Steve Saleen remarks on the future of the Mustang
During a conversation at the 2006 Cruisin' the Coast Auto Show in Biloxi, Mississippi, Steve Saleen shed some light on the future of the Mustang and what performance potential awaits buyers in 2009.
As is customary, horsepower figures will increase for the next generation Mustang, although Saleen notes that new coupe will only benefit from a facelift, rather than full redesign. The GT will probably see an increase of about 50 HP over the 300 HP available on the current model with the GT500 coming equipped with an additional 15 ponies for 2009. CarCrazy.com's John Breaux, who interviewed Saleen, maintains that a weight reduction may be in the cards.
On the Saleen side of things, the three engines currently available will all see performance increases, with the NA S281 achieving 385 HP and 390 ft.-lbs. of torque, the supercharged version producing upwards of 500 HP and the Extreme Mustang variant going to 565 HP with 535 ft.-lbs. of twist.
Since Mr. Saleen has been in close contact with Alan Mulally and others at FoMoCo, this information is as close to official as we've seen yet.
Top tip Brent!
[Source: MustangEvolution.com]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
swe 8:17AM (10/23/2006)
good ol' US.. just throw in some more horses and ignore the rest
Reply
Yaroukh 8:45AM (10/23/2006)
And what exactly is supposed to be "the rest"?
Reply
swe 8:52AM (10/23/2006)
well...the rear axle is one example
Reply
stinkey 9:07AM (10/23/2006)
leaf springs, the way fordward.
Reply
Sam 9:19AM (10/23/2006)
The rear axle is used to keep the costs down. Ford isnt aiming for a 50k target price for the mustang gt.
Reply
The other Bob 9:50AM (10/23/2006)
"leaf springs, the way fordward."
The Mustang doesn't have leaf springs...butthead. It has coils.
Look at the g's the Mustang can pull and the performance numbers and prove to me that this set up is inferior. It may not ride as nice, but its damn close and costs a bundle less.
I love how people rag on a live rear axle, but then go nuts over some fwd car's handling.
Reply
Chris 10:18AM (10/23/2006)
"The rest" includes the following:
- independent rear suspension: (and don't give me this "cost savings" B.S. The damn thing is close to $30k as it is.
- quality materials: the materials inside make it feel like a Tonka toy.
- lose some weight: this thing is great in a straight line but don't dare cornering in it.
- aesthetics: paint the damn mirrors (see Tonka toy reference above), lose the "tape" stripe on the V6, come up with one "look". Besides the basic shape the V6 and GT look like two different cars.
- fuel economy: I'd just be happy if the GT could manage 18mpg. What are we down to now? 12?
This is just a short list of "the rest".
Or we could just throw in more cubic inches and call it a revolution and/or evolution in Mustang performance.
Reply
That One Person 10:23AM (10/23/2006)
Gotta agree with #6. The Mustang handles just as well as any other car out there. Granted, hit a pothole on a turn and you instantly become a drift master. But the Mustang isnt that bad of a handler. Plus, with some suspension upgrades, the thing handles like a champ.
But I do wish Ford would put IRS in this thing. It would definitely help a bit. It would probably offset the weight so the thing isnt so nose heavy.
But other than that, I cant wait for the refresh. 50 more hp would be nice. And I am hoping the 3.5 makes its way into the Stang...
Reply
BOB 10:27AM (10/23/2006)
IT ISN'T THE SUSPENSION, BUT THE LEFTOVER BEAN COUNTER ATTITUDE ABOUT CHEAP APPOINTMENTS, THAT NEEDS THE UPDATE. THE 2007 IS NOT AS INCREDIBLY CHEESEY AS MY 2000, BUT THEY HAVE A LONG WAY TO GO. HEAVEN FORBID THEY REALIZE THAT THE MUSTANG HAS SOME "STARDUST" THAT LETS IT COMPETE WITH MORE EXPENSIVE CARS, AND OFFER A REAL INTERIOR UPGRADE. (OF COURSE, THAT COULD BE FOR THE COUGAR, LOL)
Reply
Ryan 10:45AM (10/23/2006)
Chris, your post gives me the impression that you've never driven a Mustang before, nor are you familiar with its capabilities.
"- independent rear suspension: (and don't give me this "cost savings" B.S. The damn thing is close to $30k as it is."
Actually, the GT starts at just over 26K and the V6 starts at under 20K. The live rear axel not only saves money, but is considered to be a Mustang tradition. Besides, it's better for drag racing.
"- quality materials: the materials inside make it feel like a Tonka toy."
Name another new car with this kind of performance per dollar.
"- lose some weight: this thing is great in a straight line but don't dare cornering in it."
Said like someone who has never driven one.
"- aesthetics: paint the damn mirrors (see Tonka toy reference above), lose the "tape" stripe on the V6, come up with one "look". Besides the basic shape the V6 and GT look like two different cars."
GT owners want a visual difference between their cars and a V6.
"- fuel economy: I'd just be happy if the GT could manage 18mpg. What are we down to now? 12?"
17 MPG city, 25 MPG hwy for the GT, 19 and 28 for the V6.
It sounds like you're expecting a Mustang to be just like a BMW, but at half price. Get real. Here in Canada the Mustang GT's closest rival, the 350Z, starts at $12k more.
Reply
FB 2:52PM (10/23/2006)
Yes, IRS would be nice, and give the car, well, manners, as is often stated about the BMW. But I don't want a sterile "everything is just so like Panera Bread" car... I like the the new Mustang because it is something of a brute- that's what made the 60's muscle cars so darn fun to drive.
Reply
infinihertz 10:51AM (10/23/2006)
Thanks Ryan. I knew most of Chris's statements were wrong and was trying to find the correct numbers to post, but you beat me to it.
Reply
Doug 11:33AM (10/23/2006)
Sounds like Chris is some jilted Camaro owner who's been stuck in his car too long and can't wait for the new one. So what to do? Rag on the segment leader. Come back when you know what you are talking about.
Reply
MikeW 11:52AM (10/23/2006)
How about a 6 speed manual retrofit for the 'Joe-Schmoe' GT owner?
How about putting fog lights where they belong?
How about a real [quad beam] headlight system?
Reply
Mr_Oak 1:23PM (10/23/2006)
IRS (Independent Rear Suspension) was available on previous model Cobras, IRS not really popular with the 1/4 milers, who are the majority of the 'Stang customers. Live axles are better off the line, the people who actually buy Mustangs, by a wide margin wanted live axles, Ford gave it to them. Sounds like a good business decision to me.
Stop comparing the little shit boxes that you mostly drive in europe to what we drive here. I know that you have your glamour cars, most of you don't drive them.
The geography is very different, the roads are very different, the scales (distances) are very different. Most of your common everyday cars wouldn't hold up to the typical american driving. I been to quite a few cities in Europe, and the streets are tight as hell, makes sense that you would design cars for the spaces you want to fit them into.
To better illustrate my point, at the end of this rant, I gave you a list of mountain ranges in the Pacific region of North America (i.e. Canada, USA and Mexico) This list does not represent 1/3 of all the mountain ranges in NA. The shitty little buzz bombs that you drive cannot stand up to that kind of motoring. Do you want to be caught climbing the Sierra Nevadas range (40 mile uphill run) sandwiched between convoys of big rigs (18 wheel trucks) in a 1.6 litre shit box? Hell no.
The Aussies motoring needs probable most closely resembles North Americas than anywhere in Europe. Try passing a couple of road-trains in said 1.6L shit box, and let me know how that turns out. Get the picture? Aussies also use larger cars and motors because it better suits their needs.
People who live in urban areas, tend to buy smaller more fuel efficient cars. Tighter parking spaces and grid-lock are major contributing factors. Most families that own multiple cars, tend to commute in the more efficientcars, and user their bigger cars/SUVs on weekend. People in urban areas who do not use their cars as daily commuters are free to buy whatever he or she pleases, including Hummers.
Europeans design cars that fall into either of two catagories small/cramped efficient affordable or high performance impractical mega-buck mobiles. You try to compare a Mustang to a 911, but there really is no comparison. 911s do not make good daily drivers, the cost of keeping it on the road would hasten your trip to the poor house. With simple routing maintenance you could drive a mustang everyday for 20 years.
So, drive what you drive, and let us drive what we drive. See list below.
Here is a List of Mountain Ranges of the Pacific (Western Coast of North America
• Chugach Mountains, southern Alaska
• Wrangell Mountains, southern Alaska
• Saint Elias Mountains, southern Alaska, southwestern Yukon Territory
• Coast Mountains
o Boundary Ranges, southeastern Alaska, northwestern British Columbia
o Kitimat Ranges BC North Coast
o Pacific Ranges BC South Coast
Rainbow Range northwest Chilcotin, also classifiable as part of the Interior Plateau
Pantheon Range Homathko area
Niut Range Homathko area
Waddington Range Homathko area
Whitemantle Range Homathko area
Bendor Range
Garibaldi Ranges
Clendinning Range
Tantalus Range
Chilcotin Ranges
Dickson Range
Shulaps Range
Camelsfoot Range
Lillooet Ranges, Fraser Canyon west bank
Cantilever Range
Cayoosh Range
Douglas Ranges
Front Ranges (North Shore Mountains)
• Vancouver Island Ranges, British Columbia
• Olympic Mountains, Washington
• Cascade Range, Washington and Oregon
• Oregon Coast Range, Oregon
• Calapooya Mountains, Oregon
• Klamath-Siskiyou
o Klamath Mountains, Oregon, northern California
o Siskiyou Mountains, Oregon, northern California
o Trinity Alps and Salmon Mountains, California
o Yolla Bolly Mountains, Northern California
• Northern Coast Ranges, California
o King Range, northern California
o Mendocino Range, northern California
o Mayacmas Mountains, California
o Marin Hills, California
• Southern Coast Ranges, central California
o Diablo Range, California
o Santa Cruz Mountains, California
o Santa Lucia Range, California
o Temblor Range, California
o Caliente Range, California
• Transverse Ranges, California
o Sierra Madre Mountains
o San Rafael Mountains
o Santa Ynez Mountains
o Santa Susana Mountains
o Topatopa Mountains
o Simi Hills
o Santa Monica Mountains
o Tehachapi Mountains
o San Gabriel Mountains
o San Bernardino Mountains
• Peninsular Ranges
o Santa Ana Mountains, California
o San Jacinto Mountains, California
o Palomar Mountain Range, California
o Sierra Juarez, Baja California
o Sierra San Pedro Martir, Baja California
o Sierra de la Laguna, Baja California Sur
• Sierra Madre Occidental, Mexico
Reply
Salah 3:01PM (10/23/2006)
Im from Saudia and I want to tell you people that the mustang is perfect as it is. My cousin recently got his gt500 and its awesome. He test drove the boxter before the gt500. He said the boxter very fast but when he drove the gt500 he said it was brutal. Plain and simple, violent even. The boxter doesnt even come close to the gt500. The GT500 drowns out the little porsche engine like its not even on, much less accelerating hard. It accelerates away from the porsche like the porsche is an economy car.
When I told him that the porsche has a much more comfortable interior and ride and his exact words were(after being translated) "Screw the comfort, I want speed, Id get a lexus if I want comfort."
Now I know that the porsche is for a different segment, people that "enjoy driving" but man you cannot deny the fact that the GT500 is a monster. And these new saleens will be even better.
I was also about to buy the gt500 after driving it but I think Ill wait for the saleen extreme mentioned here.
And the live rear axle helps remove the bobbing of the back wheels of a car when it has power and you accelerate hard.(my buddies gto does this)
Reply
KT 4:01PM (10/23/2006)
I recently saw pics of the refresh. Obviously, it's minor cosmeticsLooks pretty good and it's easy to guess where the next redesign will probably be going.
Didn't hear any powertrain changes but I would expect the 3.5 will find it's way into the base Stang. It would address power and efficiency shortcomings of the current V6.
Reply
Mr_Oak 4:18PM (10/23/2006)
My point exactly, europeans will use a scapel to take a rock apart, just give me a damn sledge hammer. That's how we get our gratification. Common european folk wouldn't understand or appreciate the different between live axle and IRS, they just look at it as a technology issue. The 'Vette get's away with IRS because of the Transverse mounted composite leaf spring that keeps the wheels firmly bolted to the asphalt.
Reply
Mr_Oak 4:59PM (10/23/2006)
Yes, but Roush and Saleen don't just sell you a supercharger, they sell a package. Package incluses suspension mods, brakes mods, intake and exhaust mods. If you can afford it, I say go for it.
Reply
MikeW 1:20AM (10/24/2006)
The GTO has a horrible rear suspension, take a look.
Since the Mustang is so front heavy as it is. 50/50 is not the 'perfect weight distribution' for sports cars, as BMW claims. They should be what the McLaren F1 was ~42-43% front/58-57% rear. Balance front/rear sprung to unsprung weight ratio, excellent pitch balance.
So how about developing a clutch pack front drive system? Maybe a Mustang-Skyline (Mustine, Musline) So that the car actually goes when you hit the gas.
Reply