Originally Posted by StangerGT (Post 2337857)

Also I will race my car against my same car with a Carbon Fiber hood/trunk/other bits. I will then come to the conclusion, that the only way to go is with the weight savings... otherwise its not a proper sports car...

I will then start a thread to which I will argue how its better, even tho most people cannot understand the amount of skill it would take to even see the fruits of it.

Originally Posted by StangerGT (Post 2337789)

oh and the corvette also runs leaf springs... anyone wanna say something about that? :stirthepot:

Originally Posted by m4a1mustang (Post 2337860)

Yeah but I can see that you're a fruit. :tup:

Originally Posted by jcosta79 (Post 2337863)

As a previous owner of a 2008 C6 I will say something about that. The suspension on that car was less than optimal. Above 120 I felt like I was driving a boat in rough seas.

I installed coilovers (which eliminated the leaf springs) and it transformed the entire behavior of the car. Worlds better than stock. Rock solid all the way to 190. Ask me how I know.

Oh, and I had the Z51 performance suspension.

Originally Posted by StangerGT (Post 2337868)

And yet GM slapped those leaf springs on the ZR1... which can roflstomp much of its competition. :icon17:

Originally Posted by Caustic (Post 2337817)

The problem I had is the consistent insistence that a live axle is just as good as an IRS to make a car perform well at a track. And then when that couldn't be argued, the insistence it doesn't matter. Of course it matters. That is why car manufactures spend time and money to develop these systems. That's why the cars in most track racing have it. But the live axle guys have dug their feet in because they can't deal with the fact that their cars are using inferior tech. The Mustang, one of the most recognizable marques around the world, has made forays into IRS (bad or otherwise) just for this very reason. And I'm the one that should let it go? Ford sure isn't, their next gen will offer IRS.

If you start putting other factors in there like good/bad setups, other applications, of course it muddies the whole argument, and avoids the original point.

Originally Posted by Caustic (Post 2335761)

The whole live axle vs IRS is a ridiculous debate. Billy Johnson is right from a technical standpoint. But he is also speaking from a professional standpoint, which most of are not.

The main difference between a live (stick, solid, or whatever you want to call it) vs IRS is grip and consistency. When a wheel connected to a live axle hits a bump, both wheels are affected in terrible ways. It completely throws off the handling to all but the best of drivers.

IRS is a benefit when a wheel hits a bump, the opposing wheel is still settled, the handling characteristics on the opposing wheel haven't changed. This creates consistency and predictability for handling in the majority of conditions.

The point being is that when you see Mustangs closing in on M3 lap times, everyone points it out as the Mustang being as fast and as good as the M3. But the reality is these those lap times are close because professional drivers have the ability to correct for the Mustangs weaknesses.

You put weekend warrior track day drivers in those two cars, the driver in the M3 will consistently outperform the Mustang driver by a large amount. The Mustang driver will have their hands full every time they clip an apex and roll over rumble strips.

Live axle technology is good for just one thing, price. If there were little difference between live and IRS, why does every high end race car have IRS?

Originally Posted by m4a1mustang (Post 2335609)

Let's face it, the Mustang *shouldn't* be live axle. It should have ditched it a decade ago. But they didn't. And it didn't help that for the longest time they handled like crap, so everyone just assumed stick axles can't handle. By the time they actually put together a serious chassis and got the geometry right... that's a hard stigma to shake.

Originally Posted by Chuck33079 (Post 2337822)

A properly designed IRS is better than a properly designed solid axle. The Mustang still handles very well with a solid rear. Is it ideal? No. Will it be perfectly fine for the 99.9% of us who don't make our living behind the wheel. Of course. The solid rear isn't the reason I didn't buy a 5.0. It's the interior.

Originally Posted by m4a1mustang (Post 2335609)

Let's face it, the Mustang *shouldn't* be live axle. It should have ditched it a decade ago. But they didn't. And it didn't help that for the longest time they handled like crap, so everyone just assumed stick axles can't handle. By the time they actually put together a serious chassis and got the geometry right... that's a hard stigma to shake.

Originally Posted by StangerGT (Post 2337868)

And yet GM slapped those leaf springs on the ZR1... which can roflstomp much of its competition. :icon17:

Originally Posted by m4a1mustang (Post 2337880)

This thread is long past serious.

So, grilling tonight at my house. Grab your beer or wine coolers and come on over. Yeah, I said wine coolers. I won't judge.

Originally Posted by jcosta79 (Post 2337882)

The reason the Vette still uses leaf springs is packaging. GM engineers themselves have admitted it. Would they prefer to use coil springs? Yes. But they can get 95% of the performance using a leaf spring and trick magnetorheological dampers and keep the low hood that is an iconic design feature.

Base C6 is a different animal. I can tell you from experience, it's not the same feeling driving a 370Z at 120+ mph. The first time I did it in the Vette I thought something was wrong with the car. Scared the crap out of me.

Originally Posted by StangerGT (Post 2337885)

I am not a fan of your grill technology... :stirthepot:

Originally Posted by m4a1mustang (Post 2337880)

This thread is long past serious.

So, grilling tonight at my house. Grab your beer or wine coolers and come on over. Yeah, I said wine coolers. I won't judge.

Originally Posted by jcosta79 (Post 2337882)

The reason the Vette still uses leaf springs is packaging. GM engineers themselves have admitted it. Would they prefer to use coil springs? Yes. But they can get 95% of the performance using a leaf spring and trick magnetorheological dampers and keep the low hood that is an iconic design feature.

Base C6 is a different animal. I can tell you from experience, it's not the same feeling driving a 370Z at 120+ mph. The first time I did it in the Vette I thought something was wrong with the car. Scared the crap out of me.

Originally Posted by jcosta79 (Post 2337891)

You're grilling wine coolers?

Originally Posted by m4a1mustang (Post 2337886)

That's because you had the old people shocks.

Originally Posted by jcosta79 (Post 2337895)

I had the whole old people car. Most Vette owners don't drive their cars past 60.

And NEVER in the rain.

Originally Posted by m4a1mustang (Post 2337839)

Pretty sure some here said SRA can't handle in general.

Anyways, it's the Z guys that get butthurt whenever the 5.0 is mentioned.

Originally Posted by UNKNOWN_370 (Post 2337834)

I can't recall anyone saying the mustang cant handle cuz it's an LA/SRA???? All i remember most saying is IRS is a superior design. From there it seemed "some" mustang fanboys got titty hurt. I can't remember who in this thread anyone saying the ford can't handle cuz of SRA?

Insecurity reigns supreme in this forum.

Originally Posted by /Angelo350Z/ (Post 2335794)

I've ran my 350Z on the Nurburgring more than a hundred times. Honestly, there's no way a car with a solid axle will be as quick as something with independent rear suspension, same weight, similar suspension modifications, and driver skill. Still, I wanted to know what m4a1mustang had to say about the Mustang. I never drove a car with a solid axle on the Nordschleife, but I have on the Autobahn. Honestly, it's really not the same. The elevation changes and entry speed on the Nurburgring will definitely cause a problem for a stock Mustang, or any other car with a stick axle. Not all race tracks are flat.

Originally Posted by DLSTR (Post 2335957)

Well said. Test drivers make the Mustang's look much better than they are. Applies to any street car of course. That being said the suspension and lack of quality overall keep me out of US performance cars. I had 2 Corvette's and a Z28 earlier in life. Rattle traps and lack of quality. No thanks. Performance sure. Life and driving are much more than that.

Uneven pavement at speed in a turn will bring a Mustang to life in a bad way catching many out!

Originally Posted by Mecinoid (Post 2336199)

I'll agree with you on that. I do not understand the musle car comparisons either.

If I want straight line power I go for the Mustang, Firebird, Camaro or Vette. Especially if I'm going to gut it. Who cares about the interior then?

If I want tossability I'll go with the Z. The Vette with magnetic ride is close but, it is so much bigger that it's not as nimble as the Z or transitions as well in my opinion. However, I have not had both at the same road course ever.
The competition mode on the Vette might make a difference on the track. However, on the street I'll take the Z every time for ease of use, getting around and parking situations. Those big doors on American Muscle suck.

Originally Posted by scope22 (Post 2336558)

it only doesn't matter on the track, try to take a corner on a bumpy street and see what happens...

Originally Posted by scope22 (Post 2336678)

maybe cuse you know better, ie slow down through curves ect...i've driven T/As for many years and and i bought a Z because I was tired of slowing down before each turn

Originally Posted by Caustic (Post 2336905)

Or just go for a car with with an IRS suspension which everyone in this thread has already admitted is the superior solution.

Originally Posted by /Angelo350Z/ (Post 2337171)

Perhaps on a flat track where the differences are negligible. Try racing on a track with a lot of elevation changes and you'll definitely feel the difference (the Nordschleife, especially the Karussell corner comes to mind).

Originally Posted by UNKNOWN_370 (Post 2337907)

I just think this forum has had enough 5.0 comparos it can handle. They are different cars for different people. A small crew of mustang lovers seem to keep that flame going. The sad part it's the Z owners on there own forum being defensive against 5.0 lovers.

There's a mustang forum for that shyt. Besides, up until there sports car dry up of 96. Not many would have ever made this comparo. It was only because of the only two affordable $25,000 cars that existed with a lot of power between 2002-2008 were the mustang and Z. The cars were totally different and still are. But when those are your only two affordable powerful choices, they are force comparo'd. Now it's a price comparo of which is better. I just laugh how mustang lovers here don't entertain other muscle cars to compare themselves in the other vehicles section. It has to be the Z. I guess there's more security in making that comparo when the Z has a 100hp deficit that will keep it out of the loop in some situations.

In reality, it's a comparo of which one will suit your needs. Not which one is better... Somehow some of you blur the lines of philosophy to make weak points. Somehow some of you think flow charts, graphs and eloquent word play will prove a point that doesn't even need to be proven IN A Z FORUM

The discussions always start the same way. A NEWBIE makes a thread identical to this one comparing Z's and mustangs. Z owners show their bias toward the Z. And the usual suspects make the same thread they been making since they traded for a mustang or those who are just hating there Z purchase supporting the mustang crew entertaining the same thoughts. :yawn:

If passion reigns that high for the mustang, then that passion should be shared with those equally passionate. At the mustang forum.

You say it's us Z owners that get upset??? You really need to read this thread carefully.

Originally Posted by Red__Zed (Post 2337853)

IRS is a superior framework that allows for superior designs...it doesn't guarantee them.

Originally Posted by UNKNOWN_370 (Post 2337907)

I just think this forum has had enough 5.0 comparos it can handle. They are different cars for different people. A small crew of mustang lovers seem to keep that flame going. The sad part it's the Z owners on there own forum being defensive against 5.0 lovers.

There's a mustang forum for that shyt. Besides, up until the sports car dry up of 96. Not many would have ever made this comparo. It was only because of the only two affordable $25,000 cars that existed with a lot of power between 2002-2008 were the mustang and Z. The cars were totally different and still are. But when those are your only two affordable powerful choices, they are force comparo'd. Now it's a price comparo of which is better. I just laugh how mustang lovers here don't entertain other muscle cars to compare themselves in the other vehicles section. It has to be the Z. I guess there's more security in making that comparo when the Z has a 100hp deficit that will keep it out of the loop in some situations.

In reality, it's a comparo of which one will suit your needs. Not which one is better... Somehow some of you blur the lines of philosophy to make weak points. Somehow some of you think flow charts, graphs and eloquent word play will prove a point that doesn't even need to be proven IN A Z FORUM

The discussions always start the same way. A NEWBIE makes a thread identical to this one comparing Z's and mustangs. Z owners show their bias toward the Z. And the usual suspects make the same thread they been making since they traded for a mustang or those who are just hating there Z purchase supporting the mustang crew entertaining the same thoughts. :yawn:

If passion reigns that high for the mustang, then that passion should be shared with those equally passionate. At the mustang forum.

You say it's us Z owners that get upset??? You really need to read this thread carefully.

Originally Posted by m4a1mustang (Post 2337919)

This is usually how these threads go down:

1. OP asks Z vs. Mustang?

2. Some Z owner bashes Mustang, say something factually incorrect

3. Said Z owner gets called out and corrected

4. Butthurt ensues

5. Steve makes ghey joke

6. Nobody comes to Steve's BBQ
.

Originally Posted by Red__Zed (Post 2337924)

ftfy

Originally Posted by JohnYu (Post 2337928)

Haha , I think I am going to keep the nismo , but my driving skill Is terrible ..

Originally Posted by m4a1mustang (Post 2337926)

:crying:

Originally Posted by Red__Zed (Post 2337931)

step 7: Steve buys a new car after being left alone briefly

Originally Posted by JohnYu (Post 2337928)

Haha , I think I am going to keep the nismo , but my driving skill Is terrible ..

Originally Posted by StangerGT (Post 2337934)

I would like to add that M4A1 has owned... 2 Mustangs... and 2 Z's... and he currently owns a Z...

So lets say he is probubly the best informed out of all of us. And considering he just got another Z, i doubt he has a strong bias against it...

Originally Posted by m4a1mustang (Post 2337919)

This is usually how these threads go down:

1. OP asks Z vs. Mustang?

2. Some Z owner bashes Mustang, say something factually incorrect

3. Said Z owner gets called out and corrected

4. Butthurt ensues

Now, I'm TRYING to make it better by hosting a BBQ with wine coolers but nooooo, some people want to keep the butthurt flowing.

Originally Posted by Spikuh (Post 2337874)

The problem you are actually having is that you are talking about stuff no one even brought up in the manner you seem to think. Your first post into this discussion was:



Right from the start, you immediately bring it up as a debate....which no one did.

M4a, the person who brought up Billy Johnson, even said:



before you ever stepped into the conversation.

It is also crazy funny to me that you like this:



and yet, completely ignore:



because you want to argue against Billy Johnson. :shakes head:

Originally Posted by Caustic (Post 2337946)

Maybe you are the one that is talking about stuff no one even brought up in the manner you seem to think. First off, I am not arguing against Billy in the slightest. Billy owns an NSX, is an active member of NSXPrime, and has contributed to our community immensely. He is a great source of information because he is so connected to the car community.

I was pointing out in the quote that m4a1mustang used from Billy about live axle, that Billy was speaking from a professional perspective. I went further to say that for the rest of us, a difference between the two systems (SRA, IRS) is consistency. A professional driver masks the weaknesses of the live axle, where people like us have to fight against it.

I'm sorry if you can't figure out what happened from there.

Originally Posted by Caustic (Post 2337946)

Maybe you are the one that is talking about stuff no one even brought up in the manner you seem to think. First off, I am not arguing against Billy in the slightest. Billy owns an NSX, is an active member of NSXPrime, and has contributed to our community immensely. He is a great source of information because he is so connected to the car community.

I was pointing out in the quote that m4a1mustang used from Billy about live axle, that Billy was speaking from a professional perspective. I went further to say that for the rest of us, a difference between the two systems (SRA, IRS) is consistency. A professional driver masks the weaknesses of the live axle, where people like us have to fight against it.
I'm sorry if you can't figure out what happened from there.

Originally Posted by StangerGT (Post 2337972)

I dont have issues with mine... :confused:

I think you are drinking the cool-aid on the whole concept that a live axle being hard to pilot.