They (automags) say the same thing about a solid rear when they review a car with it alone, but wait until they do a comparison with an IRS car, and they always mention the ride and handling differences and the earlier praise goes away.
This just doesn't sound good at all. How many drivers have that fast of reflexes to catch the car? Or the skill to know how to catch the car even if they did have extra quick hands. This article was in no way saying a solid rear was good. Just the car.
They wouldn't have written that if it was close to an IRS for ride and handling.

EDIT: Earlier you caught me contradicting myself. Well, the average joe has the ability to become much more educated, but will invariably look to the press reviews and not forums like this to make their decision, so they still end up with the popular opinion. Any better? I'm not all that coherent now but hope it helps.

 

The automotive press has their biases... one of those is clearly in favor of IRS. In that sense, popular opinion is indeed against it. Of course, mindlessly aping the press isn't exactly what I would call being informed, but I think that's what you meant. In that sense, they are indeed both ignorant and informed.

If you listen to the press, there's no reason at all to ever go with a solid axle. That's one of the reasons I've put up a defense of it here. The IRS doesn't win an unqualified victory in all possible scenarios. The better choice depends on the purpose and goals of the car. That's why I've respected those here who want IRS for AutoX (even though I’ve no interest in that)... and why I don't respect those here who say that IRS=god and anyone who thinks otherwise must be a hillbilly.

The latter view is just as ignorant as the trailer-dwelling stereotype that its advocates employ. Worse, even, because it masquerades as wisdom.

 

I agree with you on that, IRS isn't god, especially not for serious drag racers. Note the serious part. I was going to set up the Z28 I have now for autox but with the news of the IRS Camaro, changed my plans so that I can put that solid rear to work on a strip.

I don't think that many here are against solid rears entirely, just for the general public V6 model (which also implies the rest of them). With so many drag racers on this site, they are probably all a little saddened by the loss of a strong, well aftermarkets are strong anyway, rearend for serious drag racing. We just want the Camaro back.

Of course, it has been said that it is much easier to change from an IRS to a solid rear axle than the other way around. We know that Ford broke the mold and released a special edition with IRS instead of a solid rear. Its' fairly well known that the Z28 is supposed to be the top model at release.

Maybe a couple years into the run Chevy will do you drag racers a favor and release an SS with a solid rear. It's a stretch, but it would rock.

 

From the manufacturer's perspective they need to build the car for the street. On the street an IRS (double wishbone) will always be better than the solid rear.

There is no reason for a Chevy to produce a car with a solid rear because some people will actually mod the car to the point it needs a solid rear. 95% of these cars will only ever see street duty with occasional jaunts to the strip. For the other 5% who put enough power to the wheels will have done plenty of other modifications therefore just put the damn solid rear in yourself.

 

Because they are going to anyways!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

The reason Ford had to worry about the additional weight of the IRS in the GT500 was that they were already near 4000 lbs in the coupe and over 4000 in the cabriolet. They had absolutely no wiggle room.

W

 

I voted for IRS cause then ricers cant say well will whip you in the turns .


Not really that but it does make it feel more stable over bumps and in turns. I also love to drag race and i can over come the fact that its IRS instead of solid rear axle.

Its better to be good in all areas then great in just one area .

 

black_knight. have you actualy driven a GTO or a vette?

the fact is that most of the people with the V8 f-bods drive them daily (myself included) and wuld love an irs to lose the harshness of the rear axle even tough it may resault in a slightly lower power from engine to wheel ratio.

Solid axle is in my opinion a thing for people who are modding and need real street hooking or who have beaters and use there cars just solely for racing purposes, street or strip.

so for the majority of people who bought these car new im shure that at least 80% of them just wanted a powerfull car wich is fun to drive. not a machine thats just built to perform and sacrifices driveability and ride comfort.

GTO as a predicesor for the f-bod i like it for the most part. they got the formula just right its a car that has exelent drivability with loads of comfort features and still has a 400hp engine. the only mistake they made with the gto is that it was extremely heavy and they of course did a poor job in the design department cus it was so unlike the cars it was competing against(even though i love the gto looks)

 

No, I haven't, but I have driven plenty of other vehicles that have "soft" rides. I've never noticed my Firebird having a "harsh" ride. I'm just not the sort of fellow who notices that kind of thing, I guess.

<raises hand>

I have no problem with the car doing one thing really well, so long as it does everything else at least competently. That's the point of a muscle car: it goes really fast in a straight line and it doesn't cost a lot. Everything else is secondary. If you focus too much on the other stuff, it either doesn't go fast enough in a straight line or it costs too much. (IRS does both of those)

IMO, the f-body when stock was still WELL within the bounds of drivability. You want to talk about sacrificing drivability, there are more than a few folks here you can show you what that REALLY means.

Pet peeve #2: In addition to unconditionally preferring IRS, auto magazines also blindly ape European opinions. In Europe, roads are twisty and handling is paramount. So, to car magazines, even though American roads are straight and even SUV's have enough handling to take all turns at 20mph over the speed limit, they still act like it's Europe and handling > all.

Sorry, but the handling w/solid axle is already good enough to do anything that a non-AutoXer will throw at it. That's why I figure that if you want IRS, you're either an AutoXer (which is cool), or a dumbass who blindly thinks what the Europeans and journalists tell you to think... even though it makes no sense.

(Or, I suppose a total freaking pansy who thinks the ride is too harsh )

 

best quote ever

 

Damn, I was wondering when someone would notice. Talk about me having no sense of humor. Bah! Would a guy with no sense of humor write that?

And what the hell's this "fine for dragging?"

Reminds me of the servo-droid from Judge Dredd:

"Eat recycled food. It's good for the environment and okay for you."

 

I am the law!!! Prepare to be judged.

 

"I have no problem with the car doing one thing really well, so long as it does everything else at least competently. That's the point of a muscle car: it goes really fast in a straight line and it doesn't cost a lot. Everything else is secondary. If you focus too much on the other stuff, it either doesn't go fast enough in a straight line or it costs too much. (IRS does both of those)

IMO, the f-body when stock was still WELL within the bounds of drivability. You want to talk about sacrificing drivability, there are more than a few folks here you can show you what that REALLY means.

Pet peeve #2: In addition to unconditionally preferring IRS, auto magazines also blindly ape European opinions. In Europe, roads are twisty and handling is paramount. So, to car magazines, even though American roads are straight and even SUV's have enough handling to take all turns at 20mph over the speed limit, they still act like it's Europe and handling > all.

Sorry, but the handling w/solid axle is already good enough to do anything that a non-AutoXer will throw at it. That's why I figure that if you want IRS, you're either an AutoXer (which is cool), or a dumbass who blindly thinks what the Europeans and journalists tell you to think... even though it makes no sense."


I do not wish to buy a car that is just good enough. I wish to procure unto myself a vehicle that is capable. I am over in England right now and I have to tell you my mother's 03 Stang GT M5 is not all that capable around these little roads compared to some of the other vehicles I run across.

"Oh, also nice poll, jackass.

First, "fine for dragging" is not at all accurate. And second, "shoe laces tied together?" Which kind of stupid sh*t is that? That's like my asking:

Poll: Do you like Hondas like a good smart person or do you like LS1's because you're a retarded clown pony who likes to eat paste and shove whipped cream up your nose?"


Have you ever taken a class in English?

You call me a jackass and expect me to be nice?

The Dragging comment is quite correct...IRS equals a better all around vehicle, solid axle equals exceptionally good at one thing.

The shoe laces tied together makes a lot of sense...both of your rear wheels are tied together in a solid axle...likewise if your shoes laces are tied together you have a "solid axle."

You are a retarded person...

W

 

I find that Ford saying the IRS wouldn't perform better is disingenuous.

There is an article pitting the LS2 C6 against the Shelby GT500 in the current Motor Trend. The Ford's substantial girth puts it at a disadvantage to be sure, and the real 'cost' of adding an IRS is not the extra $$, but the portliness. The car is poorly thought out to say the least when compared to the vette. The car has all the makings of a thrown together vehicle rather than a ground up design.

A better designed car most likely would not have weight as an issue. If the GT500 were say 3300lbs and an IRS added 150lb, a 3450lb car isn't bad. Unfortunately this turd is 3900lbs with the solid. If it got any heavier it would need insulin.

That's the real issue here. Ford saying it wouldn't add a performance advantage by itself is correct. The IRS WILL make the rough roads and the corners more smooth, they would have you believe it wouldn't. Anybody who drives hard in to corners in autox, or drives rough roads as a DD knows otherwise.

What Ford is really saying is this car is fat and we know it, and a car with 100 less hp out performs our's at a similar price point. If we add any more weight we'll really get our *** kicked.

 

Nope, I expected you to be a jackass. Because that was a jackass way to write the poll. Your posts continue to demonstrate the kind of person who would write such a thing. That's what's so funny about this thread. You just keep digging yourself a deeper hole with every post!

I mean, I try to ignore you, but you just keep saying dumber sh*t.

Nope, it's not correct. Not unless you meant like the Servo-Droid.

You sound like my buddy's dad arguing for front wheel drive: "Do you want the horse pushing the cart or the horse pulling the cart. Obviously front wheel drive is better!"

Congratulations: you've tried to fashion a bad analogy into an argument. Your parents must be so proud.

Okay, time to be serious: You live in Europe. The roads there are both twisty and bumpy. I live in America. The roads here are both straight and flat. There's absolutely no point to this argument.

 

I live in SE Pennsylvania where the roads are neither straight nor flat. Between here through new york the rim bending pot holes, and their bumpy filler asphalt, and uneven ridges are a year round enjoyment. When driving my bonneville my back end stays in place. The trans am is fine until the roads get rough, which is often. You must live in one of those warm weather states with the concrete roads.

 

Yes, I do. It's very nice. But even when I lived in the Chicago 'burbs, I didn't notice any problems with "harsh ride."

...But then again I'm not an old man or a little girl who has to have a cushiony-soft ride.

 

That harsh ride equates to unstable handling. Just yesterday my car hit a nice bump and jerked the rear out to the left. Guess what I blame...

 

I know; I'm just giving you guys guff.

(Though, again, I've never seen this myself. Now on my old Taurus SHO, which was IRS btw, I saw it all the time...)

 

I'd take the all around handling of my GTO over my WS6 any day.

I just hope they put something stout back there. I hear the IRS in the current z06 has a 9" ring gear...