Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Heh you've gotta be a pretty fat dude to be at 4000 in my car. But I weigh 150, usually more like 140 if Im staying active. Americans average weights must be ridiculous these days if youre throwing around 200 as an average. Regardless, it weighs just a little over 100 lbs over my 05 which stands next to it, and has an additional 140 horsepower. The weight is negligible. And its massively smaller and lighter than tje Challenger. You see my picture above of my Mustang in my garage? The Challenger wouldnt even fit in my garage, its massive.
2015 Ford Mustang 188.3" long 75.4" wide 54.4" tall
2015 Dodge Challenger 197.7" long 75.7" wide 57" tall.
My garage is 24 feet deep. I think I read that a small garage may average 22 feet deep. Maybe your garage is not that deep. Lets say it is 18 feet deep. That would be one small garage. Both the Mustang and the Challenger are under 16 and a half feet in length. They are both nearly the same width. The average single car garage is 8 feet wide, or 96". Both cars are less than 76" in width.
Unless you are saying that you have a garage that is less than 197.7" in length, or lets say under 16 and a half feet. I have never seen a garage that short. I did look at your picture and it would seem your garage is wide enough for the Challenger. It also looked like you have an additional 10 or so inches of space. I bet you could fit the Challenger in your garage.
LOL, This was meant in fun and in no way challenging you in any way. When you said the Challenger would not fit I wanted to use data on both cars to see if it would. You look to be a Mustang guy and that is fine. Not a problem with that. I just wanted to set the record that a Challenger would fit.
2015 Ford Mustang 188.3" long 75.4" wide 54.4" tall
2015 Dodge Challenger 197.7" long 75.7" wide 57" tall.
My garage is 24 feet deep. I think I read that a small garage may average 22 feet deep. Maybe your garage is not that deep. Lets say it is 18 feet deep. That would be one small garage. Both the Mustang and the Challenger are under 16 and a half feet in length. They are both nearly the same width. The average single car garage is 8 feet wide, or 96". Both cars are less than 76" in width.
Unless you are saying that you have a garage that is less than 197.7" in length, or lets say under 16 and a half feet. I have never seen a garage that short. I did look at your picture and it would seem your garage is wide enough for the Challenger. It also looked like you have an additional 10 or so inches of space. I bet you could fit the Challenger in your garage.
LOL, This was meant in fun and in no way challenging you in any way. When you said the Challenger would not fit I wanted to use data on both cars to see if it would. You look to be a Mustang guy and that is fine. Not a problem with that. I just wanted to set the record that a Challenger would fit.
I do have a short garage on the right side. What you dont see is that I have my furnace and water heater right in front of where the Mustang is. I dont even have 2 spare inches when I park that thing. Its basically touching my furnace. And thats the only way the garage will close. On the other side, youre right it might fit, but really my point is that its just a bigger car, and not slightly in my opinion. Now the 6.4 Hemi is a beautiful motor I must admit. Speaking of tight squeezes, anyone else amazed at the brains ability to master things like that subconsciously? When I first got my Stang I was terrified of parking it because I have zero room for error and I dont want to blow up my house by running into my gas furnace. So I used to park, stop, get out, inch forward, get out, check again, etc etc. Now I can park that thing on a dime in the perfect spot every time without even looking.
I do have a short garage on the right side. What you dont see is that I have my furnace and water heater right in front of where the Mustang is. I dont even have 2 spare inches when I park that thing. Its basically touching my furnace. And thats the only way the garage will close. On the other side, youre right it might fit, but really my point is that its just a bigger car, and not slightly in my opinion. Now the 6.4 Hemi is a beautiful motor I must admit. Speaking of tight squeezes, anyone else amazed at the brains ability to master things like that subconsciously? When I first got my Stang I was terrified of parking it because I have zero room for error and I dont want to blow up my house by running into my gas furnace. So I used to park, stop, get out, inch forward, get out, check again, etc etc. Now I can park that thing on a dime in the perfect spot every time without even looking.
Okay, so, you have a tiny garage. It's not that the Challenger is "So massive". The car is less than a foot longer than your mustang. I think your perception of it is what is skewing things. For example, my 370Z seemed a lot smaller than my Z06, but looking at the raw numbers, it just wasn't so. Driver perception is a big deal, and that's a fair reason not to like a car, but calling it "massive" in comparison is a bit misleading.
PS. Why didn't you just hang a tennis ball like the rest of middle America?
Also, when you corner weighted your mustang, were you in it with at least 1/2 tank of fuel? I'm doubting it, based on your numbers. It's a 4,000# car with the average male driver and a decent amount of fuel in the tank.
Oh, c'mon. A lot of regular people have great affection for Mustangs. For some it's nostalgia. For some it's the desire to buy an American car that can provide the look of speed without breaking the bank. Many think they're fun to drive. Yes, Ford makes mistakes but Mustang has held on for decades now and has hundreds of thousands of fans. Nothing sleezy about it.
No its not over 4000 lbs. No where close in my model. I am getting a little bit sick of the BS. Ive corrected you multiple times on multiple issues and you keep coming back and repeating like nobody even pointed it out. Cut that sh* out. #1) I curb weighted my 15 so I know exactly how much it weighs and its 3746. About 100 more than my 05. #2) Your claim that the suspension in the 15 is worse than the solid rear axle. It isnt in any way and I have both. Youve already admitted here that youve driven neither. Now cut the games and talk what you can substantiate.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Meyers
Heh you've gotta be a pretty fat dude to be at 4000 in my car. But I weigh 150, usually more like 140 if Im staying active. Americans average weights must be ridiculous these days if youre throwing around 200 as an average. Regardless, it weighs just a little over 100 lbs over my 05 which stands next to it, and has an additional 140 horsepower. The weight is negligible. And its massively smaller and lighter than tje Challenger. You see my picture above of my Mustang in my garage? The Challenger wouldnt even fit in my garage, its massive.
Well I actually agree with JWG. You're arguing for maybe 100lbs. With you and a full tank, that car is right under 4,000lbs or possibly right equal to it like he is saying. He's also not claiming that the engine can't handle the weight of the car but the suspension on a stock GT or even stock basic Mustang isn't good enough for aggressive cornering on tight corners at high speed. There is way too much weight shift on the Mustangs, which is easy to tell, as I've driven Mustangs from 05-09 body style that are stock like that. The suspension simply can't handle that weight well enough as the car is very heavy. Heavier than it needs to be IMO.
I think JWG's point is that Ford should either offer a stripped down version of the car, making it lighter, or offer the Ford Racing Suspension as a stock option with the weight of the car, not an aftermarket modification. To increase the handling of my GT secondary to the weight of the car to decrease weight shift, and with increased horsepower, it was well over $2k of work for the strut tower, racing suspension, lowering the car and a front end alignment. It really should come standard with all of that in the GT version IMO.
If I am not correctly understanding your points JWG, please correct me. That's what I think you were saying though.
Looks too much like all the other Fords now. Reminds me of the Taurus. A mustang has always had a certain distinction, and didnt follow Fords usual designs. I think after a couple of years, a redesign will happen.
From about 87-93 they did all look alike- at least in the grille area.
Well I actually agree with JWG. You're arguing for maybe 100lbs. With you and a full tank, that car is right under 4,000lbs or possibly right equal to it like he is saying. He's also not claiming that the engine can't handle the weight of the car but the suspension on a stock GT or even stock basic Mustang isn't good enough for aggressive cornering on tight corners at high speed. There is way too much weight shift on the Mustangs, which is easy to tell, as I've driven Mustangs from 05-09 body style that are stock like that. The suspension simply can't handle that weight well enough as the car is very heavy. Heavier than it needs to be IMO.
I think JWG's point is that Ford should either offer a stripped down version of the car, making it lighter, or offer the Ford Racing Suspension as a stock option with the weight of the car, not an aftermarket modification. To increase the handling of my GT secondary to the weight of the car to decrease weight shift, and with increased horsepower, it was well over $2k of work for the strut tower, racing suspension, lowering the car and a front end alignment. It really should come standard with all of that in the GT version IMO.
If I am not correctly understanding your points JWG, please correct me. That's what I think you were saying though.
Pretty much. GM certainly "gets it" with the 1LE suspension under the Camaro, it's turning lap times similar to the base-model C6 and Grand Sport corvettes. Ford just threw an IRS under the Mustang and said "Tada!" is what it seems like, to me, when the older model is just as quick on the track as the newer model. I don't have to drive the car to tell you that a vehicle that has the skidpad numbers it does...and the track and slalom times that it does, is going to be a flop until changes are made when it comes to truly pushing the car, while still being fun to drive on a daily basis for people who don't have very high expectations in the handling department.
The ride is soft like you say, I sure bet it is! It will likely track VERY well around a corner, too, just like you claim. However, try pushing it fast and hard through a few hair-pins and it's going to wallow like a beached whale on the "crowd pleaser" suspension Ford likes so much.
Ford has ALWAYS done this. They make a car that appeals to the masses, and sell the hell out of it, and it works well. But GM always destroys them on the track/drag-strip/anywhere where performance matters. Witness the 9C1 Caprice that was the police car, vs. the Crown Vic. Ford won out due to marketing, etc. but the old Caprice was a faster, much better handling police cruiser. Now also look at the 1993-2001 Pony Car wars. GM decimated Ford, but they just couldn't MARKET the car. Now look at the Camaro vs. Mustang. The old Camaro (2010) is being compared to the NEW Ford...and still winning, lol.
That is my complaint, just as the person I quoted stats. Ford is ninnying about with "crowd pleaser" soft suspensions, etc. and it works GREAT! for sales, and great for many owners, but I personally, am disappointed.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
