 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Ford / Ford Mustang / April 2005For those hating on IRS, how bout a 8.75 @ 168 Viper?
A feature in the May '05 Hot Rod magazine covers a twin-turbo 510 ci Viper running that number: 8.75 @ 168. Based on trap speed, the builder estimates 1,600 hp. That's with no intercooler! The guy added Aldan adjustable coil-overs, a 2.73 gear, a Quaiffe lsd (a torsen?), and 35-spline halfshafts, and runs 28-12 x 16 slicks at the drags, but the 6-spd and IRS are as-delivered. Besides all that, the car is street driven, runs cool, it's got a full interior, functional A/C, and a stereo with 5-channel amp and a sub-woofer. 180 Out >A feature in the May '05 Hot Rod magazine covers a twin-turbo 510 ci >Viper running that number: 8.75 @ 168. Based on trap speed, the [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > >180 Out I think the fastest Viper in the U.S. today runs a crate Hemi instead of the V10. -Rich And an owner with a FAT wallet >A feature in the May '05 Hot Rod magazine covers a twin-turbo 510 ci >Viper running that number: 8.75 @ 168. Based on trap speed, the [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > >180 Out Hey! Spikey Likes IT! 1965 Ford Mustang fastback 2+2 A Code 289 C4 Trac-Lok Vintage Burgundy w/Black Standard Interior Vintage 40 Wheels 16X8" w/BF Goodrich Comp T/A Radial 225/50ZR16 >A feature in the May '05 Hot Rod magazine covers a twin-turbo 510 ci > Viper running that number: 8.75 @ 168. Based on trap speed, the [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > 180 Out Ok.. wait a minute. New gears, new half shafts, and a new differential. What about that IRS is as-delivered? The housing? Maybe a bearing or two? New coil-overs holding it down to boot. That's like the DSM guys saying that the stock transmission can handle 9's. There's nothing original inside the housing. Yeah, it can be made to hold that kind of power, but the cost to do that on a stock car is extreme, and Ford didn't want to jack the price of the car up into Corvette territory to do it. They know people are going to modify the car - why get themselves into legal battles with people who upped the boost, broke a half-shaft, and slid into a wall because of it? I wish they would stick with the IRS too, but the devil's advocate side of me can understand why they would run from it. JS > into Corvette territory to do it. They know people are going to modify the > car - why get themselves into legal battles with people who upped the boost, > broke a half-shaft, and slid into a wall because of it? So more dumbing down for the moron majority. >>into Corvette territory to do it. They know people are going to modify the >>car - why get themselves into legal battles with people who upped the boost, >>broke a half-shaft, and slid into a wall because of it? > > So more dumbing down for the moron majority. After you run 8.something one time you won't be allowed to continue at an NHRA sanctioned track. The max for an IRS rear is way up there like 11's or 12's I think, but surely no lower than 10's  Signature...And point out that he (Scott Richter) is a jerk. You can quote me. - Quaestor > Ok.. wait a minute. New gears, new half shafts, and a new differential. > What about that IRS is as-delivered? The housing? Maybe a bearing or two? [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > a stock car is extreme, and Ford didn't want to jack the price of the car up > into Corvette territory to do it. I doubt if a stock 8.8" could handle 1600 hp, a pedal clutch, and a 12" slick either. The reason I posted about the 8-second Viper is to show an example of an IRS working at the dragstrip at such a high level of performance. It's the most commonly-cited rap on IRS -- Team Mustang made it when it intro'd the '05 -- that it's no good for the dragstrip. > They know people are going to modify the > car - why get themselves into legal battles with people who upped the boost, > broke a half-shaft, and slid into a wall because of it? I'm not quite sure of the logic, that Ford chose to go with a solid axle because a drag racer who popped a half-shaft on an IRS GT500 and put his car into a wall could argue that a solid axle would not have done this. That does not seem like a very good plaintiff's case. > I wish they would stick with the IRS too, but the devil's advocate side of > me can understand why they would run from it. I too can understand why they chose not to go with IRS on the GT500. The reasons are (1) the expense and (2) they will not sell one fewer GT500 without it than they would have done with it. Basic bean counter logic. 180 Out >>Ok.. wait a minute. New gears, new half shafts, and a new > [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > performance. It's the most commonly-cited rap on IRS -- Team Mustang > made it when it intro'd the '05 -- that it's no good for the dragstrip. An IRS can work perfectly well at the drag strip if it was designed properly. How many Ford 9" rears could be bought for the cost of the Viper's IRS setup? ;) IMO, the Mustang doesn't have an IRS because of cost and most Mustang buyers either prefer a solid axle or don't care one way or the other. Personally, I hope the GT500 comes with a 9" rear. It would handle about any amount of power the blown 5.4L could muster. >>They know people are going to modify the >>car - why get themselves into legal battles with people who upped the [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > GT500 without it than they would have done with it. Basic bean counter > logic. The same goes for the GT. The Mustang's success has always been the result of the bang-for-the-buck it brings to the buyer. If Ford ever forgets this the Mustang is doomed. Helping to keep the car affordable by using a solid axle tells me they still know us Mustang buyers fairly well. I expect the IRS will show up in a few years though. Michael Johnson wrote: > 180 Out wrote: > > I too can understand why they chose not to go with IRS on the GT500. > > The reasons are (1) the expense and (2) they will not sell one fewer > > GT500 without it than they would have done with it. Basic bean counter > > logic. > The same goes for the GT. The Mustang's success has always been the > result of the bang-for-the-buck it brings to the buyer. If Ford ever > forgets this the Mustang is doomed. Helping to keep the car affordable > by using a solid axle tells me they still know us Mustang buyers fairly > well. I expect the IRS will show up in a few years though. Slight change of subject, but on Car & Driver TV the past two weekends they've show footage of a bright yellow Mustang GT doing a huge smoky burnout. That thing is an INCREDIBLE bargain for $25,000 (or it WILL be, when they start having some sitting on the lots at that price). 180 Out > Michael Johnson wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > burnout. That thing is an INCREDIBLE bargain for $25,000 (or it WILL > be, when they start having some sitting on the lots at that price). I saw that too. I can't remember the C/D guy's name but he seemed to really like the new Mustang. They said they were going to doing a segment on the GT. Do you know if it aired this weekend? Michael Johnson wrote: > They said they were going to doing a > segment on the GT. Do you know if it aired this weekend? Two weekends ago the whole show was on the Ten Best awards. The Stang was a winner and they showed the burnout -- on a public road no less -- as part of the Stang Story. This past weekend the story was a road test story on the Mustang GT alone, and they showed the same footage. And I have seen another edition of the show where they run "THE" GT against a Porsche 911 and a Ferrari Modena. (The GT comes out on top.) We're going to have continuing confusion over this, that both of the two hottest Fords can be referred to as "GT." 180 Out |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.