New Mustang v6 (no mods) suffers driveshaft failure, talk about cost cutting!

[Ninja Performance]

And it's an auto LOL

That sound is horrific. I would have shat myself LOL

-Chris

[IPD]

Both nuts > Pantera

Is the 3s not unreliable enough for you Thadd?

351 cleveland? fuck yes. add some turbos and i'm in heaven. plus the body on the 91's is sexxxxy.

[AudibleSilence]

I have a feeling that in a few years, we'll hear a lot more about driveshaft failures from stock cars, just from people who engage in stoplight races or occasionally take it to the track. It really doesn't make any sense to have cut corners on the driveshaft, as others have noted, it would cost ~$250 for one of us to put an upgraded shaft on it? That probably equates to about $50 for Ford to have done it with a proper size/strength DS from the get go.

Your logic is flawed. My 4L65e is rated to 400hp. GM put tq management on the trans and engine to govern how much hp and tq can flow through it. If I blow it up after removing those limiters and pushing +400hp/tq does that mean that GM skimped or that I am a fucking tool for bitching about a limimitation to a hard part that they built in safeguards around? Basically at this point if your driveshaft fails from going faster than the limiter allows you are a fucking moron.

I find it hilarious that any time someone talks about changing something on a car on a car forum, someone always swoops in like Spider-Man to talk about how the engineers that get paid tons and manufacturerers that pay a ton in R&D know better..but here we second guess them because we are defeating a safety that they installed on the damn car to prevent just what you're complaining about. You want to go +110mph? Don't buy a v6 Mustang...it is just that simple.

p.s. Big difference between blowing them up at cruising speed and blowing them up at almost double that.

[R/T93]

Pretty sure a 74 pinto driveshaft is safe at 135 mph. A car developed nearly 40 years later is engineered worse than that?
Ford fail.

[AudibleSilence]

They also exploded when hit from the rear.... Still want a pinto over a Mustang? It is also nonsensical to compare top speeds of cars without taking into account the materials used for the driveshaft and the driveshaft thickness/diameter. The new driveshaft might be more efficient, lighter, and relatively stronger considering the power output between the cars. Pete was on the money.

[R/T93]

Point is, there are much less performance oriented cars with driveshafts that are safe at 115% of their "limited" top speed. Most cars are probably good to at least 150%. Why isn't the v6 stang?

Sent from my ADR6350 using Tapatalk

[AudibleSilence]

Point is, there are much less performance oriented cars with driveshafts that are safe at 115% of their "limited" top speed. Most cars are probably good to at least 150%. Why isn't the v6 stang?

Sent from my ADR6350 using Tapatalk

Sigh.. Where are you getting these percentages from? What "limited" cars do you speak of?

Edit: NM I honestly don't care anymore.. You guys are still bitching over something retarded. I.E. the right to circumvent factory safeguards without damaging a car.

[j2k4]

The thing is, we're just not used to hearing of stock-ish cars destroying their driveshafts, period.

[AudibleSilence]

The thing is, we're just not used to hearing of stock-ish cars destroying their driveshafts, period.

Happens often actually....just depends on the application.

[TonyM]

The thing is, we're just not used to hearing of stock-ish cars destroying their driveshafts, period.

Thing is, once the speed limiter was removed that car ceased to be "stock".