2015 Mustang ordered

[Indy GT]

In the latest edition of Road & Track, they did a comparison of a stock Boss 302 against the new 2015 GT with the Performance Package on their home test track they use to make comparisons. In a ~57 second lap time, the new 2015 has a 14 car-length advantage.... in a single lap. Unbelievable!

Kendall, this does seem quite unbelieveable. Perhaps it is absolutely true but I want to see both these examples on the track for myself. (or ride along with Mark) I know the IRS is heavy and weight is a significant track factor as is handling which will be better with the IRS. But the Boss solid axle was pretttttty good. Tires make a big difference as well and the LS did come with R tires.

Making some distance assumptions from the quoted data, that would mean the new Mustang is a little over 5% faster than your LS around the whole track. Knowing what you know about the LS performance (as you have a lot of seat time) does that seem credible to you?:confused

 

[dbk]

In the latest edition of Road & Track, they did a comparison of a stock Boss 302 against the new 2015 GT with the Performance Package on their home test track they use to make comparisons. In a ~57 second lap time, the new 2015 has a 14 car-length advantage.... in a single lap. Unbelievable!

The home test track for R&T is a real simple loop on an old auxiliary runway at Detroit City Airport. I'm surprised the gap was that big because it's more of a sprint than a true road course. Still, Larry Webster is one of the few magazine guys that is an actual hot shoe so if it was him driving it's probably legit.

 

[Specracer]

Bill don't ignore the other end of a an s550. The dual ball joint front suspension that was modeled and benchmarked off the e9x bmw m3 is really good, more linear bump steer. so that in addition to the overall increased stiffness of the entire car, all work together.

 

[Cobrar]

I have one thing to say to my dear Friend at R&T -- bring it.

Your subsequent embarrassment at not achieving a 14 car length advantage (in one lap??) will involve some minor public humiliation on a media day at the 2016 NAIAS. Meanwhile, I'll go ahead and get your T-shirt pre-printed for your wearing. lol

 

[nota4re]

Kendall, this does seem quite unbelieveable. Perhaps it is absolutely true but I want to see both these examples on the track for myself. (or ride along with Mark) I know the IRS is heavy and weight is a significant track factor as is handling which will be better with the IRS. But the Boss solid axle was pretttttty good. Tires make a big difference as well and the LS did come with R tires.

Making some distance assumptions from the quoted data, that would mean the new Mustang is a little over 5% faster than your LS around the whole track. Knowing what you know about the LS performance (as you have a lot of seat time) does that seem credible to you?

Well, I'm not sure to be the best qualified "driver" to make the comparison - although my goal is to get there some day! But that said, from an engineering perspective, it is relatively easy for me to believe. As others have said, I think that Ford had the executive nod and corresponding budget to develop the IRS for the Mustang. Having completed that, early testing of this "now good" rear suspension, the weaknesses of the front suspension became rather obvious. The engineers had to go back to request additional program money and approval to re-do the front suspension geometry. They got it and they did it.

What Ford accomplished with a live axle with the Boss 302/LS program was truly amazing. I don't think anyone could have predicted just how good of a job they pulled off with those "constraints". But, I can vividly remember multiple track sessions when I was chasing my friend in his M3 around the track. While I should have been looking and thinking about my driving, more than once I caught myself (the engineer) in total awe of what his rear IRS suspension was doing. Honestly, it was kind of mind warping. In a different context, I could have stared at it for hours instead of just seconds. It was literally just following/hugging the road. So as the road rose, fell and turned while the car dove, twisted and yawed about - the suspension kept total road-holding composure. Simply stated, in the "chaos" going on around it, the suspension was relentless in just keeping the entire contact patch of the tire glued to the road. It was really cool to watch. This was the ah-ha moment for me. In contrast, following my buddy in his Boss 302, there was two tires connected by a "stick" and in the chaotic environment of the pitching and yawing of the car with the simultaneous twisting and turning of the tarmac.... there was never the same "connection" between tires and asphalt. Hands down, IRS for a road-course car is just super-superior solution.

Engine performance between the Boss and the 2015 is really a wash. Hats off once again to Ford who managed to accomplish Boss-like HP/TQ numbers and curve shape in a mass-produced engine. And finally there is the braking - which once again is so clearly superior in the 2015 with massive 6-piston Brembos on much larger rotors. In short, massive suspension advantage. Comparable engine performance. Big braking advantage. = 14 car length advantage..... and likely even more with a curvier track.

 

[Indy GT]

Thanks Kendall!

Good observations.

I look forward to more of these comparisons to further verify the apparent tremendous advantage the 2015 track pac Mustang has over the former zenith LS Mustang.

 

[Xcentric]

I can't find the R&T results. Indy GT will probably be the only one to check my math. I did not double check it.

- The airport track is 1.1 miles.

- A 57 second lap is 69.5 mph avg.

- 69.5 mph = 102'/sec.

- 1 carlength = 188.3" = 15.7'

- 14 carlengths = 219.8'

Ergo, the 2015 Mustang was 219.8'/102 fps = 2.15 sec faster than the Boss 302.

That is a lot, but not inconceivable given all the variables. Could be very different results on another day. Still, quite impressive that the '15 is so close to the Boss.

 

[Howard]

Gary, don't you have a lawn to mow? Or a rooster to feed?

Howard

 

[Indy GT]

Gary,

Your numbers closely parallel my calcs as well. Very good!

I knew nothing about the track but assumed it was short knowing the cars had a lap time near one minute. Did not know anything about the layout either so just assumed an average track speed of around 55 mph. A little below your more accurate speed prediction.

The car lengths are very close. I measured 15.5' you used 15.7'.

And we both calculate the 2015 Mustang was about 2 second faster around this short track.

That is a pretty impressive showing for the new Mustang. Good job Ford!

 

[dbk]

Picked mine up this afternoon. Nice car. Interior materials quality is quite nice, sounds good, shifter is good. Not gonna have much to say about it for another 3 months though. Driving impressions when it's 11* out aren't much use. And it's all black, which is perfect for the Michigan winter.

 

[nota4re]

You guys both good/smart on your calculations. Lap times were 56.81 vs 58.39. 2015 was faster in straightaways, braking, and turning. Straightaway superiority no doubt from greater exit speeds from the corners. Better braking no doubt from big brake hardware upgrade (despite more overall car weight). A twistier/curvier track would, in my opinion, make the differences much larger. The engines (as stated previously) are just about a push in both peak power and power delivery. 2015 is heavier...... but suspension differences are the most significant factor.

 

[Cobrar]

Gary,

Your numbers closely parallel my calcs as well. Very good!

I knew nothing about the track but assumed it was short knowing the cars had a lap time near one minute. Did not know anything about the layout either so just assumed an average track speed of around 55 mph. A little below your more accurate speed prediction.

The car lengths are very close. I measured 15.5' you used 15.7'.

And we both calculate the 2015 Mustang was about 2 second faster around this short track.

That is a pretty impressive showing for the new Mustang. Good job Ford!

So Indy, you just going to roll over and capitulate to the 2015 GT PP? :facepalm::biggrin

Biggest advantage in the new car is the brakes (IMO: Achilles heel(s) of the 2013 Boss are its' brakes and shifter), and not mentioned heretofore - software (AdvanceTrack improvements enabled in the S550. Lets turn off the electronics so we can better understand variables/contributions/differences from driver, track, brakes.

I do believe that you'll find the Boss motor as an advantage, not a push, at least on a road course.

 

[Indy GT]

So Indy, you just going to roll over and capitulate to the 2015 GT PP? :facepalm::biggrin

Biggest advantage in the new car is the brakes (IMO: Achilles heel(s) of the 2013 Boss are its' brakes and shifter), and not mentioned heretofore - software (AdvanceTrack improvements enabled in the S550. Lets turn off the electronics so we can better understand variables/contributions/differences from driver, track, brakes.

I do believe that you'll find the Boss motor as an advantage, not a push, at least on a road course.

Rex, I really, really did not have that in my ownership plan. :frown However the GT350R may change that. Will wait and see as more is revealed.

I am very pleased with my Mustang (although Track Key gets an “F” in my book, but that is another story). My Boss now has the MGW so one Achilles fixed. The engine is plus on power (a real track key) and with my Performance Friction pads and DBA rotors, really do not have any complaints on the brakes. No fade and plenty of stop, at least at my level.

I just need more driving track time (like the big guns Andy, Ron, Jeff, Tim, Blake, etc). Mr. McGowan makes it look soooo easy and flowing. And I will NEVER forget my ride in the Nardo car at R3 with Mr. Martindale who casually said “Hey I just have a lot of FGT seat time”. I previously did track events in the Boss “sport mode” but got tired of unexpected interventions at seemingly inappropriate times and although still cautious, I now usually run with the nanny’s off. That's the only way I can keep up with Mr. BigInch.....

 

[Xcentric]

Lap times were 56.81 vs 58.39.

1.58 seconds sounds closer than "14 carlengths." Of course, at LeMans lap speeds, 1.58 seconds would be 30 Mustang carlengths/lap....or 11,885 Mustang carlengths/24 hrs. hehe.

 

[nota4re]

I do believe that you'll find the Boss motor as an advantage, not a push, at least on a road course.

Why? Peak HP/Tq numbers were nearly identical and it sure *feels* like the power delivery (i.e. tq curve) is substantially the same. No?

 

[CJ428]

Got the stripes and graphics on the mustang last week, a little red and it would match the track bike! Roush blower go's on this week with Tec article & photo shoot for Mustang 5.0 :wink

 

[CJ428]

Got the blower on last week, made 580 rwh with the Roush tune.

 

[dbk]

Wimbledon white 50th in for storage.

 

[twobjshelbys]

Wimbledon white 50th in for storage.

Nice looking car, sure love the color. Dealers were putting big ADMs. The local dealer wanted 15K over, now he's at sticker.

 

[Vince H]

Great taste Dave. Wimbledon White, what's not to love.

Vince H