Originally Posted by Red__Zed (Post 1521242)

inorite? It made me almost want to build another drag car

Originally Posted by Red__Zed (Post 1520986)

As promised:

5.0

This car was a real surprise to me, and it doesn't really surprise me that most people still don't accept it for what it is. Check out the Motortrend videos where they stack it up against an M3 for a pretty good idea of what the car is about...then take one for a spin to get a REAL idea of the beast this car is.

The power is the first thing most people talk about on the car, and rightfully so. Over 400 hp and nearly 400 ft/lb of torque is nothing to sneeze at, and the car is a power monster. We are talking no-problem power-on oversteer on demand, "go" power that is only traction-limited, etc...but it is really not the major story with the car, at least in my opinion....

Why?

The handling prowess of the new 5.0 is absolutely, disgustingly amazing. The car bites in sharp, corners flat, and exits with as much power as you could hope for. Balance is incredibly neutral, meaning you are using all four tires at the limit (side note: this neutral handling is awesome for actual track use, generating great feel and response, but costs on skidpad grip, since it is (misleadingly) done in a throttle-on state)

Even relative to my Z with the best alignment I could find for it (no front toe, 3* camber in the front, 2.5* in the rear), the Mustang holds its own. Against a stock alignment Z, the Mustang bites in far harder and seems much more eager to dig into a turn, belying its obesity.

The 6 speed trans is very impressive. The 5 speeds available in previous 'stangs got the job done, but never impressed me much. The trans in my 5.0 is a slick unit with fantastic feel.

Of course, as with any car, it is not all peaches and cream. The most obvious complaints with the mustang are the looks (subjective), interior(subjective), and the rear suspension.

I've got no problem with the first two. I don't mind either, and they are lower on my priority list anyways-- I'm driving the car, not looking at it. Other people who have different priorities may feel differently, and since they are subjective anyway, no sense giving you my opinion. Take a look at one and judge for yourself.

Now onto talking about suspension, where I bring up the issues created by the solid rear...wait....

The car catches a lot of flak for the SRA, but in my 6k or so miles, I've found it to be a non-issue, not having upset it once on the street. In contrast, the 07 mustang that I test drove a while back was a legitimately scary experience that resulted in me swearing off the S197 for a while. In my opinion (and corroborated by several other drivers), the mustang SRA is more stable than the bump-steer-prone 370z multi-link for street use, which means you won't run into any problems.

The real "issue" with the rear is a pair of floaty dampers that get flighty when cornering over 90mph. Swapping them out for Koni Yellow's seems to address that, although I am still on stock suspension and have no issues driving quite spiritedly (on the street). For high speed track use, swap them.

The Mustang also feels "big." I actually hated it the first time I drove it. The car is huge, and it is a completely different feel from the Z. I can say you do get used to it (and this is coming from a guy who wondered if he would ever get used to the ridiculous size of the 370z). Do I wish the car was smaller/lighter? Sure, but it notably outhandles a variety of lighter cars, so I am pretty happy with it.

Steering feel is pretty bland as well. Not impressed with it, but at the same time not tremendously bothered by it.




The brembo package is a must. In addition to the great looking wheels/brakes, the car stops faster than sport package Z, rocks some excellent Pzeros all around, and includes some slightly revised spring rates, traction control tuning, etc. It's freaking great.

Overall,* I freaking love this car, and it kind of annoys me that it was introduced without a lot of separation from the previous gen mustang-- it catches a lot of flak from ignorant people who don't understand the revisions that have been made....on the other hand, the community is full of enthusiasts (similar to the way the 370z community used to be), which is always a great perk with a car. Barring anything catastrophic, I see myself actually keeping this car for quite a while--which will be quite a change for me. Who knows how that will actually turn out though....

Cliff notes:
Neutral handling is sweet
tons of power
steering is bland
rear dampers are floaty

Originally Posted by Pharmacist (Post 1521735)

test drove one a few days ago and agree with most of what you say. but i do have a few observations:

- the mustang may "feel" faster at turn in, and may very well be more neutral than a Z or even an M3, both of which are designed with a slight bit of understeer from the factory. but you also have to remember that part of it is due to the very unusual square set up of the tires with the brembo package (mostly due to the skinny rear wheels on the mustang). almost all performance RWD cars come from the factory with staggered set up with the rear wheels being wider. pretty sure you can eliminate the understeer on the Z, or the M3, or any other RWD car, with a simple wheel/tire swap to a square set up. Anyway, a mustang may "feel" like a better handler than a Z, but objectively, numbers don't lie and I don't recall a single time when a mustang objectively bettered a 370z in terms of cornering g's or lateral grip, either on a skidpad, slalom, or road course.

- the big size thing I find really unacceptable. why they had to make it so darn huge compared to the previous generation mustang, i have no clue. but to be honest, if i were to get a car that big, i might as well go all the way and get a 4 dr sedan for the added practicality. small and impractical i can understand. big and practical i can understand. big and relatively impractical is just illogical.

- the numb steering is probably in part due to the electric power steering. no idea why ford would do that. bmw actually removes electric power steering from the M version of its cars and replaced them with hydraulic systems for better steering feel

-what do you mean by bump steer prone Z? I never had any bump steer on my Z. In fact the rear end was very planted and had lots of grip. maybe you drive on roads full of bumps and enormous potholes. but if that's the case, you dont need a sports car, but a 4X4 jeep. eitherway, any bump steer problems you had on the z are probably due to the stiffer springs and dampers relative to the mustang, not because of the multilink suspension.

- do you have the actual numbers about stopping distance of a mustang being shorter than a 370z? i was quite unimpressed by the look of the brembo brakes. the front rotors are about the same as the z (i believe both are 14 inch) as for the rear brakes, they for some reason remain sliding calipers, not sure if they're any bigger than the non brembo mustang brakes. for a car that big with brakes that small, i can't see how it can outbrake a 370z. could be pad material, but then again, a z's brake pads aren't really all that bad (as long as you don't overheat them with repeated braking)

My conclusion: A 370z is still the proper sports car. The mustang is a very good handling muscle car (undergoing a slow transformation to a sports car).

Originally Posted by Alchemy (Post 1521779)

This will turn to carnage soon enough.


IBTRL (In Before The Re-Lock)

Originally Posted by Pharmacist (Post 1521735)

test drove one a few days ago and agree with most of what you say. but i do have a few observations:

- the mustang may "feel" faster at turn in, and may very well be more neutral than a Z or even an M3, both of which are designed with a slight bit of understeer from the factory. but you also have to remember that part of it is due to the very unusual square set up of the tires with the brembo package (mostly due to the skinny rear wheels on the mustang). almost all performance RWD cars come from the factory with staggered set up with the rear wheels being wider. pretty sure you can eliminate the understeer on the Z, or the M3, or any other RWD car, with a simple wheel/tire swap to a square set up. Anyway, a mustang may "feel" like a better handler than a Z, but objectively, numbers don't lie and I don't recall a single time when a mustang objectively bettered a 370z in terms of cornering g's or lateral grip, either on a skidpad, slalom, or road course.

Originally Posted by Red__Zed (Post 1521942)

Not sure if serious. Lap times>skid pad numbers. Read my post again if you aren't sure why. I also don't think you understand what turn in is.

Originally Posted by Pharmacist (Post 1521965)

Not sure what your point is. I never felt the car unstable either in a straight line or a turn. I care more about what I feel as a driver than what some gauge on a lift in a garage says. I'd say that gauge is probably even less relevant to car handling than a skidpad is.

Originally Posted by Pharmacist (Post 1521965)

laptimes are also dependent on power and straight line acceleration too. show me ONE test when a mustang outhandled a z. car and driver (i think) tested best handling cars, and they found out after eliminating the straight sections from lap times that the mustang and z were pretty much even.

Originally Posted by Red__Zed (Post 1520986)

As promised:

5.0


The handling prowess of the new 5.0 is absolutely, disgustingly amazing. The car bites in sharp, corners flat, and exits with as much power as you could hope for. Balance is incredibly neutral, meaning you are using all four tires at the limit (side note: this neutral handling is awesome for actual track use, generating great feel and response, but costs on skidpad grip, since it is (misleadingly) done in a throttle-on state)

Even relative to my Z with the best alignment I could find for it (no front toe, 3* camber in the front, 2.5* in the rear), the Mustang holds its own. Against a stock alignment Z, the Mustang bites in far harder and seems much more eager to dig into a turn, belying its obesity.

Originally Posted by ihatepotholes (Post 1522202)

i don't know what you drove, but my Boss 302's handling is far from absolutely, disgustingly amazing even with adj dampers on the hardest setting. my Z handled better than my boss, not only it did not have the brake dive it had far less body roll. Z's steering is just on another level compared to the Boss; far more directly, precise and sensitive.

unless you think 5.0 GT out handles the Boss 302 i find that review slightly biased.

Originally Posted by red6spd (Post 1521985)

Uh ohhhhh. Disagreement!!!!!!!! Lol. I don't think Dan is a good judge of the Z since he seems to have had such a bad experience with it then I think anyone else on the forum.

Originally Posted by Red__Zed (Post 1522209)

Running the hardest setting on the dampers anywhere in nj is your problem.

Body roll is less, see any objective numbers. It might feel different due to the higher roll rate, but objectively it corners as flat.

Brake dive is worse, not part of handling.


Steering was covered, if you read the post.

Originally Posted by ihatepotholes (Post 1522270)

what's that suppose to mean? roads are as flat as it gets by where i live. brake dive is not part of handling? :icon18:

more body roll "feel" gives drivers less confident, it is a negative no matter how you spin it. i don't care what the number says, significant seat time in both cars tell me Z handles better.

Originally Posted by m4a1mustang (Post 1522282)

That's actually not true. It's personal preference. You might not be comfortable with it, but that doesn't mean someone else wouldn't be. For reference, just take a look at the varying spring and damper rates being run on the Z's here. Also look at the varying roll bar sizes.

There is no one perfect setup. Everyone likes their car setup a little bit differently. Driver A might like to run a super stiff rear bar to keep it flat, but Driver B might like to run less bar to get some more roll. It's entirely subjective.

Originally Posted by ihatepotholes (Post 1522291)

i can assure you that majority of drivers prefer less body roll.

Originally Posted by ihatepotholes (Post 1522270)

what's that suppose to mean? roads are as flat as it gets by where i live. brake dive is not part of handling? :icon18:

more body roll "feel" gives drivers less confident, it is a negative no matter how you spin it. i don't care what the number says, significant seat time in both cars tell me Z handles better.

Originally Posted by ihatepotholes (Post 1522291)

i can assure you that majority of drivers prefer less body roll.

Originally Posted by m4a1mustang (Post 1522309)

If that was true then everybody would run the stiffest dampers, springs, and roll bars humanly possible. And guess what? The cars would handle like **** as there would be no suspension compliance and the tires would skip across the pavement.

My preference is the least amount of body roll possible while still retaining a compliant suspension. I want to maximize tire contact under all conditions. This means a little bit of roll is going to be required. I'm not going to run super stiff all the time for the reason I gave above.

I guess I'm not a "driver," though. :rolleyes:

Honestly I feel like you're mixing body roll with roll rate. The Mustang is very flat in the corners, it just has a faster roll rate than the Z. I'm in the process of tuning that out myself.

Originally Posted by Red__Zed (Post 1522301)

Blindly setting your dampers to full stiff is not a ticket to performance. I've spent a lot of time in nj, and there's maybe a handful of roads where full stiff makes sense. The vast majority will cause you to experience all sorts of negative dynamics running full stiff

Brake dive is what allows the mustang to outbrake the z. Getting weight onto the front tires is crucial for both braking and turning. You'll notice many race teams spend a lot of time trying to allow for sufficient weight transfer while maintaining sufficient stability.


Like Steve said, much of this is subjective, to me (and many others) nose dive is no problem. You're entitled to your preferences, and perhaps should invest in some stiffer front springs.

Originally Posted by ihatepotholes (Post 1522347)

i love how you just assume that i don't try other settings and you sound like you know about my car better than i do. it is on the most stiff setting because it is the best i could dial the car in after hundreds of miles of trial in each setting. you've spent enough time in nj to experience every road? that's funny, because i keep finding these great roads in NJ that are great for spirited driving.

if you like more body roll and break dive i guess you can say what you said. but "absolutely, disgustingly amazing" tells me you haven't experienced many real sports cars.

Originally Posted by ihatepotholes (Post 1522202)

i don't know what you drove, but my Boss 302's handling is far from absolutely, disgustingly amazing even with adj dampers on the hardest setting. my Z handled better than my boss, not only it did not have the brake dive it had far less body roll. Z's steering is just on another level compared to the Boss; far more direct, precise and sensitive.

yes, Z has slight bump steer. however, mustang has far worse than bump steer to deal with. have you ever hit a bump while corning in your mustang? let me tell you it is not a good feeling, regardless what ford did to hide the SRA's characteristic it is still there, and you'll know that when you get on a bumpy road.

unless you think 5.0 GT out handles the Boss 302 i find that review slightly biased.

Originally Posted by m4a1mustang (Post 1522309)

If that was true then everybody would run the stiffest dampers, springs, and roll bars humanly possible. And guess what? The cars would handle like **** as there would be no suspension compliance and the tires would skip across the pavement.

Originally Posted by m4a1mustang (Post 1522309)

Honestly I feel like you're mixing body roll with roll rate. The Mustang is very flat in the corners, it just has a faster roll rate than the Z. I'm in the process of tuning that out myself.

Originally Posted by m4a1mustang (Post 1522359)

ihatepotholes, I think you'd be well served by the Fays2 Watts Link. Much lower rear roll center (which you can fine tune) and much better rear body control. The axle articulates more like a multi-link rear than a panhard bar live axle.

Originally Posted by ihatepotholes (Post 1522373)

i am in the process of choosing between Fays2 and Steeda Watts link. thank you for the recommendation. right now im just waiting for FRP release to their Boss specified springs.

Originally Posted by m4a1mustang (Post 1522381)

I think the Fays2 is probably the better unit. It's a little heavier than the Steeda unit but it doesn't compromise clearance on the passenger side like the Steeda does. It's also what, $400 less?

Originally Posted by Pharmacist (Post 1522388)

I just wanted to say how unreal the feeling is to see people talking about Watts linkages on a performance car in the year 2012. Perhaps the next gen Mustang will have people discussing which carburettor to maximize horsepower :stirthepot:

*runs away and puts flame shield on*

Originally Posted by m4a1mustang (Post 1522400)

This has been an exciting day for you! First you learn about toe and then you learn what a Watts Link is! Thank goodness for Wikipedia!

Originally Posted by m4a1mustang (Post 1522400)

This has been an exciting day for you! First you learn about toe and then you learn what a Watts Link is! Thank goodness for Wikipedia!

Originally Posted by m4a1mustang (Post 1522353)

:icon14:

Honestly I don't think you can take that comment at face value. Look deeper and it's disgustingly amazing because the car is a Mustang. A Mustang is not supposed to drive like this. A GT Mustang shouldn't even be within five seconds of an M3 at Willow Springs let alone a tenth of a second. Popular car culture has had us believing for years that at first sight of a corner the Mustang should plow straight off the road into a barrier.

To me, that is why it is so impressive. It's unexpected.

Originally Posted by ihatepotholes (Post 1522438)

yes the current 5.0 is the best mustang ever produced. though it does not mean it is amazing or incredible compare to other competitors. sheer performance wise yes the mustang is amazing especially when you consider the dollar to performance ratio. however, to some people numbers don't mean that much. i value the allover driving experience far above what numbers magazines produce.

it's the new 5.0 coyote that did it for me. yes the numbers are impressive, but it "feels" more like a pony car than a sports car.

Originally Posted by Pharmacist (Post 1522435)

Not exactly. Learned about toe in human anatomy class. And learned about Watts links while reading about the "history" of suspension design. :roflpuke2:

Originally Posted by m4a1mustang (Post 1522381)

I think the Fays2 is probably the better unit.. It's a little heavier than the Steeda unit but it doesn't compromise clearance on the passenger side like the Steeda does. It's also what, $400 less?

Mine should be here either Friday or Monday. Planning on installing it next Friday.

Originally Posted by ihatepotholes (Post 1522456)

who are you ordering from? Strano?

keep me updated, write a review here :tup:

Originally Posted by m4a1mustang (Post 1522450)

Trollolol?

It'd honestly be funny if you didn't make yourself look like an ignorant fool back in the Corvette thread when you simultaneously declared the 370Z a better handler than the Corvette while admitting that the 370Z was indeed the ONLY RWD CAR THAT YOU HAD EVER DRIVEN. :icon14:

But that's ok... whatever makes you happy. :tup:

Originally Posted by Pharmacist (Post 1522465)

It'd be funny if you actually didn't put words in my mouth and read what I said instead. :ugh2:

But hey, whatever floats your boat :tiphat: