S650 cancelled?

[Competition Orange]

Sadly hardy anyone races anymore. One guy I worked with would regularly place in events that required sponsorship. I asked him if he still has the car and if he ever races it. He still has it but does not bother anymore. In the six months I have had this little Mustang I can count 1 5.0 and 1 Challenger that you could actually hear the exhaust. I still to this day have not seen anyone other than myself take a corner that would spill a Starbucks mocha! The S650 built as some of you enthusiasts would like would be a financial nightmare for Ford. Screw the extra rigidity and horsepower and concentrate on a cheap 5.0 at 25 grand USD without all the bells and whistles. That is the modern day converted price of what I paid in the 1980s. And just keep it as a North American muscle car and not a sports car. That was what a Mustang was. If it ain’t broke don’t fix it. But Ford wants to fix it. :frusty:

You're hanging out with the wrong people...

Sponsored

 

[DickR]

I note those cars are actually lighter than the 2018 5.0 Mustang. Progress! :lol:

Many of those cars got smashed up running off the road in a corner. It was claimed that you could use the power to break the rear end loose and balance the car. But usually it would just just send you into the weeds faster. Many of those cars idled like shit. I remember that - carborators.

Narrow wheels and tiny brakes/tire, tin can bodies, no A/C or crash protection and not much sound insulation, crappy fuel mileage but gas was cheap, . . . ;)

My 69 351 Autolite 4 bbl carb used a plate above the secondary throttle plate called an air valve that was opened via vacuum pulling a piston down. I learned the hard way that the piston would tend to stick and not open the air valve. Not much fun when you pull out in highway traffic expecting lots of revs and power only to find the car suddenly "nose over" as if I took my foot off the throttle. "Exercise" at every opportunity (but never on the Army base!!!) supplemented by frequent doses of car cleaner usually warded off the problem.

 

[UAmach1]

Boat anchor 4.6 are you kidding me. You keep showing your lack of knowledge. Those 3V engines can handle a lot of modifications and boost. All you praise is your tech pack 5.2. During the mustang challenge that ran for 3 years ....those engines stood the test of time on the track.

The biggest issue with the 4.6 was that in any form, 2v, 3v, 4v, they were all limited to having the same internals so they all had a "safe" max of about 475whp before a rod would possibly go out. So the real only difference was powerband, and TQ once you went FI.

 

[Norm Peterson]

... I still to this day have not seen anyone other than myself take a corner that would spill a Starbucks mocha! The S650 built as some of you enthusiasts would like would be a financial nightmare for Ford. Screw the extra rigidity and horsepower and concentrate on a cheap 5.0 at 25 grand USD without all the bells and whistles. That is the modern day converted price of what I paid in the 1980s. And just keep it as a North American muscle car and not a sports car. That was what a Mustang was. If it ain’t broke don’t fix it. But Ford wants to fix it. :frusty:

I don't think we're getting all this new-found rigidity out of the goodness of Ford's beancounters' hearts. It's a side benefit to today's crash standards.

It's true that few drivers ever push their cars very hard at all (other than in straight lines anyway). But as the exception that proves the rule, yesterday was the first time in months, maybe a year, where I saw another car being hustled through a certain Interstate sweeper pulling enough lateral g's to put that Starbucks mocha in jeopardy.

Actually, the Mustang has a legitimate road-racing claim in its background, going all the way back to the mid-1960's with the original Shelby efforts and continuing with Ford's own Boss 302. I'm inclined to blame the Fox for emphasizing the straight line at the expense of cornering.

I have no idea what I'd have been driving since 2008 if the S197 had only been another weak-sauce rehash of the Fox chassis with more power.


Norm

 

[Norm Peterson]

The biggest issue with the 4.6 was that in any form, 2v, 3v, 4v, they were all limited to having the same internals so they all had a "safe" max of about 475whp before a rod would possibly go out. So the real only difference was powerband, and TQ once you went FI.

Ford could have 4-valved and Ti-VCT'd the 4.6 and made almost 400 HP and 350-ish torque . . . all while meeting emissions and mpg standards with room to spare.

That would have been plenty for everything except drag racing and bragging rights over the competition.


Norm

 

[nastang87xx]

It's impressive to see you at only age 18 having a GT350 and a tuned Focus ST. You must have a heck of a job man. Is your company hiring? lol

Lol I'm 30. Yes, millennials are also 18 but I'm on the tail end of the millennial generation. We're not happy about it either, us early 30 year olds. :lol:

 

[68fbjjz109]

I’ve asked this question before, but don’t think anyone’s actually quantified just how “quite superior” GM’s Alpha platform is when compared to S550. I know Alpha is slightly lighter due to its Aluminum-intensive construction — Aluminum that I hope Ford implements into S550 if it is, in fact, slated to underpin the 2021 Mustang. Is Alpha more-structurally-rigid? I know the 2016 Camaro outperforms the 2015-17 non-Shelby Mustangs, but couldn’t that be because the sum of its parts, ie, Magnetorheological shocks, stiffer springs and sway bars, more-powerful engines, better transmissions, superior tires, etc?

The GT350, to me, proves that S550 is just as capable if performance is the sole inicator of a superior platform. The next GT500 will undoubtedly raise the bar, if all the leaks and rumors are to be believed.

There is a pretty significant weight difference. The Camaro has a 110lbs advantage in just the body in white. IIRC looking at just the body and core chassis systems it's about 180lbs.

That being said the mustang is very weight competitive for its material usage. There are some base GTPPs that are in Camaro territory.

Ford could probable get about 80-100 lbs out by following a similar material usage strategy as the Camaro. But I don't really see them doing aluminum shock towers, I could see aluminum cradle/s, suspension links, knuckles, impact beams, ect; things that bolt on.

I don't have modal numbers for the S550. I do have them for all the Alpha cars. I will have the check Monday. But I think the Camaro was a little less than the CTS. I would also have to confirm it was tested the same fixed glass, cross car beam, cradle, and bumpers.

Frankly I don't think the Alpha is on a unattainable level. There is alot of engineering hours in Alpha and it shows, and we can never take that away or discredit it. However the GT350RC has shown that as a platform or architecture it still very competitive with a lower technical cost and lower capital expenses and that is almost just as impressive in my mind.

The new Mustang is being worked on now. Maybe I was more right then we knew, but I was told platform wise it was mostly carry over. They might not want to spend the money on the R part of D6R. Well see, its been pretty successful all things considering, but nothing like the F150.

The Challenger is in a similar spot. Sedans are dying, the Challenger is built of a sedan platform its really hard to make some of these business cases now.

 

[Eritas]

Camaro is lighter, has coolers (only Shelby's have them), has Magnaride (now 2018 gets them), active exhaust (2018 gets it) and an E-LSD. Add all of that to an S550 and that 110lb disadvantage will double or triple in a apples:apples comparison.

On paper the Camaro is quite a bit better. Im not sure Ford cares about light weight outside of trucks, and they are behind on Tech (just got IRS, just got Magnaride, no ELSD), but they make better engines!

 

[jake_zx2]

I don't think the Alpha is on a unattainable level. There is alot of engineering hours in Alpha and it shows, and we can never take that away or discredit it. However the GT350RC has shown that as a platform or architecture it still very competitive with a lower technical cost and lower capital expenses and that is almost just as impressive in my mind.

Agreed. Like I said before, I have not a single doubt in my mind that Ford would be able to make a FAR superior chassis if they applied the time and money towards it. Ford just seems to be better at working with what they've got. Same reason our Solid axle cars were able to handle on par with the superior IRS cars, same reason our traditional dampers cars can still hang with some Magride systems, and same reason our magride can hang with some DSSV.

Im not sure Ford cares about light weight outside of trucks, and they are behind on Tech (just got IRS, just got Magnaride, no ELSD), but they make better engines!

I'm sure ford cares about weight everywhere, thus why their first project solely dedicated to weight savings was executed on a Ford Fusion. I imagine they were just able to implement it on the trucks first because, since it's the first mainstream aluminum architecture platform from Ford, would probably cost the most, and would make the development money back in the shortest amount of time... it's low-risk development. And again, wouldn't say they're behind on Tech, they're just better at working with what they've got. Ford innovates and finds ways to make the old components work on par with the current technology so, that way, when they switch to the current technology, it will be superior to the competition

Also, ELSD sucks. I don't want that

 

[Twin Turbo]

The new Mustang is being worked on now. Maybe I was more right then we knew, but I was told platform wise it was mostly carry over. They might not want to spend the money on the R part of D6R. Well see, its been pretty successful all things considering, but nothing like the F150.

The Challenger is in a similar spot. Sedans are dying, the Challenger is built of a sedan platform its really hard to make some of these business cases now.

Good to know the new Mustang (even if it's "just" S550 v2.0 rather than S650 v1.0) is being worked on. If the time frame remains for the '21MY, my guess is we'd start seeing very early mules on the road some time next year? Guess they'll be harder to spot, too, if they're heavily based on the current car, as they could, effectively, be hiding in plane sight, at least as far as the chassis changes are concerned

As far as the Challenger is concerned, I thought the plan was to spin the next version off the Alfa Romeo Giulia platform. If that's still the case, I really hope they can squeeze those big Hemis in there :(

 

[jake_zx2]

As far as the Challenger is concerned, I thought the plan was to spin the next version off the Alfa Romeo Giulia platform. If that's still the case, I really hope they can squeeze those big Hemis in there :(

That was previously the plan... the plan now (allegedly) is to use the cheaper (and more outdated and worse performing) Maserati Ghibli platform

 

[Eritas]

Also, ELSD sucks. I don't want that

Why does it suck? It has advantages over any type of differential and can be tuned to act like an open, torsen, clutch type, and most importantly, be active and vector torque.

Sounds like your mistaking an E-LSD for the fake "LSD" that uses the brakes independently to "act" like an LSD. McLaren does this and it's quite amazing when they do it, quite crappy when most others use it on lower budget cars, but you really need to look at what a true ELSD is, like what GM, Ferrari, Porsche use.

 

[jake_zx2]

Sounds like your mistaking an E-LSD for the fake "LSD" that uses the brakes independently to "act" like an LSD. McLaren does this and it's quite amazing when they do it, quite crappy when most others use it on lower budget cars, but you really need to look at what a true ELSD is, like what GM, Ferrari, Porsche use.

I'm more so thinking of the BMW E-LSD, which almost always acts as an open diff on anything other than an ///M car, is incredibly difficult to tune, and can't handle hard launches or high horsepower

 

[68fbjjz109]

That was previously the plan... the plan now (allegedly) is to use the cheaper (and more outdated and worse performing) Maserati Ghibli platform

It's still in flux, Ghiibli was the last I heard, however nothing has been confirmed. I hoping for Guilia based.

 

[Eritas]

I'm more so thinking of the BMW E-LSD, which almost always acts as an open diff on anything other than an ///M car, is incredibly difficult to tune, and can't handle hard launches or high horsepower

That's not what im talking about, nor what the Camaro has. Look it up.

You're mistaking BMWs Automatic Differential Braking - ADB for an e-diff, which the M5 has a proper and comparable unit to what im talking about.

Sponsored