The Worst Mustang Ever. It’s been a dream for decades, and while Ford has made some valiant efforts to achieve it in the past – many would mention the Mustang II here – I’m of the opinion that so far, Ford has not achieved this goal. Some say it’s a pipe dream, that the true Worst Mustang Ever (WME) only exists on paper, and can never be truly realized. But I beg to differ; I have just realized that, thanks to some incredible technological advancements made in the development of the Mustang GTD (which, by the way, you can read about in incredible detail here) it is now technologically and economically possible for Ford to build a Mustang so deeply flawed, so wildly misguided, and so ill-conceived that it has a real chance of becoming the Worst Mustang Ever. And it’s all thanks to one key component developed for the Mustang GTD.
Yes, you read that right: part of the development of what is easily the fastest production Mustang ever is the key element in making the Worst Mustang Ever. Previous speculative designs for a WME have all required too much custom development and bespoke parts; they were too expensive to actually ever be possible to make real, because there are still, if you can believe it, many in positions of power at Ford who believe any money spent in the development of a genuinely terrible Mustang is too much money spent. That’s why for this to work, it needs to use components already in production, and thanks to the GTD, we’re finally there.
What is this crucial component? Glad you asked! It’s the Rear Engine Mounting System (REMS), which is used to connect the output shaft of the GTD’s 815-horsepower Predator engine to its rear-mounted transaxle. You can see it being installed by a technician here:
…and here it is, shown where it fits into the drivetrain of the GTD:
Now, you may be wondering just how this one crucial component for the GTD can be used to make the Worst Mustang Ever. The answer has to do with the fact that the Predator engine is part of Ford’s modular engine family, which also includes the 5.0-liter V8 used on the Mustang GT. This means that the REMS will bolt right onto the 5.0 engine.
This is the crucial step to making the Worst Mustang Ever. Remember, only the Mustang GTD has a rear-mounted transaxle. All other Mustangs use a transmission bolted right to the engine, which then spins the driveshaft that connects to the differential at the rear axle. So, to make the WME, all we need to do is replace the transmission with the REMS, which will bolt right into place without any trouble:
Essentially, we’re doing a Transmission Delete option for the Mustang GT. And that one change alone will definitely make a Worst Mustang Ever possible. Ford is in a unique position in the entire automotive industry to make this happen; while there are other cars without a traditional transmission, they’re all either electric or hybrids (like the upcoming new Honda Prelude); no other carmaker currently has the components needed to make a transmission-less combustion car other than Ford.
So, what would this Mustang WME (that’s my suggestion for the name) be like? Well, it would be quite similar to a base Mustang GT, just without a transmission. Maybe it could be optioned with some really terrible stuff, too, like a head unit that only plays true crime podcasts and always-on heated seats, or something like that. Those details can be hammered out later. But I’d like to avoid having a clutch or anything like that, to keep costs low.
Right now, I’m just thinking about the performance that this unique 5.0/REMS drivetrain would offer. Because figuring this out involves math, I involved our own in-house engineer, David Tracy.
I asked David to help me figure out what the acceleration would be like using the stock 486 horsepower/418 pound-feet of torque engine, and using the final drive from the manual transmission car, which would give a final drive ratio of 3.55. David looked at how much torque the engine makes at idle, about 650 rpm – it’s about 25 lb/ft – and with a tire size of 27 inches, he figured out how much thrust the car would make:
… so it’s about as slow as basically every car from my GenX childhood
Don’t forget that the off button for the “always-on” heated seats will be subscription based.
that would be a neat experiment “how much torque do you need to have a direct drive combustion engine” and it be ‘livable’
There have been lots of one speed cars for some form of motorsport or other.
A great way to kill wheel spin at cars and coffee for Mustangs.
I must admit when you wrote Predator I did think of Harbor Freight.
Not recommended as the next father/son driveway project with a red Mustang. (-;
You could combo meal that. Harbor Freight Predator and REMS. The engine would stall at any speed below about 30 mph or on even the slightest incline regardless of speed.
A term other than Glacial would have to be invented, since I figure in a race between this HF Predator/REMS Mustang and how fast that single engine would melt the polar ice cap, the Ice cap would win.
Would a single speed Coyote powered ‘Stang really be worse than a ’65 with the 170 cubic inch Thriftpower six and a 3-speed?
Introducing the new Ford Mustang 5 Point Slow
Did I hear correctly this morning as I half-watched a Youtube video about the Mustang GTD that it costs about $330K?! What kind of person would actually buy one and ought they be forcibly neutered so as not to be able to contribute their DNA to future generations for the good of all humanity? Like WTF?
The kind of people hoarding more than they know what to do with. Perhaps also the kind of people buying things like brand new ’79 Chevettes on BAT…
I think Beau might want to have a word with you..
A pal of mine buys a brand new Ferrari every other year or so. They each seem to cost at least twice what a Mustang GTD MSRPs for, and you have to agree to let Ferrari/the dealership have right of first refusal if/when you want to resell it, and/or you have to resell through the dealer, otherwise no more Ferraris for you. Even doing it this way (letting the dealer resell it so they get another cut) he basically makes a few hundred thousand dollars of profit each time he ‘flips’ a car… even though he’s specced it to his personal preferences and driven it for a couple of years.
If I were rich like him (or Beau) I guess I’d probably do this too: why not make a few hundred thousand dollars simply for tying up my cash in a fancy car for a few years? I’m not anti-capitalist (though I’m not as fervently pro-capitalist as I once was) by any means, but it’s one of the many ways that the rich get richer through little/no effort, and certainly contributing nothing to society as a whole.
We live in an imperfect world of course. Some aspects of it are less perfect than others.
Yep, I don’t disagree with you, haha. It’s not my cup of tea and if I had the funds they would be spent on something else, but if I already had a large collection and could also leverage a dealer allocation at wholesale, it might make sense.
Here I was thinking the chevy camaro was the WME as it’s always been a poor copycat of the Mustang, but this concept might beat it.
I – or rather, William Jennings Holman and I – have a solution for you. See, the WME is missing a critical corner of the performance envelope: highway drivability! Therefore I propose a smaller set of wheels which maintain adhesion with the main wheels, which will spin at a higher speed than the main wheel.
This confers extraordinary benefits: one, it distributes the road wear over more wheels, safeguarding our great nation’s highway infrastructure; two, increased surface area means more grip; and three, the increased height will make the WME more competitive in a marketplace dominated by crossovers.
This does, of course, mean that the WME will be traveling in reverse, but when you think about it, having the red brake lights facing forwards will be better for maintaining the driver’s nighttime visibility, won’t it? And with the additional manpower required to push-start it (a necessary sacrifice if you ask me) the now rear-opening doors will handily scoop the crew into the cabin!
If you’re caught doing a burnout leaving Cars & Coffee, you don’t get a ticket, you don’t lose your license, you’re forced to drive this setup for a year.
That’ll take care of the problem real quick.
You could do a drag race between this hypothetical Mustang and a Model T, and the Model T would win
The Model T is a lot simpler and stouter too. Those times Ford assembled vehicles with pride and quality.
Now? Everyone suffers from poor QC, not just Ford.
This is the kind of unhinged bullshit I come here for.
But think about the weight saving! and less complexity!
I find it odd to name the highest output Mustang after a Golf Diesel
I had the same thought. And truth be told, I would rather have the Golf.
Also the engine is named after the one they sell at Harbor Freight.
At $330,000+ for a car that still says “Mustang” on it, the GTD is already the worst Mustang ever, and I say that as a Mustang owner.
What this proposal and the GTD have in common, other than the REMS, is that they lack a proper transmission.
At that point a C8 or electric are better options.
I thought Koenigsegg already built the WME?
Okay so here me out: a high-stall, lockup torque converter. You already don’t have gears to shift, just stuff a big ol’ donut of slush in there instead of a clutch. Now, arguably that’s a hydraulic CVT, but it’s still not technically multiplying or dividing RPMs.
Which would increase driveability, but make any point that isn’t post-lockup shall we say less than ideal when it comes to responsiveness.
So… worse? Or better?