Originally Posted by sstlaure

I understand that IRS is better from a purely handling standpoint - however muscle cars have typically been tail happy, and historically have always been solid axle. You can still get excellent handling out of a solid axle if it's set-up properly as evidenced by the road course success the Mustang had from it's 2005 debut season & later.

A RWD IRS is also much more expensive to implement than what is in your Malibu (no driveline going through it, doesn't have to deal with torque, etc.) Have you noticed the price tags of those IRS Roush Mustangs? There are reasons for that - IRS is one of them. You say it's what can be done when the company is serious - I say it's what can be done when you've got a much larger budget, sales price and profit margin to work with. Big difference in cost between a $26K GT Mustang and a $50+K Roush.

You sacrifice some "drag-ability" with IRS. More difficult to change gearing, fewer aftermarket parts available to strengthen the rear end, etc. That is something that is taken into consideration with the Mustang. Unfortunately you can't please everyone all the time. Drag racing is a HUGE part of the Mustang heritage (and muscle cars in general), with entire classes of racing devoted to Mustangs.

You can keep it solid axle for the masses that want it, then have the Roush's, Saleen's etc of the world develop their own supercars off of them at much higher price tags. (Cars that for the performance offered, are some of the best high performance deals going.)

Have you driven a new Mustang at it's limits? I have. It has a very controllable feel....and it you push it too far, the rear does come out, but it's still in control. All of the professional write-ups I see are very positive about the handling of the Mustang.

Originally Posted by VB

For Mustangs, I can only go on what I see others do (which, tbh, is usually driving like an ***). Anyone I've known with a Mustang has either had an auto (not interested) or won't let me drive because "I couldn't handle it." That's pretty much BS considering what I learned to drive stick on...

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v3...43887_1560.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v3...521205_674.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v3...21206_1016.jpg

I would have to ask for the video file as evidence, but the last dyno run on that Evo was 480WHP. I think I could handle a Mustang GT, I'm not a fool. That aside, I'll always give the Mustang the edge on sheer presence on the road...

And you're right, Scott, the Roush Mustang is much more expensive - but, IMO, it's everything a Mustang SHOULD be. As far as the money issue - well, I understand that it's of course much more involved to implement IRS on a RWD car, but IMO it makes things so much better. I guess if I ever buy a RWD car, it'll be an RX or maybe an S2000 anyway - I honestly was never a V8 fan. Does that make me a bad American?

Originally Posted by sstlaure

I understand - I've met plenty of Mustang owning douchebags. Don't hate the car, hate the person. Anyone can "handle" a Mustang....

Also remember that the suspension of the Mustang GT is also common with the V6 derivative (more V6's are sold than V8's) they make nice sporty cars for the less affluent crowd (around $20K gets a pretty nice ride) - although in my mind it's not a Mustang unless it's a V8/Manual.

Ford has sold ~800,000 Mustangs in the last 4 years since the new bodystyle - Roush has made maybe 4,000. The market they sell to is too small to base the design decisions for the car off of.....you'd never make money on it. (Roush doesn't have to do any of the safety/crash development on their cars as aftermarket companies are held to different standards than OEM....they just bolt on/develop their unique parts, saving them the need to make enough cars to pay off the expensive tooling needed to produce an entire car.)