willow Springs.

So, the solid axle is not a safety issue, not a performance issue, and no one buys the mustang for it’s comfortable ride, so what’s left? Basically just what people think about it, and the solid axle has become a negative point in people’s perception. It must be noted, holding on to an “outdated” design does not automatically make a car worse, just look at the Porsche 911 or the LS engine, but the Mustang has chosen not to fight to keep it’s one piece of unique design.

One of the biggest things I learned in my MechE studies was that there is no “best”. Everything has pros and cons, and the pros can be less effective than expected and the cons can sometimes be engineered around. (Besides, different types of layouts have different types of driving experiences, and variety is the spice of something).

But I guess some of my grumpiness is some “old man” mode kicking in (even though I’m only 33). I’m annoyed that there is no current match for a Foxbody (which was the most fun car I have ever owned). (The GT-86 twins come the closest, and they’re not as practical and don’t have the torque to match the Foxbody). Maybe more annoying that that is the fact that the Mustang GT is still out of my price range, even though I’m getting paid a decent salary.

The new Mustang is absolutely an amazing vehicle, and I suppose it has always moved with the times (cheap speed, luxo, economy car, cheap speed again, retro, etc). So, while I don’t believe a Mustang needs to compete with the best offerings from Germany, it’s impressive that it can.