Changes I'd Make To The 2011 GT

As good as the new 2011 5-liter GT Mustang is what changes would you
like to see in future versions?
I'll start.
Weight: (Disclaimer -- It could weigh 3,200 pounds and I'd like to see
3,000; 3,000 and I'd like to see it under 3,000, etc.) But the
current 3,600 is too chunky. Pony cars, IMO, should never exceed
3,500... ideally less than 3,200. Please Ford, in the coming years
look for ways to cut the poundage.
Optional rear seat delete. Some of us are never going to use the rear
seats. A flat floor in the back would be nice.
Optional sport seats. I'm not talking about leather material or power
adjustable. I'm talking about something that offers some nice lumbar
support and side bolstering. Here's an idea -- make a deal with
Recaro, like you did this year with Brembo for optional brakes.
Optional functional ram-air hood: A Boss '9 style would be boss.
Steering wheel. You [finally] upped the sporting image of the base V6
model. Did you really then have to equip it with that cheap looking
steering wheel, AND make that same cheap-looking, family-sedan style
steering wheel standard in the base GT? Next time, make one, the
upgraded GT interior steering wheel standard in ALL Mustangs!
More interesting exterior color palette. Not that any of them are
terrible, but there's nothing that catches your eye, IMO, except for
the grabber blue. How 'bout a green, orange or a yellow?
Rear-end styling. The '05-'10 rear end had the right idea but didn't
quite hit the mark. For one, the material used for the tail light
lenses looked a little cheap. The '11's look slightly better, and the
sequential blinkers are a very nice touch, but the rear end
proportions seem off. The rear quarter panels over the tires, and the
rear bumper, are a little thick.
Anyone agree with me?
Would you suggest other changes? Post 'em.
Patrick
Reply to
NoOp
It is going to be difficult to achieve that without making the car unsellable to most people spending enough to buy the car. It won't make it all that much cheaper from a manufacturing POV either.
Why? It's not difficult to remove a rear seat if you really want it removed.
It would be nice to get better seats.
Why? it's a feature that didn't do much in the era of 4bbl carbs and will do even less today.
otay...
My only real complaint. No dark green metallic. Not many metallic choices period. For some reason dark green is now reserved for the bullitt models... blah.
discussed that in earlier thread... 6 of one, half a dozen of the other IMO. I am not fan of the giant bumper covers but that's the thing these days. So many cars have them. Not really much getting around it.
they've fixed most of my complaints with the 2011 model. I still think they should have an IRS suspension, at least as an option. But there's probably expensive government compliance regs in the way.
Reply to
Brent
It is going to be difficult to achieve that without making the car unsellable to most people spending enough to buy the car. It won't make it all that much cheaper from a manufacturing POV either.
Why? It's not difficult to remove a rear seat if you really want it removed.
It would be nice to get better seats.
Why? it's a feature that didn't do much in the era of 4bbl carbs and will do even less today.
otay...
My only real complaint. No dark green metallic. Not many metallic choices period. For some reason dark green is now reserved for the bullitt models... blah.
discussed that in earlier thread... 6 of one, half a dozen of the other IMO. I am not fan of the giant bumper covers but that's the thing these days. So many cars have them. Not really much getting around it.
they've fixed most of my complaints with the 2011 model. I still think they should have an IRS suspension, at least as an option. But there's probably expensive government compliance regs in the way.
Reply to
Brent
I don't really see the point of a stripped street car, my 86 GT only had power steering & brakes and I NEVER want to go back to that. Everything I wanted I added or removed myself. Now it looks like the 2011 GT in stock form might out perform my 2000 that I poured too much cash into.
Maybe some good shocks, tubular suspension parts, the upgraded seats would work too but that stuff adds to the bean counters bottom line.
Reply to
Gill
I don't really see the point of a stripped street car, my 86 GT only had power steering & brakes and I NEVER want to go back to that. Everything I wanted I added or removed myself. Now it looks like the 2011 GT in stock form might out perform my 2000 that I poured too much cash into.
Maybe some good shocks, tubular suspension parts, the upgraded seats would work too but that stuff adds
Reply to
Gill
It is going to be difficult to achieve that without making the car unsellable to most people spending enough to buy the car. It won't make it all that much cheaper from a manufacturing POV either.
Why? It's not difficult to remove a rear seat if you really want it removed.
It would be nice to get better seats.
Why? it's a feature that didn't do much in the era of 4bbl carbs and will do even less today.
otay...
My only real complaint. No dark green metallic. Not many metallic choices period. For some reason dark green is now reserved for the bullitt models... blah.
discussed that in earlier thread... 6 of one, half a dozen of the other IMO. I am not fan of the giant bumper covers but that's the thing these days. So many cars have them. Not really much getting around it.
they've fixed most of my complaints with the 2011 model. I still think they should have an IRS suspension, at least as an option. But there's probably expensive government compliance regs in the way.
Reply to
Brent
Wow.... deleting the wheels and tires would save an easy 200~300 pounds... all of it unsprung weight, no less... That nasty assed gas tank... when it is full, it must be a couple of hundred pounds...
I'll bet that they could get the weight of the car down to almost 2000 pounds by using some exotic materials and construction techniques.... And that would give some of you guys the opportunity to bitch about the price....
Mustang... it is what it is.... I like mine and it's only a V6.... I push the button and the top goes down... Nice for some days.... I push the button and the top goes up.... Nice for some days... It takes my wife from here to there.... and it brings her back....
What would I like to see in future generations? Affordable would be nice...
We have SuperDuty trucks on our lot with stickers pushing $80,000 - Mustangs close to $50K....
If your Mustang is too chunky, you could say fuck that and buy a Veyron...
Just thinking out loud, ya know...
Reply to
Jim Warman
I believe if there's a will there's a way.
So you don't have to pay for the seating and the floor is nicely/ factory finished without it.
Factory shifters have begun to get better, but why seating remains below par is a mystery.
1) Ram air can increase HP.
2) These are retro cars with swagger. Hood scoops are part of the image so IMO they should be offered.
I looked at a standard GT steering wheel today. It's not nearly as bad looking as I remembered. In fact it's the same as the upgraded wheel except for the lack of aluminum trim.
I know! I wanted a dark green when I ordered my LX in '87. And when I ordered my '11 GT. I love that color.
Looking at Mustangs again today, I found it's more the body line/rear quarter panel behind the rear tire that needs correction. But maybe it'll grow on me.
As you know the Challenger and Camaro both have IRS and neither handle as well as the Mustang. Plus IRS generally adds weight, something the Mustang doesn't need.
Patrick
Reply to
NoOp
It all amazes me when you start striping a car down at how much poundage you find.
Hey, how about a car that's 7/8s the size of the current car? (Oh yeah, now that most Americans are either overweight, obese or massively obese a smaller car would likely hurt sales.)
The car needs to continually get better.
Well we all wanted a 6-speed, bigger/better brakes, more HP, etc. It all comes at a cost.
There's new 2011 GT sitting on a local deal lot that has a sticker just over $30K.
The Vette has been able to cut weight over the years. There's no reason the Mustang can't.
Patrick
Reply to
NoOp
All you're going to be able to remove are creature comforts and trim. Everything else is going to have to stay for performance or regulation. The next option is lighter materials. This will cause the price to sky rocket. Why does a Ford GT or Ferrari cost so much? Low volume parts made of expensive materials. If Ford had wanted to it could have delivered a GT like car for upper range corvette pricing. Much the same with a light weight mustang in this day and age. Ford can make it, but it's gonna cost.
You're not going to have a flat floor unless they add some sort of structure in there, then carpet it, so there goes your weight savings.
Cost.
By what? 0.0002?
I just see something to suck up/in crap from the road and air and something else to clean along with a touchy mechanism exposed to all sorts of environmental damage.
I still wonder if a dealer can be offered enough cash if a special color can still be done.
Chicago roads have frost heaves... and heat heaves. and pot holes. and places where heavy trucks have rutted or caused the pavement to 'flow'. I've been driving live axle cars since the 80s and while ford has made it handle, fixing one part of the complaint, it's still likely to do the things live axles do on bad pavement.
Reply to
Brent
There you go!
Like I said earlier, build a smaller Mustang -- 7/8s the current size. Trim it up like Chevy did with the Vette.
Okay then just trim it out a little and add something to keep some cargo in place/from sliding around. The point is there are some of us who never use the Mustang's rear seats, so build us something like a '65 Shelby.
BS. There are some decent factory-built seats out there, why aren't some in the Mustang?
Do your research. Ram-air makes HP.
Ram air below the bumper I agree is nothing much more that a street vacuum. But top side it can functional.
Sadly, I doubt it.
I know the new steering minimizes the tires following ruts. So maybe the rear axle with the stouter structure is better over the bumps.
Patrick
Reply to
NoOp
And you get an unsellable car. All that stuff is pretty cheap. You aren't going to cut more 5, maybe 10% off the final price. Meanwhile you have a car so stripped that looks like something out the 1960s. A base car with the top engine option. It's not going to sell at the price it has to be at to turn a profit.
Last time Ford did that you got mustang ii Now to see what 7/8ths of a mustang is:
7/8* 1970 Focus 2011 1965 1971 1974 1979 2011 Pinto 2 door WB 107.1 108.0 109.0 96.2 100.4 93.7 94 103 OL 188.1 181.6 189.5 175.0 179.1 164.6 163 174.9 OW 73.9 68.2 71.3 70.2 69.1 64.66 69.4 66.9
What you want is a V8 pinto or focus.
And how is the tooling cost and crash test costs for that going to be paid for? The cheapest way to that is for the few who want it, to remove the seat and put in some black automotive carpet of their choosing.
Factory built seats in what? It will come down to cost.
I know. very very very little.
A great way to ingest snow. It's just going to be a mechanism that is going to require routine care so it stays working in much of the country.
The rigidity, the firm solid connection between both rear wheels is the problem in the pavement conditions I mentioned. Now that my current mustang is lowered and I've put on aftermarket rear LCAs the heaves hurt me more but they do not seem to be as disturbing to control. Hopefully the 2011's suspension minimizes it as much as possible, but simple engineering tells me it won't go away.
Reply to
Brent
Brent wrote in news:i2g4pm$5lv$1 @news.eternal-september.org:
Then make it smaller, that'll cut weight.
Reply to
Rich
I say perfect!
Don't needs: P/W, P/L, P/M, P/S, C/C, 6-speaker stereo, fuzzy interior carpeting, under-hood insulation and engine cover. And, if I could, stability control and air bags would go.
Bummer.
=A0
=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 7/8* =A0 =A01970 =A0 =A0Focus
=A02011 =A0 =A0Pinto =A0 2 door
=A0 =A094 =A0 =A0 =A0103
163 =A0 =A0 174.9
=A064.66 =A0 69.4 =A0 =A066.9
The current styling of the current car scaled down an 1/8, to 7/8s, will make it look like, or a a combination of, the Mustang II, a V8 Pinto or Focus? Really? So how does Revell make model cars 1/24 the original size and it still retain the original design?
C'mon, work with me. I'm talking a little shorter wheel base, a little narrower, a little shorter, and a little lower, but with all the current design ques.
Tooling cost for a piece of matting? Sure there would be some, but it couldn't be much.
Simply removing a rear seat requires new crash testing? Geeze, I would hope not.
Or they could nix the rear seat and install a piece of black matting.
For one: The seats in the hemi Magnum I rented a few years back were so comfortable I drove non-stop from Michigan to Florida and when I arrived at my destination felt so good/refreshed I could have jumped back in a drove back half way. But any Mustang seats I've even been for a long drive have made me feel like I lost badly in an MMA match. So I contend _better engineered_ seats are the answer.
And races are won by .001s.
=A0
I'm only asking for it to be an option. Image sells these cars and a ram-air hood boosts image.
If I'm hitting bumps I'd rather have a solid platform than a floppy flier.
I don't know. I lived in Michigan for years and the solid axles cars I drove weren't that uncomfortable. I guess we're getting spoiled.
Patrick
Reply to
NoOp
It's not all that big. Once you get it down to 7/8th's, focus size, the weight hasn't even dropped below 3000.
Reply to
Brent
The number of people who'd buy that to save peanuts would be close to zero.
Where did I bring up styling? I didn't. I'm talking size. Size wise you want a mustang ii or pinto or focus.
And that's the size of a mustang ii, actually somewhat smaller. See data above.
You want more than that above. To build the platform you're talking some good sized molds. at least 150K.
I'm fairly sure it does because it changes what could impact the passengers.
I doubt the magnum was using any kind of supportive seat... I'd guess it would be like an old full size.
99.9% of mustang buyers are not buying race cars.
I don't know if you just don't understand or are doing that on purpose. The problem is force applied to one rear wheel is transfered to the other.
It's more like the rear end starting to skate in heavy fast moving traffic upon hitting a frost heave.
Reply to
Brent
Take your pick among cues, queues and ques.
Here's an original Hertz Mustang and a 2008, side-by-side. Gross?
formatting link
Look into the "8/10 Cord", a serious proposal by one of the magazines back in history (1960s? 70s? I forget).
I've been saying all along, make the S197 and its declensions at 8/10 scale for a really lively sports car. I'm afraid the current versions are more in the 55-60 Thunderbird, "personal car" vein. Not to say I don't /like/ the S197s (I have two), but the scaled-down versions would so much more match my true loves and be much easier to work into sporting shape: the 1960s and 70s MGs, TRs, Austin Healeys, Datsun 2000s and 240Zs, and perhaps even (it's a stretch) the best sports car I ever owned, the 1966 Lotus Elan S2.
Someone ought to put us in charge ...
Reply to
Frank ess
So basically you want the 'mustang I' show car of the early 1960s.
formatting link
That said, no production mustang has never had the dimensions of the cars you mention and the only one that came close is the much disliked mustang ii. I contend that such a car wouldn't be a mustang for 9/10s or at least 8/10s of the mustang buyers under normal circumstances. Maybe if you strangled fuel supplies in some way you could get a 1974 repeat in sales volume.
So you'll build monster miatas and call them mustangs?
Reply to
Brent
Brent wrote in news:i2qtmi$s87$1 @news.eternal-september.org:
Then I'd do a radical re-design of the fundamentals of the body since that is where the weight is. My Mach-1 has two metal rails "tacked on"the underside to stiffen it. There has to be a better way. Also, an all-aluminum engine would help, though with the Chinese buying up every scrap of base metal on the planet, the cost would be high.
Reply to
Rich
I don't know about that. Enough people signed up to buy the stripped- down 90's R models. And plenty liked the less-optioned LX V8 models. And there's a market for motorcycles without all the fairings -- "naked biked".
Your chart isn't easy to read. So here it is again:
'65 Mustang W/B = 108 OL = 181.6 O/W = 68.2
'79 Mustang W/B = 100.4 O/L = 179.1 O/W = 69.1
'11 Mustang W/B = 107.1 O/L = 188.1 O/W = 73.9
Or you could say a car closer in dimensions to the Fox cars -- 7" reduction in wheelbase, 9" in length, 5" in width from the current car. Sure a cut like this would result in some weight loss.
I wouldn't want anything extravagant. Something to cover the metal floor pan with a few ribs to help prevent things from sliding around too much.
The point is better seats can be engineered and done without any added cost. In other words, just make a well designed seats from the get- go.
Yet most factory cars have their engines breathing from somewhere other than in the hot engine compartment (behind the grill, inside the front fender, etc.)
Question) What was one of the primary reasons the Mustang retained it's straight axle? Answer) Drag racers prefer a straight axle. Conclusion) The percentage seems to be a little bit larger than . 1%.
Two things.
Buying a Mustang/sporty car means you're willing to sacrifice some ride quality.
Modifying the suspension generally means you have to sacrifice a little more.
Granted an IRS would help, but you're still not going to get a family sedan ride. That rougher ride comes with the [sporty-car] territory.
Patrick
Reply to
NoOp

Site Timeline Threads

  • Got this from here: Specialist-Gresham, OR Location : Gresham OR US 97030 Job...
  • next in

    Ford Mustang

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.