CG Height?

[racerjourno]

Does anyone know what the CG height is for the GT? Searched the Net and haven't found it.

Thanks for any guidance or help.

 

[partsbill]

is this what your looking for?
SECTION 204-00: Suspension System — General Information
2006 Mustang Workshop Manual
SPECIFICATIONS

Front Ride Height 37 mm ± 8 mm (1.5 in ± 0.3 in)
Rear Ride Height
Rear — Convertible 118 mm ± 8 mm (4.6 in ± 0.3 in)
Rear — Coupe 115 mm ± 8 mm (4.5 in ± 0.3 in)

front item# 1 Ride height = B - A
front item# 2 Measurement A
front item# 3 Measurement B


rear item# 1 Body reinforcement
rear item# 2 Ride height (shortest distance)
rear item# 3 Rear axle

 

[racerjourno]

Calculated CG

Nope. See: http://www.longacreracing.com/articles/art.asp?ARTID=22 for an overview of how to measure CG height with a car in hand.

After some more online research, I have mathematically calculated what I believe to be close approximation of a stock S197's static CG height by using rollover crash data generated by the NHTSA. Our tax dollars at work.

At this link:

http://www.safercar.gov/Cars/3307.html (scroll down a little)

They supply the SSF: Static Stability Factor of the S197 chassis (2005 Mustang) as 1.53.

At this link they supply how SSF is calculated:

http://www.safercar.gov/rollover/pages/FAQs.htm#ssf
(see #7)

I reworked the equation at #7 of SSF = T/2H, where T = vehicle track width and H = CG Height, to solve for H.

H = T/(2)(SST).

Guess they solve for CG Height or get it from the manufacturer.

So:

H = 62.3/ (2)(1.53) = 20.359-in. static CG Height

where 62.3-in. is the Front track width of the 2005 Mustang. Rear is 62.5-in.

I guess we can thank all the SUV rollover hoo-hah of a years back for the govn. gathering vehicle rollover data beginning in 1988. If you believe info on the NHTSA websites and links (LOTs of info on them) the SSF is a statistically accurate indicator of a vehicle's rollover propensity. In general, a higher SSF can indicate resistance to rollover; a lower one the opposite. A low SSF is 1.0, and high one is 1.5.

For example from the NHTSA:

2005 Mustang SSF = 1.53 (wide tires, yes!)
92--97 Ford Crown Vic's = 1.42
88--91 Izuzu Trooper = 1.02 (Yikes!)
88--92 Ford Ranger = 1.03
88--93 Ford Mustang = 1.38
88--92 Camaro = 1.53

Comments welcomed.

 

[fordracing]

Keep in mind it looks like that was a 6 cyl. they tested so the C/H will change with the added weight of the 8cyl. kinda stinks because they dont really tell you what they tesed. but the top picture is not a GT.

 

[GIG4FUN]

Keep in mind it looks like that was a 6 cyl. they tested so the C/H will change with the added weight of the 8cyl. kinda stinks because they dont really tell you what they tesed. but the top picture is not a GT.

engine weights are close. They are cast iron block forged rods... we are aluminum block powder rods..... more difference perhaps would be the larger rear axle, brakes and misc other stuff.

Thanks for posting this. I like this kind of stuff. (I rolled a V8 Pinto once ~~~ street racing ....)

 

[racerjourno]

fordracing: Good point. I should have made it clear it looked like a 6 cyl Mustang was used in the government tests and not a GT. Guess they couldn't get the funds approved (or a GT car out of Ford) to wang into a wall or smack with a side-impact sled.

 

[US-1]

Does anyone know what the CG height is for the GT? Searched the Net and haven't found it.

Thanks for any guidance or help.

Not sure anyone has calculated that one yet. Then again...most people don't know how either. I'd have to get mine over to Dad's shop but it will have to wait until after Orlando.