Next-Gen Mustang Confirmed For Ecoboost, IRS

next gen mustang confirmed for ecoboost irs

Few cars are subject to such intense rumor-mongering as the Ford Mustang. Luckily, an Automotive News report has confirmed two nuggets of information that will mark some of the biggest changes to Ford’s pony car.

AN reports

Ford brass have confirmed that an Eco-Boost engine will be added to the future portfolio. A smaller-displacement, high-output V6 (code-named Nano) would provide ample grunt while likely improving efficiency.

V6 Mustangs still carry a bit of a stigma with the muscle car faithful, but an Ecoboost Mustang would be a bit like a modern day SVO Mustang. The Buick Grand National substituted a turbo for a couple of cylinders, and it never lost any credibility or performance to its V8 brethren.

Also on deck for the next-generation Mustang is that

Ford will finally eschew the live rear axle in favor of an independent rear suspension, likely adding a bit of modern refinement to the occasionally raw (though energetic) feel of the contemporary car, which swings out easily from the tail

Again, we’ve seen an IRS setup on the venerated ’03 Cobra, though the independent-versus-live rear setup is still a subject of debate for Mustang enthusiasts. Ford seems to be looking at marketing the Mustang overseas, and these changes, along with more modern styling, are likely necessary to turn the Mustang into a “world car”/

Comments
Join the conversation
9 of 119 comments
  • Robert Gordon Robert Gordon on Aug 27, 2012

    By road courses do you mean tracks that are derived from public highway roads? The whole purpose of IRS is to maintain in a controlled manner as possible wheel contact with the road surface and thus optimise traction. IRS is superior to LRA (in concept but not necessarily in execution) due to its decreased succeptibility to sypathetic camber changes. Obviously the rougher the track the more likely this is to be an issue and amplified by the unsprung mass disadvantage that LRA typically carry over IRS. On a billard table surface the difference is likely to be less apparant though. However not all race tracks are particularly smooth However I don't see how you come to the conclusion that LRA actually have an advantage on race tracks. Apart from being cheaper, that assertion is patently not true. The quality of the track may be such that they are not at a disadvantage but that is the limit.

    • See 4 previous
    • DenverMike DenverMike on Aug 27, 2012

      @DenverMike "If the suspension is a decent double wishbone set-up then camber control is much better than a LRA set-up. Controlling camber is the key to maintaining contact." Decent IRS with double wishbone set-ups do a good job of maintaining camber relative to or 90 degrees to the roadway, but only under hard straight line braking, accelerating or quick elevation changes, right? That's fine and good, but what happens under hard cornering or any combination thereof?

  • RobertRyan RobertRyan on Aug 27, 2012

    Robert Gordon said: "Perhaps they are considering it for the Mustang? Yes they are: http://news.drive.com.au/drive/motor-news/ford-mustang-for-australia-20120413-1wxil.html "Set for release in 2015 the new Mustang is believed the biggest change in the history of the iconic pony car that was first launched in 1964. The new car will ditch the retro design of the current model, add new efficient engines, cut weight with more advanced materials, and sit atop all-new underpinnings with modern independent rear suspension (the current Mustang still uses an archaic live axle rear end). It’s the last point that is the most interesting because it offers up a potential lifeline for a large rear-wheel-drive sedan such as the Falcon. One website whose author for the story is the editor. of TheMustangNews.com is taking it a step further; according to the PopularHotRodding.com story the Mustang would be based on an all-new global platform that could be shared with the Falcon. http://rumors.automobilemag.com/spotted-2015-ford-mustangs-independent-rear-suspension-146451.html "We now have photographic evidence that the Mustang will finally ditch the old live rear axle setup in favor of an independent rear suspension. As we reported yesterday, it was expected for the next-generation Mustang to use a version of the Control Blade trailing-arm setup used down under by the Ford Falcon. Thanks, to this picture, we can pretty much confirm that will be the case when the 2015 Mustang is revealed in 2014, most likely at the car’s 50th anniversary at the New York auto show" I hope this does happen as it will rescue the Iconic car from the slow slide to medioctity , that has been happening since the Halycon days of Ex-pat Australian Horst Kwech's wins in in his early 1970's Mustang in the Trans Am series,

  • RobertRyan RobertRyan on Aug 27, 2012

    Robert Gordon said: ""The Ecoboost does not sell, that is a major disappointment for Ford.15.5 over the quarter? hardly." Falcon Ecoboost can pull a 15.2 over 400m straight out of the box. The Falcon on LPG pulls a 15.1" That is from a Ecomomy tuned LPI unit. I think they can do a lot more with this technology.Holden has its HSV cars running LP1. My feeling about the 2 Litre Ecoboost it was a bit of a slug. Not as much horsepower, definitely not as much torque but better fuel economy.The Australian Public has been keeping away from it and have started buying the LPI vehicle again. http://smh.drive.com.au/motor-news/fourcylinder-falcon-flops-20120717-2272o.html "The four-cylinder engine that was supposed to be the saviour of the Ford Falcon has failed to set sales charts alight – despite being the most fuel-efficient Falcon ever made. Ford and its employees have bought three times as many four-cylinder Falcons as private buyers in the car’s first three months in showrooms."

  • DC Bruce DC Bruce on Aug 27, 2012

    Having just spent more than a week driving a rental Mustang convertible with the V-6, I'm somewhat apprehensive about this news. The 3.7 liter V-6 is a pretty impressive engine. Driven moderately and thanks to the autobox's aggressive upshifting, which keeps engine rpm between 1K and 2K rpm, I achieved 31.9 mpg over the highway (2-lane) driving between 50 and 60 (people in the Great Northwest seem to take speed limits seriously). Yet, kick it to over 3,500 rpm and the motor makes a satisfying growl and more than satisfying thrust. I could certainly see this as the principal performance engine, with the V-8 reserved for the wilder versions and an ecoboost 4, as the base motor. The car did feel large to me, and the steering was pretty numb and seemed artificially weighted. That said, the suspension was compliant and controlled, although I did not attempt any hooliganism, with the standard 65-series Michelin primacy tires. Still, other than the obviously cheap base interior, this was a pleasant ride to spend time in while touring Washington's Olympic Peninsula.

Next