Wieght gain a big negative? - Page 7 - Ford Mustang Forum
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
GT Member
 
908ssp's Avatar
 
Joined: May 2010
Location: Keego Harbor
Posts: 1,439
 
Do you know any automotive writers? I do they are as lazy and unreliable as anyone else. I doubt they even had the car on a scale.


Alex
2010 GTRR in 5.0 Magazine [http://www.mustangandfords.com/featured-vehicles/m5lp-1212-2010-ford-mustang-gt-rr-total-fabrication/viewall.html]

2015 White SC, PP, etc....

908ssp is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Apprentice
 
14MustangV6's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2013
Location: Essex County
Posts: 154
 
Didn't they also weigh a fully-loaded Mustang? If you're checking off every option on the list, you probably shouldn't complain too much about the weight of the car.


Current: 2014 V6 Mustang Premium, Automatic Transmission, Oxford White, Safety & Security Package.

Previous: 2006 Chevrolet Cobalt LS, bone-stock except for automatic transmission.
14MustangV6 is offline  
GT Member
 
Radioguy's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2010
Location: Saint Louis
Posts: 1,569
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Radioguy View Post
Motor Trend sees many many cars every year. They have a long history of testing and reporting on cars - they make their living on their credibility with "car guys." I'm betting their comparisons are rather accurate. They also seem to be supported by the "straight line" performance numbers. The performance difference will likely be much greater if the Camaro - as predicted - comes in much "leaner" next year.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 908ssp View Post
Do you know any automotive writers? I do they are as lazy and unreliable as anyone else. I doubt they even had the car on a scale.
Actually they quote "Curb Weight" - which is defined as the car with a full tank of gas but no cargo or passengers. If you take the Vorshlag weight (3718) and add the full tank of gas (probably about 14 more gallons, at 6.4 pounds per gallon - and a few (5 lbs) for the floor mats and the tire repair kit and you get 3812.6 LBs. That is pretty close to Motor Trend's 3814 LBs. More importantly, they follow the same process for all cars - so you get accurate comparisons. By the way, the Challenger and the Camaro hold more fuel, so their curb weight includes a few extra pounds for the additional fuel. No Conspiracy here

Comparison: Camaro SS 1LE vs. Challenger R/T Scat Pack vs. Mustang GT Page 4
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Capture.JPG
Views:	95
Size:	112.4 KB
ID:	389233  
Attached Files
File Type: docx Ponys.docx (108.8 KB, 31 views)

2013 Mustang GT Premium Convertible
Candy Apple Red, Auto, FRPP Tune, GT500 Axlebacks, KONI Yellow Sport (adjustable dampers), FRPP Front and Rear swaybars, Custom Removable 4 Point Roll-Bar, BOSS 302 Low Expansion Brake Lines, Roush side splitters, GT500 spoiler, Redline Tuning hood struts,18" Ford Chromed Aluminum Wheels (9R3Z-1K007-A), Michelin Pilot Super Sports - 235X50X18
2011 Mustang V6 Premium Convertible - Gone
Radioguy is offline  
 
Rookie
 
Duc93's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2014
Location: Anytown
Posts: 3
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Radioguy View Post
Actually they quote "Curb Weight" - which is defined as the car with a full tank of gas but no cargo or passengers. If you take the Vorshlag weight (3718) and add the full tank of gas (probably about 14 more gallons, at 6.4 pounds per gallon - and a few (5 lbs) for the floor mats and the tire repair kit and you get 3812.6 LBs. That is pretty close to Motor Trend's 3814 LBs. More importantly, they follow the same process for all cars - so you get accurate comparisons. By the way, the Challenger and the Camaro hold more fuel, so their curb weight includes a few extra pounds for the additional fuel. No Conspiracy here

Comparison: Camaro SS 1LE vs. Challenger R/T Scat Pack vs. Mustang GT Page 4
+1 Precisely. If there was any way the official weight figure could have been reduced, Ford would have naturally taken advantage of those options. When all is said and done, there is no getting around the fact that this new model is substantially heavier than the outgoing model.
Duc93 is offline  
Apprentice
Classic Member
5.0L Member
 
1965mustang's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2003
Location: 15 Year Member, GA
Posts: 228
 
I want a 2015 Mustang GT with the Track option.

1995 Mustang Cobra R
2019 Mustang GT350 K1868
1965mustang is offline  
Shelby Gt 350 member
S197 Member
 
sqidd's Avatar
 
Joined: Dec 2006
Location: South Eastern
Posts: 9,239
           
Are there any cars in the same class with less weight?

Waiting on 2019 GT500

2012 GT Vert Brembo - Stock-ish

2012 F-150 FX4 EcoBoost 4x4 406rwhp/522rwtq. The most powerful EB F-150 on the planet?

2007 GT-TSR/Stops/Turns/Custom Everything/3.4L Whipple Crusher/1000hp SOLD
sqidd is offline  
GT Member
 
Radioguy's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2010
Location: Saint Louis
Posts: 1,569
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by sqidd View Post
Are there any cars in the same class with less weight?
I think it really depends on what you consider to be "the class." Randy Pobst did a very good comparison of the 2011 GT with the 2011 BMW M3 a few years ago. I think you would say the M3 has gone a "different way" when you look at the specs and performance of the 2015 cars. The 2015 Mustang performance is no longer competitive with the 2015 M3 and the curb weights are very different -2015 Mustang Curb weight 3814 - 2015 BMW M3 Curb weight 3590 . In 2011 the BMW M3 had a curb weight that was 1 LB more then the 2011 Mustang GT.

Read more: 2015 BMW M3 Track Drive, Road Trip Page 2
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Capture.JPG
Views:	62
Size:	68.1 KB
ID:	389353   Click image for larger version

Name:	CaptureB.JPG
Views:	65
Size:	64.7 KB
ID:	389361  

2013 Mustang GT Premium Convertible
Candy Apple Red, Auto, FRPP Tune, GT500 Axlebacks, KONI Yellow Sport (adjustable dampers), FRPP Front and Rear swaybars, Custom Removable 4 Point Roll-Bar, BOSS 302 Low Expansion Brake Lines, Roush side splitters, GT500 spoiler, Redline Tuning hood struts,18" Ford Chromed Aluminum Wheels (9R3Z-1K007-A), Michelin Pilot Super Sports - 235X50X18
2011 Mustang V6 Premium Convertible - Gone
Radioguy is offline  
Shelby Gt 350 member
S197 Member
 
sqidd's Avatar
 
Joined: Dec 2006
Location: South Eastern
Posts: 9,239
           
Quote:
Originally Posted by Radioguy View Post
I think it really depends on what you consider to be "the class." Randy Pobst did a very good comparison of the 2011 GT with the 2011 BMW M3 a few years ago. I think you would say the M3 has gone a "different way" when you look at the specs and performance of the 2015 cars. The 2015 Mustang performance is no longer competitive with the 2015 M3 and the curb weights are very different -2015 Mustang Curb weight 3814 - 2015 BMW M3 Curb weight 3590 . In 2011 the BMW M3 had a curb weight that was 1 LB more then the 2011 Mustang GT.

Read more: 2015 BMW M3 Track Drive, Road Trip Page 2
A $62,000 car is not in the same class as the Mustang.

Waiting on 2019 GT500

2012 GT Vert Brembo - Stock-ish

2012 F-150 FX4 EcoBoost 4x4 406rwhp/522rwtq. The most powerful EB F-150 on the planet?

2007 GT-TSR/Stops/Turns/Custom Everything/3.4L Whipple Crusher/1000hp SOLD
sqidd is offline  
GT Member
 
Radioguy's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2010
Location: Saint Louis
Posts: 1,569
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Radioguy View Post
I think it really depends on what you consider to be "the class." Randy Pobst did a very good comparison of the 2011 GT with the 2011 BMW M3 a few years ago. I think you would say the M3 has gone a "different way" when you look at the specs and performance of the 2015 cars. The 2015 Mustang performance is no longer competitive with the 2015 M3 and the curb weights are very different -2015 Mustang Curb weight 3814 - 2015 BMW M3 Curb weight 3590 . In 2011 the BMW M3 had a curb weight that was 1 LB more then the 2011 Mustang GT.

Read more: 2015 BMW M3 Track Drive, Road Trip Page 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by sqidd View Post
A $62,000 car is not in the same class as the Mustang.
Which is why I said it really depends on how you define " the class." If you look at the cars in the SCCA SOLO F Stock class, then there are several cars that weigh less then the Mustang - assuming the 2015 Mustang GT winds up in the same or similar class. In 2011, many were glad to "see the BMW M3 and the Mustang GT in the same "class,"" in terms of performance - if not price. Then, the Mustang was viewed as a "low cost "BMW Class" car." The 2016 Camaro sounds like it will also "take a different path" from the Mustang in terms of weight - and presumably performance.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Capture.JPG
Views:	54
Size:	68.1 KB
ID:	389458   Click image for larger version

Name:	CaptureB.JPG
Views:	80
Size:	64.7 KB
ID:	389466  

2013 Mustang GT Premium Convertible
Candy Apple Red, Auto, FRPP Tune, GT500 Axlebacks, KONI Yellow Sport (adjustable dampers), FRPP Front and Rear swaybars, Custom Removable 4 Point Roll-Bar, BOSS 302 Low Expansion Brake Lines, Roush side splitters, GT500 spoiler, Redline Tuning hood struts,18" Ford Chromed Aluminum Wheels (9R3Z-1K007-A), Michelin Pilot Super Sports - 235X50X18
2011 Mustang V6 Premium Convertible - Gone
Radioguy is offline  
Shelby Gt 350 member
S197 Member
 
sqidd's Avatar
 
Joined: Dec 2006
Location: South Eastern
Posts: 9,239
           
Quote:
Originally Posted by Radioguy View Post
Which is why I said it really depends on how you define " the class." If you look at the cars in the SCCA SOLO F Stock class, then there are several cars that weigh less then the Mustang - assuming the 2015 Mustang GT winds up in the same or similar class. In 2011, many were glad to "see the BMW M3 and the Mustang GT in the same "class,"" in terms of performance - if not price. Then, the Mustang was viewed as a "low cost "BMW Class" car." The 2016 Camaro sounds like it will also "take a different path" from the Mustang in terms of weight - and presumably performance.
By class I mean what competes with the Mustang on the sales floor.

Waiting on 2019 GT500

2012 GT Vert Brembo - Stock-ish

2012 F-150 FX4 EcoBoost 4x4 406rwhp/522rwtq. The most powerful EB F-150 on the planet?

2007 GT-TSR/Stops/Turns/Custom Everything/3.4L Whipple Crusher/1000hp SOLD
sqidd is offline  
Rookie
 
st3v's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2009
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 15
 
I was always into Fords and BMWs. I have had various Mustangs and BMWs.

I can say without a doubt - BMW is in trouble with this new Mustang. I test drove a GT today and was blown away. Who in their right mind would buy an M3/M4 for $60-$75k, when you can get as nice of an interior (with premium trim), and an amazing exterior 2015 stang for less than $40k?

Ford has really upped the quality on these new Mustangs. I would say very close to BMW feel.
st3v is offline  
GT Member
 
Radioguy's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2010
Location: Saint Louis
Posts: 1,569
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by sqidd View Post
By class I mean what competes with the Mustang on the sales floor.
Quote:
Originally Posted by st3v View Post
I was always into Fords and BMWs. I have had various Mustangs and BMWs.

I can say without a doubt - BMW is in trouble with this new Mustang. I test drove a GT today and was blown away. Who in their right mind would buy an M3/M4 for $60-$75k, when you can get as nice of an interior (with premium trim), and an amazing exterior 2015 stang for less than $40k?

Ford has really upped the quality on these new Mustangs. I would say very close to BMW feel.
As you can see from the comments on this board, the "sales competition class" is a really big class. Some people are shopping "BMW Vs. Mustang" and care a lot about the quality of the interior. Others are shopping performance - and only care about "fastest on the hill." Others are shopping price/looks and their shopping list includes a wide list of other cars - including the Genisis Coupe (Which weighs less). It is probably only the "performance buyers" that care about the weight - and they are less focused on cost.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Capture.JPG
Views:	69
Size:	68.1 KB
ID:	389738   Click image for larger version

Name:	CaptureB.JPG
Views:	77
Size:	64.7 KB
ID:	389746   Click image for larger version

Name:	CaptureC.JPG
Views:	82
Size:	67.9 KB
ID:	389754  

2013 Mustang GT Premium Convertible
Candy Apple Red, Auto, FRPP Tune, GT500 Axlebacks, KONI Yellow Sport (adjustable dampers), FRPP Front and Rear swaybars, Custom Removable 4 Point Roll-Bar, BOSS 302 Low Expansion Brake Lines, Roush side splitters, GT500 spoiler, Redline Tuning hood struts,18" Ford Chromed Aluminum Wheels (9R3Z-1K007-A), Michelin Pilot Super Sports - 235X50X18
2011 Mustang V6 Premium Convertible - Gone
Radioguy is offline  
Rookie
 
TexArmageddon's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2010
Location: Dallas
Posts: 34
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Radioguy View Post
And yet, the world continues to compare the "three pony cars" - Mustang, Camaro and Challenger
Comparison: Camaro SS 1LE vs. Challenger R/T Scat Pack vs. Mustang GT
Why does it matter guy? I don't see them in CTSCC saying the BMW in the likes can't race. The facts remain the Camaro, Mustang, and challenger are Sport Coupes no matter how we face it. If you were to sit those people down as to what establishes a Pony car vs A muscle car I'm willing to bet my 15 GT on order a war would start between them.
TexArmageddon is offline  
Rookie
 
TexArmageddon's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2010
Location: Dallas
Posts: 34
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Radioguy View Post
Actually they quote "Curb Weight" - which is defined as the car with a full tank of gas but no cargo or passengers. If you take the Vorshlag weight (3718) and add the full tank of gas (probably about 14 more gallons, at 6.4 pounds per gallon - and a few (5 lbs) for the floor mats and the tire repair kit and you get 3812.6 LBs. That is pretty close to Motor Trend's 3814 LBs. More importantly, they follow the same process for all cars - so you get accurate comparisons. By the way, the Challenger and the Camaro hold more fuel, so their curb weight includes a few extra pounds for the additional fuel. No Conspiracy here

Comparison: Camaro SS 1LE vs. Challenger R/T Scat Pack vs. Mustang GT Page 4
What's the point of linking what MT states. Either MT scale is broken or Chevy is using other means to weigh their car.

Chevy Clearly has the 1SS at 3,905lbs and the 2SS at 3,935. So who here is following the same process because I don't see it.
TexArmageddon is offline  
GT Member
 
Radioguy's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2010
Location: Saint Louis
Posts: 1,569
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by TexArmageddon View Post
What's the point of linking what MT states. Either MT scale is broken or Chevy is using other means to weigh their car.

Chevy Clearly has the 1SS at 3,905lbs and the 2SS at 3,935. So who here is following the same process because I don't see it.
I think if you look at the manufacturers "Base Curb Weight" for the Challenger and the Mustang, you can see that MT's "Curb weight" is about the manufacturer's "Base Curb Weight" number plus a full tank of gas. Not sure what went wrong on the Camaro weight number. In an earlier writeup MT called the 13 1SS approximately a 4000 pound car. The number for the Camaro in the comparison chart looks wrong. The Challenger and the Mustang look correct for Curb Weight.

Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	3car.JPG
Views:	104
Size:	112.4 KB
ID:	390097  
Attached Files
File Type: docx 15cmp.docx (150.5 KB, 34 views)

2013 Mustang GT Premium Convertible
Candy Apple Red, Auto, FRPP Tune, GT500 Axlebacks, KONI Yellow Sport (adjustable dampers), FRPP Front and Rear swaybars, Custom Removable 4 Point Roll-Bar, BOSS 302 Low Expansion Brake Lines, Roush side splitters, GT500 spoiler, Redline Tuning hood struts,18" Ford Chromed Aluminum Wheels (9R3Z-1K007-A), Michelin Pilot Super Sports - 235X50X18
2011 Mustang V6 Premium Convertible - Gone
Radioguy is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
 

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Ford Mustang Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a VALID email address for yourself, otherwise you will not receive the necessary confirmation email needed to confirm, validate and activate your new AFM member account.

Failure to provide a VALID email address, will result in the cancellation of your new AFM member account registration.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome
 


Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.1