2015 Mustang to gain 300lbs.!?!

[GTSpartan]

Whats wrong with their hybrids? And where is the hybrid mustang?

They got big time caught inflating their hybrid mileage last week, resulting in some not insignificant MPG readjustments and payments to owners. Not the first time this has happened. Of course, their explanation is much more benign.

http://blogs.cars.com/kickingtires/2014/06/fords-revised-mileage-figures-match-what-weve-observed-mostly.html

 

[tbi0904]

See, I was gonna wait until the 2015 Mustang actually comes out and is, and I know this is crazy talk, put through it's paces and strapped to a scale and dyno before making any judgements on it. I was also gonna do the same with a 2016 Camaro but again, that's crazy talk. They should rename this place svtspeculation&benchracing****yofactsandrealworldtests.com.

 

[black92]

You should check your facts before you post. Only thing Ford has said about the Boss is that it was the starting point for the new GT.

Did you even read the link I posted?

 

[ON D BIT]

They got big time caught inflating their hybrid mileage last week, resulting in some not insignificant MPG readjustments and payments to owners. Not the first time this has happened. Of course, their explanation is much more benign.

http://blogs.cars.com/kickingtires/2014/06/fords-revised-mileage-figures-match-what-weve-observed-mostly.html

I was under the impression the epa tested all cars not just regulating testing procedures/environments. Mpg is so dependent on driving as Ford's 1000 mile tank proved in non world driving experiment.

 

[steeltoe]

I was under the impression the epa tested all cars not just regulating testing procedures/environments. Mpg is so dependent on driving as Ford's 1000 mile tank proved in non world driving experiment.

MPGs are set on a rolling ground force plane or chassis dyno and the EPA does the testing IIRC.

 

[GTSpartan]

I was under the impression the epa tested all cars not just regulating testing procedures/environments. Mpg is so dependent on driving as Ford's 1000 mile tank proved in non world driving experiment.

MPGs are set on a rolling ground force plane or chassis dyno and the EPA does the testing IIRC.

OEM's do testing also. Ford simply got greedy and got caught. Their spin says otherwise, and the cars are already sold. It's happened to them multiple times now, but they aren't the only ones. Being up to 7mpg off is ridiculous though, especially when you brag about best in class mpg's.

Not sure how this relates to the '15 stang though????? Maybe they are are having delays with the final certifications because of this, and that explains the specification delays lol

 

[ON D BIT]

As I see now. Epa says how and the manufacturer runs the testing and the has input on the final numbers. Though with the cars.com article 41.8 in traffic at 25mph I would suspect 1 or 2 mpg increase in normal 40-60mph driving.

I dont know that there are delays, remember most new cars come out in late Sept Oct. What Ford has changed is the past couple mustangs being at dealers in Feb so it makes the wait for the 15 and oct that much longer. I have heard a about a delay with the 15 150 because alcoa does not have enough aluminum. To be perfectly honest Im looking forward to this debut over the mustang. I hope Ford does not exaggerate this mph trying to reach 30 mixed driving.

 

[GTSpartan]

As I see now. Epa says how and the manufacturer runs the testing and the has input on the final numbers. Though with the cars.com article 41.8 in traffic at 25mph I would suspect 1 or 2 mpg increase in normal 40-60mph driving.

I dont know that there are delays, remember most new cars come out in late Sept Oct. What Ford has changed is the past couple mustangs being at dealers in Feb so it makes the wait for the 15 and oct that much longer. I have heard a about a delay with the 15 150 because alcoa does not have enough aluminum. To be perfectly honest Im looking forward to this debut over the mustang. I hope Ford does not exaggerate this mph trying to reach 30 mixed driving.

I agree. They are on the radar now. After all this, the spotlight is on them, and Ford is likely taking a very close look at their certification process. It wouldn't surprise me to see them dial back other current models (i.e. EB 3.5).

 

[blackvette101]

I have a 99 Cobra (seriously).

Next argument.

I don't think a lot of younger guys are going to get that comment.

 

[61mmstang94]

Ouch!

Any other OEM and it would be splattered all over this site.

Or how the f150 ecoboost fell short of expectations and bragging done by ford. It's a good engine but I think it's fair to say ford hyped it a little more than what it really is.

 

[Ninjak]

I still find it funny to argue about a car NOBODY on this board has driven or seen the true data on. Also funny how everyone knows what a Camaro on a platform that it has not been made on EVER will know the exact weight and specs.

the last joke is how these same people have not even taking what they currently drive around a track or down the strip to care what it even weighs to begin with. When its release it will be released. Then you can bench race until your hearts content. The people who actually do race and drive will adjust, mod and move on.

 

[ON D BIT]

Everyone knows the new mustang is 400lbs lighter, the Camaro will be too.

 

[StuckInNY]

Brian Cotter said its faster than the LS time of 139.5 at laguna seca. Link is in this thread.

Unfortunately, they were still under the impression that the Mustang would come in at 200 pounds less than the current one. And like the owner of the '99 Cobra hinted at, we will definitely need to wait for the testing to prove it.

 

[ON D BIT]

Unfortunately, they were still under the impression that the Mustang would come in at 200 pounds less than the current one. And like the owner of the '99 Cobra hinted at, we will definitely need to wait for the testing to prove it.

They meaning Ford never had the impression the new mustang was going to be lighter. Brian Cotter was referring to actual Ford test results. Now it is possible he was not referring to the 1.39.5 time run by an independent race driver but referring to Ford's individual testing of the boss l/s which we don't have access to these times.

 

[PowerUp]

They meaning Ford never had the impression the new mustang was going to be lighter.

You can rewrite history, but that doesn't make it so. Next, you'll tell us Lincoln wasn't shot, he died of lead poisoning.

Brian Cotter was referring to actual Ford test results. Now it is possible he was not referring to the 1.39.5 time run by an independent race driver but referring to Ford's individual testing of the boss l/s which we don't have access to these times.

I suppose Randy Pobst ran the '15 PP...and Dagwood Bumstead ran the BOSS, head-to-head... Funny, when GM ran THEIR tests, those were discounted as 'P.R.'

 

[ON D BIT]

You can rewrite history, but that doesn't make it so. Next, you'll tell us Lincoln wasn't shot, he died of lead poisoning.

When did Ford ever say this mustang was going to be lighter? :bash:

And no it was not Pobst, but most of the manufacturer test drivers/engineers are former race car drivers unlike the media writers. They are damn good, such as Walter Rohrl of Porsche. :beer:

 

[PowerUp]

When did Ford ever say this mustang was going to be lighter?

Pericak was, in the beginning and as interviewed, aggressively attacking weight...and he was meeting all his targets. Then, things changed...but the talking points then shifted to "performance targets". The long-talked-about "2-300 lb" was NEVER corrected...until, during the last 6 months, when "we're NOT talking about weight..." And NOW we know why! A few words of "caution" with regard to weight would have quelled this current firestorm...meaning Ford only has FORD to blame for the wildfire. BAD P.R.

You see, Pericak is an engineer with an engineer's mindset, but he also has to exist in the hyperactive world of MARKETING. The other guy spouting times 'n things is from that "other world". Pericak said "BOSS", Mr. Hype sez "BOSS LS" (the Mustang named after a GM engine) and YOU assume he means "1:39-and-change".

Let's now wait (weight?) for the REAL numbers, head-to-head. The rest is guessing...and there's FAR to much of that, proven wrong, about this car even before it hits the street/road/track...

Rorhl's greatest feats were behind the wheel of various Audis, long before Porsche was absorbed totally by VW.

 

[ON D BIT]

Did they ever say what those targets were? I never saw one quote or print from Ford stating loss of weight. Even the source here never said weight loss, while referring to the so called smaller mustang by cm not inches. This two years ago. Point the evidence I have seen let's me believe Ford thought the new mustang was going to be lighter.

Just search google "Pericak and mustang losing weight". I did not find one quote from before 12/13 and not one quote where he stated the mustang was losing weight. If you have this source please refer me to it.

May of 12, the speculation was the 15 Mustang GT was going to lose weight. The discussion purchase the 13 GT500 or wait for the new light weight Mustang? Yet one member was saying the 15 Mustang was not losing weight. Again this was 2 years ago. Did he know what Ford knew or was it just a lucky guess?
http://www.svtperformance.com/forum...nge-anyone-s-plans-on-buying-a-13-or-14-GT500

Hell he said it here, post #39. quote from 1-20-12, mustang will get heavier. Ford new at this time the mustang was going to be heavier.

 

[PowerUp]

Did they ever say what those targets were? I never saw one quote or print from Ford stating loss of weight. Even the source here never said weight loss, while referring to the so called smaller mustang by cm not inches. This two years ago. Point the evidence I have seen let's me believe Ford thought the new mustang was going to be lighter.

Just search google "Pericak and mustang losing weight". I did not find one quote from before 12/13 and not one quote where he stated the mustang was losing weight. If you have this source please refer me to it.

May of 12, the speculation was the 15 Mustang GT was going to lose weight. The discussion purchase the 13 GT500 or wait for the new light weight Mustang? Yet one member was saying the 15 Mustang was not losing weight. Again this was 2 years ago. Did he know what Ford knew or was it just a lucky guess?
http://www.svtperformance.com/forum...nge-anyone-s-plans-on-buying-a-13-or-14-GT500

Hell he said it here, post #39. quote from 1-20-12, mustang will get heavier. Ford new at this time the mustang was going to be heavier.

GLAD YOU ASKED!

4:36...and PAY ATTENTION!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eF924X3c4Tw

Remember what I said about Dave NOT being a Marketing type? Apparently, there, I was wrong...

Perhaps he and Al O. shop for their slide rules at the same off-brand store... Dave's is lighter, but Al's is quicker...

And yet, @ 6:22, he agrees he has a "no bull shit job". REALLY?!

 

[ON D BIT]

That vid says 3-13, if that was taped in march of 13 he should have known the weight of the car. Meaning the basics were done. How does one know the car is not losing weight/even gaining weight prior to this vid and he not know?

Pericak actually never did say it was going to be lighter, he stated that he thinks 200lbs can be taken from the car. I can see how people might confuse the two.