BRZ/FR-S vs 2015 Mustang
 

With all the new information starting to leak out about the new mustang platform, it's looking like it may be a pretty decent car.

According to Ford inside sources reporting to Edmunds.com, The 2015 Mustang is set to loose at least 400lbs off the current body weight, but that’s not all.

A 400LBS Lighter, 15 Inch Shorter 2015 Mustang

Up until now, we have only been able to speculate about the next generation S550 Mustang being a smaller, more nimble vehicle. Now we have some solid evidence to support the findings. In addition to dropping 400 pounds in curb weight, the same inside source is also reporting a smaller in length 2015 Mustang–slicing off ~15 inches from the total size. This will undoubtedly have a positive impact on the 6th generation Mustang’s gas mileage and MPG. How much it will impact fuel efficiency, is still a mystery.

How this will play out with regards to interior space is yet to be seen, but given the tight constraints of the current Mustang’s back seats, one would wonder how much more room there is to loose from the interior compartment. For those of us who keep the rear seat belts buckled year-round, the prospect of loosing a little more real estate isn’t much of a concern, especially if that means dropping 400lbs.


2015 Mustang Dimensions vs The 2014 Mustang
Width: The 2015 is said to have a “10%” (~6.5 inches) shorter in width compared to the 2014 Mustang.

Width... Mustang: 67.4 inches wide; BRZ/FR-S: 69.9 inches wide

Length... Mustang: 173.5; BRZ/FR-S: 166.7

Weight: 2015 is set to loose ~400lbs curb weight taking it down to around 3200 pounds. This is still about 450 pounds heavier than the BRZ, but this is with the 5.0. The 4-cylinder is thought to weigh in around 3000 pounds.


Pairing Less Weight With the EcoBoost 4-Cylinder Mustang
The drop in curb weight was brought on by two developments on the automotive world–Ford’s need for a more fuel-efficient fleet of vehicles and Europe’s tight vehicle sizing constraints. Given that we’ve heard reports and we have a video of the 2015 Mustang with a turbo’d 4 cylinder under the hood, its only natural to speculate how this new “SVO” will perform.

If the Edmunds report is true and the new Mustang sheds 400lbs of weight–not including the motor–the turbo 4-cylinder would have a curb weight of around 3,000lbs and be pushing somewhere around 300-350 horsepower. Comparatively, the last 4-cylinder turbo’d Mustangs–the 1986 SVO–came in at a curb weight of 3,049lbs and had a power output of 200 hp (149 kW) @ 5000 rpm 240 lb·ft (330 N·m) @ 3200 rpm. Throw in the addition of an IRS and shorter overall length, you have one completely overhauled pony car. Look out, there might be one formidable 4-banger with Mustang logos blowing the doors off older v8s when the 2015 model year Mustangs start rolling out.

The Coyote V8 Will Return in 2015
It’s not all a loss for the die-hard V8 crowd–in addition to a turbo 4-cylinder, the 2015 Mustang will also be produced with the current Coyote motor, possibly with a bump in power to between 450-475HP. A 2015 prototype videotaped doing test runs around the Dearborn, MI area had a V8 and sounded as good as ever, producing the low, muscle car growl we’ve come to expect from the beloved Mustang. The current V6 is set to return as the base model Mustang. The turbo 4 would be the middle ground while the V8 GTs would still be the premium model.

I just test drove a 5.0 again yesterday. I'm holding out a ton of hope for this new model. I felt like I was driving a boat. Granted it was quite large, the 5.0 moves that car quite well. I'm super excited to see what the new model can do with the same power output while on a diet.

2014 Z28 is where it's at. Good review on the Mustang though.

IMO, the Z/28 is addressing a different market - it's a bit too stripped out to be a daily driver. It has a one-speaker audio system (one speaker!) and A/C is an optional extra. As far as Camaros are concerned, the SS would be more comparable to something like the new Mustang than the Z/28 unless all you wanted was a track toy (and honestly, once you get to the price of the Z/28, a base C7 'Vette starts to look awfully tempting instead).

Yea, the Z/28 is sick but it's a bit out of the price range too. I would totally pick up a C7 before I went for one. Since the C7 is way out of my price range too, I started looking into the Mustang. I'd buy one now if they weren't so fat.

I've always been a Mustang fan, had an 03 Cobra, 03 Mach 1, and was about to pull the trigger on a Boss 302 before buying the BRZ, but I could just could not get over the fact that the new Mustang felt like a boat on track after driving a 2013. Steering didn't feel that connected to the car; it was like the car would move a second after the steering input, and was just too darn heavy.

With that said, I have high hopes for the 2015 Mustang. I caught a 2015 mule testing at Sebring a while back, and running some SERIOUSLY fast laps.

The car itself was a silver 2013 mule, had the Boss 302 front grille, black tape around the car, for what appeared to be sensors and such, and then what I found to be the most odd was the gas tank area protruded from the normal body lines of the car, significantly enough that I could see it as it was going around the track at full speed. The wheels were also much wider than stock, and stuck out of the wheel wells a significant amount.

The car was EXTREMELY quiet; there was zero blower whine, and it was significantly quieter than the ZL1 and 911 Carrera S they were testing as well (more on that in a second).

So I went over to the hot pits and found a black dual car trailer with a black F series dually, neither had any markings on it, and there was a black pop-up tent next to the trailer in the hot pits. This appeared to be the same setup that was down here at Sebring when they were testing the 2013 GT500 last October. I saw some guys with laptops next to the tents, and then two test drivers in white fire suits with giant "SVT" logos in blue on the back of the fire suits. In front of the tent, they had what appeared to be a stock black Camaro ZL1 and the new 911 Carrera S, that also appeared to be stock, and was silver.

I got a few lap times on the silver Mustang and the Carrera S, but I did not get one on the ZL1:

Mustang best lap time: 2:27
Carrera S best lap time: 2:24

That is 3 seconds off one of the best driver's cars out there, on one of the roughest tracks in the country.

Here is a video (sorry for the poor quality, had to snap it with my Iphone):

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BHzbfKV7BdU"]Ford Testing at Sebring 1/18/13 - YouTube[/ame]

Not sure if it was mentioned already, but the 2015 mustang is rumored to have independent rear suspension. Should make for some serious competition for the twins.

Too fat. More expensive than a Corvette = nonsense collector item.
______

To the OP. Finally a good versus thread topic. This is actually the debate I had prior to picking up my 86 recently.

Reasons I went w/ the 86.

1-Still going to be 300-400lbs lighter.
2-Will have a wider width and track, if the early figures are correct.
3-Reliabilty/quality-For all the quirks of the early 86, an early Ford is even scarier. For anyone who complains about the interior of the 86 being cheap, touch the inside of any Ford/Lincoln product. Yuck.
4-Aero/mileage advantage will remain unchanged.
5-Which also translate into better potential for noise control in a DD.
6-Waiting for the unknown and missing out on a 10 series (I wasn't attracted to either Scion or Subaru available packages).

Reasons to wait for the Mustang:

1-Immense and easily attainable power potential compared to the stock 86.

Regardless, future Boss type Stangs will be seriously fast. Toyobaru will have its work cut out if it wants to play in the same league using the 86.

Were the Mustang and 911 running street tires?

definitely squealed like street tires; they were howling around every corner.

I'm pretty sure pricing for the 2014 z28 hasn't been announced yet (could be wrong though). The z28 lapped Nurburgring faster than the Lexus LFA, Lamborghini Gallardo Superleggera, and the Porsche 911 Carerra S... Not exactly a nonsense collector item.

Inside source told me ~$70k

Smaller, lighter, independent suspension. These were all musts with the Mustang. I am excited to see the finished project, but if these renderings are close to being accurate, I think Ford missed the boat on design:
http://www.autoblog.com/2013/10/15/2...ke-real-thing/


http://hss-prod.hss.aol.com/hss/stor...rs-1-1-opt.jpg

http://o.aolcdn.com/dims-global/dims...enders-2-1.jpg

agreed; that is pretty much what the front end looks like. Here's a leaked photo:

looks way too much like the Fusion/Taurus


http://www.mustang6g.com/forums/atta...7&d=1381155614

They should have left the looks alone, and just trimmed it down a bit. :barf:

Anyway, I used to own a 2000 Mustang (V6) when I was a teenager, and always wanted an 03/04 Cobra, but still haven't gotten around to ever getting one (always wanted a 4th gen Supra too, but yea).

If they can get the Mustang down to around 3000 lbs with a turbocharged 4 cylinder "SVO," I think Toyota/Subaru are going to have their work cut out for them with increasing power figures (hp/tq) to compete.

I think they are just trying to make it look like that Mustang designed by Italian design power house Giugiaro back in 06. Which can be good......if it's not molested by some imbecile in ford design department. :D

It pretty much has actually.

Umm, yeah 00:00.53ms faster than a base spec LFA. Many of those times for tons of cars were never even crried out past seconds so we really don't know for sure. Still not faster than the track tuned Nurburging package at 7:14.64 which is what the Z/28 (7:37.47) is for the regular Camaro.

That's 6th fastest time ever versus 36th. So let's not get carried away w/o proper perspective.

http://nurburgringlaptimes.com/lap-t...times-top-100/

It is nonsense because a 2011 Corvette Z06 did 7:22.63.
___________

4-cylinder Muscle car? Thx but just no. They might as well rebadge Fiats. I think you can find a 4 cylinder Mustang for real cheap on Ebay, someone might even give you one for free. ;)

Btw, I think that render is pretty crude and is missing things that make it look much worse than it will be.

I kind of like that look, though I think it would look better with wheels an inch or two smaller. I'd want to see it in person to decide for sure, but I think the design has a lot of potential (both aesthetically and technically).

Absolutely right. Easy to fix up a Mustang. Fake louver over glass here, hood scoop there, tack on a spoiler, angry grill and headlights, name it Jessica, all done!

Base Mustang today looks pretty bland in case anyone didn't notice.

By cutting down the Mustang so much, will it still be maintaining its muscle car heritage? I wonder if muscle car purists would be crying afoul of the new design of the Mustang once it debuts at a rather slim-ish ~3200lbs and smaller size.

I don't think so. The Mustang & Camaro were always "pony cars" compared to the big block muscle cars of the day like the Hemi Cuda, Charger, and 454 Chevelle (:drool:) - all were much larger cars. Mustang & Camaro were smaller cars with small block & sometimes big block v8's put in them.

Anyway, I'm very excited to see what the next gen mustang is like and I'm sure I'll be taking a test drive in one. The only thing I didn't like about the current gen was it felt like a boat - if they can fix that they'll have an excellent car.

I did a quick search and can't seem to find anything.

These are $100,000+ "supercars" we are comparing the z28 too. You have to give credit where credit is due.

What is nonsense about the z06 time?

theres an article where someone at gm says it will be the most expensive camaro variant

as in > zl1

Isn't the ZL1 around $59k? I feel like the Z/28 shouldn't have CCB's standard. If they were an option instead that's $8k right there.

Generic race car for the street edition Camaro beats LFA around Nurburgring. Which one would I rather be seen in (and own)? The LFA...

It's a pony car. The pony cars always weighed less than muscle cars.

Pony cars, the Mustang and Camaro, were always supposed to be small. And were for quite some time.

It's only with the rapid demise of the true muscle cars in the late 70s, that had the Pony cars move up to fill their gaps in the late 80's

For the first 25 years of its life, the Mustang was quite small. It debuted at a mere 2,500lbs. Keep in mind, that a full-size car at that time, like the Galaxie, tipped the scales at nearly 4,000lbs. The Mustang, in its time, was even smaller and lighter than the BRZ/FRS is compared to many of its modern peers.

For half its 50-year lifespan it managed to remain under 3000lbs, and now tops 3,500lbs. A modern Mustang is now only 300lbs shy its full-size sedan brethren the Taurus. In 1964 it was seperated from the Galaxie by over 1,300lbs.

So the Mustang could lose HALF A TON, and still remain as disparate today from Ford's lineup as it was 50 years ago when it debuted.

Lol, nothing. That's the point. The new Vette will come close to the Z06 and slaughter the Z/28 for around $15K less give or take. This is why I don't take it seriously when you pay more for less performance simply for aesthetics as a collector item. That's what I was getting at originally.

Exactly! People have the wrong impression of muscle/pony cars IMO. If they had kept true to their origins I would have owned a domestic a lot longer ago. It's was the land cruiser/led sled era in the 70's that made everything get huge for the sake of comfort. I've never been a led sled guy. The pinnacle of American Muscle cars for me is the AC Shelby Cobra and 427 Corvette Stingray or the 2400lb Dodge Hemi Dart. Not those big ass boats.

So I think Ford is moving in the right direction and getting back to it's real roots.

So wouldnt you think the z28 performs incredibly well against $400,000+ exotics, you waste 4x the money on one car that doesnt even perform better than chevy's tricked out camaro?. It doesnt matter what you think the car is a rocket and hardly a novelty. Yes, we all know its still a camaro

It depends on what you buy a car for. If I buy a car for the reasons you state, the Z/28 is stupid because the Corvette is cheaper and faster.

If you buy a LFA for reasons you should buy a LFA, you still buy the LFA even if the Camaro can go to the moon and back while doing your laundry for you. Or you could pay a little bit more and blow the z/28 away by 20 seconds. Even though it's just a LFA.

Some people just don't seem to understand exotic cars. People must be reaaal stupid to buy an Aston V8 Vantage over a Lancer Evo!

:bonk:

Which corvette is cheaper and faster?

New C7 starting at $51K. Z/28 is going to more than $60-65K.

http://www.corvetteblogger.com/2013/...ette-stingray/

"So far GM has been mum on the C7 Corvette Stingray’s Nurburgring time but we just know that setting a fast lap would be on the table. Remember that 7:19.63 Corvette ZR1 time that was set by Mero in 2011? While they were in Germany for that test session, the Corvette team also ran the 2011 Corvette Z06 with the Z07 package which earned a lap time of 7:22.68. As the Stingray was faster than the 2011 Corvette Z06 with the Z07 package and Michelin’s Pilot Sport Cup tires at VIR, can we assume that the C7 Corvette Stingray will be faster on the Nordschleife?"


No wonder GM is keeping the official times secret.

You were the one saying why pay more when you get less while comparing the vette vs camaro, I was just showing you that people do and will pay more for looks and prestige ie exotics. Chevy wins with either choice you make.

Okay then, so you agree w/ my original point that the reason anyone buys the Z28 is looks not performance.

Btw, rereading your previous post does not at all sound like what you just said at all. Sounds like the opposite in fact.

Somewhere in this thread there is a conversation about a 2014 mustang vs the twins... hehe


I think despite the diet and shrinkage the engine placement, and high center of gravity will still not hold a candle to the stock 86 twins feel. Even if it blows us away at a light.

Not looks but prestige, value, exclusivity, absurdity, or 'because I want the fastest camaro ever offered'(performance).

I have yet to see the VIR comparison verified and I have serious doubts about the C7 eclipsing a Z07 C6 same track same day same driver. The laws of physics don't support a heavier car with less power on relatively skinny PSS's out gunning the lighter, more powerful ZO6 on cups. Regardless a $60,000 Z51 C7 will be the most performance per dollar available on the planet. If the C7 Z? is earth shattering, I may give up the 427 Vert for one.

I agree, but it could get close and definitely better than the z/28. It does have better traction management, aero, and perhaps braking fwiw.
____

But yeah, this is a Mustang/twins thread so I'm off the derail.

The original '64-'65 was pretty small and lightweight, but the '67-'68, '69-'70, and '71-'73 iterations each gained in size and weight, up to ~3600 lb max. Basically gained nearly 1000 lb in less than 10 years! I have no idea why those are all considered "1st gen" Mustangs, seems like four very distinctive generations to me...
Then the Mustang II came out in '74, much smaller and lighter at ~2800 lb for a v8 model, but God what an ugly little spud... A buddy of mine in high school in the 80s had the "King Cobra" version of the "Cobra II", which was basically a Mustang II with a buncha decals. What a damn freakshow...
Then the Fox Mustang replaced the Mustang II, 4.9/5.0 v8 versions were ~3000-3200 over those years. 90s SN95 5.0 Mustangs were also ~3200 lb., but they gained weight again when they went to the OHC and DOHC "mod" motors in '96. The top DOHC V8 versions were ~3400 lb., and the ultimate supercharged Cobra versions in '03/'04 were pushing 3700 lb.
The 2005+ S197s are a LOT bulkier and heavier, ~3600+ for V8 models, ~3800+ for supercharged GT500s.

Anyway, LOTS of weight fluctuation over the years!

Very much looking forward to the 2015 with IRS. I sincerely hope the rumors of losing 400 lb. are true, 3200 lb. for a V8 model would be OK with me. But targeted weight savings are rarely achieved...

The weights of all cars have increased by around that much, no? A Civic or Corolla from 25+ years ago were less than 2000lbs, if I remember correctly. But today's versions easily top 2800lbs. Current LS460 easily tops 4200lbs and then AWD L versions top over 4600lbs.

Imagine if we had car weights from then with the engines of today. We'd be getting like 60mpg+. Although I'd be fearful of getting into crashes with those chassis from back in the day.

I guess we can only wait, watch, and hope at this point.