2. Ford Mustang Timeline
First
Generation
(1964 ½ -
1973)
Second
Generation
(1974-1978)
Third
Generation
(1979-1993)
Fourth
Generation
(1994-2004)
Fifth
Generation
(2005-2014)
Sixth
Generation
(2015-)
FrontsuspensionRearsuspension
Prof. Dr. Pim van der Jagt, Dr. Paul Zandbergen, Tim Drotar, Nicole Zandbergen21.07.2016
3. MUSTANG Suspension Development
First generation (1964 ½ - 1973)
Falcon platform
Body on frame
Stabilizer bar
Lower wishbone:
tension link bolted to
lateral link
Front Suspension
Double wishbone
Rear Suspension
Hotchkiss with leaf springs
Inclined shock absorbers
Variable rate, semi-elliptic
leaf springs
Rubber-bushed hangersSpring & shock
absorber on upper
wishbone
Prof. Dr. Pim van der Jagt, Dr. Paul Zandbergen, Tim Drotar, Nicole Zandbergen21.07.2016
4. MUSTANG Suspension Development
Sixth Generation (2015-)
S550 platform
Unitized chassis
Stabilizer bar
Tension link
Perimeter subframe
Front Suspension
Double-ball-joint MacPherson strut
Rear Suspension
Integral link Independent Suspension
MacPherson strut
Knuckle
Prof. Dr. Pim van der Jagt, Dr. Paul Zandbergen, Tim Drotar, Nicole Zandbergen21.07.2016
Lateral Link
Two ball
joints
Toe Link
Isolated subframe
Stabilizer bar
Integral link
Aluminum H-arm
Aluminum
Knuckle
Camber link
5. Wheel base and track width
1st generation
2743 mm
2nd generation
2443 mm
3rd generation
2550 mm
4th generation
2573 mm
5th generation
2720 mm
6th generation
2712 mm
Prof. Dr. Pim van der Jagt, Dr. Paul Zandbergen, Tim Drotar, Nicole Zandbergen21.07.2016
1250
1300
1350
1400
1450
1500
1550
1600
1650
1700
1 2 3 4 5 6
trackwidth[mm]
Ford Mustang Generation
track width front
track width rear
Track width
6. Power
Prof. Dr. Pim van der Jagt, Dr. Paul Zandbergen, Tim Drotar, Nicole Zandbergen21.07.2016
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
1 2 3 4 5 6
Power[PS]
Ford Mustang Generation
Base model min
Cobra
Base model max
?
2.3L I4 EcoBoost®
5.0L V8, >425 PS
7. 1965 Mustang versus 2015 Mustang
Prof. Dr. Pim van der Jagt, Dr. Paul Zandbergen, Tim Drotar, Nicole Zandbergen21.07.2016
8. 1965 Mustang versus 2015 Mustang: Vehicle specifications
Prof. Dr. Pim van der Jagt, Dr. Paul Zandbergen, Tim Drotar, Nicole Zandbergen21.07.2016
1965 2015
Body style 2 door coupe 2 door coupe
Engine 289 CID (4.7L V8) 302 CID (5.0L V8)
Transmission 4 speed manual 6 speed manual
Front suspension SLA with coil spring on upper arm McPherson strut with double ball joint lower arm
Rear Suspension Solid axle with leaf springs Integral link independent
Steering System
Recirculating ball parallel linkage with external power cylinder.
Rear steer
Rack and pinion electric power assisted steering.
Front Steer
Overall Steering Ratio 19.8:1 16.4:1
Tires
6.95in -14in Bias Ply;
24 psi
Front P245/40R19 Radial,
Rear P275/40R19 Radial;
35psi
9. Kinematics and Compliance Test
21.07.2016 Prof. Dr. Pim van der Jagt, Dr. Paul Zandbergen, Tim Drotar, Nicole Zandbergen
10. Kinematics and Compliances – Vertical Motion Test
21.07.2016 Prof. Dr. Pim van der Jagt, Dr. Paul Zandbergen, Tim Drotar, Nicole Zandbergen
-5 0 5 10
Rear
Front
Bump Steer [deg/m] +ve = toe out in jounce
Bump Steer
1965
2015
-30 -20 -10 0
Rear
Front
Camber Gain [deg/m] +ve = positive camber in jounce
Camber Gain
1965
2015
-50 0 50 100
Rear
Front
Wheel Center Recession [mm/m] +ve = rwd in jounce
Wheel Center Recession
1965
2015
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00
Ratio
Rear
Front
2-up Ride Frequency
1965
2015
11. Kinematics and Compliances – Roll Motion Test
21.07.2016 Prof. Dr. Pim van der Jagt, Dr. Paul Zandbergen, Tim Drotar, Nicole Zandbergen
0 1 2 3 4 5
Rear
Front
Roll Steer [%] +ve = roll understeer
Roll Steer
1965
2015
-100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0
Rear
Front
Roll Camber [%]
Roll Camber
1965
2015
0 500 1000 1500 2000
Rear
Front
Roll Camber [%]
Total Roll Stiffness
(Springs/Bars and Tires)
1965
2015
12. Kinematics and Compliances – Lateral Force & Aligning Torque Tests
21.07.2016 Prof. Dr. Pim van der Jagt, Dr. Paul Zandbergen, Tim Drotar, Nicole Zandbergen
-0.20 -0.10 0.00 0.10 0.20
Rear
Front
Steer Compliance [deg/kN] +ve = Understeer
Parallel Lateral Force
Steer Compliance
1965
2015
0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00
Rear
Front
Camber Compliance [deg/kN]
Parallel Lateral Force
Camber Compliance
1965
2015
0 100 200 300 400
Rear
Front
Roll Center Height Above Ground [mm]
Parallel Lateral Force
2-up Roll Center Height
1965
2015
0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0
Rear
Front
Steer Compliance [deg/kN-m]
Parallel Aligning Torque
Steer Compliance
1965
2015
13. Vehicle Dynamics Testing – Steering, Handling, Ride
21.07.2016 Prof. Dr. Pim van der Jagt, Dr. Paul Zandbergen, Tim Drotar, Nicole Zandbergen
14. On Center Steering – 120kph
21.07.2016 Prof. Dr. Pim van der Jagt, Dr. Paul Zandbergen, Tim Drotar, Nicole Zandbergen
For on center steering, the 2015 Mustang has:
• Significant higher response and lower deadband
• Higher torque build-up
• Higher and more linear yaw rate
15. Steady State Handling – Constant Speed Understeer Test @ 75kph
21.07.2016 Prof. Dr. Pim van der Jagt, Dr. Paul Zandbergen, Tim Drotar, Nicole Zandbergen
For steady state handling, the 2015 Mustang has:
• More lateral acceleration / steering wheel angle response gain due to lower
cornering compliances and lower overall steering ratio
• Higher level of steering wheel torque due to speed sensitive EPAS
• Lower total roll angle due to higher chassis roll stiffness and wider track width
16. Frequency Response Test – 120kph
21.07.2016 Prof. Dr. Pim van der Jagt, Dr. Paul Zandbergen, Tim Drotar, Nicole Zandbergen
The 2015 Mustang has higher yaw response and lower phase lag due to lower front and
rear cornering compliances, differences in vehicle mass/inertia, and overall steering ratio.
17. What makes the handling performance of the ‘65 different from the ‘15?
21.07.2016 Prof. Dr. Pim van der Jagt, Dr. Paul Zandbergen, Tim Drotar, Nicole Zandbergen
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Steady state yaw rate gain Yaw velocity response time
PercentContributiontoDifferenceinVehicleResponse
Vehicle and Chassis Contribution to Differences in Steering Response
Between 1965 and 2015 Mustang
Vehicle Mass,
Inertia and
Wheelbase
Overall Steering
Ratio
Front and Rear
Lumped Cornering
Compliances
As shown, the lumped cornering compliances have the biggest contribution to the
difference in handling performance between the 1965 and 2015 Mustang.
