There are no shortage of automotive journalists praising neutral handling balance, sliding a car half way around a track, and condemning understeer as the enemy of speed. It's not just journalists, either. Forums for all sorts of cars are filled with people who hate understeer and try their best at exorcising every last understeering demon out of their cars. But is understeer actually that bad? Drifting vs Hot Laps Everyone seems to categorize the three distinct traits at the limit - "understeer", "neutral", and "oversteer" - this way: Understeer is bad. Neutral is good. Oversteer is slow but fun. And since most people don't get to drive a multitude of different cars, let alone push them to their limits, most opinions are formed based on professional reviews. That's fine in general, but there is a distinction between "fun" and "fast". Drifting is a lot of fun, yet everyone knows that drifting is not the fastest way a
No, it's not because it's called Mach 1 or the heritage that comes with the name, although that's pretty cool for Mustang fans. There are few cars out there that have the widespread track use of Mustangs. A combination of affordability, a decent RWD platform with endless aftermarket support and the potential to be competitive when properly set up makes them a staple in most track paddocks in North America. But being popular for track use comes with some headaches for manufacturers. It means that the car will be pushed hard by its customers and that will inevitably lead to discovering weak links . The vast majority of factory main-stream performance cars have limitations on track when pushed to hot lapping pace. That's not to say they are all equal - some are, without a doubt, far more durable and dependable than others - but nearly all require modifications. Mustangs are no exception. And their popularity also means those weak links are discovered fast, and marketing d