Likely no center diff, the press release states it has an "RDU" which I think means rear differential unit, two-clutch system.

At a sacrifice to airflow most likely. The RS has a bigger radiator than the ST and needs that grill for additional cooling.

The press release specifically states it uses a twin-clutch RDU (rear differential unit). Please explain how this is car marketing BS.

Typos and misinformation abound:

Please go buy a VW Golf R or Mercedes A45 AMG if you want a boring and flawed DCT, if you really need the .1s shift time improvement for your hot laps through suburbia.

Also, didn't mean to come off as troll-like as I did, no offense intended!

I actually do design and calibrate a very simular engine. Never heard the teem reverse boosting.

its because of the restrictor you dolt, not reverse boosting (???)

Likely running cat-piss Cali gas, turbo engines are not happy without 93 premium. The 5.0L will see less de-rate with crappy gas than a high strung turbo 4, so makes sense they feel more distant in a heat-soaked extremely high speed track.

To add to that, the fusion is also built in the flat rock assembly plant. So by that logic, the fusion is a 4 door mustang, or wait the mustang is a 2 door fusion, I forget?

Subaru has no AWD competition with Mitsu leaving the market, except for a certain Focus RS upcoming with very likely AWD drivetrain!

His comment about the engine being the same based on the car being built in the same plant, no basis. The engine is not built in Flat Rock for the 2.3L in either platform, that is where the car is assembled. The engine for the 2.3L mustang is built in Valencia, Spain, likely the same was true for the Mazda engine. …

Sounds like the IMSA race car, this is good. Hopefully uses some form of anti lag or launch control!

Dual clutch trans

Pure speculation, or on what basis?

Keep in mind these are test mules still...and likely not even close to production parts. Why wouldnt it be based on the new ST styling?

True, and after reading Jalops latest article on the interior I'm more convinced. Honda does have a history of being rather conservative on interior design, but also being very driver focused. Looks like this is no different, in a good way.

So a pdeudo auto journalist gets his panties in a bunch over a subjective design feature. This deserves a front page article why?

Case in point: GT350R. The cost that could have been spent on carbon ceramic rotors was used for carbon wheels, which result in a much greater performance benefit (nearly 50lbs unsprung rotational mass), AND they are a non-consumable part.

Why does every journalist get a raging hard on for carbon ceramic rotors? The cost/performance is usually not feasible for all but the highest cost track specific cars. Especially for a consumable part. There's a reason most race cars still use two piece steel rotors.