My blog about Ford Motor Corporation. News, products, engines, concepts and showcars, opinion, projects, owner experiences. Covers all corporate Ford brands: Ford, Lincoln, Mercury, Volvo. Special emphasis on performance cars and international operations.
Note: Mazda is in it's own section, complete with it's own blogs and RSS feeds.
If you are wondering what the ~4400-pound Taurus SHO competes against, Larry Webster (formerly of Car and Driver) of Popular Mechanics has the answer: the all wheel drive Chrysler 300C. And the SHO is actually bigger and heavier:
Chrysler 300C AWD
Ford Taurus SHO
Base price
$39,925
$37,995
Powertrain
370 hp/398 lb-ft, 5.7-liter V8, 5A
365 hp/350 lb-ft, 3.5-liter V6, 6A
Suspension (f/r)
control arms/multilink
strut/multilink
Wheelbase (in.)
120.0
112.9
Length (in.)
196.8
202.9
Width (in.)
74.1
76.2
Axle ratio
3.07
2.77
Weight
4280
4368
Brakes (f/r)
12.6-in disc/12.6-in disc, ABS, ESC
12.8-in disc/13.0-in disc, ABS, ESC
Tires (f/r)
P225/60R-18
P245/45R-20
ACCELERATION (sec)
0-30 mph
2.0
2.2
0-60 mph
5.5
5.4
0-100 mph
13.9
13.3
40-70 mph
4.2
4.9
20-60 mph rolling start
4.4
4.2
Quarter-mile
13.9 @ 100.3 mph
13.7 @ 101.7 mph
BRAKING (ft.)
30-0 mph
30.4
29.9
60-0 mph
126.2
117.6
EPA fuel economy (city/hwy)
16/23
17/25
PM Fuel Economy
21
22
This doesn't seem like very much progress to us, and the 1000 pounds over the original SHO is a definite step backwards from both the philosophy and the dynamics of the original SHO. Remember that we owned both a Gen 1 and a Gen 3 SHO. Gen IV looks to be pointless to us.
In a press release Tuesday, Ford discussed some of the progress that has been made to date, as well as plans over the next few years.
New news: Ford will introduce the EcoBoost technology for the F-150 in 2009. It's been said before that it was coming, but it wasn't clear that it is going to be this fast.
Old news: Ford will offer dual-clutch transmissions. It's known that one recipient will be the all-new Focus that is coming to us from Europe (by 2011 - note the BEV Focus below). And the weight reduction program, which is not yet going full speed but should drop a couple of hundred pounds from each product once it is. That will be very interesting to watch - and in the age of 4400 pound Taurus SHOs it is very much needed.
What wasn't said: the plan is to add direct injection across the engine lineup. This has been discussed before, but that part of the story is probably being held back so as not to take away from the EcoBoost news. There are, after all, naturally aspirated engines which will need to improve: the Duratec V-6 family is one. Direct injection (and it's next stage, central direct injection) is one of those rare technologies that offers it all: emissions, fuel economy, and performance.
Ford Press Release follows:
FORD MAKES PROGRESS ON SUSTAINABILITY STRATEGY BY INCREASING FUEL ECONOMY, LOWERING EMISSIONS
Ford’s Blueprint for Sustainability addresses the challenges of climate change and energy security, while creating safer, more fuel-efficient, quality products customers want and value
The cornerstone of Ford’s near-term plan remains a new generation of fuel-saving, turbo-charged gasoline direct injection engines to be offered in high volume across its vehicle lineup. In 2009, EcoBoost will be introduced on the Lincoln MKS, followed by the Lincoln MKT, Ford Taurus SHO, Flex and F-150
Ford’s electric vehicle strategy accelerates with the introduction of a pure battery electric (BEV) Transit Connect commercial van in 2010 and a BEV Focus in 2011, as well as a plug-in hybrid electric (PHEV) and next-generation hybrid electric vehicle (HEV) by 2012
Mid-term advancements focus on full implementation of known technologies, increased use of hybrids and electric vehicles, weight reductions, advanced electric power steering and aerodynamic improvements
DEARBORN, Mich., June 23, 2009 – Ford Motor Company’s Blueprint for Sustainability includes the introduction of a range of global environmental technologies to provide more fuel-efficient vehicles that emit fewer greenhouse gases without compromising customer expectations for safety, interior room or performance. Since its original introduction in 2007, Ford accelerated key aspects of its sustainability strategy including a more detailed plan for vehicle electrification and other advances.
“Ford is committed to offering customers affordable, environmentally friendly technologies in vehicles they really want,” said Alan Mulally, Ford’s president and chief executive officer. “We are focusing on sustainable technology solutions that can be used not for hundreds or thousands of cars – but for millions of cars, because that is how Ford can truly make a difference.”
Climate Change
Ford recognizes climate change is a significant global challenge that must be addressed by a range of stakeholders. For the automotive industry, this includes the vehicle manufacturers, the fuel industry, governments and consumers.
To do its part, Ford is pursuing multiple technological paths and collaborating with others to find new, meaningful fuel economy and emissions solutions that will be affordable for customers.
Ford uses sophisticated modeling tools to map its future sustainability goals for CO2 reduction. They are helping the company to determine which technology solutions are viable over time by balancing customer wants, costs and environmental needs. The analysis will guide Ford’s fuel economy plan through 2020.
Some of the improvements to boost fuel economy outlined in the sustainability strategy are already on the road, while Ford continues to innovate for the future. For example: Ford is eliminating energy waste in its vehicle systems, such as power steering, cooling and electrical systems, as well as minimizing wind drag through design and optimizing its new six-speed transmissions. All of these innovations are benefiting customers today, particularly in fuel economy. Among the advances made since 2007 are:
Doubled hybrid offerings and production with the introduction of the all-new 2010 Ford Fusion Hybrid and Mercury Milan Hybrid, which deliver 41 mpg in city driving.
Equipped with a new 2.5-liter I-4 engine, the 2010 Ford Fusion S delivers fuel economy up to 3 mpg better than the Honda Accord or Toyota Camry.
Ford Escape delivers unsurpassed 28 mpg on the highway – ahead of the Toyota RAV4 and Honda CR-V. And the hybrid version – the Ford Escape Hybrid – is the most fuel-efficient SUV on the planet, delivering 34 mpg city and 31 mpg highway.
Ford F-150’s fuel economy has improved an average of 8 percent across the fleet and delivers an unsurpassed 15 mpg city and 21 mpg highway.
The new Ford Fusion, Mercury Milan, Ford Taurus SHO and Lincoln MKT include electronic power-assist steering (EPAS), which can improve fuel economy up to 5 percent, while reducing CO2 emissions and enhancing steering performance. By 2012, Ford plans to fit nearly 90 percent of the Ford, Lincoln and Mercury lineup with EPAS.
Ford says the push will continue. The company quickly will introduce technologies to further eliminate energy waste in vehicle systems by improving powertrain warm-up time, using vehicle control technologies like aggressive fuel shutoff during vehicle deceleration, and reducing engine workload through better battery recharging systems.
“While we implement our near-, mid- and long-term plans, we are continuing to achieve efficiencies throughout the vehicle in areas that can quickly lead to fuel economy improvements today,” said Derrick Kuzak, Ford’s group vice president of Global Product Development. “We continue to make improvements in what we call the ‘1 percent’ areas – items such as reducing wind drag, eliminating engine-driven power steering pumps and switching to low-friction engine oil. Collectively, these small improvements deliver significant fuel economy gains for our customers.”
Delivering the numbers
The cornerstone of Ford’s near-term plan is a new generation of smaller-displacement turbo-charged gasoline engines with advanced fuel-saving direct injection technologies. The new family of EcoBoost engines potentially provides customers with a fuel savings of between 10 to 20 percent versus a larger displacement engine, without compromising performance.
With direct injection, fuel is injected directly into the combustion chamber in small, precise amounts. When this is combined with turbo charging, customers may enjoy better performance and fewer trips to the gas pump. EcoBoost is designed to deliver the power and torque of a V-8 engine with the fuel efficiency of a V-6.
Ford plans to deliver EcoBoost across the full range of its product portfolio, from small cars to large trucks and by 2013, will offer EcoBoost engines, V-6s and I-4s, on 90 percent of its North American nameplates. Ford’s first application will be in the new Lincoln MKS, followed by the Lincoln MKT, Ford Taurus SHO and Flex less than a year after launch. Within three years, Ford expects to deliver 750,000 EcoBoost-equipped vehicles per year in North America and 1.3 million vehicles globally.
Technology Enablers: In addition to EcoBoost engines – and as part of the company’s near- and mid-term plans – Ford will apply a portfolio of technologies to achieve additional fuel savings and emissions reductions. They include:
Dual-clutch transmissions, which deliver the fuel economy of a manual with the convenience of an automatic. These new transmissions include greater use of six-speeds to replace less-efficient four- and five-speed gearboxes.
Advanced electric power assist steering (EPAS) systems in between 80 to 90 percent of Ford vehicles.
Aerodynamic improvements through better design and wind tunnel optimization.
Weight reductions through platform efficiencies and greater use of aluminum, magnesium and high-strength steel.
The fuel savings will grow during the mid-term – between 2012 and 2020 – as weight reductions become a critical focus of Ford’s plan. Targeted vehicle weight reductions will range from 250 to 750 pounds, depending on the segment – without compromising safety.
Ford’s Electrification Strategy: Ford accelerated its aggressive strategy for delivering a suite of electric vehicles to market, including a pure battery electric (BEV) Transit Connect commercial van in 2010 and a BEV Focus in 2011, as well as a plug-in hybrid electric (PHEV) and next-generation hybrid electric vehicle (HEV) by 2012.
Ford already is working with battery suppliers, utility companies and the government to develop, test and validate electric vehicle transportation in order to speed commercialization of the technology.
Hybrid Electric Systems: Ford is in its fifth year producing the world’s most fuel-efficient SUV – the Escape Hybrid, and now has added the most fuel-efficient midsize sedan in the market, the Fusion Hybrid. In addition, Ford makes hybrid versions of Mercury Mariner SUV and Mercury Milan midsize sedan.
Moving forward, Ford plans to deploy different levels of hybridization. In Europe, for example, Ford established in 2006 the European Hybrid Technologies Centre in Gothenburg, Sweden, which will have overall responsibility for the application of hybrid systems into Volvo cars globally and ensure that Ford of Europe is able to apply core hybrid systems into its products.
Plug-in Hybrids: Ford, in collaboration with 10 utilities and the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), is in the midst of a three-year test program on the Ford Escape PHEV, designed to develop and evaluate technical approaches for integrating PHEVs into the electric grid. The utilities are collecting data on battery technology, vehicle systems, customer use and grid infrastructure. In total, Ford will provide 21 vehicles for the real-world trials to explore the commercialization of plug-in hybrids and the business models that might make them viable. Ford has announced plans to introduce a PHEV to market in 2012.
Battery Electric Vehicles: Ford will launch two pure battery electric vehicles (BEVs) over the next two years, including BEV Transit Connect in 2010 and BEV Focus in 2011. BEV Transit Connect, which Ford is developing with Smith Electric U.S., is expected to have a range of up to 100 miles with reduced operation and maintenance costs, making it a useful hauler for commercial and government fleet customers. The BEV Focus, which Ford will produce in collaboration with strategic supplier Magna at the Michigan Assembly Plant, will use a common household current to provide a full charge within eight hours for a targeted range of 100 miles.
Bio-Fuels: Ford will continue to deliver products capable of running on renewable fuels such as bio-diesel and E-85 ethanol. Ford has more than five million flexible fuel vehicles (FFVs) on the roads today globally. In the U.S., Ford has pledged to make half of its production capable of running on alternative fuels by 2012, provided the necessary fuel and infrastructure are in place.
Ford currently offers a total of 14 flexible fuel vehicle models in various markets globally. Ford also continues to support the development of cellulosic biofuels, which in the long term promise up to 90 percent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions.
In Europe, Ford is a FFV market leader and FFV market pioneer. With its current Flexifuel models – the Ford Focus, C-MAX, Mondeo, S-MAX and Galaxy – Ford is offering one of the broadest FFV portfolios in Europe. The vehicles run on E85 (85 percent bio-ethanol; 15 percent petrol), petrol only, or any mix of both in one fuel tank (making them flexible in terms of choice of fuel and operation). Ford Flexifuel models are now available in 17 European markets with Sweden, Germany, the Netherlands, Spain and France being the markets with strongest demand. FFVs are part of Ford's portfolio of environmentally advanced, low-CO2 vehicle technologies which Ford is committed to offer at affordable prices to its customers.
In Brazil, FFVs account for 72 percent of Ford’s volume. The success with FFVs was achieved through a central energy policy and collaboration among agriculture, fuel providers, automakers and the government.
In Asia Pacific, Ford is leading in the introduction of flexible fuel vehicles, particularly in early-adopting markets, such as Thailand and the Philippines.
Clean Diesels: Ford’s sustainability plan calls for adding more diesel engines to more products in more markets. In Europe, the Ford ECOnetic range of ultra-low CO2 vehicles offers an attractive and affordable alternative to customers who prioritize low emissions performance from their cars.
The latest introduction to the ECOnetic range is the Ford Fiesta ECOnetic. Powered by a specially-calibrated version of the 1.6-litre Duratorq TDCi engine, combined with coated Diesel Particulate Filter (cDPF), the Fiesta ECOnetic is the vehicle with lowest CO2 emission in both its segment and Ford’s European range.
The Fiesta ECOnetic completes a trilogy of production models in the company’s European vehicle range that also includes a Focus ECOnetic returning and a Mondeo ECOnetic. In addition to the successful passenger car ECOnetic variants of Fiesta, Focus and Mondeo, Ford recently presented the Ford Transit ECOnetic as the first commercial vehicle of its ECOnetic range, which will be available later in 2009 across Europe. The ECOnetic line is an important part of the Ford of Europe’s product portfolio with further variants and improvements to come.
These vehicles will sit alongside Ford’s standard range of clean diesel engines in Europe that use advanced technology to deliver extremely competitive CO2 levels.
In 2007, Ford also began launching the Focus TDCi diesel in Asian markets.
Hydrogen Power: Ford remains committed to its core research on hydrogen fuel cell technology, which holds promise as a longer term solution. Ford’s global fleet of 30 hydrogen-powered Focus fuel cell vehicles has accumulated more than 1 million miles in real world testing. While hydrogen holds promise, challenges related to the technology’s high cost and the lack of fueling station infrastructure remain.
About Ford Motor Company Ford Motor Company, a global automotive industry leader based in Dearborn, Mich., manufactures or distributes automobiles across six continents. With about 205,000 employees and about 90 plants worldwide, the company's automotive brands include Ford, Lincoln, Mercury and Volvo. The company provides financial services through Ford Motor Credit Company. For more information regarding Ford's products, please visit www.ford.com
Tools & Links for Ford Motor Corporation post number # 2699
The first crunched SHO is in Chicago. If they're a friend of Obama, maybe they can get a free bailout or a job in DC. Thanks to ChicagoSVT, who works at the dealer.
Tools & Links for Ford Motor Corporation post number # 2697
And their first impressions were good. You can't call this a test because it wasn't instrumented - just a drive around the back roads of the press event. Everything worked well, except the brakes. That concerns us, since the brakes of our original Gen 1 SHO were terrible and it took all the way until the 3rd generation to get brakes that didn't wobble and smoke until after the first 10k miles...
So here I am ranting on the problems of the Mustang again. From my last post, written with a furious pounding of the keyboard, it seems that I am having a case of deja vu about Ford yet again. It's a love/hate relationship in the end - one of those relationships you just have to walk away from because it's all a big drama and you realize the years are slipping by.
Here's the problem with Ford: we like most of them, but when it comes to the ones that we really want to get passionate about, they just fail to measure up. It’s been 5 model years since the 2005 Mustang came out – and we still have the same old engines. Yea, sure, the 2011 will get the engines the 2005 should have had (Ford engineering has attempted to create a DOHC 5 liter twice in the last ten years!). 6 years will have passed to get just one step forward!
The 2010 has gotten a few bandaids - - they’ve juggled the bushings in ye olde solid axle a bit, offered a "track pack" (a lousy alternative that doesn't measure up to what could have been), fixed the interior (a very smart move, but then the old one sucked and they still have the giant "bumper car" steering wheel and the lousy gauges with the indecipherable script and less than 180-degree sweep) – but it’s all bandaids on top of the basic problems of the car. Since Ford never spent the right money building any Mustang other than the very first (and I still don't forgive them for the rust my original '67 Mustang suffered), it's always about bandaids and hoping that the next iteration will somehow "get it right". Well, folks, it never has.
The current Mustang is too heavy, it’s too large, and it has no possible future given the direction of the car industry. I expect Ford to make a major patch job in 3 or 4 years and perhaps the IRS will even show up (and if it does I will go to the Ford dealer in a hypnotic trance and buy one without even thinking it thru). And if I do take that fateful step I will inevitably end up unhappy yet again when some cheap component inevitably fails and the car doesn't measure up.
I miss my last much smaller and lighter Fox Mustang, with it’s very practical and usable hatch (I could carry 4 race tires and my tools in the back!). Of course, the chassis was as flexible as pasta, but the size and reasonableness of the total package made it into one heckuva great car. I could take it on highway trips, on TSD rallies thru back roads, to autocrosses, and to the racetrack (of course I'd have to take an extra set of rotors, calipers, and brake pads that would just barely get me thru a track weekend). It was a car you could do everything with in it's day... and nothing like it exists anymore.
If Ford ever brings something of that nature to market again, it’ll probably be around 2020 – over 40 years from the original FOX. Perhaps you have to be immortal to finally get what you want out of a Mustang!
Tools & Links for Ford Motor Corporation post number # 2693
They've got a couple of points wrong in their article, but by and large it's right. My own involvement with the IRS Mustang begins in 1999, when I took delivery of the 1st or 2nd IRS-equipped Cobra in Texas. And I took delivery of another in 2003, with the improved IRS (thicker half-shafts, and very much improved bushings). Both cars were so good on the track - especially my 2003 (with 2000 Cobra R springs and shocks) that I swore I'd never do another solid-axle Mustang. I spent some considerable time talking to the lead engineer of the IRS at SVT and learning from him what it would take to make it work best on the track (start with doubling the spring rates, for one).
Like Joe over at My Ford Dreams http://myforddreams2.blogspot.com/2009/06/real-reason-05-and-forward-mustang.html, I hold the current Mustang in complete contempt. But it's even worse than Joe knows - an IRS for the Mustang wasn't just stuck in development, it was out being tested on streets and test tracks. So much so that it was encountered on the street and photographed (the exact same car later had a solid axle transplanted into it and became the engineering mule for the Shelby). I have the photo preserved, and put it on my blog years ago. I've copied that entire post below (or follow the link below to view *all* my posts about the IRS).
Motor Trend claims the IRS that was finalized for the Mustang came right out of the Australian Falcon. That could be true, although the photo of the IRS doesn't support it. Trying to build an IRS out of some backwards stamped-steel components on the cheap does not make for a good IRS. Ford knows how to build one, but the eternal cost cutters inside Ford ruined it. If the Australian rumor is true, it's another example of those types at their worst.
But I don't think it was from Australia. I spent over a year corresponding with the senior executive inside Ford who was running a project to study the feasibility of the IRS in the Mustang, a few years before the S197 design was finalized. It was his job to figure out how to cost justify it, and it turned into a major political battle against the cost cutters. I won't mention his name because I was asked to keep it confidential, but from our talks I learned a lot and I hope he did too. I've also talked to some of the Ford engineers who worked on the S197 IRS project and every single one of them were mad as hell that they weren't allowed to put into production what they worked so hard on, and what they believed should be standard in the S197 across the board. Yes, across the board - every single model. Those folks wanted to build the best car they could - not a low common denominator for customers who didn't know any better. Of those folks, only two are still in the company. One was bounced out of the former SVT group and wound up designing a suspension for a worldwide Ranger replacement that little Billy Ford cut out of the budget years ago.
Lets make sure we all know who the real idiots were in Ford: both Phil Martens who canceled it and especially Hau Thai-Tang (Director, Advanced Product Creation and Special Vehicle Team:) for running around saying it it wasn't needed anyway. It was Hau Thai-Tang who told the press a couple of statements that made me see red. First, the IRS was "go" as an option. Later it was off and those of us who wanted one were "snobs". In progression, HTT goes from addressing the requirements of his customers and promising they would be met, to outright insulting them:
"Drag racers and Ford's accountants will be pleased at the choice of a live axle out back. Among our customer groups that know and care what sort of rear suspension their car has, a large number of them want a solid rear axle; they're primarily the core enthusiast drag racers, and they like the durability, reliability, and ease of modification with it, changing axle ratios, etc.," says Thai-Tang. "There's another group that wants the sophistication and cornering advantage of an IRS, and we're going to offer it on the upcoming SVT Cobra. Unlike the last time, when we kind of shoehorned the IRS in [an older platform]; this time, we've designed the rear architecture to accommodate both right from the beginning."
"Ninety-two percent of (Mustang) Cobra customers wouldn't have considered a Ford product"
"We'll never appease those IRS snobs."
Note that the IRS was canceled and the Cobra was canceled, Yes, there was a real Cobra - it was a model above the Shelby (which Shelby has nothing to do with developing). And, finally, Hau Thai-Tang was canceled - sent to South America in exile to build a cheap SUV with no future. Straight to hell, where he belongs. And then SVT itself was canceled, at least in it's original form. The reason for that was simple - every product they brought out on their own got progressively worse and worse from a quality standpoint. The further away the product got from the "base" production vehicle, the worse the quality ended up. Their final product, the 2003 Cobra, has terrible engineering problems in several areas. Many owners suffered thru engine replacements that Ford didn't want to perform (including myself, who was amazed to find three identical red Cobras like mine all lined up at the dealer for the same purpose - total engine replacement). Finally, the crowing achievement of SVT - the Ford GT - turned into another debacle. What was billed as "the pace car for the entire company" turned into a quality and warranty disaster: http://www.drivingenthusiast.net/sec-blog/2005/03/31.html#a458. I suspect - without evidence - that it was also the final straw for Coletti that forced him into retirement. Great guy as he was, as popular as he was, his products were seriously flawed. And I know, I had 4 of them. The IRS was finally perfected, but the engines got worse and worse. Cooling problems in the earlier ones, and a total lack of engineering and testing process for the final one. And despite it's great suspension, the car was a worthless POS because of that damned engine.
Somewhere inside Ford, the S197 IRS suspension sits on a shelf ready for production. It's not too late - it can still be done. Indeed, not one year after the introduction of the 2005, a Ford executive said that they "needed" to offer the IRS as an option. That may have been back-tracking, but it was said. Fast-forward to today, where there is no platform for a Mustang replacement in the pipeline. The Mustang is too big and too heavy (although not anywhere near as bad as it's competition) for the long term. Ford needs a platform like the Nissan FM platform to build a family of small rear wheel drive cars on. It doesn't have it (the Australian Falcon is a very poor chassis, and very much out-dated).
The current Mustang will probably be patched up in a few years, like the SN95 Mustang was half-way thru it's lifespan (as the FOX Mustang was 3 or 4 times). If Ford's plans to take a few hundred pounds out of each model in it's lineup works out, it may even last another ten years. But who wants one, when every year that goes by shows how backward it is? Oh yes, we have a "track pack" option - but that is nothing more than something we could have easily done ourselves (and better) and it does little to actually prepare the car for open track weekends. The brakes are still too small, and the cooling is still too poorly done. I remember shaking my head in disgust when in 2006 the demo Mustang brought by Ford to the SVT events kept garking it's coolant all over the place - and they had retired their Ford GT a year earlier for the same exact reason. The SVT engineers that came with the Mustang told me that they had already totally rebuilt the Ford GT's engine once and never could make it work on the track. Yes, it's a pace car for the entire company - the company that went down the drain at the same time.
Here's the reprint of the article from my site on the S197 IRS.
S197 Mustang IRS Suspension
2005.03.21 (updated)
Many pictures have surfaced of a red engineering prototype of a future high-performance flagship Mustang. What hasn't been known to date is what rear suspension would be used in the eventual production car - although it's been repeatedly told to us during the original development of the all-new 2005 Mustang that it would be an IRS. Now we have confirmation of those statements.
A lucky member of the online Mustang fan community, fortuitously equipped with a camera, came across an engineering prototype on the streets of Dearborn recently. His pictures have ended up all over the web, across several sites. The red mule he encountered has an independent rear suspension (IRS). How do we know? Look closely at the photo below and you'll see a large nut in the center of the hub (in addition to 4-piston Brembo brakes).
Now look at the following picture of the standard solid axle suspension on an '05 Mustang: note that like all solid axle setups from Ford the center of the hub is just indented - no nut. There is very clearly a significant engineering difference from the car above.
For comparison, let's look at a stock '99 Cobra IRS (same as '99 thru '04). Notice the nut in the middle the hub.
And here's how this goes together on the '99-04 (image from the Ford shop manual) - notice the threaded area on the half-shaft to the upper left, and nut at the lower right. This is typical of all IRS suspensions. The half-shaft has to be bolted to the hub thru the upright.
The large nut is the giveaway: the red engineering car has an IRS. A couple of other observations, based on this low-res spy photo:
The red mule has 4-piston calipers front and rear. And not just the "baby" Brembos found on the 2002 Cobra R, but much larger "real" Brembos.
The rear hub on the '99-04 IRS has the tie rod attachment point located very close to the rotor - resulting on a lot of heat transfer into the tie rod and also the inability to fit larger rotors. It's located further in on the red mule.
Its not clear how provision is made for rear parking brakes... they aren't integral in Brembo calipers. There isn't a second set of small calipers. Therefore, the system must use small drum brakes within the to the rotor (aka like the Supra, C5/6, Jaguar S-Type R, etc).
Tire size continues to be much taller than SN95s - the tires are 285/40ZR-18s Goodyear F1s.
Unfortunately, the spy photos are such low-res that we can't see any further detail... there appears to be an aluminum lower control arm, but the resolution is really too poor to verify the meaning of it's position or the type of rear suspension.
Reference: this is a Lincoln LS rear suspension, 2002 vintage. It might be logical that this is what will be used to source some of the parts (some, given that the LS uses an 8" differential)... however there are some fundamental differences in component location. Note that the LS suspension is state of the art... including coilover shocks. The same rear suspension is also used by Jaguar, and of course on the Thunderbird (and on the Mustang GT concepts, which were literally rebodied Thunderbirds using the complete platform including the full SLA/IRS suspension front and rear). Note that on Jaguar R models, Brembos are used along with hub-integral drum parking brakes (Lincoln uses the cheaper version, with conventional iron calipers and caliper-integral parking brakes).
Conclusion: We know the IRS has been under development from the start, and Ford has been talking about it right from the start as being standard on the future "Cobra". This time out, given the new platform, it's in integral part of this new platform rather than an afterthought. One of the early spy pictures appeared to have an IRS underneath. In any case, the rear suspension is being brought into the 21st century (at last), and Mustang buyers can now follow along.
History of the Red Mule: A later version of the red mule has a solid axle, as shown in these pics:
Notice the standard brakes, and the standard swaybar hanging down behind the axle. And the lack of the "nut" as shown above. This is a solid axle car - once the decision was made to leave the IRS behind, a standard GT axle was swapped into the car. This is the car ole 'Shel is shown driving, just before it's debut at the New York Auto Show (2005). Some early Shelby press material even referred to the larger rear brakes and 4-piston Brembos - this oversight was eventually corrected and removed from that material.
So, the Mustang performance flagship has a solid axle. And as we've found out since, the "real" Cobra was cancelled by Ford. In various interviews, we have been told that the "real" Cobra (aka with the IRS, big brakes, and something on described as "more" under the hood) had been cancelled (this decision was made in November 2004). The Cobra moniker was then added to the Shelby, which otherwise was simply a special edition model (like the Mach, et al, used to be). The Shelby was never an "SVT", although it was engineered by SVE. All that changed when the big shakeup inside SVE/SVT at the end of 2004. The Cobra moniker was then removed and SVT was killed off as a product organization. The remaining SVT engineers are a virtual team split across several development groups.
Will we ever again see a real sporting "SVT Cobra"? Just exactly why did SVE/SVT drop out of product creation? Those are questions for which there are no public answers. Ford's premier Mustang is dead, replaced by a straight line muscle car.
Will we ever see the IRS? We at least now know that Ford has the suspension... and it's ready to go.
Tools & Links for Ford Motor Corporation post number # 2692
4400 pounds... that's 4400! A nearby Lincoln MKS was heard to shout "Holy mother of god, I've been cloned"!!!!
Interest in the new SHO across the internet is making SEO heroes out of certain sites, this one included. This was a car we wanted to like... but "she's too much girl for me". Perhaps she is for President Clinton (in the P.J. O'Rourke sense)
The web is all a-twitter this week about the upcoming Duratec V-6 Mustang. That, folks, is not news - it's been the plan all along and only lack of funds has held it back. One fanciful site went to far as to suggest that some sort of complex "engineering" was taking place to convert the transverse Duratec to rear wheel drive.
Couldn't be more wrong - a rear wheel drive version of the new V-6 has existed all along. In fact, it was the very first version of the new Duratec engine that was shown to the public! Here's the picture: and it's clearly a rear wheel drive configuration. The engineering was done a long time ago when the engine was originally created.
Shortly after the Duratec 3.5 liter engine went into production for North American models, Mazda started using it in their CX-9 crossover. In the second model year of that vehicle, the engine was bumped to 3.7 liters - well before Lincoln started using a 3.7 liter variant. A 3-mm increase in bore is all it took. The architecture allows for even more bore as well as a longer stroke.
There was an intent to offer the "other" Duratec in the 2005 Mustang - the 3 liter version (an entirely different and unrelated engine - except for the brand name). It was discussed during the creation of that car, and a mule of a Lincoln LS with a Mustang front end was built with the 3 liter engine - we have seen a picture clearly showing that engine in the mule. Convenience for testing or production intent? More like another thing that was lost in the big fall of that car as budget cuts killed the 3 liter, the original Cobra engine (all aluminum instead of the heavy engine block that was originally used), the Cobra model itself (intended to be the ultimate Mustang - well above the Shelby), and the IRS suspension (engineered and caught in photographs back then - the picture is on this site).
So instead the Mustang got the antiquated 4 liter V-6 instead of a modern engine. The reports this week traced the lineage of that engine back to the 2.8 liter engine used in the 1979 Mustang (and dropped a year later for an equally old inline 6). Look a little more closely - this engine's lineage actually goes back much further - all the way into the sixties. Yes, folks, the 4 liter is the most "heritage" feature of the Mustang. And it's pathetically out-dated: 210 HP, 240 torque, and the type of EPA (16/24 auto and 18/26 manual) that geriatric strangulation - not efficiency - provides. Compare this to the 304 HP Camaro V-6, with direct injection (and 6-speed transmissions). There is no comparison and it's clear that Ford has been caught flat-footed yet again.
In 3.5 or 3.7 liter form (which only differ by a few HP and lb-ft of torque), the Ford Duratec has fallen behind it's rivals. GM has two direct-injection DOHC V-6 engines, with variable valve timing on both the intake and exhaust (the Ford is intake only). Chrysler has a brand new V-6 engine coming in a year, and it's also state of the art. Nevermind the Nissan/Infiniti V-6 range, which completely out-does all these engines in power and output (making due without direct injection, which it starts to adopt across the board in 2010).
Where is Ford with a competitive naturally aspirated V-6? Nowhere. The engine needs direct injection and an entirely new cylinder head with independently variable intake and exhaust valve timing. That'll be expensive to engineer - and while it probably already exists on paper getting it thru testing and into production is an tough stretch for a company that is so short on development funds. It will have to go into both transverse and longitudinal versions of the V-6 engine to pay it's way. If the current engine will receive direct injection, some of the engineering work is already done thanks to the EcoBoost version of the V-6. Lincoln needs direct injection to get competitive, and the F-150 trucks needs it for EPA. Because the Mustang engines are paid for by the truck budget (and you can thank the Explorer for the last V-6 and V-8), it's likely that the 2011 V-6 Mustang will have direct injection.
There is a plan within Ford to move to direct injection cross the board, and central direct injection will be introduced on the smallest 4-cylinders first (already shown on the 1.6 liter engine in the Lincoln C showcar).
It is new news that little Billy Ford let slip plans for a more powerful mid-range V-8 Mustang. But, again, this has been known for some time and a picture of the engine in the car has already been shown in public (granted, a spy pic - Ford is not ready to show us anything that isn't in production yet). Ford of Australia let the existence of this engine slip, and our hero Brenda Priddy has the engine in the Mustang, very nearly production ready, right down to the studs for a cover over the intake manifold.
The technical specs are not at all clear at this early point. A DOHC design is obvious, and this prototype appears to use port fuel injection instead of the more desirable and more powerful (and cleaner) direct injection. Very clearly the engine does not use central direct injection. Twin sensors on each bank would suggest independently variable intake and exhaust cam timing. If it does make 400 HP, then 80 HP/liter is hardly state of the art - this engine is clearly focused on cleanliness rather than pure power.
So this, folks, is the engine lineup for the 2011 Mustang.
Tools & Links for Ford Motor Corporation post number # 2690
Speaking of the Fiesta, Ford of Europe has just introduced the Fiesta R2. The Fiesta R2 provides rally enthusiasts with an entry level rally competition car with which to compete and to eventually work their way up the ranks to WRC events. Ford's intent is to provide a relatively inexpensive way for enthusiasts to start in professional rallies, using as many production-based components as possible. A conversion kit is offered which includes an engine, sequential gearbox, safety cage, and rally suspension. Owners can start with their own existing car or a new one.
Visit the Fiesta R2 site http://www.FiestaR2.com/ for complete details, tech specs, information on where you can see the R2 in action, and media galleries.
Tools & Links for Ford Motor Corporation post number # 2687
Natalie Neff, an up-and-coming editor at AutoWeek, was almost killed by a runaway tire. The tire came off an old Cutlass traveling in the opposite direction, took a bounce, and came down on top of the Fiesta she was test driving at approx. 75 miles per hour. Thanks to fate and the Fiesta's boron steel windshield frame, she survived and walked away from the incident.
There remains the question of how a tire came off the Cutlass. Presumably the owner was ticketed... presumably the tire was improperly torqued or was worn out.
Kudos to Ford for the new Ford Fiesta. This car clearly isn't some cheap little econo-box. It's a very well designed car, high quality, and carefully executed. This, and the upcoming new Focus, demonstrate what the Europeans have been telling us for years: that quality, luxury, and driving dynamics can be had in small cars. These cars are the wave of the future and it's a very bright future.
Tools & Links for Ford Motor Corporation post number # 2686
RSS Feed for the DrivingEnthusiast network
About the DrivingEnthusiast network
Index of all posts by title
And their first impressions were good. You can't call this a test because it wasn't instrumented - just a drive around the back roads of the press event. Everything worked well, except the brakes. That concerns us, since the brakes of our original Gen 1 SHO were terrible and it took all the way until the 3rd generation to get brakes that didn't wobble and smoke until after the first 10k miles...
The web is all a-twitter this week about the upcoming Duratec V-6 Mustang. That, folks, is not news - it's been the plan all along and only lack of funds has held it back. One fanciful site went to far as to suggest that some sort of complex "engineering" was taking place to convert the transverse Duratec to rear wheel drive.
Natalie Neff, an up-and-coming editor at AutoWeek, was almost killed by a runaway tire. The tire came off an old Cutlass traveling in the opposite direction, took a bounce, and came down on top of the Fiesta she was test driving at approx. 75 miles per hour. Thanks to fate and the Fiesta's boron steel windshield frame, she survived and walked away from the incident.
