Goindeafonmtx said:
His car has all the advantages.
This is why I find it so hard to believe. To me there are only two possible explanations for that. Either, you can drive better than him, or you have a MUCH more aggressive tire. Tires are responsible for most handling anyway. There is no way in hell IRS would compensate for a 700lbs difference, and a car that's very well setup with proven performance parts (currect AIX national champ Chris Griswold is running MM)
I need to bring to your attention to the fact that every "real" performance car(I say real because you and I both know Mustangs were not designed to be used in the manner in which we use them) has an IRS and not a stick axle. Just because people do not use an IRS doesn't mean it isn't a viable performance option.
I never once said that a well designed IRS rear would be outperformed by a solid axle. As a matter of fact, I did mention that BMW has a much better designed rear suspension than both of Ford's rears. Believe me, if I could afford to run a competitive BMW, I would have never bothered with Mustang in the first place. What I said was that the cars in American Iron and American Iron Extreme (Camaros, Mustangs, FFR) have more success with the solid axle. There are people who are running IRS on some mustangs, but they don't do nearly as well as solid axle guys.
Ford is capable of designing a bitching IRS and a really good chassis. They've done so many times in Europe with cars like Escort (old generation, newer Cosworth), Sierra Cosworth, and even Falcon back in the 60s was a great car. I'm just saying that as far as the Mustang goes, IRS is not the most proven setup.