Live rear axle? WTF

Discussion in '2005 Saleen Mustang S281 SC' started by Ferrari Addict, Dec 12, 2004.

  1. I like this car, simply because it shows how Ford's quality and design has been improving. But i also love the retro design.

    But while i like the retro design, I DON'T WANT THE RETRO TECHNOLOGY.

    I dont know why the guys at Ford used a LIVE REAR AXLE....this is a sports car, and as such it should have FULLY INDEPENDENT REAR SUSPENSION, and not a LIVE REAR AXLE....ppl stopped using this type of suspension set-up on sports cars back in the 60's and 70's.....and yet here we are in 2004 and Ford is still using a live rear axle on a sports car.....they should be shot

    and what's worse, they don't even offer independent rear suspension as a option or something....
  2. you know why they did it? TO CUT COSTS! How do you think they push them out the door for $28K, fully loaded?

    The tech is completely out of date, but it still works. It isnt approaching Ferrari-like handeling capabilities, but the Mustang will do what needs to be done.

    Plus, drag racers love the live axle...

    Going completely modern costs big bucks, and that is what killed the F-body. Sticking every piece of watered down corvette tech is a great idea, but when you are donating the suspension, breaks, engine, transmission, gets very very pricy. '02 SS' were retailing for over $35K, and they were completely missing the target that the Camaro had always sold to...16-24 y.o. with money to spend.
  3. americans have always had old tech in their cars, they still were using pushrods well into the 90s...
  4. OHC engines are older than pushrod engines. The pushrod design came to be to reduce size, weight, and moving parts. It generally works out best in Vee form.
    If you don't know how old some "tech" is, you shouldn't be commenting.
  5. OHVs a old tech? Not hardly! If they are so old school, and were completely out of date, obviously, manufactuerers wouldnt use them any longer.

    The simple fact of the matter is that GM builds them right, making a good ammount of low-end torque (which I love) and a fairly flat powerband.

    I will admit, some OHC and DOHC engines have their advantages...most of which have to do with the ability to spin at higher RPMs and the ability to make more power with less of an engine.

    However, OHC and DOHC engines come at a substantial price. First of all, it will cost the consumer several thousands more to upgrade to a OHC or DOHC engine...Atleast $2-8K in some cases. Also, the OHC and DOHC engines weigh more, and are slightly larger in actualy size, not displacement.

    Frankly, I will take a good ol small block chevy over just about any engine out there...You can beat the hell out of it, and she will still run just as good as the day you bought it. Why the hell do you think GM has kept the same design going since the 1950's?
  6. The solid axle was used mainly to keep the costs right down, but also because hardcore Mustang owners made it clear they wanted a solid axle because it's better for drag racing.
    So you have, in part, people who are obsessed with travelling fast in a straight line to blame for antique suspension designs.

    The basic chassis is shared with the Jaguar S-Type but because of the cost difference the 'Stang has completely different suspension.

  7. The live rear axle, at least from Ford, was to keep cost down and reliability up. The Cobra will have an IRS just as it did in the fox bodied Mustangs.
  8. you all have good points

    if you really think about, the fact that American cars still use "old school" technology is what makes our cars so unique

    plus, it fits in with our rough-and-tumble nat'l personality, so to get rid of the old technology would be to give away a piece of our personality
  9. Who would even want a Mustang that works like an M3? That just isnt a Mustang...

Share This Page