[smoothz]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AfmkwY-Q_oM

 

[pumpkinhead]

So hard to buy American when all Ford does is slap a few little band-aids on their "new" vehicles here and there, and expect the populace to gobble up their warmed over ****. How about a redesigned suspension and an engine that is actually technologically sound? I get so pissed when I hear GM and Ford Execs whining about how nobody will buy their product, when their product is based on platforms and tech that are decades old. Good on Nissan for developing some new ideas with the 370.

 

[Diz]

QUOTE (Pumpkinhead @ Apr 20 2009, 09:39 AM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=573786

So hard to buy American when all Ford does is slap a few little band-aids on their "new" vehicles here and there, and expect the populace to gobble up their warmed over ****. How about a redesigned suspension and an engine that is actually technologically sound? I get so pissed when I hear GM and Ford Execs whining about how nobody will buy their product, when their product is based on platforms and tech that are decades old. Good on Nissan for developing some new ideas with the 370.

:banghead:

!!!!!!!!!!!

We have a decent chassis for a Grand Tourer Mustang right here in Oz in our Falcon.

I read in Motor Trend that the reason they give for stick with a Live Rear Axle is - "It's what we understand, so we're sticking with it". That attitude isn't how we progress.

http://www.themotorreport.com.au/5625/2008...urbo-road-test/

 

[pumpkinhead]

The real shame is exactly like you just stated about the having decent platforms outside the U.S. The Euro Ford Focus is apparently a very good car. The Ford Mondeo is apparently a very good car. Does the U.S. market get these versions? **** no, we get the shitty models reserved for rental car fleets, and warmed over, renamed, "Ford 500s" that didn't sell the first time around. I will never understand how executives think this is a good idea. Spend the money to convert these Euro cars to meet U.S. crash/emissions standards (which I believe they already do as Euro is harder in some of these areas), and send them over here. Tell me teenage ricers wouldn't gobble this thing up:

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/hot_li...st_drive_review

The article mentions Ford intends to bring some European chassis' over to the U.S. I'll believe it when I see it. As for GM, well, bringing a Holden over from Australia and putting an LS engine in it was a pretty good idea- Calling it the "new" GTO was not. A perfect example of domestic car companies thinking U.S. consumers are dumbasses. The Pontiac G8 was the best hope GM had for stepping in the right direction, yet GM is looking at killing that brand off. :doh:

 

[minesfaster]

hahahahahaha. I LOVED watching the front end of that mustang jump up on the 0-60 and SLAM down on the 60-0. Didn't see the Z move much. I love that about my car. Jump on it and go straight forward. Slam the brakes and stop straight. Turn under high speed without much body roll. A mustang is laughable at best. And now even uglier than before. Its sad to see that domestic brands are just so outdated and undesirable. I like the new challenger, but I'm sure it'll soon be just like the charger and mustang: everyone and their brother will have a v6 version. Sad really.

Imports for me: Faster. Better Looking. And More Reliable. Like a good hooker.

 

[Diz]

"The article mentions Ford intends to bring some European chassis' over to the U.S. I'll believe it when I see it. As for GM, well, bringing a Holden over from Australia and putting an LS engine in it was a pretty good idea- Calling it the "new" GTO was not. A perfect example of domestic car companies thinking U.S. consumers are dumbasses. "

Agreed. Made in Australia is Great, but when it comes to Muscle Cars, I completely understand why calling a Holden Commodore a GTO would be insulting for Americans.

Imagine if Ford released a Mondeo GT-HO !

"The Pontiac G8 was the best hope GM had for stepping in the right direction, yet GM is looking at killing that brand off. :doh: "


Unfortunately the American Government bailout package will see the end of many iconic brands.

And brining technology over from overseas may not be allowed either as they are pretty adamant on ensuring the money stays on American soil.

 

[idrm350]

This is the thing that gets me, the Mustang has about 24% more displacement but 5.4% LESS horsepower. Now, I know that displacement isn't everything but come on, Ford is either lazy or their engineers suck. If the Mustang had the same horsepower per liter, it would have about 410 HP. With that horsepower and no solid rear axle, the Mustang MAY be a little more attractive. As it stands now, Ford just polished a terd with this new Mustang.

 

[pumpkinhead]

QUOTE (IDrm350 @ Apr 21 2009, 09:09 AM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=573935

This is the thing that gets me, the Mustang has about 24% more displacement but 5.4% LESS horsepower. Now, I know that displacement isn't everything but come on, Ford is either lazy or their engineers suck. If the Mustang had the same horsepower per liter, it would have about 410 HP. With that horsepower and no solid rear axle, the Mustang MAY be a little more attractive. As it stands now, Ford just polished a terd with this new Mustang.

Old pushrod technology does not compete with newer engines in the power race. It will be a good thing when Ford comes out with these supposed new turbocharged V6 engines they are claiming to be working on.

 

[minesfaster]

QUOTE (Pumpkinhead @ Apr 21 2009, 12:49 PM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=573941

Old pushrod technology does not compete with newer engines in the power race. It will be a good thing when Ford comes out with these supposed new turbocharged V6 engines they are claiming to be working on.

haha. just working on turbo v6 huh? They probably should have taken that idea from the Supra and GTR LONG LONG ago.



I seriously think that the idea is that in america "bigger is better". I can't tell you how many kill stories I have that begin with "yeah right! I have a v8!" Some people really need to search supra vids on youtube. What murcielago?

 

[pumpkinhead]

QUOTE (minesfaster @ Apr 21 2009, 12:02 PM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=573944

haha. just working on turbo v6 huh? They probably should have taken that idea from the Supra and GTR LONG LONG ago.



I seriously think that the idea is that in america "bigger is better". I can't tell you how many kill stories I have that begin with "yeah right! I have a v8!" Some people really need to search supra vids on youtube. What murcielago?

I personally prefer the "add lightness" ideology. Lotus is King in my book. Sure, displacement is great, but the weight that goes with the monster can only cause problems. The Ariel Atom, Lotus Exige S, Pagani, Koennigsegg(sp?), and Caterhams and racing trim Porsches(GT3, RS etc) are all among my favorite cars. Nothing massive on the engine size (exception for Pagani and CCX), but good/great power and low weight/ideal distribution make for great grip/track ability and awesome hole shot times. Plus they all look kickass. Nissan RB engines are perhaps the greatest examples, along with Toyota, of lower displacement meets monstrous power potential. Too bad ford's flash of brilliance, the Ford GT, didn't mix over into their overall automotive approach (as in building a good machine).

 

[smoothz]

QUOTE (Diz @ Apr 20 2009, 08:54 AM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=573836

:banghead:

!!!!!!!!!!!

We have a decent chassis for a Grand Tourer Mustang right here in Oz in our Falcon.

I read in Motor Trend that the reason they give for stick with a Live Rear Axle is - "It's what we understand, so we're sticking with it". That attitude isn't how we progress.

Yep, that's the ticket. They never learn. I think it lies with the problem of money. The company probably thinks it's not worth it to retrain the factory line workers, nor does it make sense to actually replace the entire car and start with a fresh specimen (in their eyes). They just stick with what works, which is relying on domestic owners who are loyal to the brand.

QUOTE (IDrm350 @ Apr 21 2009, 11:09 AM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=573935

This is the thing that gets me, the Mustang has about 24% more displacement but 5.4% LESS horsepower. Now, I know that displacement isn't everything but come on, Ford is either lazy or their engineers suck. If the Mustang had the same horsepower per liter, it would have about 410 HP. With that horsepower and no solid rear axle, the Mustang MAY be a little more attractive. As it stands now, Ford just polished a terd with this new Mustang.

I love it when they say there's no replacement for displacement. I've always wondered in a snotty way why the domestic engines with more displacement don't put out much HP. I don't really care since I like what I have.

I have to admit that I really like my 3.8L engine in the Caravan which pumps out over 200hp at the crank. FWD minivans ftw!

 

[Diz]

That LS in the Corvette seems pretty awesome though.

It's funny how we see Push Rods as old and OHC engines as new. The OHC technology was actually developed in the 30s-40s, by GM (I believe - read The Machine that Changed the World). The Japs just took it and pitched it well.

There are benefits to Big Displacement though, particularly if you're traveling a long distance in a straight line.

BUT - most smaller displacement engines have EVOLVED to eliminate the higher fuel consumption over long distances. Check out the mid-range torque on your Z for evidence.

Most big displacement engines haven't evolved at the same rate to improve their downfalls.