More Photos of the 2021 Mach 1

[Fat Boss]

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.

As someone who runs complex engineering programs, the number one objective for us is a technical one. We have to meet the performance characteristics or it simply won't be a competitive product. Second is nearly always schedule, then cost rounding out the top three. If for some strange reason we have time and resources to design out some cost, then we do it.

 

[Dires114]

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.

Those are exactly all the parts I fixed on my GT350R.

along with caliper studs.

 

[Bill Pemberton]

It's early in Cornland, but old farts often are up at the break of dawn so we can see if we are still on this Planet, ha. Well the news this morning focused that " Negativity" in life may accelerate dementia!! So , I am going to go for the positives and continue the trend here on TMO of stating the positive , having a good time, hanging with the rest of you Trackraticus Humanus Speeddemoniacal Lifeforms and sharing a beer or two ( substitute your favorite number ). This is just a car Forum, yet it is one that has fostered the love of the underdog ( to many) Mustang on road courses, auto crosses and drags, showing the uninformed that the car is only a " Sleeper " to the uninitiated .

Staying positive because I am not liking what the news says about dementia...............heh, there are a more of us old farts on this site than many of you may realize and that is not something any of us want to experience.

 

[TMSBOSS]

Bill

I have seen this on other sites that I visited....briefly. Someone felt Ford, Chevy or Dodge should have built a car for the masses and also for a very specific segment of a sport. Then package it with a bow and low price tag. Example, when the S550 came out guys were using power adders and snapping stock rear axle shafts on their Mustang GTs. On another site, I stated they were buying stock and demanding HP parts and that their expectation was not reasonable. Strangely enough, I made the assessment that since none of the manufacturers put HP parts in a standard entry level car, the business model may have been the reason for the decision(s). Of course, the haters came out of the wood work. Fairly sure that is one of the several sites where my number of posts range in the single digits. (Their loss, I am a really great guy!!)
You want to hate on something, GREAT, this is America. There are MANY site where you can do just that. It just ain't here. Got a list of part, mods, aero, driver mods to discuss, COOL.
BTW. That "Fat Pig" dances around most of the skinny girls at the Prom (Read Road Courses) and does not even break a sweet. The one I saw on track was dressed all in white. Now that may have been a little pretentious. LOL .

 

[Bill Pemberton]

This site has some of the best builds I have seen anywhere, and folks give advice without telling folks to check the " Search " button. I just think it is a place where folks who are serious about playing with their cars can go for some solid stuff , tech heavy mods from some pretty experienced dudes, and lastly a group of individuals who actually enjoy each other.
None of us has all the answers , but I know I love that folks here, are willing to share and do so in such a carefree and friendly manner. Sure there will be disagreements , but they seem to be rare and members respect each other even when they disagree. In other words , TMO , to me, operates exactly like folks are talking directly to each other --- face to face.

I think this is an old school Forum, very similar to the ones that started when this Social Media gave birth, somewhat silly , pretty polite, civil and a perfect escape. Hard data for the average Track Afficianado , comments from respected authorities ( whether from Sponsors like Apex , Vorshlag, etc. ) , along with info from those that have worked with established, Nationally Winning Race teams , even Ford Engineers.

 

[byronj]

so any more pics of the new Mach 1?

 

[Grant 302]

Lol. So say the MT-82 haters.

 

[Tonymustang302]

Lol. So say the MT-82 haters.

and lets get into all the voodoo clickbait on youtube ‘’my engine blew after revving to 9000rpm and ford denied my claim..’’

 

[Grant 302]

and lets get into all the voodoo clickbait on youtube ‘’my engine blew after revving to 9000rpm and ford denied my claim..’’

Yeah, that too.

 

[Ludachris]

So quick summary of page #4 here.... we'll see what the Mach 1 chassis and drivetrain looks like when it gets confirmed so we can applaud or moan, some still aren't happy with the GT350/500 engineering choices, others want those people to quit nitpicking because these cars are pretty good regardless, but all of that debate doesn't really fit well in this forum because we're all here to get more info on how to have more fun at the track and make friends with those who enjoy the same past time, where other forums tend to have a lot of members getting stuck on tangents that take away from the focus of that forum. And this site is full of great people.

Did I miss anything?

Will anyone be considering trading their existing Mustang for a Mach 1 if it ends up being available with X? Like, a Tremec maybe?

 

[Tonymustang302]

So quick summary of page #4 here.... we'll see what the Mach 1 chassis and drivetrain looks like when it gets confirmed so we can applaud or moan, some still aren't happy with the GT350/500 engineering choices, others want those people to quit nitpicking because these cars are pretty good regardless, but all of that debate doesn't really fit well in this forum because we're all here to get more info on how to have more fun at the track and make friends with those who enjoy the same past time, where other forums tend to have a lot of members getting stuck on tangents that take away from the focus of that forum. And this site is full of great people.

Did I miss anything?

Will anyone be considering trading their existing Mustang for a Mach 1 if it ends up being available with X? Like, a Tremec maybe?

if its going to come with a dct i will decide to get the this instead of the gt500

 

[302BOB]

Thankful for all those rental cars and daily driver Mustangs out there

Anybody remember when Hertz was renting Hi-Pro GT350 Mustangs in the 60's??????????....A lot of them came back with lesser motors..... you give them boys an inch..they'll take a Galazy !!!!!!!!!!

 

[Ludachris]

Anybody remember when Hertz was renting Hi-Pro GT350 Mustangs in the 60's??????????....A lot of them came back with lesser motors..... you give them boys an inch..they'll take a Galazy !!!!!!!!!!

Still hard to believe some of rental car options that have been available.

 

[blacksheep-1]

Anybody remember when Hertz was renting Hi-Pro GT350 Mustangs in the 60's??????????....A lot of them came back with lesser motors..... you give them boys an inch..they'll take a Galazy !!!!!!!!!!

I do, and I remember in the 80s when they rented 302HO mustangs with manual transmissions, fortunately, because they provided a ready source of replacements for those old T5s, kind of like having a factory sponsorship...so I've been told...from a guy who's name I can't recall.

 

[yotah1]

Will anyone be considering trading their existing Mustang for a Mach 1 if it ends up being available with X? Like, a Tremec maybe?

I won't replace my 350 by a Mach 1, even though it will look absolutely badass on the road, maybe even more than the 350 in some aspects. But i will grab a few things from the Mach 1 that I want on my 350 and that we weren't able to put in production on previous programs.

Really thinking about getting one for my dad though as a retirement gift.

 

[blacksheep-1]

I wish to hell Ford would pick an engine and go with it, this is what got them in trouble with the kids market in the 60s, they had a great motor in the flathead, lot's of interchangeability, then Chevy figured it out and built the small block, an engine who's major parts were interchangeable from 1955 to when it's demise around 1998.
the new LS series is fairly uncomplicated but Ford has to have an engine of the week BS. It's bad (or good depending on your point of view) having DOHC but now they've bugged that up, you need an interchange guide to know what fits. Just keep 1 freaking block configuration, 1 or 2 crank/rod/piston combinations and 1 or 2 head configurations and call it a day.

 

[Grant 302]

Did I miss anything?

Will anyone be considering trading their existing Mustang for a Mach 1 if it ends up being available with X? Like, a Tremec maybe?

Just no FPC and it’ll be under consideration.

I wish to hell Ford would pick an engine and go with it, this is what got them in trouble with the kids market in the 60s, they had a great motor in the flathead, lot's of interchangeability, then Chevy figured it out and built the small block, an engine who's major parts were interchangeable from 1955 to when it's demise around 1998.
the new LS series is fairly uncomplicated but Ford has to have an engine of the week BS. It's bad (or good depending on your point of view) having DOHC but now they've bugged that up, you need an interchange guide to know what fits. Just keep 1 freaking block configuration, 1 or 2 crank/rod/piston combinations and 1 or 2 head configurations and call it a day.

Those times are done. For better or worse, done.

I get your point, but without the rapid changes, the GT would still have a 412 hp 4.95L.

 

[blacksheep-1]

Just no FPC and it’ll be under consideration.


Those times are done. For better or worse, done.

I get your point, but without the rapid changes, the GT would still have a 412 hp 4.95L.

Like building the 3 valve 4.6 in 2005, they were already building 4 valve 4.6s so why even fart around with the 3 valve?. Just build the best motor first.

 

[67GTA]

Will anyone be considering trading their existing Mustang for a Mach 1 if it ends up being available with X? Like, a Tremec maybe?

I’m with @Tonymustang302 on this one - 500hp FPC with DCT and I’m all in. Won’t consider trading in my current Mustang though - the Mach 1 would stay stockish while encouraging the slippery slope towards full blown race car with the 14 GT.

 

[Grant 302]

Like building the 3 valve 4.6 in 2005, they were already building 4 valve 4.6s so why even fart around with the 3 valve?. Just build the best motor first.

I think it was a good evolutionary step to take for SOHC engines. And cost would be more he main issue going back to the first modular Mustangs pre-'96. Took time for even those to trickle down from Lincoln platforms. 4 valve variants were too much money for me back then, even if you took away the SVT/Cobra premium in price.