Ford Mustang 2012 review

[Santilli]

Hi
Car died. Needed a car to get to work. Rented a mini car, didn't like the color, black, so they upgraded me to a 2012 Mustang, 3.7L v-6 for the same price.

Automatic, 6 speed, with a Sirus sound system that allows me to Bluetooth the phone for music and calls. VERY cool.

Performance gas mileage wise. Town 14 -23, more around 15. It's a 305 hp engine, trying to move a 4000 pound car, without a lot of torque.

Just came over Donner Pass to Reno. about 28 miles to a gallon. Maybe a little more. Going up the hill gas mileage is in the 20's. Coming down it's in the 50's.

Power steering has little feel, and you are in the next lane if you look away for a second. Goes well in a straight line. Think Nascar, then add 500-700 pounds. Brakes
are pretty big, but don't know how good. Still has a live rear axle, and I don't think it has a Watts linkage or coil over shocks like my 64.5 funny car did.

Passable coming over highway 80, which has a lot of high speed turns.

I'm really glad I'm not making this drive in my 89 Toyota.

 

[ddrueding]

I hear the next generation will be entering the 20th century with independent rear suspension.

 

[Handruin]

So, would you buy one? I think the reason for not having independent suspension in previous years of the Mustang is that if you decide to tune the car and add lots of extra HP, the independent suspension can't handle the torque as well as a leaf spring.

 

[ddrueding]

IIRC, higher performance Mustangs of the past have had IRS to good effect. It'll probably hurt the drag racing scene, but the car will be much better for it.

 

[Stereodude]

And the Corvette has a leaf spring in the suspension too! Oh gnoes!!! :scratch:

 

[Bozo]

So, would you buy one? I think the reason for not having independent suspension in previous years of the Mustang is that if you decide to tune the car and add lots of extra HP, the independent suspension can't handle the torque as well as a leaf spring.

The Corvette ZR-1 has 500+HP and independant rear suspension.
It's probably the cost.

 

[Bozo]

And the Corvette has a leaf spring in the suspension too! Oh gnoes!!! :scratch:

The Corvetts leaf spring is tranverse. ( side to side ). Torgue is handled by control arm/links

 

[Stereodude]

The Corvetts leaf spring is tranverse. ( side to side ). Torgue is handled by control arm/links

Yes, I know that. I was attempting to make fun of those people who make a big deal out of things that aren't really.

 

[time]

AFAIK, the 1973 Mustang was the last model to use leaf springs. Since 1979 they've used coil springs with a Panhard rod.

Station wagons and 'utes' aside, Aussie Fords went straight from leaf springs to coils with a Watts linkage in 1982. IRS became standard in 2002; options at the time included a 390hp V8 (courtesy Ford Performance Vehicles).

Local GM cars changed to coils in 1971 (the smaller Torana in 1967). IRS was introduced in 1995 and became standard in 1997.

The last car I owned without IRS was a 1994 model.

 

[Bozo]

Yes, I know that. I was attempting to make fun of those people who make a big deal out of things that aren't really.

Sorry, it went right over my head.

 

[Santilli]

Would I buy one? Probably not. It's pretty expensive. I like the gas mileage on the freeway and the speed. I don't really like the lack of feeling in the power steering. I do like being able to blow up hills really fast. It's fun easily doing 80-90 up hills
even if the gas consumption is bad doing that.

For a 4000 pound plus car it doesn't have much useable space. The trunk is not particularly large and the back seat would be better used as a storage space. For one person it is a comfortable trip car. Two you have to use the back seat for bags
and luggage. This risks tearing the upholstery.

Handling wise the suspension is questionable. It is sprung stiffly. Yet it does have considerable body lean when cornered hard. Really should have a Watts linkage to minimize the roll and force the body down onto the suspension.

In other words it corners passably at high speeds but not really well. Tires are a major issue since the car is so heavy. It needs wider and bigger tires to corner at high g forces. I'm sure the brakes would go away if the car was really
pushed.

I find I can't really drive a car with an automatic transmission well at near the limits of the cars handling. I just haven't practiced the two footed gas braking techniques enough to get good at it. If driven in that style I'm positive the brakes
would heat up and probably fade or fail.

The speaker system and Sirus system is just incredible. It makes long distance driving a real joy, and just cruising along at the speed limit bareable when the bears are out(US slang for highway patrol officers/cars) and the radar detector is going off everytime I go over 65. In the People's Republic of Kalifornia the highway patrol also has airplanes to give you tickets. I am pretty sure they have to use radar to time you but I need to find out for sure.

It's really strange to be out in the middle of nowhere and have your radar detector go on and off for five minutes with no vehicles in site and no buildings present.

 

[Santilli]

Good stuff on airplane tickets:
http://www.ibiblio.org/rdu/ca-speed.html

Appears the airplanes actually WARN you by hitting you with radar to determine your speed or they have to call an officer that then has to manage to pace you.

That brings up one of the two major faults with the mustang.

The first is parking it in a tight space is nearly impossible due to it's size and the lack of reward vision. That fastback combined with the huge head rests in the back seat limit reward visibility severely.

I've managed to loose a mid-sized car in the blind spot on the right rear. To check that spot you have to take your eyes off the road to focus on the rear view mirror. This mirror distorts distance so your brain takes a bit of time
to process what you are seeing and to calculate how far away the car is.

There is one part of highway 680 www.mapquest.com/maps?city=Benicia&state=CA

that runs up to highway 80 through Bahia. I've been tailed by a motorcycle officer with his headlight off at night in the Toyota. I only know this because I was going around 65-70 and not any faster. I suspect it was the surf racks on the
car that drew his attention (surf racks are like honey to bears or bees or CHP's: California Highway patrol: this IS an attempt at humor;-).

All of a sudden he flips on his light, accelerates to 90 while weaving in acceleration and disappears. NICE.

No ticket. In the mustang it is likely he would be able to approach from the rear and pace me without being seen in the mirrors or by my constant reward checks.

 

[sdbardwick]

In the People's Republic of Kalifornia the highway patrol also has airplanes to give you tickets. I am pretty sure they have to use radar to time you but I need to find out for sure.

I-5 and I-15 (and probably others, but these I know) in sparsely populated areas used (still do?) to have hash marks on the shoulders every mile (and 1/2 and 1/4 mile in some areas) to provide timing points for air enforcement.

 

[Stereodude]

They definitely don't use radar from aircraft. They use painted lines on the freeway that are a certain distance apart.

 

[ddrueding]

I-5 and I-15 (and probably others, but these I know) in sparsely populated areas used (still do?) to have hash marks on the shoulders every mile (and 1/2 and 1/4 mile in some areas) to provide timing points for air enforcement.

They definitely don't use radar from aircraft. They use painted lines on the freeway that are a certain distance apart.

I can back this up. My last significant ticket was from an aircraft. No radar was detected by my V1, and the CHP was already moving towards me before I came over the ridge towards him.

 

[MaxBurn]

It's not like it is a secret, they have signs saying speed enforced by aircraft. Radar from aircraft wouldn't work at all, consider the angles involved. Radar/laser speed detection works best with objects moving straight to it or away from it from a stationary platform. Otherwise you have to figure the platforms movement and angles etc, stuff that cops won't do and present in court. On the other hand lines on the road and a stopwatch are simple.

I agree the mustang isn't a practical car at all. I also find the handling and fun quotient on the last couple I have rented and the last one I owned is far lower than my current ride. Pricing is a bit crazy too. I can say they are a pretty safe car to have a bad collision in.

 

[time]

We now have point-to-point speed cameras in Oz. They can be several kilometers apart. They read each vehicle's license plate and time how long it took to drive between them. No radar to detect and it should be extremely accurate.

We also have combined red-light and speed cameras at some intersections, mobile speed cameras and laser ('LIDAR') speed guns. Radar detectors are illegal and police have radar detector detectors.

You lose your license for exceeding the speed limit by 40km/h (25mph) in this state, but only 25km/h in the State of Victoria. Really high speeds will attract a dangerous driving charge, so Ddrueding would be a jailbird.

They don't call Oz the "nanny state" for nothing.

 

[Chewy509]

Like my wife says, it's easy to avoid a speeding ticket... Don't speed.

 

[time]

Speed limits on public roads here are 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90, 100 and 110 km/h. 50 is normally unsigned (as is the 40 km/h once you're inside the CBD boundaries). School zones alternate between 60 (or 50) and 40 km/h depending on the time of day and day of week. New connecting roads sport variable speed limits (with electronic signs) combined with fixed speed cameras to catch anyone who misses the change. In Sydney, the automated cameras booked 30,000 drivers passing through a tunnel where not all the electronic signs were in sync.

Police regularly position mobile speed cameras at the bottom of hills, or the latest wheeze that I've seen twice now, on exit ramps from freeways where the limit drops from 100 to 60. That's flat out dangerous - you don't want people slowing down while they're still in the 100 km/h zone or braking hard on a downward sloping ramp so they can be under 60 within 50 meters or so.

From what I've seen, enforcement isn't anywhere near as much of a problem in your area - try living in one of the State capitals. It's not at all easy to avoid a ticket, it's damned hard and takes a fair amount of luck as well as obsessive watching of the speedo instead of the road. When you've spent as many years without any speeding tickets as I have, come back and tell me it's easy.

 

[Chewy509]

I know it's not easy, having copped a few in the past. It's especially hard going on the bike as well...

However I was under the impression that any location (in QLD) that had a speed camera in place had to be approved by the courts first, and could not be placed ad hoc anywhere the local copper sees fit? And AFAIK there are some nice guidelines in relation to that. (like no closer than 100m between change in speed limit, not within a certain distance of an intersection, no downhill runs, etc).

PS. This seems to give weight to my understanding: http://www.police.qld.gov.au/rti/published/policies/traffic-manual/06/Ch_06_PT1.htm . Section 6.3.2. So basically if you are caught at a location not approved, then it makes it a lot easier to fight the fine in court. (especially if it's a just-over fine, and not a +30km over fine). Also Section 6.5.2 says no camera within 300 of a decrease in speed zone... :wink:

 

[MaxBurn]

In the US I'm aware that we have laws against predatory speed traps, I don't know what they are but it sounds like a couple of those wouldn't fly in the US.

 

[ddrueding]

In the US I'm aware that we have laws against predatory speed traps, I don't know what they are but it sounds like a couple of those wouldn't fly in the US.

My best defense so far is going to the court and pointing out how unreasonable the trap was. The judges around here seem to be pretty good.

 

[timwhit]

You could always take matters into your own hands.

 

[Bozo]

My car was in for repairs ( I backed into a Jeep). My insurance company paid for most of the cost to rent a car. I got a mini Cooper. In my ~50 years of driving, that was the worst car I ever drove. I literally kissed the keys and steering wheel of my XB when I got it back.

 

[MaxBurn]

My best defense so far is going to the court and pointing out how unreasonable the trap was. The judges around here seem to be pretty good.

Excellent point, never let them go. Even if you are wrong you can usually knock them down a bit. Chances are good you can walk too. This in the US that is.

 

[Chewy509]

Bit harder to avoid one here in Oz, usually you have to show that:
1. Equipment was not maintained accordingly to spec, nor had calibrations done as maintenance requirement.
2. Location not pre-approved for placement of camera, or meet one of the criteria that a trap shouldn't be placed in.
3. Operator was not trained correctly in it's use.
4. Wasn't shown the read-out on the gun. (Police must show you the reading they received before issuing you a ticket, for road side speeding tickets).

And in some cases, people have had to go to the extreme, and prove that the vehicle is not capable of the speed they were clocked at. (In some cases people have been fined for doing 150km+, when there car can't even do 130km).

 

[timwhit]

There are cars that can't go 130km/h (80.7mph)?

 

[ddrueding]

In the rest of the world they sell cars with sub-1 liter engines.

 

[Chewy509]

There are cars that can't go 130km/h (80.7mph)?

Unfortunately, like dd said, there are cars with sub 1L engines, but as cars get older, the power from the engine decreases (due to wear), so the car is able to go as fast as it was when new. (And due to tightening household budgets, people are holding on to well running cars, and not upgrading every 4-5 years like they did in the past).

For example a 1980 Datsun 120Y, with it's 1.2L engine can still occassionally be seen on the road. Most of these will be lucky to hit 130km/h unless they have had work done to the engine.

 

[BingBangBop]

This is the Mustang that you really should have reviewed: Shelby GT500 Mustang. You reviewed the bottom-end wimp Mustang and complained of lack of torque. Well, this one won't be torqueless with 662HP and 631 Lb-Ft of torque. It will cost a bit more though and isn't likely to be avail from Hertz

 

[Stereodude]

In the rest of the world they sell cars with sub-1 liter engines.

In the US we call those vehicles golf carts.

 

[Bozo]

This is the Mustang that you really should have reviewed: Shelby GT500 Mustang. You reviewed the bottom-end wimp Mustang and complained of lack of torque. Well, this one won't be torqueless with 662HP and 631 Lb-Ft of torque. It will cost a bit more though and isn't likely to be avail from Hertz

Back in the 60's, Hertz actually rented the original Mustang GT350. They found out real quick that wasn't a good idea. Besides being beat to death, some came back without the original engine in them. :bigeek:

 

[Bozo]

In the US we call those vehicles golf carts.

:-D

 

[Santilli]

I can't find the listing now. Ford had a pretty much race prepared Mustang for sale for about 80 thousand, US. Roll cage, the entire setup. It was yellow.

I see the car as a Nascar weight car, without the benefits of using that size. The old Nascars, like the Daytona Charger, where huge cars that weigh the same as the current Mustang. They had MUCH more room inside.

Top Gear also did a test, and the handling on the New Mustangs translates into pretty horrible track times. They haven't really solved how to get the car to handle using a solid rear axle, and still be streetable.

I forgot to mention the turning radius is huge as well.

 

[Santilli]

This is more the direction I wish the Mustangs went, but still using the 5.0 liter V 8:
http://www.themustangnews.com/content/2010/03/pro-challenge-ford-mustang-race-car/

 

[ddrueding]

This is more the direction I wish the Mustangs went, but still using the 5.0 liter V 8:
http://www.themustangnews.com/content/2010/03/pro-challenge-ford-mustang-race-car/

That is a tube-framed race car with some fiberglass that makes it look like a mustang. You could make it look like a pinto if you wanted.

 

[BingBangBop]

If you want to race, on a track, get yourself an Ariel Atom. Top gear's review of the Atom. Pretty much a motor in a roll cage. Really quite inexpensive for the performance level at $30,000-$40,000. but then it isn't a Mustang and you wont get that fabulous stereo.

Imagine putting That Ford 600HP motor in an Atom, rather than its normal 25HP0-300HP motor. See Greg move. Go Greg Go. See Greg die. lol

 

[Santilli]

Essentially the same thing I drove on the street, in the 70-90 period. However mine weighed 2880, with a 32 gallon fuel cell, Nascar coil over suspension with a Watts linkage, and the suspension mounting points redone, ala Bud Moore/Ford IMSA racing technology. Lincoln disk brakes on the front and Mustang disk brakes on the rear. .60" over 289, with a Turbo cam, putting out around 330 HP, through a Nash 5 speed, and 2.73 9" rear end. 780 Holy with mechanical secondaries.
Boss rockers and trick hydraulic lifters. Combination did 150, but ran into a wall at that point, thanks to the aerodynamics of a brick. 12 quart oil pan, remote oil radiator, giant custom radiator. Pretty much every panel was replaced with fiberglass.

The irony was failing to buy a race motor. I was offered a Falconer & Dunn race motor. Boss 320, 540 hp with 4 dual webers. It was used in the IMSA race car series. Looking back, I might have been able to sell the webers and manifold for nearly the price of the engine.

Pirelli VR rated tires, on alum Bud Moore racing wheels, the 5 spokes, 15 X 9 IIRC.

 

[Santilli]

I REALLY enjoyed the video of the Atom and the Stig running the car through the track. Funny how the car didn't really look fast through the track. A cheaper route would be just buying a formula Vee Track car. You get a body and a windscreen.

We had a couple cars around that terrified their owners. My boss at the time bought a Dodge 440 Challenger. No brakes, no suspension near 440 hp, and it flopped around under acceleration like a small whale.
He sold it. Scared him to death. His brother had a Katana, 1100cc, that went 0=60 in two seconds, in first gear.

For me, I'm not really sure I should have a car with over 350 hp.

 

[ddrueding]

They do make an Atom V8 with 500hp...