Ford Head of Product Development Addresses Four-Cylinder Ford Mustang and Independent Rear Suspension Rumors - Ford Mustang Forum
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread
post #1 of 12 (permalink) Old 01-12-2012 Thread Starter
Sponsored Editorial Content
 
AutoGuide.com's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2011
Location: Autoguide.com
Posts: 223
 
Ford Head of Product Development Addresses Four-Cylinder Ford Mustang and Independent Rear Suspension Rumors

At the 2012 Detroit Auto Show, Ford's head of product development Derrick Kuzak addressed some of the rumors circulating about their famed Mustang sports car. Though many of Kuzak's answers are vague and don't give a real conclusion, some reading in between the lines gives us a hint of things to come.

In terms of independent rear suspension being a possibility for the next-generation Mustang, Kuzak stated that it was a tad early to even speak about it but that recognizing Ford's commitment to product excellence, "it will probably give you a sense of direction we [Ford] have." But things got interesting when asked about a four-cylinder Mustang, Kuzak answered with:

More: Ford Head of Product Development Addresses Four-Cylinder Ford Mustang and Independent Rear Suspension Rumors on Autoguide.com


AutoGuide.com is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 12 (permalink) Old 01-12-2012
74stang2togo
Guest
 
74stang2togo's Avatar
 
Posts: n/a
So... it's a post about an executive being vague with regards to speculation...

This is news... how?

post #3 of 12 (permalink) Old 01-12-2012
GT Member
4.6L Member
 
jep23's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2008
Location: Chesapeake
Posts: 2,004
 
In other news....Ford might be in the works for a flying hovercraft. But the sources have been very hush-hush bout it.

Now to Bill for the weather...Chance of rain but not sure.

Toy: 2002 Mustang GT
Daily Driver: 2010 Ford Fusion Sport
jep23 is offline  
 
post #4 of 12 (permalink) Old 07-03-2012
Apprentice
2.3L Member
5.0L Member
 
dbentesr's Avatar
 
Joined: Jun 2012
Location: Crane
Posts: 75
 
With the success of the F150 EcoBoost engine setup, they would be fools not to go with something similar for the Mustang. Being that Ford is the only one of the "Big Three" not to NEED a bailout in recent history ... I think you can count on it.

Spend your money once and get what you need. Do not cut corners and try to save a buck. It will cost you MORE to fix the problems caused.

Don't just hack into your Mustang to cut out weight to make it faster (some of those components are important to the overall function and safety of your Mustang).

Knowledge equates to power and handing... get to know what works and use it! Sometimes the popular MOD of the moment may NOT be best... ignore "fads"!
dbentesr is offline  
post #5 of 12 (permalink) Old 09-03-2012
PONY Member
4.6L Member
 
4.6StangRage's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2006
Location: Jamestown
Posts: 256
 
I think the problem would be making all three models different to the extent that they don't "eclipse" one another. It's like "hmm the ecoboost is about as powerful as the V6 but cheaper and better fuel economy" That would likely make it so the V6 one doesnt sell even though the V6 would have more torque and probably worth the buy compared to the Eco. I guess proper marketing will dictate how these sell.
4.6StangRage is offline  
post #6 of 12 (permalink) Old 01-02-2013
Rookie
 
yknot's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2009
Location: Burlington
Posts: 7
 
Look, Ford has to keep up with the times, and now that they want the Mustang to be a global market, that means European times not just ours. Over there where gas is currently selling for just under $8.00/Gal, V8 are not very popular, in fact V6's are not very popular and considered the optional engine choice. So with all that, how could Ford have the Mustang's standard engine be a V-8 or even a V-6 in those countries? I would not be surprised if the Mustang does not come with a standard 4 cyl in-line engine/turbo, with a twin turbo v-6 and V-8 optional. This would also greatly affect those that want a V-8. Since the standard equipment would be a 140-160HP engine (say under 200hp) the standard running gear would not be like it is now. You would have a 7.5" rear end, small 6-speedtrany and other suspension related items, so when you go for the V-8, you will also have to pay for the HD running gear associated with that kind of power. Bottom line is it will cost the average Joe, much more for a V-8 powered Mustang, regardless what they list the base price at.
yknot is offline  
post #7 of 12 (permalink) Old 03-24-2013
Apprentice
 
fredcrideout's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2012
Location: Windsor
Posts: 56
 
Come on give us something firm to work on for our replacements or not./
fredcrideout is offline  
post #8 of 12 (permalink) Old 04-05-2013
Rookie
5.0L Member
 
Materialman's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2010
Location: West Monroe
Posts: 19
 
The new Mustang will be independent rear suspension, which it should and the plan to offer a turbo 4 is a good idea as well. They have to bring the car into the future if it is to survive.
Materialman is offline  
post #9 of 12 (permalink) Old 05-13-2013
GT Member
V6 Member
4.6L Member
 
kawik99's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2008
Location: Exeter
Posts: 1,876
 
the name wont die. the ranger still exists in australia, and it has a diesel option.

35th Anni. Laser Red 3.8 coupe
ET: 1/8-9.892 @71.57 ET: 1/4-15.452 @88.06
4.6 60' 2.195 ET 14.205 MPH 99.44

98 Ranger XLT 4x4 Oxford White 3.0 M/T
kawik99 is offline  
Rookie
 
DRJ Boss 289's Avatar
 
Joined: May 2013
Location: Saline
Posts: 46
 
A 4 cylinder has no place in a muscle car...
DRJ Boss 289 is offline  
RonX91
Guest
 
RonX91's Avatar
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by DRJ Boss 289 View Post
A 4 cylinder has no place in a muscle car...
Mustangs aren't muscle cars.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
PONY Member
Classic Member
4.6L Member
S197 Member
 
Sleeperstang07's Avatar
 
Joined: Jun 2008
Location: Chicago
Posts: 914
 
I'm all for the IRS and four cylinder. Retro styling and sticking to the past can be fun but we need to keep with the times. I mean isn't that already what the Mustang has been about? Think of all the different vehicles that have been given the mustang name: Boss 429, the 5.0 of the 80s, Mustang II, the late 68s fastbacks, etc. As long as the Mustang is a semi-sporty two door pony car, I don't view it as killing the brand. Plus, if you want a Mustang with a log axle and no optional 4 cylinder, buy an old one... They're more fun anyway.

Black 2006 GT T-2 Torsen Diff, 3.73 gears, FRPP 90MM CAI, SCT X-Cal 3 tuner/ Speed Inc. dyno tune, FRPP catbacks, Steeda Triaxe w/ Hurst stick and T handle, SVT strut mounts, FRPP strut brace, Steeda UDP, JBA long tube headers, JBA O/R H-pipe, CHE LCAs, CHE anti-squat brackets, Steeda adj. UCA, Steeda heavy duty engine mounts, FRPP AC delete, Shaftmasters aluminum driveshaft, Hotchkis swaybars, Corbeau FX1 Pro

DONE: 1968 Convertible PROJECT candy apple red 289 w/ edelbrock 4bbl 600 cfm
Sleeperstang07 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Tags
None

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
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:



Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may post replies
You may post attachments
You may 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