Why Mustangs Keep Crashing After Car Shows (Explained)

[Mike C]

 

[espo]

This person knows what he's talking about and explains the problem in a calm manner. In my area the same type of issue seems to center on high performance Dodge Chargers in the hands of low performance drivers which is the bases of the whole problem anyway.    

[webestang]

Most of those idiots can't drive normally let alone try this BS. Same goes for street racing. Both Mustang and the one Ford club here in St. Lou have big car shows every year and tell you over the PA that they have cops sitting and waiting for you if you are inclined to be a moron. 

Edited Tuesday at 07:01 PM by webestang

[sfhess]

400 horsepower cars, 50 Horsepower drivers

[Matt Bacon]

You wait until the 50HP drivers get hold of the 1064HP 2025 Corvette ZR1...

@Brudda is going to have to open a second shop for putting those things back together...

best,

M.

Edited Tuesday at 07:29 PM by Matt Bacon

[bobss396]

I think that some drivers are not used to RWD driving. The cars are light-ish in the rear, not as bad as the OG Mustangs.

My 2020 Mustang weighs #4500 and has the Ecoboost turbo with the manual 6 speed. Only 310 or so HP, but I have to be careful in the rain with it.

Tires are Nitto brand, 265/40-19 up front, 285/35-19 out back.

Horsepower comes into the equation too. Some of us here had 400 + HP cars 40-50 years ago. We had to learn how to respect that.

[Dave Van]

It's NOT a Mustang problem.  You can replace Mustang with Charger, Challenger or Camaro.  The Mustang is targeted because there are so many of them, so cheap to upgrade and easy to own by idiots. I've owned a Mustang since 1975. My son has a 2016 Roush with 700 HP at wheels. We don't do dumb stuff on public roads. He does enter burnout contests at car shows at organized events off street.  It all boils down oo driver/owner. Thanks

[Bainford]

1 hour ago, bobss396 said:

My 2020 Mustang weighs #4500...

This might be the saddest statement made in this thread.

[johnyrotten]

1 hour ago, bobss396 said:

I think that some drivers are not used to RWD driving. The cars are light-ish in the rear, not as bad as the OG Mustangs.

My 2020 Mustang weighs #4500 and has the Ecoboost turbo with the manual 6 speed. Only 310 or so HP, but I have to be careful in the rain with it.

Tires are Nitto brand, 265/40-19 up front, 285/35-19 out back.

Horsepower comes into the equation too. Some of us here had 400 + HP cars 40-50 years ago. We had to learn how to respect that.

Even "low" rear wheel horsepower can get out from under you.(motorcycle guy here).Overconfidence and ego. Your point of respecting the situation is spot on. Everyone thinks they're John Force or Mario Andretti until they aren't. 

[mcs1056]

29 minutes ago, Bainford said:

This might be the saddest statement made in this thread.

My '69 428 Mach 1 weighed in at around 3600 lbs. At only about 400HP, it would act the same if I were a similar idiot. In that car, I knew to never turn the steering wheel at speed, as it didn't handle anything like today's versions. 

I never really knew how Camaros handled, as they were always behind me.  

[Brudda]

Hello guys. When I was working at the ford dealership, I was working on the ford GTs and the GT 500’s. There was one car that was unique. At that time (around 05-06) was a black GT 500 for export only. Black with grey snakeskin stripes with red pinstripes around the big stripes and side stripes. Beautiful car. The seats were black with red piping all thru the interior. This car had 640 hp rather than the 500 for the regular GT 500’s. Naturally we had to take her for a test drive. My buddy Steve, was the new car manager. I took this car an uphill on ramp and it was going sideways. Totally crazy. I took her back to the dealership and said this car will kill someone. On the sticker was in bold print, extremely powerful GT 500, be extremely careful. It went to Finland. That was the most beautiful GT 500 I have ever seen and one that made me clean my shorts. These cars should require special driving school before delivery.   But fast forward to today, I work on so many C8 corvettes because of this same thing. You guys will love this one. A hemp dealer ( yes it’s legal here) has a dispensary, bought a new C8. Let his 17 year old drive it. You guys know the rest. Ran it off road. Four tires and wheels, new sub frames , 4 blown shocks. And misc other suspension items . So guys the beat goes on and on……..

[espo]

2 hours ago, Brudda said:

Hello guys. When I was working at the ford dealership, I was working on the ford GTs and the GT 500’s. There was one car that was unique. At that time (around 05-06) was a black GT 500 for export only. Black with grey snakeskin stripes with red pinstripes around the big stripes and side stripes. Beautiful car. The seats were black with red piping all thru the interior. This car had 640 hp rather than the 500 for the regular GT 500’s. Naturally we had to take her for a test drive. My buddy Steve, was the new car manager. I took this car an uphill on ramp and it was going sideways. Totally crazy. I took her back to the dealership and said this car will kill someone. On the sticker was in bold print, extremely powerful GT 500, be extremely careful. It went to Finland. That was the most beautiful GT 500 I have ever seen and one that made me clean my shorts. These cars should require special driving school before delivery.   But fast forward to today, I work on so many C8 corvettes because of this same thing. You guys will love this one. A hemp dealer ( yes it’s legal here) has a dispensary, bought a new C8. Let his 17 year old drive it. You guys know the rest. Ran it off road. Four tires and wheels, new sub frames , 4 blown shocks. And misc other suspension items . So guys the beat goes on and on……..

This problem with cars and truck with powerful engines is nothing new if you were to look back to the '50's and 60's when these vehicles were termed as "Muscal Cars" we used to have bumper stickers that stated, "Stamp out lower performance drivers not high-performance cars". This was manly in response to high insurance rates on those of us under 35 years of age at the time. The horsepower race between manufacturers has been going on for a very long time. Someone mentioned the difference in the handling between a rear-wheel-drive vehicle and a front wheel vehicle and that is a true statement. I'm agreeing with this as a previous owner of both types of vehicles. Both have advantages as well as disadvantages depending on the road conditions, but the main issue remains with the person behind the wheel. I have observed either type of vehicle get in trouble through no fault of the vehicle and solely because of operator error. 

[iamsuperdan]

It doesn't take much to make a rear drive vehicle break loose.

I had a 1985 Volkswagen T3 Doka. Rear wheel drive. Even before the engine swap, these van/truck things only had 90hp max. Mine was the 83hp version. I could get the back end to step out. Even more so after doing the TDI swap.

 

Only two cars have ever truly scared me. Both were turbo Porsches.

The first was a Porsche 930 that has been tweaked by Andial Racing. If I recall, the car had around 700hp, which was mental back in the mid 90s. The clutch was basically an on/off switch. I knew it would be insane, but nothing could prepare me for that massive turbo kicking in.

The second was a Porsche 951, aka 944 Turbo. The car was an '87 and came in on trade. The client didn't inform us that he had done some tuning on the car. Normally, the 951 has a decent amount of turbo lag, and if you know where it kicks in, you can plan your drive. There was one corner on our normal test drive loop, where I knew that if I entered the corner at a certain speed, downshifted, then floored it, by the time I was pointing straight, the boost would kick in and I'd be gone like a rocket. So I did the same thing with this seemingly stock looking car.  Entered the corner at speed, downshift, floor it...no lag. The boost kicked in and the car got sideways immediately. I still don't know how I kept it on the road. I might have screamed. Probably would have looked impressive from a spectator POV.

[bobss396]

6 hours ago, Bainford said:

This might be the saddest statement made in this thread.

Nah, it is a very good road car. Stable in any weather except snow.... Very safe too with airbags all over.

I got it in 2021 with 434 miles on it. It came from Tennessee to NY where I found it at a dealer. It was likely a demo, loaded with a black leather interior. 

[Ace-Garageguy]

2 hours ago, bobss396 said:

Nah, it is a very good road car. Stable in any weather except snow.... Very safe too with airbags all over.

I got it in 2021 with 434 miles on it. It came from Tennessee to NY where I found it at a dealer. It was likely a demo, loaded with a black leather interior. 

I'm sure it's a very nice car, but...

His point was the weight.

Speaking as an actual PO'd engineer, I can pretty confidently (and disgustedly) say that there is NO good reason a surface vehicle that is designed to primarily haul one human backside around NEEDs to weigh 4500 pounds.

A really competent engineering department could shave 1000-2000 pounds off of that and deliver a vehicle that was just as "safe" in anything but a collision with a semi.

The materials, manufacturing techniques, and engineering analysis tools exist to get there at a reasonable price too.

Now let the shouting-down begin.

                               

Edited Wednesday at 10:11 PM by Ace-Garageguy

[bobss396]

8 minutes ago, Ace-Garageguy said:

I'm sure it's a very nice car, but...

His point was the weight.

Speaking as an actual PO'd engineer, I can pretty confidently (and disgustedly) say that there is NO good reason a surface vehicle that is designed to primarily haul one human backside around NEEDs to weigh 4500 pounds.

A really competent engineering department could shave 1000-2000 pounds off of that and deliver a vehicle that was just as "safe" in anything but a collision with a semi.

The materials, manufacturing techniques, and engineering analysis tools exist to get there at a reasonable price too.

Now let the shouting-down begin.

                               

Gotcha. My '68 probably came in at #2800. The newer ones are much safer and hold the road, providing the car is driven in a reasonably safe manner. 

My car is babied. I have 16k miles on it and took it over 90 once. I looked at some used 5.0 cars, 60k miles, 4 years old and MORE than the $29k I paid for it.

[Bainford]

15 hours ago, Ace-Garageguy said:

I'm sure it's a very nice car, but...

His point was the weight.

Speaking as an actual PO'd engineer, I can pretty confidently (and disgustedly) say that there is NO good reason a surface vehicle that is designed to primarily haul one human backside around NEEDs to weigh 4500 pounds.

A really competent engineering department could shave 1000-2000 pounds off of that and deliver a vehicle that was just as "safe" in anything but a collision with a semi.

The materials, manufacturing techniques, and engineering analysis tools exist to get there at a reasonable price too.

Now let the shouting-down begin.

                               

Yup, that's it exactly.

 

18 hours ago, bobss396 said:

Nah, it is a very good road car. Stable in any weather except snow.... Very safe too with airbags all over.

I got it in 2021 with 434 miles on it. It came from Tennessee to NY where I found it at a dealer. It was likely a demo, loaded with a black leather interior. 

I quite like modern Mustangs (well, the ICE ones, anyway). Very good road cars. I like driving them, great for road trips.

As Bill pointed out, my comment was of a general nature regarding all modern American performance cars (and perhaps, more generally, most modern cars). If a car such as yours weighed 2000 lbs less, it could be fitted with a 200 hp, 2.0 litre engine and run circles around your current car. It would use 1/3 less fuel. Tires, brakes, and some suspension components would last twice as long. It would out accelerate, out corner, and out brake a 4500 lbs car by a huge margin. And it would be all-round easier to drive. In fact, many of the post-car show wrecks that inspired this thread would not have occurred without the added inertia of an overweight modern performance car.

To take the point to an extreme, my ancient-technology Lotus Europa weighs less than 1500 lbs and is fitted with a 113 hp engine and skinny tires, and it will absolutely embarrass many 400+ hp modern cars on a twisty country road. Bloated Corvettes are a favourite. Oh, and Subaru WRX too. I don't know what it is with those guys, but they all want to tangle with the Lotus, they all try to stick with it in the corners, and they all create a huge dust cloud in my rearview mirror from which emerges a much slower travelling Subaru with a driver who needs to change his shorts.

[Ace-Garageguy]

1 hour ago, Bainford said:

As Bill pointed out, my comment was of a general nature regarding all modern American performance cars (and perhaps, more generally, most modern cars). If a car such as yours weighed 2000 lbs less, it could be fitted with a 200 hp, 2.0 litre engine and run circles around your current car. It would use 1/3 less fuel. Tires, brakes, and some suspension components would last twice as long. It would out accelerate, out corner, and out brake a 4500 lbs car by a huge margin. And it would be all-round easier to drive. In fact, many of the post-car show wrecks that inspired this thread would not have occurred without the added inertia of an overweight modern performance car.

To take the point to an extreme, my ancient-technology Lotus Europa weighs less than 1500 lbs and is fitted with a 113 hp engine and skinny tires, and it will absolutely embarrass many 400+ hp modern cars on a twisty country road. Bloated Corvettes are a favourite. Oh, and Subaru WRX too. I don't know what it is with those guys, but they all want to tangle with the Lotus, they all try to stick with it in the corners, and they all create a huge dust cloud in my rearview mirror from which emerges a much slower travelling Subaru with a driver who needs to change his shorts.

Yup. Exactly, exactly, exactly. My Lotus 7 decades ago, same story.

I think I was 18 or 19 when I realized a lighter car with the same power-to-weight ratio as a heavier more powerful car would be the winner in any kind of competition...assuming comparable coefficients of friction of the tires, aero drag, and comparable gearing.

There was a popular saying in the '40s and '50s that went something like "a heavy car holds the road better". Which is, in a word, baloney.

There was good reason for Colin Chapman's car design philosophy of "simplify, then add lightness".

[iamsuperdan]

18 hours ago, Ace-Garageguy said:

I'm sure it's a very nice car, but...

His point was the weight.

Speaking as an actual PO'd engineer, I can pretty confidently (and disgustedly) say that there is NO good reason a surface vehicle that is designed to primarily haul one human backside around NEEDs to weigh 4500 pounds.

A really competent engineering department could shave 1000-2000 pounds off of that and deliver a vehicle that was just as "safe" in anything but a collision with a semi.

The materials, manufacturing techniques, and engineering analysis tools exist to get there at a reasonable price too.

Now let the shouting-down begin.

                               

 

You're 100% correct.

Engineering could easily lighten that car significantly. 

But here's the rub. 

Your typical Mustang owner wouldn't buy that car. I'm not talking about car guys or enthusiasts. I'm talking about the typical Mustang buyer. 

If you were to de-content and lighten the car, those people would go away, because they NEED all the stuff. Plush seating for 4, thick sound deadening, thicker and quieter windows, plush carpet, power everything, all the speakers, touchscreens, heated seats, vented seats, auto transmission with paddles, tilt and telescoping steering, 20 inch wheels, spoilers, fog lights, etc. They need the comfort and the luxury. Then the regulations come into effect. Crash structures, a dozen or so airbags with pre-tensioners, blind spot monitors, rear cameras, etc. Then add all of the emissions items required. Not to mentioned the miles and miles of wiring needed to run all of the electronics and computers.

 All of the above adds a ridiculous amount of weight.

I would love to see ford bring out a lightweight Mustang. Leave the safety stuff, leave the emissions stuff, strip out the features. 

Porsche used to do that. Go back a few years and compare my dream car, the Carrera RS to a standard 911 Carrera. All the luxury features went out the door. Heck, the doors became literally a flat panel with a pull strap to open it. No power steering, no AC, no stereo, no cruise control, no back seat, no sunroof, thinner glass, no sound deadening, thinner carpets. The car was significantly lighter, and far more fun to drive.

Alas, the only way to do that now would be to do it yourself. Buy a Mustang, and "ruin" it. I'd love to do that.

 

[michelle]

On 6/4/2025 at 8:59 AM, johnyrotten said:

Even "low" rear wheel horsepower can get out from under you.(motorcycle guy here).Overconfidence and ego. Your point of respecting the situation is spot on. Everyone thinks they're John Force or Mario Andretti until they aren't. 

or dom toretto or the duke boys got to look at tv/movies also for giving people ideas to try with their cars 

[johnyrotten]

23 minutes ago, michelle said:

or dom toretto or the duke boys got to look at tv/movies also for giving people ideas to try with their cars 

Very true. Influences are everywhere. 

[deuces wild]

No wonder my insurance keeps going up and I drive mine normal..🙄🤨

[Dave Van]

FYI...................that thing is RED!!!

[deuces wild]

Yep! That's the way I like it.....😁😁😁😁😁👍

And I've never been pulled over for it...🙂

Edited 13 hours ago by deuces wild

[Dave Van]

1 hour ago, deuces wild said:

Yep! That's the way I like it.....😁😁😁😁😁👍

And I've never been pulled over for it...🙂

Way back I had a orange 70 Mustang sportroof........I like them bright cars!!

1975