More Photos of the 2021 Mach 1

[Bill Pemberton]

I was the Viper/SRT Sales Mgr from 1999 till 2017 and I have worked under the aegis of Performance Sales Mgr or whatever for endless years and I often find it amazing how folks who own one brand of machine fear what is happening across the street. The Challenger has had an endless life and we ( Woodhouse ) were even part of that with some ideas and Hurst Collaborations, but the Mustang has been rocking with the same kind of build flexibility . We have had a plethora of Challenger model builds and the car is still continuing with more and I am honestly thrilled to see it happen, but to discount the Mustang seems a bit humorous to me. I love both cars, I have the pleasure of knowing Engineers on both platforms ( and companies) and I not only admire all of them, I am astounded by their passion and endless hours they put in because they really are Sick Motorheads in the end run. Plus, I have to admit to being privy to some inside machinations and absolutely have loved to sell both brands!

But, let's stop for a second and keep in mind , the Challenger is a unique situation where a vehicle that was originally scheduled to die around 2014-2016 is still around since 2008 -- with not much visual or basic chassis change. Yet the brilliant guys ( and they are that to keep this machine pertinent after 12 years ) in Marketing and Executive Positions keep challenging Engineering and the results aren't just visual remakes, Hellcats, Demons, a Red Eye, and likely a lightened model ( say ACR version ) next. But ..............

In that time frame Ford has gone from S197s , to S550s , to derivations with the 7500 rpm mean Boss motor and handling to blow off an M3. The Shelby GT 500 was there , a badass cruiser not too far from a Hellcat and to many that was partly where the thought process ( for the mean Kitty ) came from. We had the Bullet , 50th Anniversary, the LS version of the Boss 302, and on and on to an 8250 rpm ( say what !!) flat plane crank ( huh) with the GT 350. Blur Oval Boys did an R version , popped up with some Carbon rims, did we forget to mention the fully independent rear end earlier in the S550 radical move to the future? First to do line lock, and a crazy idea of a factory computer upgrade mod ( track key on the Boss ), killer 10 speed. Then there is a PP1 ( renamed GT Performance Pack in later years ) and a PP2 ( don't they count) , with a more entry level, lower cost track machine with serious stuff -- I remember ordering a few stripped PP1 Stangs with Recaro and not much else for under 40K, a few years back. Now we have a new 7 Speed DCT in the GT 500 , more upgrades , a car that will annihilate virtually all of it's contemporaries on a road course, and it is helping FCA consider an ACR Challenger. I love FCA, I love Ford, heck I even like GM, as all this crazy competition is keeping things going , but the GT 500 is barely on the street and we have a few bemoaning the Mach 1 and it is not remotely on the ground. Have we all become so jaded we expect a full blown rocket every year that we are not satisfied with another cool missile? Everything can not come out at once and I want to thank Ford for extending the GT 350 ( from it's original timeline) , and making killer improvements in 2019 and 2020.

Please FCA Engineers, Ford Engineers, and GM Engineers , along with your Marketing Gurus and Execs, keep up your passion and don't listen to the nay sayers, because if you did the Hellcat or Demon would never have surfaced and that might have meant no new GT 500 --- who knows.

Loving the 3 Decades of Muscle and hoping for the 4th!!!

 

[saleen367]

If giving the opinion that I don't like the nostril grill is bemoaning the Mach I then I stand guilty as charged.

I've been a Ford fanboi all my life ... have never owned another brand, but I'm not shy about voicing my opinion. Didn't mean to p*ss on anyone's Wheaties this weekend.

Carry on with the Mach I convo ...

 

[Bill Pemberton]

No worries , we will have to see the actually front end to really evaluate ,as often it is not what we completely expect. What always drives me nuts is often I hate the initial change and within a month or so I decide I Iike the change after all -- ha, ha, oh,well!

 

[JDee]

I just get tired of them recycling the old halo car names. In a lot of cases they were something special back in the day, now they're just a few added baubles to an existing model. The '69 Mach I had a special place in my life, this one appears to be just a warmed over PP2, which is just a warmed over PP1. And so it goes.....

 

[yotah1]

You should be able to stop speculating within a week or so as Ford will have released all the info by then.

I won't go into details for obvious reasons but you'll be happy with the power, the transmission, the handling and the cooling, and the price too. Plus, USA gets a bit of extra compared to everybody else. Don't except crazy things like twin turbos or carbon this and carbon that, or you'd have to pay GT500 money and that doesn't make any sense in terms of business case.

All I can say is we did everything we could, and fought hard with the bean counters to get the good stuff on this car and be proud of calling it a Mach 1.

 

[Bill Pemberton]

I am sure many of us agree with your thoughts JDee, as it is part of our Old Fart DNA, yet what I have seen is the excitement of younger buyers who have heard their grandfathers and fathers talk about our Legendary machines and they really want to be a part of that or feel they can capture some of the essence. It kind of spoils our memories , but it brings new ones. SS,Z28, Bullitt, TA, Shaker, Shelby GT 350, Superbee, Daytona, GT 500, Hemi, California Special, Scatpack,etc. become available to a different generation of buyer. There is an instant recognition and surprisingly , for some in our age group, it brings back a dream never realized. To be frank, I had gotten tired of another replica Bullitt last year, yet I was visibly moved by a friend, my age, who was damn near in tears getting his first Bullitt ever. Super great guy, very hard working, but he never could quite afford a new Mustang ,let alone a Bullitt. He retired and the Bullitt was his prize for years of honest work and I was honestly touched more than I expected. Seen sparkling eyes with younger guys feeling they were reliving stories of old when they got their Mustangs , but to a degree I wonder if the PP! or PP2, LE1s, Hellcats, Redeye, Boss LS, ZL1, or other variations will be what folks in the future will want. I often imagine what folks will think of the Flat Plane crank in the GT 350 in future years , will it become a very, very special beast as we all get more electrified or hybridized?

Relate to you, man, I felt quite similar ,yet I was able to understand why Marketing went in that direction and to be honest , I even suggested a few thoughts to folks in those areas ( not naive that others were likely doing the same ) because I heard so many desires from customers.

So no argument, just a personal understanding and distinction.

The Mach 1 may be the stop gap model for those that lust for a GT 500 , but don't have the funds or means. FCA and GM do the same, the machines like a 1LE or a 1320 , are there for those wanting a ZL1 or Hellcat, but.........

The Mach 1 , if some cool stuff is done, like coolers and maybe a tranny change means the evolution might prove to make a stout track machine at a reasonable price? I am wiling to wait and I understand the ladder step it represents and it is needed in the build matrix, imho.

 

[BmacIL]

Can you be more specific about what's a mixed bag on the GT500? Last September at the Mustang Roundup one of the lead Ford engineers went over the car pretty throughly and I was impressed what they did with it. Lots of little details were covered. The hood pins are a good example. There are always compromises and having worked at Ford you know cars are built to a price point. Plus the Mustang starts life as a rental car darling.

1. It did not need to be 4100+ lbs - there are plenty of weight reduction stones left unturned that many would expect in a $80-90k sports coupe. Some of these are compounding (brakes, wheels).
2. The car is confused at what it wants to be - drag-esque powertrain in a road racing suit; all the extra cooling required for the DCT and blower just made it a fat pig
3. I'm not a drag guy, but not offering a drag variant with 18" wheels and tires, base GT or lighter brakes and sans all the track cooling was a HUGE miss. Whether we like it or not, drag is still way more popular here. What I hear is that they could've offered one at <$65k with that and you'd have something to embarrass Demons and Hellcats.

All that aside, what it can do with all that is pretty incredible. The only point of the car as it sits is to be faster than the ZL1 1LE for bragging rights, and even with that they tied at least one arm behind their back for cost, NVH or to appease FRAP. For an amazing road race type street car, they already had it in the GT350R and GT350, both of which still sold every one they could build at great margins.

 

[Bill Pemberton]

I politiely question a couple of your remarks , mainly on the basis of the cars competitors. None of the three can be as lightweight as wanted , mainly due to the weight of the SuperCharger , though both the Camaro and Mustang are somewhat closer weight wise than the Whalecat. There is no argument among a single Engineer I am acquainted with at GM, Ford or FCA that does not wish the cars to be lighter , but the cooling on the GT 500 is more or a coup than a detriment considering it's prowess on the track.

1. We can not criticize Ford for the excessive cooling when the 1/3 higher price Corvette ZR1 would heatsoak in 3-4 laps at Road Atlanta with a skilled driver. Gotta say thank you after watching one being hammered all day long ( on a very warm day ) this past September, without nary a hiccup...........and no heat soak. Seen it ( heat soak ) happen with a Hellcat , ( and many other cars )a Drag/Cruiser concept machine in my mind, but it goes after that theme primarily. Even it's Engineers have worked to make it better for a road course, though not in the same league as the Mustang.

2. Not sure where the Drag-esque nature comment comes from , since if you were working there , you had to be acquainted with the key Engineering personnel and how the focus was changing from a Drag Strip format to an extremely capable road course machine faster than anything ever built except the GT. I heard over and over from some test drivers and friends at the tracks ( that the car was quietly being tested at) about the road course competence and they were spending hardly a minute at the strips. Granted, I was told to keep my mouth shut , but the excitement was at such a high degree, folks had to tell someone - sure I know others were very discreetly told too. Keeping my mouth very shut has benefitted over years , and I know others in the same league and I have always respected the trust.

3. I love manuals , but the Marketing Key, the reality Key, and the yes the ultimate Speed Key , is a DCT, PDK , heavy duty auto, whatever because;
A). Even die hards know they can not shift as quick
B). Common sense is you must do what your competition is doing -- Hellcat ( auto ) , Camaro ZL1 ( 10 speed auto )
C). Power delivery and control
D). Heck , it was a joint , killer effort with Tremec and Ford for the car , great step towards dominance on track , imho.

4. Lastly , I constantly would wonder why Ford, GM, FCA did not take the concept a step farther and do something like you commmented on. The very simple initial reason is one does not Market a " Halo Car," with all it's special attributes at the same time as a " Cut Rate" model because it will detract from all the Promotion, Testing , Advertising, and even Engineering Focus. Is it a good idea, absolutely, since we see some of these concepts arrive later, like the 1320 Challenger. We ( Woodhouse ) were very lucky to share ideas similar to yours with FCA and I completely felt as you , yet I had to realize the extra testing, even EPA and other approvals often delayed models, yet also the Companies do not want to delete the overall Sales Launch of a Super Special Model. There are tons of different Mustangs , Camaro, Challengers, built in variations ( this was discussed elsewhere) actually made to capture " Mystique Sales, " of the GT 500, Hellcat ,or ZL1. Marketing knows the limited nature, the cost , etc. of a " Halo Machines," means the masses will want something that in their mind mimics their desires , and that is why we have a Challenger TA , or a 1LE Camaro, or , yes, a new Mach 1. I know I got my first Firebird Formula because I could not quite afford a full Trans Am , at the time. In fact over the years I often took a model a step down from my ultimate desire because it was limited , I could not afford it, or my timing was not right.

Hang in there and yes I commend your dreaming thought process ,because that is what in Engineering of anything continues to make improvements, and it is an integral part of folks who aspire to the constantly changing profession. Yet, things can never all be done at once, for monetary or other reasons, and usually the problems Petrolheads feel are why is it taking so long or Marketing to see what we feel is so apparent. Engineerings focus is unique in that their DNA is imbedded in making improvements over and over ( a constant) and I often felt it was a little bit of their innate impatience --- but that is why I love so many of them. They are the puzzle masters, they are the detectives, but today , like in the past , government regulations, competition, consumers, dependability, and so many other factors determine the end.

Enjoy your week.


I completely agree that ideas like a drag model or variations should be thrown out, as models evolve , but I also have become aware, through time, that many things that seem , initially easy, are not conducive for overall Sales, Marketing or the current game plan. But , throwing them out there, whether from Engineering , Marketing , Dealers , and customers , means the Auto Industry may eventually hear and respond --- and there is no place they do it better than in the " Performance Arena."

 

[BmacIL]

I politiely question a couple of your remarks , mainly on the basis of the cars competitors. None of the three can be as lightweight as wanted , mainly due to the weight of the SuperCharger , though both the Camaro and Mustang are somewhat closer weight wise than the Whalecat. There is no argument among a single Engineer I am acquainted with at GM, Ford or FCA that does not wish the cars to be lighter , but the cooling on the GT 500 is more or a coup than a detriment considering it's prowess on the track.

1. We can not criticize Ford for the excessive cooling when the 1/3 higher price Corvette ZR1 would heatsoak in 3-4 laps at Road Atlanta with a skilled driver. Gotta say thank you after watching one being hammered all day long ( on a very warm day ) this past September, without nary a hiccup...........and no heat soak. Seen it ( heat soak ) happen with a Hellcat , ( and many other cars )a Drag/Cruiser concept machine in my mind, but it goes after that theme primarily. Even it's Engineers have worked to make it better for a road course, though not in the same league as the Mustang.

2. Not sure where the Drag-esque nature comment comes from , since if you were working there , you had to be acquainted with the key Engineering personnel and how the focus was changing from a Drag Strip format to an extremely capable road course machine faster than anything ever built except the GT. I heard over and over from some test drivers and friends at the tracks ( that the car was quietly being tested at) about the road course competence and they were spending hardly a minute at the strips. Granted, I was told to keep my mouth shut , but the excitement was at such a high degree, folks had to tell someone - sure I know others were very discreetly told too. Keeping my mouth very shut has benefitted over years , and I know others in the same league and I have always respected the trust.

3. I love manuals , but the Marketing Key, the reality Key, and the yes the ultimate Speed Key , is a DCT, PDK , heavy duty auto, whatever because;
A). Even die hards know they can not shift as quick
B). Common sense is you must do what your competition is doing -- Hellcat ( auto ) , Camaro ZL1 ( 10 speed auto )
C). Power delivery and control
D). Heck , it was a joint , killer effort with Tremec and Ford for the car , great step towards dominance on track , imho.

4. Lastly , I constantly would wonder why Ford, GM, FCA did not take the concept a step farther and do something like you commmented on. The very simple initial reason is one does not Market a " Halo Car," with all it's special attributes at the same time as a " Cut Rate" model because it will detract from all the Promotion, Testing , Advertising, and even Engineering Focus. Is it a good idea, absolutely, since we see some of these concepts arrive later, like the 1320 Challenger. We ( Woodhouse ) were very lucky to share ideas similar to yours with FCA and I completely felt as you , yet I had to realize the extra testing, even EPA and other approvals often delayed models, yet also the Companies do not want to delete the overall Sales Launch of a Super Special Model. There are tons of different Mustangs , Camaro, Challengers, built in variations ( this was discussed elsewhere) actually made to capture " Mystique Sales, " of the GT 500, Hellcat ,or ZL1. Marketing knows the limited nature, the cost , etc. of a " Halo Machines," means the masses will want something that in their mind mimics their desires , and that is why we have a Challenger TA , or a 1LE Camaro, or , yes, a new Mach 1. I know I got my first Firebird Formula because I could not quite afford a full Trans Am , at the time. In fact over the years I often took a model a step down from my ultimate desire because it was limited , I could not afford it, or my timing was not right.

Hang in there and yes I commend your dreaming thought process ,because that is what in Engineering of anything continues to make improvements, and it is an integral part of folks who aspire to the constantly changing profession. Yet, things can never all be done at once, for monetary or other reasons, and usually the problems Petrolheads feel are why is it taking so long or Marketing to see what we feel is so apparent. Engineerings focus is unique in that their DNA is imbedded in making improvements over and over ( a constant) and I often felt it was a little bit of their innate impatience --- but that is why I love so many of them. They are the puzzle masters, they are the detectives, but today , like in the past , government regulations, competition, consumers, dependability, and so many other factors determine the end.

Enjoy your week.


I completely agree that ideas like a drag model or variations should be thrown out, as models evolve , but I also have become aware, through time, that many things that seem , initially easy, are not conducive for overall Sales, Marketing or the current game plan. But , throwing them out there, whether from Engineering , Marketing , Dealers , and customers , means the Auto Industry may eventually hear and respond --- and there is no place they do it better than in the " Performance Arena."

1 and 2: it's a blower. Blowers are extremely difficult to keep cool on track. GM has proved this. It can be done, as they have done with the 500, but is it better for it? I'm not convinced.

The rest of it: do you even own an S550? There are so many little stupid design things all over the chassis and suspension that needed not to stay with any of the Shelby variants, let alone the top dog. GM did a much better job with this and it would not have cost Ford hardly any, if any money to do them just as well. As it is, it was lazy design, compromise driven by the plant being unnecessarily difficult, or the crazies in the NVH group (they're fun) who bent the VEM and chief engineer to their will while sacrificing loads and loads of consistency and predictability. They caved to FRAP and built in enormous tolerances for important assemblies that engineers fought the results of for many, many months.

Don't get me wrong, I love my car, but I had to make it this way to love it. Stock, it was a jiggly, sloppy and inconsistent mess that my prior FWD, 190 hp street car annihilated in autocross. Ford did a good job making it a comfy cruiser, but fell well short of the mark for a great driving experience. The GT350 is a lot better but it merely masks a lot of same problems.

I'm not being unnecessarily harsh on Ford, I just don't look at everything they do as amazing just because it's a Mustang or has a Ford badge. Simply put: GM could've kept the S550 permanently in 2nd place if they hadn't kept on with their cartoon exterior and interior styling choices that make the 6th Gen Camaro hard to DD and harder to live with compared with the S550 and Challenger. The base underpinnings are that much better, if you ever get a chance to go through it part by part.

 

[302BOB]

We have had a plethora of Challenger model builds

The new breed of Challengers have evolved over the years to include more HP and creature comforts some will enjoy.. It's a muscle car ( with its high end options) that appeals to the occaisnal cruiser who has no interest to track their car..I was tempted by the SRT Challenger back in the day but ended up with my Boss...no regrets............The Demon version with it's drag strip potential may have appealed to a few, but not many I would think..................................

 

[TMSBOSS]

Most would not be convinced that "Less is More" when it comes to HP. If not a blower, then what? The game has always been HP to weight. Changing the platforms to something smaller would have killed the Mustang, Challenger and Camaro. What would you suggest?

Comparing the 500 to an import autocross machine is comparing apples to Suchi. Ford, Dodge and GM have not been serious about autocross in some time. Some would say Autocrossers have not been serious about the big three.

Your point of view, argument appears to be "Why didn't Ford modify my car to my desires before I bought it". Well, you bought the car built for the masses. My wife drives a 2019 GT Mustang. A great car as is. It does not compare to my Boss or GT350R in most ways. It has more power than the Boss, shifts extremely well, rides great. Its not autocross or road race car.

 

[302BOB]

Many folks buy performance cars for many different reasons. I was in the market for a "muscle" car to enjoy driving and getting on it once in a while.Both the Boss or the Challenger would have fit the bill. I admit the GT350 is a better performing and engineered car than the Boss...But it wasn't around when I was buying....................I chose the Boss for its limited build aspect and appearance................

 

[Bill Pemberton]

Quick answer ( well sometimes that is a misnomer with me , ha ), to your question, yes I previously owned a GT 350, and sold somewhere close to 35 - 40 S550s and Shelby's over the past 4 years ,even though my main focus was as the SRT/Viper and Performance Sales Mgr. I helped start the Woodhouse Motorsports Division which was capably taken over by an individual who was considered by many to be the suspension and Viper Guru for mods in the entire US.

So , sure there are compromises on the S550 and the Camaro, and the Challenger primarily due to cost , suppliers , etc. You are likely well aware that the Tremec was selected years back to be in the Boss 302 by the Engineering staff, but ye olde Beancounters went with the M-80 ( yeh, not my favorite ). But all these things said , when I was killing folks in Porsches, Vettes and other machines that were supposed to be destroying the Boss, then the S550 or GT 350 , I was pleased with what is the constant compromise.

I agree everything they do is not amazing, but then neither is what GM or FCA do, but that is why I mentioned keep being the dreamer that is indicative of an Engineer who loves his occupation. Things can always be improved , short cuts have to be taken , but the end result, for the timeframe is how does it compare to it's contemporaries? I am personally not a big GM fan ( though at one time in my life I was ) , primarily for a silly emotional reason ( I think the Camaro is butt ugly , especially inside where we rationally actually live in a car ), I am an old fart appreciative of the retro styling and neat upgrades on the Challenger, and I absolutely love the looks of the Mustang -- the S550 even over my Boss S.

Lastly , I will jump in on a little comment from my good buddy Tracy, and say that the Mustang is not only a killer Autocross car it is a dominator. Over the years it started cleaning up on many machines and though times change I encourage folks to wander out to an SCCA event , because you will find a bunch or Stangs out there competing. The number of National Championships in Mustangs is unheard of, but we all have to get over the inherent bias that a bigger car does not handle as well as a smaller machine. Depending on the course and the driver , this is an abstract , but most often one will find some larger machines absolutely destroying a track. Sneak on down to Lincoln, Nebraska in September and watch the good old Merican Iron destroy the pavement.

 

[Ludachris]

I think when we tear into cars like the GT500 we do so with other cars in mind that have the attributes we like better - lower weight being one of them. I've always thought that these new muscle cars could be lighter weight, but as the power keeps going up, the weight goes up too. As do standards for crash testing. I think it's harder to keep the costs down when you have more options that remove systems/pieces that have a big weight savings. And let's keep in mind that the only people who care much about weight is people like us who are interested in road racing and autocross, and we tend to make up a small percentage of the people who will probably buy a car like the GT500. Most of them will probably never be tracked.

 

[BmacIL]

Most would not be convinced that "Less is More" when it comes to HP. If not a blower, then what? The game has always been HP to weight. Changing the platforms to something smaller would have killed the Mustang, Challenger and Camaro. What would you suggest?

Comparing the 500 to an import autocross machine is comparing apples to Suchi. Ford, Dodge and GM have not been serious about autocross in some time. Some would say Autocrossers have not been serious about the big three.

Your point of view, argument appears to be "Why didn't Ford modify my car to my desires before I bought it". Well, you bought the car built for the masses. My wife drives a 2019 GT Mustang. A great car as is. It does not compare to my Boss or GT350R in most ways. It has more power than the Boss, shifts extremely well, rides great. Its not autocross or road race car.

Import autocross machine it was not...FWD sedan with no mods and lots of body roll.

That's interesting you say they haven't been serious about it, because the GM factory team won CAM-C at nationals last year with a 1LE Camaro. The new Ecoboost HPP + Handling pack was targeted for autocrossers.

That is not my point of view. My point is that it could've been a better road race or autocross car w/o taking away from its great DD road manners and without a significant, or any cost hit. They have all the resources to have made that possible.

 

[Ludachris]

That is not my point of view. My point is that it could've been a better road race or autocross car w/o taking away from its great DD road manners and without a significant, or any cost hit. They have all the resources to have made that possible.

You might be right. I've been told it's more difficult to lighten a car without a cost hit, but maybe I heard it from the wrong people. I'm wondering if they felt it wasn't necessary due to who would be buying the car.

 

[BmacIL]

You might be right. I've been told it's more difficult to lighten a car without a cost hit, but maybe I heard it from the wrong people. I'm wondering if they felt it wasn't necessary due to who would be buying the car.

Significant lightening would be more expensive.

What I'm referring to are design choices that did not need to be:
- Making assembly tolerances tighter than +/- 1/4" for the rear subframe location (interesting story on that one!)
- Designing rear subframe bushings that allow MASSIVE amounts of deflection when applying throttle, not just hard launches....this is the thing your entire suspension is mounted to
- Designing a massively bound-up rear suspension (and front to a much lesser extent) with all their indexing bushings
- Making the rear upper shock mount rubbery, handicapping the shock's ability to control the wheel and sprung mass, and making shock tuning more difficult for the vehicle dynamics engineers

There are more. All of those remain on the Shelby models. All of those could've been designed differently, while retaining the isolation that ensures great noise and ride comfort. I'll point again to the Alpha platform from GM as well as many other performance cars.

 

[Ludachris]

Significant lightening would be more expensive.

What I'm referring to are design choices that did not need to be:
- Making assembly tolerances tighter than +/- 1/4" for the rear subframe location (interesting story on that one!)
- Designing rear subframe bushings that allow MASSIVE amounts of deflection when applying throttle, not just hard launches....this is the thing your entire suspension is mounted to
- Designing a massively bound-up rear suspension (and front to a much lesser extent) with all their indexing bushings
- Making the rear upper shock mount rubbery, handicapping the shock's ability to control the wheel and sprung mass, and making shock tuning more difficult for the vehicle dynamics engineers

There are more. All of those remain on the Shelby models. All of those could've been designed differently, while retaining the isolation that ensures great noise and ride comfort. I'll point again to the Alpha platform from GM as well as many other performance cars.

Well I'm certainly not qualified enough to offer any feedback on those points. Maybe someone else can chime in on the thought process behind some of those. What I do know, is that sometimes people who manage engineering teams tend to think they know better than the engineers, and they force their requirements into a design even when it isn't necessary to be "extra" sure that things like vibrations are not noticeable. There always seems to be forces fighting each other in automobile design.

 

[BmacIL]

Well I'm certainly not qualified enough to offer any feedback on those points. Maybe someone else can chime in on the thought process behind some of those. What I do know, is that sometimes people who manage engineering teams tend to think they know better than the engineers, and they force their requirements into a design even when it isn't necessary to be "extra" sure that things like vibrations are not noticeable. There always seems to be forces fighting each other in automobile design.

You're absolutely correct on that. Also engineering management also often has certain 'hot buttons' that they focus on relentlessly and put priority on for the vehicle requirements, sometimes to the detriment of other attributes.

 

[xr7]

Thankful for all those rental cars and daily driver Mustangs out there. Our product wouldn't be there without them.