I always hear about mustangs having live rear axles, most often in a negative way. Pardon my ignorance, but what exactly does this mean?

 

it's a solid rear axle. good for drag racing, not so good for ride handling.

 

So basically the rear suspension is not independent?

If I hit a bump on the right rear wheel, the left rear wheel will move?

 

The myth that solid axles are for drag racing only is false. Anyone remember older SN95 Mustangs and the last generation Camaro SS's? The Cobra used to have a solid axle, and it could keep up with the best of them. Same thing with the Camaro SS. From what I've heard, the steering on both cars is very neutral. Of course, these designs are limited in movement compared to the double-wishbone and multilink suspensions.

 

A solid axle is known as a dependent suspension. For more information, check out this webpage -

http://www.chris-longhurst.com/carbi...ion_bible.html

 

Got it, thanks

 

No problem bro' .

 

I've always read that the solid axle mustang were twitchy at limits. I'm not a Mustang expert, but I thought one of the trim level of Mustangs comes with independent rears, wasn't it the Cobra.

I don't see how you can maintain optimal tire contact when both wheels are linked. There is a reason why good handling cars all have independent rear suspensions. My educate guess says that it is easier to manufacture and design a solid axle suspension than an independent rear.

 

The media, especially SCC, Super Street and the like, enjoy skewing the results of anything remotely American and muscley. The 99+ Mustang Cobra enjoyed the benefit of the independent rear suspension. Personally, I would've kept the solid-axle, as it was tried-and-true on the dragstrip, and the circuit.

 

I wouldn't say SCC is anti-US, they are really in love with SRT-4 and Focus. Besides Mustang and other muscle cars are, by definitions, not Sport Compact Cars. BTW the really luv the v-8 powered (I believe it's the 5.6L V-8) Focus. I don't subscribe to the other mags, so I can't comment.

I think for handling I'll stick with the tried and true independent rear suspension.

 

Oh no. I know they're not anti-domestic. Like you said, they love the SRT-4, the Focus, the ION Redline (I like them too :D). Maybe it's the misinformed readers (scan the Letters section for domestic bashing) that think that way. I used to subscribe to SCC, SS, as well as read hot rod mags, just to see what each side's opinion is like.

 

Actually, they did a test on the Mustang GT v. the Acura Integra Type R. It was really interesting that they had an unbiased opinion. Maybe it's Super Street that has a skewed opinion on domestic iron.

 

There are ignorant jerks in both the sport compact and muscle car crowd. A good car is a good car, doesn't matter the manufacturer I say.

 

Spoken like a true genius .

 

yeah on that too.

well, the deal with live axle rear suspensions is just that they simply aren't as good at distributing force on the wheels as well as an independant suspension can when you're going around a corner. it's just a fact that if you have any given car (like a 97 Firebird TA, WS6 motor) with a live axle rear suspension that it in all probability, with some obvious optimizations made, it would handle significantly better with an independant system of some kind.

going straight ahead, though, swing arms are great. "solid" rear axles are super strong and light, the Ford 9" differential has basically yet to be outdone, and they (live axle rear suspensions) just simply work, really really good. they easily control wheel hop, keep your boat straighter, lay down the power better, etc etc etc.
so, it's just a matter of what it's designed to do, not one thing better than another.