Originally Posted by jz78817
I see you live in a place which doesn't experience winter. If you're claiming that Mustangs have no business being driven north of the Mason-Dixon Line, then that's your choice. But up here, we have to deal with frost heaves and potholes and temporary repairs. My '12 Mustang jiggles its *** around those bumps, my Ranger hops all over the place. IRS makes a huge difference whether you want to admit it or not.
I too live where it doesn't snow, well, maybe only once in every 5 years.
But just because I live in the South does not mean that we do not see slippery road conditions or imperfect pavement.
As much as the S197 solid rear axles jiggles over imperfect road road conditions, Pascal is still correct. Upgrading the shocks makes a completely noticeable difference. And doing that does not cost too much money to do either. Without going IRS, upgrading the suspension makes a world of difference too.
Many fellow MF members also compete in road course racing and they make the simple stick axle work with suspension upgrades that are well below the cost of a cheap supercharger kit. Look in the S197 Handling sub-forum for first hand experience from members who race professionally and semi-professionally.
If you are looking for controlled experiments, forget finding it. BUT do not forget what controlled experiments are supposed to do: simulate the real world or a portion of the real world conditions.
Controlled experiments are fine and dandy but don;t forget that they too have their inadequacies: The cost of replicating all conditions might be impossible. Even if it is possible to replicate even a set number of conditions, it might be too cost prohibitive. The designer of the experiment might be under pressure from the people funding the studies to skew the results because of what the funders want or are willing to spend on the studies. (No, they do not have to "cook the books" with false or incorrect numbers, but they have say in what factors the experiments will test and not test.)
Look at your EPA MPG test parameters. You said it yourself; there are too many variables to account for what you, the individual end customer will get out of your car because there are too many variables to consider.
The EPA test model is therefore limited because you cannot feasibly account for every variable, nor can you factor in every variable because it would be cost-prohibitive to scale it for public consumption.
My point is just because IRS is superior in keeping the individual tires on the ground evenly and flat, that does not mean that solid rear axles cannot be made to handle very well too despite their limitations.