Automotive News, Media & Press - This is why the new Mustang V6 is limited to 112mph

BOOM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k9hEJHhw9hA
One individual recently learned firsthand what happens when you remove the factory's 112-mph speed limiter on the Ford Mustang V6 and proceed to accelerate to 135 mph. The vehicle lost its driveshaft, which turned itself into a spinning hunk of metal that tore into the floorpan, bashed through its interior bits and generally caused mechanical mayhem.

In a statement to Autoblog, Ford said that the Mustang V6 is "the ultimate in fuel economy and performance," noting that owners looking for more speed should look toward the Mustang GT with its 412 horsepower V8, heavy-duty two-piece drive shaft and variety of rear axle ratio choices. The Mustang GT is limited to 145 mph.

As it turns out, 305-horsepower, 280-pound-feet of torque 3.7-liter V6 Mustang is built with a 2.73 rear gear ratio and a lightweight, one-piece driveshaft that's engineered to toe the line between fuel economy and performance. That driveshaft is part of the recipe that allow the coupe to produce yield 31 mpg highway – it simply isn't built to handle the type of speed the owner in the video submitted it to.

why the fuck would you go that fast in the bitch model anyways?

They've been limited at 116/117 for a long time, maybe since the v6 was brought back as an option

I wanna see the damage it caused

That's why cost cutting is not a good idea....a stock 300hp car that can't even do 135 safely?

Wow...just wow :jest:

In the U.S. market, there's nowhere you can "safely" run 135mph anyhow... Bit of a moot point.

Driveline engineering envelope is definitely something worth educating one's self on prior to removing speed limiters and adding h.p. with tunes. You've gotta know your weakest links.

Ford dropped a carbon-fiber 1-piece shaft into the '13 GT500 to get it safely past 200mph. The prior-model's 2-piece steel unit wasn't adequate. Strange harmonic sh** happens under those loads at those RPM's!

I wanna see the damage it caused

^^^ this

Does the warranty cover that?

In the U.S. market, there's nowhere you can "safely" run 135mph anyhow... Bit of a moot point.

I agree. That's why I don't understand why it's that important to go that fast. When I was younger I went 130 in my old Camaro once. I will never do it again lol. It was too dangerous. Everybody is different I guess. I would never go that fast in a brand new car unless I was on a race track or something.

That's why cost cutting is not a good idea....a stock 300hp car that can't even do 135 safely?

I feel the car was designed correctly.
It isn't a performance model and driveshafts aren't too terribly expensive to upgrade. Many times you can get them locally as well.

Does the warranty cover that?

"One individual recently learned firsthand what happens when you remove the factory's 112-mph speed limiter on the Ford Mustang V6 and proceed to accelerate to 135 mph"

Ummm, NO, it wouldn't. The failure was directly attributable to the car owner removing the speed limiter.

Also commonly, speed limiters are in place due to the speed-ratings of the factory-spec tire. So often people ask "why do they limit the speed"? Tire safety...

I agree. That's why I don't understand why it's that important to go that fast. When I was younger I went 130 in my old Camaro once. I will never do it again lol. It was too dangerous. Everybody is different I guess. I would never go that fast in a brand new car unless I was on a race track or something.

I saw 170mph in my 1993 Corvette 6-speed (that was top of 5th gear). It CURED ME of ever desiring to fool with high speeds again, at least on an open road... Just as you get past 160, things start going by you so fast you have a hard time getting a focus or referrence on ANYTHING. Gets blurry and disorienting, I imagine that race drivers become conditioned to it. Nevertheless, I was out on a straight clean 4-laner without another car in sight.. Why did it scare me? Because as I was slowly coming back down to earth I started to realize that all it would have taken was a possum, or armadillo, skittering out into the road and getting under a tire, to send me careening off the road to certain death. Forget the deer, at that speed, just about any little critter will get you out of shape.

Closed courses, fine. Open road, stupid/risky. IMHO...

Besides, everybody knows it's the pull that's more exhilerating than the top-speed.

I saw 170mph in my 1993 Corvette 6-speed (that was top of 5th gear). It CURED ME of ever desiring to fool with high speeds again, at least on an open road... Just as you get past 160, things start going by you so fast you have a hard time getting a focus or referrence on ANYTHING. Gets blurry and disorienting, I imagine that race drivers become conditioned to it. Nevertheless, I was out on a straight clean 4-laner without another car in sight.. Why did it scare me? Because as I was slowly coming back down to earth I started to realize that all it would have taken was a possum, or armadillo, skittering out into the road and getting under a tire, to send me careening off the road to certain death. Forget the deer, at that speed, just about any little critter will get you out of shape.

Closed courses, fine. Open road, stupid/risky. IMHO...

Besides, everybody knows it's the pull that's more exhilerating than the top-speed.
Just wait for all the haters to come in here and say we are sissys for not wanting to drive fast. It seems that often smart people are ridiculed on ls1tech :jest:

The Stang hit 135 plus pretty quick for a V6. I wonder if the shaft failure was typical problem when doing this speed. Maybe the driveshaft was made in China, like some Mustang trannys... wouldn't be nice to have this part engineered and built in the US.

In the U.S. market, there's nowhere you can "safely" run 135mph anyhow... Bit of a moot point.

Well, afaik you can nowhere in the US do 112mph "safely".
So why wasn't the speed limiter set to ...80? (or whatever the highest legal speed limit is now...)

why the fuck would you go that fast in the bitch model anyways?

Careful. It may be able to outrun you. :D

I bet that guy totally crapped his pants when it went!

Well, afaik you can nowhere in the US do 112mph "safely".
So why wasn't the speed limiter set to ...80? (or whatever the highest legal speed limit is now...)

We're still free here (barely), and the speed limiter was installed by Ford as a function of engineering limits, not social control, so I think you're creating a bit of an apples/oranges debate here with an extreme example.

Just because diseases can be spread sexually, doesn't mean we should all have our johnsons amputated...

Just because I believe red-light-runners are dangerous, does not mean that I support 100%-computerized-auto-pilot technology in our cars.

And so-on. Bottom-line, it's not the fault of the engineers, they had their clearly-outlined reasons for the driveshaft they specced. You want to play, you get to pay, as the owner of this v6 has abruptly learned.

The hell was that driveshaft made out of? Glass?

Careful. It may be able to outrun you. :D

so will I win by default when he gets catapulted throught he air?

so will I win by default when he gets catapulted throught he air?

How are you enjoying your new ride, btw?

Damn, that sucks. I can't blame the guy for being a little mad though, the '05-'10 GT's I think had like 300-305hp too and those were able to do 130-140 no problem from what I've seen.

Makes me glad I just bought a driveshaft hoop.

Driveshafts have always been a weak link for Fords. I remember when Marauders were trying to break into Impala SS territory and the driveshafts were turning into jump ropes at 120+ MPH speeds. Seems like Ford never bothered to lock it down like the GM counterparts have.

I bet that guy totally crapped his pants when it went!

Hell I almost did just watching the video, my sound was up too high :emb:

that sounded brutal. ill bet it tore the shit out of his car. :lol:


i wouldve call ford roadside assistance and played stupid.:D

"i was just curising along at 5 under the speed limit when I heard this horrible noise.." :lol:

I doubt they'd fall for it.

Driveshafts have always been a weak link for Fords. I remember when Marauders were trying to break into Impala SS territory and the driveshafts were turning into jump ropes at 120+ MPH speeds. Seems like Ford never bothered to lock it down like the GM counterparts have.

Indeed, and even after the Marauder days, they still never went back and fixed the design on the Crown Vic's. Police interceptor versions of the crown victoria are limited to 127 for the 3.27 gear ratio and 119 for the 3.55. Although at one point they offered a composite drive shaft that apparently didn't have the issue.

"i was just curising along at 5 under the speed limit when I heard this horrible noise.." :lol:

I doubt they'd fall for it.

id still try. nothing to lose.

Video doesn't work anymore :(

Damn, that sucks. I can't blame the guy for being a little mad though, the '05-'10 GT's I think had like 300-305hp too and those were able to do 130-140 no problem from what I've seen.

This is what I was going to say; my 4X4 235hp truck when stock would do 118 with the factory speed limiter, how can they make a 300+hp sports car that's slower than that? Hell, bolt-ons and I would bet those cars hit around that in a 1/4 mile.

id still try. nothing to lose.

There's no way they could track him down based on that video alone, either way that drive shaft should have been able to handle that speed.

Video doesn't work anymore :(

Ford paid 10 large to have it removed. :devil:

No video. :(

You guys need to learn how to use the googles-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-qWhxYElSW0

What's google?

What's google?

Something Al Gore started in the mid-90s.

*coughsarcasmcough*

How are you enjoying your new ride, btw?

Good so far, need to do some mods though thats for sure. And the fucking panels by the console towards the raduo have all fallen off!! Turns out whenever we took it in for the radio wobbling the tech left out, ohh half a dozen of those clips amd we found a mysterious screw in the carpet...

So next wed. we shall see what they say and do when it gets brought in...

*coughsarcasmcough*

:confused:

I just took a look on youtube. It looks like the v6 driveshafts even bust on the dyno.....that really sucks.

Why the hell are they using a 2 piece dirveshaft? I thought those were only used on 4X4s with a 14 foot lift or the delivery truck. :confused:

Why the hell are they using a 2 piece dirveshaft? I thought those were only used on 4X4s with a 14 foot lift or the delivery truck. :confused:

Even my car has a two piece DS. You can use a smaller two piece DS in place of a larger one piece to deal with space restrictions.

I suggest some of the people in this thread do some research on driveshafts before you learn the hard way.

At certain RPMs the shafts will deflect and eventually blow out in the middle, happened to my car on the dyno. It has to do with RPM, material used, material diameter, material weight, and length of the shaft. A driveshaft safety loop if installed properly will be towards the front of the car, which is to prevent catapault like behavior from U-joint failure. A driveshaft broken in the middle from over RPM'ing will still tear a bunch of shit up.

My driveshaft is 56" long, it needed to either be lighter aluminum or larger diameter and stronger to be able to handle over 5600rpm (in 1:1 gear). I went from the stock junk to a high speed balanced 3.5" diameter chromoly steel unit to remedy the situation.

Another option is a 2 piece shaft since the result is 2 shorter shafts which can be smaller diameter.

Regarding
Also commonly, speed limiters are in place due to the speed-ratings of the factory-spec tire. So often people ask "why do they limit the speed"? Tire safety...
That's all fine, but was there any information from Ford "Our driveshafts only hold up to 130 mph"? I mean, a tire check is easy.
If such infos officially exist, than it's all the owners fault (but still a cheap move).

And yeah, I still think it's a very cheap move from Ford to install a weak driveshaft, because they're advertising the Mustang like it's the best thing since sliced bread...........and it can't do 130mph without losing a critical drivetrain component?
We're in 2011. 130 mph should be a joke for a V6. A 3.8 F-body had a higher limited top speed than 112 (I believe it was 113?) and the 5th gen V6 has a 155mph limiter...

Regarding

That's all fine, but was there any information from Ford "Our driveshafts only hold up to 130 mph"? I mean, a tire check is easy.
If such infos officially exist, than it's all the owners fault (but still a cheap move).

And yeah, I still think it's a very cheap move from Ford to install a weak driveshaft, because they're advertising the Mustang like it's the best thing since sliced bread...........and it can't do 130mph without losing a critical drivetrain component?
We're in 2011. 130 mph should be a joke for a V6. A 3.8 F-body had a higher limited top speed than 112 (I believe it was 113?) and the 5th gen V6 has a 155mph limiter...

And so by that logic GM should have used a better rear in fbody cars

they're advertising the Mustang like it's the best thing since sliced bread...........and it can't do 130mph without losing a critical drivetrain component?

Pretty silly in modern times for sure. No component should fail within that capabilities of the vehicles power to weight ratio. That is just poor engineering.

And so by that logic GM should have used a better rear in fbody cars

Yes, they should have!

/edit: But it's too late to fix the F-bodys, but Ford still can fix the Mustang driveshaft.

The piece of shit aluminum driveshafts in 4th gens were marginally better. This is nothing new.

I wouldn't want to do 120 in a f body with the stock driveshaft.

I did 160+ on my stock ds.....hell I did well over 120mph on the stock ds in the 1/4.

Why the hell are they using a 2 piece dirveshaft? I thought those were only used on 4X4s with a 14 foot lift or the delivery truck. :confused:

Look up "driveshaft critical speed"...that will explain the two shorter shafts.

I did 160+ on my stock ds.....hell I did well over 120mph on the stock ds in the 1/4.


Not saying it can't be done, saying I personally would not. I've seen 2 bust in person and I've yet to ride in an fbody with one that isn't at least slightly out of balance or bent causing vibration. Seeing how flimsy they are upon inspecting a broken one doesn't add to the faith either.

A good driveshaft is ~$200 and is worth it IMO. Everyone else can carry on as they wish.



First time you see a car blow out a shaft at the track or on the dyno you might be less confident in trusting a soda can stuffed with a toilet paper roll with your life. :eek2:

And so by that logic GM should have used a better rear in the manual fbody carsYes, they should have in the manual cars!Fixed. ;)

I added "in the manual cars" because the stock 10 bolt (especially the Series II/3.23 geared cars) is perfectly fine in the 4L60 automatics until one goes REALLY fast or shoots too much nitrous, possibly well into the 10s without breaking in most cases. :nod:

Damn that scared me and I knew it was coming. It seems these new Mustangs are paper lions. Thats a shame because I really like the 5.0 and would consider buying one but with all the problems and my history with all the Fords I owned I think I would be better off owning a mid 1970's Jaguar.

And so by that logic GM should have used a better rear in fbody cars

The F-body plug was probably planned to be pulled as the LS engines were being dropped in. That body was old and the original rear was made for V6's and LT-1's with a lot less power. GM was not going to retool a rear for a product that was going to be laid to rest shortly. The rear may have been one of the reasons that the intake was restricted for less power. Just my 2 cents.

Fixed. ;)

I added "in the manual cars" because it's the 4L60E that goes first in the automatics.

Fixed :D

Have to say it again, but it's pretty damn sad when their 2011 300+hp sports car is only a few MPH faster than their mid-90s 100hp 4-bangers were. Hell, I'm pretty sure the mid-late 90s V6 Mustangs did more than 112 with less than 200hp.

Fixed. ;)

I added "in the manual cars" because the stock 10 bolt (especially the Series II/3.23 geared cars) is perfectly fine in the 4L60 automatics until one goes REALLY fast or shoots too much nitrous, possibly well into the 10s without breaking in most cases. :nod:

weather people agree or not there were reasons why GM used a 10 bolt. from a cost and mileage standpoint it made sense. being lighter was also a reason.


ive never heard of one blowing from a high speed run however.

The piece of shit aluminum driveshafts in 4th gens were marginally better. This is nothing new.

I wouldn't want to do 120 in a f body with the stock driveshaft.

The difference is that the drivetrain components on these cars were designed well over 10 years ago. With today's technology, there really is no valid excuse for a driveshaft failing at 120-130mph, especially on a performance oriented vehicle, V6 or not, it has 300hp.

IDK, there wasn't really any problems with the F-bodys stock drive-shaft. When do they usually break? 450-500whp, and slicks? That's not bad out of a car that came with 350hp stock. That said, I do run a drive-shaft loop on mine, but I think anyone (with any car) that could benefit from one should. Surprised Ford doesn't have something on them to keep this from happening. I would think that by now there are some safety rules on drive-shafts, considering how easily someone could get killed by a loose drive-shaft flying through the floor.

The difference is that the drivetrain components on these cars were designed well over 10 years ago. With today's technology, there really is no valid excuse for a driveshaft failing at 120-130mph, especially on a performance oriented vehicle, V6 or not, it has 300hp.

Yeah, I'm thinking 20 years ago in the case of a F-body rear. Its not very often that you hear of a driveshaft failing on a brand new vehicle, kinda odd.

i actually destroyed my stock DS on my SS.


thankfully i was going slow and it was covered under warranty.

IDK, there wasn't really any problems with the F-bodys stock drive-shaft. When do they usually break? 450-500whp, and slicks? That's not bad out of a car that came with 350hp stock. That said, I do run a drive-shaft loop on mine, but I think anyone (with any car) that could benefit from one should. Surprised Ford doesn't have something on them to keep this from happening. I would think that by now there are some safety rules on drive-shafts, considering how easily someone could get killed by a loose drive-shaft flying through the floor.

They're not really a huge issue if you have an A4, but I've heard of people with sticky tires and an M6 breaking them under stock power, not common I don't think but it can happen I guess.

Pretty sure it's not as bad as what that guy who originally brought it up made it out to be though. Both my car and my 2 friends with stock-ish M6 LS1 F-Body's have been up past 120 numerous times and we haven't had any problems out of ours.

They're not really a huge issue if you have an A4, but I've heard of people with sticky tires and an M6 breaking them under stock power, not common I don't think but it can happen I guess.

Pretty sure it's not as bad as what that guy who originally brought it up made it out to be though. Both my car and my 2 friends with stock-ish M6 LS1 F-Body's have been up past 120 numerous times and we haven't had any problems out of ours.

That's kind of what I was thinking, anything can break at stock power in any car but it wasn't very common. I don't think any have lost drive shafts from going to fast, and it would be hard to blame it on the shaft vs them driving with bad U-joints.

We're talking about two different failure modes here - the one in the video was due to the driveshaft reaching its critical speed where it starts wobbling so bad that it fails. A lot of other people are talking about applying too much torque to the shaft, causing it to shear. Two totally different reasons, although they are both caused by the same basic issue - poor design (be that material selection, thickness, etc.).

You'd have to be able to feel some vibration at that speed.. If a car feels even slightly off as far as a shimmy or wobble I immediately back out of it, I don't understand how people can keep on it like that.

That also may have not been the first time he's pulled that stunt either, economy car parts can only take so much.

Either way, if the car is capable of going that speed, it should be designed accordingly IMO.

And back to the Mustang....

Wouldn't Ford have saved money if they used the same driveshaft in the V6 as in the GT? I mean, the one in the GT can really go 135mph+ right? Why pay to have 2 shafts engineered/produced??

Wouldn't Ford have saved money if they used the same driveshaft in the V6 as in the GT? I mean, the one in the GT can really go 135mph+ right? Why pay to have 2 shafts engineered/produced??

As someone previously mentioned the v6 was likely lightweight and designed to get the absolute best fuel economy since that was the main bragging point with the v6 car. And where in America would a person really be allowed to go 135+mph where the car is actually capable? I doubt it would reach those speeds on a track.



I wonder if these driveshafts are made right next to the Chinese manual transmissions? :secret2:

You'd have to be able to feel some vibration at that speed.. If a car feels even slightly off as far as a shimmy or wobble I immediately back out of it

That is completely wrong thinking. If you do that, then you have to diagnose the problem and find the vibration. If you stay in it, catastrophic failure will lead you right to the source of vibration. :D

That is completely wrong thinking. If you do that, then you have to diagnose the problem and find the vibration. If you stay in it, catastrophic failure will lead you right to the source of vibration. :D

And hell surely has enough crooked mechanics to help you put it back together :devil:

please change "safely" to "legally" and realize that much smaller countries allow retard speeds on roads less long, straight, and level.

damn! had my sound cranked to and it scared the shit outta me! please please please some one find some carnage pics!!
and if I was that guy I would of returned all the tuning back to stock before bringing it in to ford for warranty work;)
weather people agree or not there were reasons why GM used a 10 bolt. from a cost and mileage standpoint it made sense. being lighter was also a reason.


ive never heard of one blowing from a high speed run however.
a 10bolt shouldn't blow up from high speeds but that doesn't mean they like high speeds. at sustained high speeds they heat up(unless you installed a diff cooler) and that heat is a killer! I know mine never missed a beat til I went from the canadian border to ma traveling at a steady 145...ever since then its been whining and occasionally the posi wont work. I know it'll blow the first time I put some DR's under it..

and to who ever said it crown vics top out @ 133 according to the troopers who were chasing me(on a dif occasion than the one I mentioned above)

I sheared the pinion gear right off and through the housing on my 96 LT1 camaro. that wasnt even modded, nor getting a beating when it happened. then the one it was replaced with busted not to long after with ebaring problems. the 10 bolt was a POS anywhere and the 4l60e wasnt to much better. it seemed very hit and miss

That is completely wrong thinking. If you do that, then you have to diagnose the problem and find the vibration. If you stay in it, catastrophic failure will lead you right to the source of vibration. :D
I do hate me some troubleshooting..

One piece shafts are always stronger. And as to why it broke it has been stated that it wasn't designed to go that fast. Euro spec Evos and Beamers have the same problem with their body panels coming off at high speeds. That's why even though they make over 500 they are limited to 155

One piece shafts are always stronger. And as to why it broke it has been stated that it wasn't designed to go that fast. Euro spec Evos and Beamers have the same problem with their body panels coming off at high speeds. That's why even though they make over 500 they are limited to 155

The reasons for speed governors vary. In some case it's a matter of protecting the car from damage. In the case of a few marquee European car makers it was a bit of self regulation through a gentlemen's agreement.

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2006/12/by-thy-speed-limits-thy-shall-be-known/
http://www.carkeys.co.uk/news/end-155mph-limit
http://www.autoblog.com/2005/07/14/manufacturers-may-lift-155-mph-limits/

The piece of shit aluminum driveshafts in 4th gens were marginally better. This is nothing new.

I wouldn't want to do 120 in a f body with the stock driveshaft.

Several have "risked their life" going well beyond 120. I've seen 130, 140 and 150+ multiple times in my WS6 and its "soda can" drive shaft. Not saying it was intelligent, saying that at any time any component can break or fail. A wheel bearing, a tie rod, a valve spring, any one of a hundred things can break at any given time with or without warning. And you can't make a perfect car.

Not saying it can't be done, saying I personally would not. I've seen 2 bust in person and I've yet to ride in an fbody with one that isn't at least slightly out of balance or bent causing vibration. Seeing how flimsy they are upon inspecting a broken one doesn't add to the faith either.

A good driveshaft is ~$200 and is worth it IMO. Everyone else can carry on as they wish.



First time you see a car blow out a shaft at the track or on the dyno you might be less confident in trusting a soda can stuffed with a toilet paper roll with your life. :eek2:

That "soda can" material is also used to build the blocks and heads most of us have under our hoods. I know my 148,xxx mile engine is still going just fine as is its Al driveshaft. That said, I too would pony up for a new driveshaft were I going much beyond stock power in it.