SVT being lighter than the mustang gt or being lighter than the current svt mustang? This is a big difference. I got one think it's only going to be the latter.
AAAAAAAAAAnd here we go (weight)
- Thread starter svt 500
- Start date
SVT being lighter than the mustang gt or being lighter than the current svt mustang? This is a big difference. I got one think it's only going to be the latter.
I understood it as being lighter than the GT but it could be the other way as you said. If it's lighter than the current GT500 then that is still good.
Ding Ding Ding!
If this is true, then count me in the unhappy crowd about weight increase as I was hoping for 3400 lbs. I loved my 03 cobra but always felt it was too heavy at 3665. I'll still hold out for the official announcement and hope for the best.
3600lb Mustang owners complaining about 3700lb Mustangs. Apparently the previous platform, at 300lbs less, was not good enough. Seems legit.
Bob Cosby, you make a valid point. Although, you can't deny power to weight ratios, and it's importance. If you raced an s197 with a coyote back in your F/S days, it would have been wayyyyyy quicker and faster...even at oem weight. I would assume you know that, so....I guess you are simply saying you don't like the way a heavier car "feels". That's understandable.
Bob Cosby, you make a valid point. Although, you can't deny power to weight ratios, and it's importance. If you raced an s197 with a coyote back in your F/S days, it would have been wayyyyyy quicker and faster...even at oem weight. I would assume you know that, so....I guess you are simply saying you don't like the way a heavier car "feels". That's understandable.
if this is true,thats a dam shame.They had a good chance here.The mustang should have been made out of aluminum.
Honestly this isn't the worst news for me, I now have 0 interest in trading in my car for a 15'. Good thing Ford failed, it'll save me money.... well at least until I give into the C7 temptation.
i'm sorry, does that say 3825
I was unaware the new mustang is sibling to the challenger...god she's fat.
i realize that's for the vert, but none of those weights impress me. Should shave 300 off each number and it'd be impressive.
I was unaware the new mustang is sibling to the challenger...god she's fat.
i realize that's for the vert, but none of those weights impress me. Should shave 300 off each number and it'd be impressive.
Last edited:
Good morning!
Power to weight is vital, of course, when it comes to straight-line performance. But there are a few things that really make me pause....one is a personal preference. To wit; I like going fast without needing big power to do it. Back in 'the day', I was running 12.5's @ 105 mph with 225-ish RWHP, and then 11.9's @ 112 mph with 275-ish RWHP in a very close to stock-weight LX. My 99 was going 11.6's with 315-ish RWHP, though with quite a bit of weight reduction (it was a relative pig ~3500 lbs from the factory). Needing 590 RWHP to run 11's, or perhaps 10's with slicks just doesn't do it for me. Again though, that is personal preference, and I understand completely that I am in the extreme minority on this.
The second though, is more universal. Everything else being equal, extra weight requires extra power to accelerate at the same rate. Extra power and extra weight means more stress on everything, which means more breakage, more inconsistency, and more dollars to combat said breakage and inconsistency. Also, and though I am again in the minority here with this, extra weight (and in to a lesser degree these days - more power) means more wear (on everything), less efficiency and less MPG. Ya, with gas prices the way they are, I CARE. If someone else doesn't, that's ok with me (I've heard the 'why do you want a Mustang if you care about gas mileage yada yada yada, many, many times).
The new Coyote-powered Mustang GTs are far, far quicker/faster than previous editions. No doubt about it. The HUGE increase in power (FINALLY giving us power levels competitive with their primary competition) certainly did that for them. The neat thing is we got that 110 HP increase in 2011 with barely any change in weight (even if I, personally, didn't like how fat the Mustang had become). I was close to pulling the trigger on one....REAL close.
FYI, F/S is a poor example here. The competitive cars in the class are dedicated race cars with dedicated race engines that are playing on a pretty much level playing field no matter what the chassis or powerplant (via rules). I don't think the Coyote engines are even allowed in the class. That said, one of these days (when I have a real job...lol), I hope to run C/S with my 99 Cobra....and I can easily meet the minimum weight with it.
To each their own....appreciate the discussion.
LOL! 3,400lb Mustang?!? I told everyone on here months ago who had that pipe dream that it wasn't happening. A C7 Vette or new Viper weigh in at 3,400lbs and don't have rear seats. A 3,400lb Mustang would be as light as the 1995 Mustang Cobra but yet have to have today's saftey and technological requirements AND support almost twice the HP in SVT form. Was never realistic. Not only did the new car not lose weight, it gained some! Just as I figured. So glad I got my 2013 Shelby sitting in the garage!
Good morning!
Power to weight is vital, of course, when it comes to straight-line performance. But there are a few things that really make me pause....one is a personal preference. To wit; I like going fast without needing big power to do it. Back in 'the day', I was running 12.5's @ 105 mph with 225-ish RWHP, and then 11.9's @ 112 mph with 275-ish RWHP in a very close to stock-weight LX. My 99 was going 11.6's with 315-ish RWHP, though with quite a bit of weight reduction (it was a relative pig ~3500 lbs from the factory). Needing 590 RWHP to run 11's, or perhaps 10's with slicks just doesn't do it for me. Again though, that is personal preference, and I understand completely that I am in the extreme minority on this.
The second though, is more universal. Everything else being equal, extra weight requires extra power to accelerate at the same rate. Extra power and extra weight means more stress on everything, which means more breakage, more inconsistency, and more dollars to combat said breakage and inconsistency. Also, and though I am again in the minority here with this, extra weight (and in to a lesser degree these days - more power) means more wear (on everything), less efficiency and less MPG. Ya, with gas prices the way they are, I CARE. If someone else doesn't, that's ok with me (I've heard the 'why do you want a Mustang if you care about gas mileage yada yada yada, many, many times).
The new Coyote-powered Mustang GTs are far, far quicker/faster than previous editions. No doubt about it. The HUGE increase in power (FINALLY giving us power levels competitive with their primary competition) certainly did that for them. The neat thing is we got that 110 HP increase in 2011 with barely any change in weight (even if I, personally, didn't like how fat the Mustang had become). I was close to pulling the trigger on one....REAL close.
FYI, F/S is a poor example here. The competitive cars in the class are dedicated race cars with dedicated race engines that are playing on a pretty much level playing field no matter what the chassis or powerplant (via rules). I don't think the Coyote engines are even allowed in the class. That said, one of these days (when I have a real job...lol), I hope to run C/S with my 99 Cobra....and I can easily meet the minimum weight with it.
To each their own....appreciate the discussion.
Good post.
My reference to the F/S car you ran, was simply to show you that the newer cars - regardless of the weight, are just so much faster. IE; A 2014 GT with a tune, mufflers, and big n littles would run circles around the F/S cars from your day.
As for the comment about 590rwhp -etc, a stock 11+ Mustang on wheels and tires, and some suspension, can go 11's (370-380rwhp)
Our 2011 GT, at 3750 raceweight, went 11.6@118 with 395rwhp.
I can relate to your experiences, mine are similar. I had a '98 Cobra that I modeled around F/S. It featured a Mach 1 engine with 98 Cobra Intake cams. It made 345rwhp...and went 11.6@118 at 3300lbs on a 26" DR, and a T45 trans. I had a 1999 GT with a stock 2V, that went 12.6's@106 with 245rwhp at 3300lbs, also on a DR and T45.
To me, it's just no comparison. I had to turn my cars into race cars, with huge gear (4.56) - to run mid 11's.
It's also no comparison just driving the cars around. The 2005+ Mustangs are just SOOOO much more of a car - I really think Ford did an excellent job with them.
As for the 2015, personally, I am VERY excited at the minimal weight gains, for what the buyer is getting. I think this car is going to be awesome. The IRS excites me greatly.
I think everyone should wait and see. The weights in the manual may even be a loaded loaded unit which may weigh more than the unit you may order. I am downright stoked and eagerly awaiting my 15. I can't wait to get my hands on it with the performance pack. Everyone also has to remember bigger brakes, heavy duty differential, thicker sway bars, etc. Etch. Adds weight but also all these things bring so much a better car in handling, braking and durability and usually speed is not a difference if engineered correctly. I think everyone is going to be surprised that this car will run better than any mustang before it. Look at the Nissan GT-R at almost 4000 lb it is one of the fastest, best handling cars in the world. Why. Engineering. My 14 track car runs incredible and I am sure the 15 won't disappoint me. I think the new design will bring me my first 180+ mph Mustang. I will at least give it the old college try.
I'm glad I bought my '14 now. I hoped the new one would be lighter, but I figured that wouldn't be the case. Yeah, my '14 is pretty heavy too, but I wasn't willing to pay several thousand more for a '15 unless it truly was at least a couple hundred pounds lighter. I would prefer lighter weight because of the affect on turning and stopping, not just going fast in a straight line. My '14 is about the limit for me in terms of weight...next car likely won't be a Mustang.
I never bought that the S550 Mustang will lose massive weight. I was however hoping it would lose some weight like they did with the F150. A weight gain was a bit disappointing for me. Initially it was an over 200 pound gain. No thanks. Now its around 100 pounds. I can live with that considering all the improvements in the car. Ford is really good at hiding the weight in it's cars, so I look forward to reading and watching the S550 GT in action
AMEN!
The weight is the main reason I haven't purchased a new Mustang since my '93. I was really hoping the rumors that it was going to be 200 - 300 lbs. lighter than the current model were true, if they were I would have ordered mine day 1. I was really looking forward to the new Mustang...
I just want to know how in the world people were thinking that it is possible to have such a loaded up car, with IRS, and the ability to handle 400-500 HP durably.....that would be 200-300lbs lighter than the current 2014. While maintaining a realistic price. I just don't get it?
coolwater28,
coolwater28,
Base to base this thing up approx 250lbs heavier than out going car. My base gt weighed in at 3450. Dont be fooled by everyone saying it only gained 100lbs. A 15 base over a 14 premium sure, but not a base to base car.
BMR....am a BIG fan of the 11-14 5.0 Mustangs. A 2014 no-option GT would be my choice of new cars if I had to go out and buy one today. Like I said....just disappointed that Mustang continues to get heavier instead of lighter, despite all the hype. Perhaps we still don't have the full story? I'd love to eat some crow on this one, but I'm doubting it. The good news is that by the end of the year (or first of next year), left-over 14's will be GREAT deals. Who knows....might jump to one of those....though It will be hard to get rid of a 3200 lb car that makes 470 RWHP and gets 29+ mpg highway........
BTW...in my day....my F/S car was running 11.4s on DRs. A GT with tune, mufflers, and tires would have had its hands full!
Bob
BTW...in my day....my F/S car was running 11.4s on DRs. A GT with tune, mufflers, and tires would have had its hands full!
Bob
Users who are viewing this thread
