And if the new GT500 is 4200 lbs, this thing will be 5500............
Ford is not great with how porky their stuff is.
Latest gasoline Porsche is 5300 lbs, go figure.
And if the new GT500 is 4200 lbs, this thing will be 5500............
Ford is not great with how porky their stuff is.
That many people are buying SUVs and CUVs is not the same thing as buying them because they might have the Mustang name pasted on them.Average new car buyer these days is 50+ years old and this is the sort of thing they are buying. Easy entry/egress, high seating, lots of creature comforts. So that's where the market is going unfortunately.
Yet another reason why this vehicle should not have the 'Mustang' name attached to it.I also think we are only going in the direction of more and more people viewing a car as an appliance and nothing more. Most new vehicles just seem completely soulless to me.
And if the new GT500 is 4200 lbs, this thing will be 5500............
Ford is not great with how porky their stuff is.
And if the new GT500 is 4200 lbs, this thing will be 5500............
Ford is not great with how porky their stuff is.
It's gonna be a heavy slug.
I've seen the number 5000 somewhere, and not as an upper limit.And if the new GT500 is 4200 lbs, this thing will be 5500............
Ford is not great with how porky their stuff is.
6.5 0-60 in the basemid 3's to mid 5 second 0-60 times according to reports.
2.3EB Mustang runs that in about 5.3
5.0 GT runs it in about 4 seconds give or take a bit.
Heavy? Yes. Slug? Doesn't like it'll be a slug.
But still NOT a Mustang.
mid 3's to mid 5 second 0-60 times according to reports.
2.3EB Mustang runs that in about 5.3
5.0 GT runs it in about 4 seconds give or take a bit.
Heavy? Yes. Slug? Doesn't like it'll be a slug.
But still NOT a Mustang.
You're not alone.But then, I'm just a 76 year old car guy fading into the sunset. A crusty old bastid resisting change if you will. Pretty obvious I'm not the demographic Ford is looking for these days.
6.5 0-60 in the base
Sri, did not mean to imply it was slow....just heavy. I wonder how it will handle..with the AWD option, like say for auto cross..or a road course..with real tires ? Mid 3's for 0-60 mph is stupid fast. What will it do in the 1/4 mile ? I see no published data.
All this single-minded emphasis that mfrs are giving to low speed acceleration feels a lot like a magician's misdirection to me. Distract me with something that sounds good while you're hiding whatever you've got going on in the background that you want to keep to yourself.mid 3's to mid 5 second 0-60 times according to reports.
2.3EB Mustang runs that in about 5.3
5.0 GT runs it in about 4 seconds give or take a bit.
Heavy? Yes. Slug? Doesn't like it'll be a slug.
But still NOT a Mustang.
All this single-minded emphasis that mfrs are giving to low speed acceleration feels a lot like a magician's misdirection to me. Distract me with something that sounds good while you're hiding whatever you've got going on in the background that you want to keep to yourself.
Throw enough power at it and even a cement truck could run to 60 in the fives.
Norm
All this single-minded emphasis that mfrs are giving to low speed acceleration feels a lot like a magician's misdirection to me. Distract me with something that sounds good while you're hiding whatever you've got going on in the background that you want to keep to yourself.
Throw enough power at it and even a cement truck could run to 60 in the fives.
Norm
And how long will the cement truck take....to get from 60 mph....to 0 mph ??
As far as I know, regenerative braking is always present. How much and how fast any of the braking energy during harder stops is handed off to friction brakes has to involve computers and (I suspect) complex interaction with the ABS system.I just can't fathom a 5000+ lb car, with oem skinny tires, having a 'good' 60-0 time...... or 100-40, 80-50, etc, etc. Does the regenerative braking kick in ? ....or friction brakes...or both ? Does the car do a... 'nose dive' ?