If you are still on the fence on the 2015 - Page 3 - Ford Mustang Forum
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Apprentice
Classic Member
5.0L Member
 
1965mustang's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2003
Location: 15 Year Member, GA
Posts: 228
 
I am not on the fence. I'd buy one.

P/S I do not like Fiats.


1995 Mustang Cobra R
2019 Mustang GT350 K1868
1965mustang is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
PONY Member
 
GottaHave14's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2013
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 364
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blazin72 View Post
What "theme" might that be? It is closer than any "theme" that was offered from 1974-2004...
Don't even get me started on those cars......... I was a Chevy guy during that entire time period. It wasn't until 2005 that a Mustang good looking enough to my eye was built again. It's been that bad to my eye since the 1960s. You choose to only the cars from '74 but I'd go a bit further back than that. The Mustang got FAT under Bunkie Knudsen in 1971. I know some here love the old Mach 1 cars......but you can't count me among those people.

The entire period of Mustangs between 71-04 are all cars I've never consider buying based on their appearance alone.

As an 18 year old in 1978 I had a '69 for all of a few months but never actually registered it......got it just about completed when a friend offered to buy it as I was getting ready to head off to college. I always regretted selling it. But over the years after school there was always a better looking Camaro or Corvette to buy when-ever I'd consider a new Mustang. Even in 2004 when I wanted a new car again I bought a Thunderbird......here in 2014 it was the first time a Mustang was the over all BEST choice and I finally got the replacement for the car that got away so long ago.

Kinda rushed to it too......because pictures of this new 2015 re-design had been leaked and I didn't care for what I was seeing.


2014 Mustang GT-Black-Track Package
GottaHave14 is offline  
BOSS Member
 
Blazin72's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2010
Location: Union
Posts: 3,543
           
Garage
At least you're consistent with it. There are a lot of people that seem to gripe for the sake of griping or because they jump on the same bandwagon as everybody else that is doing it and it drives me nuts.

You are definitely right about the Mustang bulking up before 1974 and I don't particularly care for the looks of them either but they definitely "resemble", if you want to call it that, the earlier cars more than the later cars.

They sold a lot of the 74-78s though.
Blazin72 is offline  
 
PONY Member
 
GottaHave14's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2013
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 364
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blazin72 View Post
At least you're consistent with it. There are a lot of people that seem to gripe for the sake of griping or because they jump on the same bandwagon as everybody else that is doing it and it drives me nuts.

You are definitely right about the Mustang bulking up before 1974 and I don't particularly care for the looks of them either but they definitely "resemble", if you want to call it that, the earlier cars more than the later cars.

They sold a lot of the 74-78s though.
They did sell a lot of little Mustang IIs..... I was a kid in high school back then and remember the period very well. I earned my gas and car money working part time pumping gas in 1976-78 at a local gas station on the high way near my parents home. The fact that there were no mechanics working the bays was an added benefit to me and the other guys working there. We had free access to the lifts. Great for working on our cars.

But the other front line look at things I had was the impact higher gas prices had on car design and used car pricing. The muscle cars were cheap and available in a BIG WAY in my youth as second hand cars. I cringe as I think of the cars we DESTROYED as we cut holes in the doors for cheap speakers and then also just allowed them to decapitate because "kids" don't have the coin to properly fix up and restore cars. Everything from Big Block monsters to small block screamers that today fetch big prices at auction were throw away gas guzzlers deemed to be worthless to anyone but kids and gear heads back then.

Those little cars were the desirable models. That '74-'78 Mustang sold well with it's little motors because it could achieve good gas mileage and in a world with gasoline over $1.00/gallon for the first time vs prices under 50 cents just a few years earlier.......the belief at the time was we'd never see "muscle cars" again. Given the new emissions rules and changes required to meet 'em nobody saw the day when it'd be possible anyway.

2014 Mustang GT-Black-Track Package
GottaHave14 is offline  
PONY Member
 
JediDave's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 618
 
Garage
The 1974 Mustang sold 364,000 units the first year and earned Motor Trend's car of the year award.

Jedi D.

2014 Mustang GT Coupe Premium. Options include: California Special package, comfort package, navigation, glass roof, shaker pro system, 3.73 ratio limited slip axle, GT front grill/fogs, MGW race spec shifter, BBK X-Pipe, Corsa GT500 Quad Sport axle-back, Ford Racing ProCal tune. "If I wanted insane HP, I would have purchased a 2014 Shelby GT500!"
JediDave is offline  
Apprentice
 
KC3333's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2012
Location: midwest
Posts: 246
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by JediDave View Post
The 1974 Mustang sold 364,000 units the first year and earned Motor Trend's car of the year award.

Jedi D.
Thirteen Inch Wheels.

Rest muh case.

2012 Boss Yellow Blaze, Recaros/Torsen, Cover/Mats
2012 MCA PP Sterling/Lava
KC3333 is offline  
PONY Member
 
JediDave's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 618
 
Garage
KC3333:

The 74 Mustang could have had 9 inch wheels.....doesn't mean squat! I lived during the muscle car years, and in 74, the smaller Mustangs is what people wanted!! I remember seeing Boss 302's, Mach 1's on the used car lots for $1,500-$2,000, and even a Boss 429 sitting unsold for $2,300. Today, Mustang fanatics make fun of the 74-78, but the market then supported the "Pinto Stang" because that's what people wanted. When the gas lines disappeared and gas prices stabilized in the late 70's to early 80's, the market for performance returned......1982 Mustang GT...."The Boss Is Back!"

Jedi D.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	untitled.png
Views:	62
Size:	101.4 KB
ID:	378882   Click image for larger version

Name:	untitled2.png
Views:	86
Size:	93.2 KB
ID:	378890   Click image for larger version

Name:	untitled3.png
Views:	62
Size:	92.5 KB
ID:	378898  

2014 Mustang GT Coupe Premium. Options include: California Special package, comfort package, navigation, glass roof, shaker pro system, 3.73 ratio limited slip axle, GT front grill/fogs, MGW race spec shifter, BBK X-Pipe, Corsa GT500 Quad Sport axle-back, Ford Racing ProCal tune. "If I wanted insane HP, I would have purchased a 2014 Shelby GT500!"
JediDave is offline  
PONY Member
 
GottaHave14's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2013
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 364
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by JediDave View Post
The 1974 Mustang sold 364,000 units the first year and earned Motor Trend's car of the year award.

Jedi D.
Yup, the Chevy Vega won that award too........ anything stylish a light that could achieve good gas milage was legitimate contender for the award.......in the case of the Vega the award provided one more reason to buy just before people noticed that an un-sleeved aluminum engine while light weight was only capable of approximately 30-40,000 miles before it would burn up a quart of oil in under a 1,000 miles.

.....and all of the cars, Pintos, Vegas, Mustang IIs and the very many other cars that were light enough to get better MPG rusted away in Northern Climates where road salt is used at an alarming fast rate.

Truly a low water mark for Detroit.

Motor Trend gave out awards in those years for anything that showed a sense of forward thinking on MPG that came with some actual style and good looks vs the little boxy Japanese car alternatives at the time.......actual quality didn't seem to enter the decision making process at all. The Mustang II fit the profile......despite the idea it was a true POS!! Don't even get me going on the Vega......better looking than the Mustang and TWICE as big a POS!

2014 Mustang GT-Black-Track Package
GottaHave14 is offline  
GT Member
 
Radioguy's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2010
Location: Saint Louis
Posts: 1,569
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Old5Oh View Post


Throw in the extra Coyote power, the revised front suspension and the IRS with the 3 inches of extra track width, and this car can't miss being the best driving Mustang ever. All of you who are clinging to the S197 because you can't stand change are gonna miss out. Big time. Sorry.

As I said, just one opinion. But strongly held.
Looks like it didn't really make it as the "best driving" Mustang......

"Though it managed a higher average g on the figure eight than the Boss 302 -- which we'd still feel confident calling the best Mustang ever -- the 2015 Mustang didn't feel as nimble or competent as the Boss; it didn't feel like the front and rear ends were talking to each other. Turning in off-throttle resulted in moderate push (understeer from the front end), which needed to be corrected with the throttle. This, in turn, caused a bit of slushy oversteer that, while manageable, slowed the GT down a bit. While that's not bad per se, we were expecting a bit more from the new IRS-equipped Mustang. So why isn't the new ponycar faster than the old one, or handle as well given its horsepower and torque bump and new suspension? One word: weight. The new Mustang GT weighs in at 3814 pounds, a 196-pound increase over the last similarly equipped Mustang GT we tested. While that extra weight is unnoticeable on the street, it does rear its ugly head during limit handling and performance driving."

2013 Mustang GT Premium Convertible
Candy Apple Red, Auto, FRPP Tune, GT500 Axlebacks, KONI Yellow Sport (adjustable dampers), FRPP Front and Rear swaybars, Custom Removable 4 Point Roll-Bar, BOSS 302 Low Expansion Brake Lines, Roush side splitters, GT500 spoiler, Redline Tuning hood struts,18" Ford Chromed Aluminum Wheels (9R3Z-1K007-A), Michelin Pilot Super Sports - 235X50X18
2011 Mustang V6 Premium Convertible - Gone
Radioguy is offline  
Apprentice
 
KC3333's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2012
Location: midwest
Posts: 246
 
Not to mention the Boss is stripped down to nothing, options-wise.

2012 Boss Yellow Blaze, Recaros/Torsen, Cover/Mats
2012 MCA PP Sterling/Lava
KC3333 is offline  
Apprentice
5.0L Member
 
imjrk's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2005
Location: Chilton
Posts: 197
 
Saw a ’15 up close and personal at Road America during the Vintage races. In my opinion it was underwhelming, I was not impressed. It looks better in photos than it does in person.

It is far too heavy and looks it. Shoot, according to Edmunds.com it weighs almost 600 lbs more than my four door family hauler (’13 Mazda 6) and almost 800 lbs more than my ’94 Mustang coupe. Granted neither of these have a V8, but the aluminum V8 doesn’t weigh that much.


Something else that made it look fat, the distance between the outside of the door to the drivers seated position. To me it looks to be a lot of wasted space, even with federal side impact reg’s.


They may grow on me the more times I see them, but I think Ford would have been better served by taking out about 500 lbs and also making it look slimmer and more svelte.


Thank You
imjrk is offline  
PONY Member
 
Old5Oh's Avatar
 
Joined: Dec 2012
Location: Wilder
Posts: 344
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Radioguy View Post
Looks like it didn't really make it as the "best driving" Mustang......
Oh, I think you're wrong. Two reasons. One, MT is just about alone in their opinion, really harsh compared with some of the others especially Motor in GB, which is probably less influenced by who they plan to name COTY.

Second, you are comparing an absolutely loaded, every option in the catalog 15 GT with a Boss, which was as stripped as they come. So the 15 is 100 pounds heavier? Let's weigh a 15 GT PP without the Premium interior, the Shaker Pro and all the gee-gaws. I think that 100 pounds disappears.

Nope, three reasons. The PP is still a GT. The Boss was never intended to be the mass-market car. It has a sharp an edge as Ford could grind onto the old battle axe. Compare 14 to 15 GTs and there will be no comparison. You can already see that in the reviews. No one has yet actually compared track times. The closest I've seen to that is MT's own Figure 8, where the PP just made mince meat of the Boss. "Squishy feel" or not, I am very anxious to see some lap times on real tracks.

Oh. And just to put an exclamation point on it, I think the GT 350, the "sharp edge axe" version of the S550, may make all this discussion sound like yesterday's news. Wouldn't want to drive one every day as I will drive my GT, but it'll be a heck of a weekend toy.

'15 GT Oxford White, Redline Premier leather, AT, navigation, reverse sensing, 18" Foundry wheels
'94 GT 5 spd, Explorer heads, shorties, Bullit suspension, O/R H-pipe, Flowmasters, FR500 wheels, 12 years of effort
Old5Oh is offline  
PONY Member
4.6L Member
S197 Member
 
Wildcat07GT's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2011
Location: Tampa
Posts: 430
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Radioguy View Post
Looks like it didn't really make it as the "best driving" Mustang......

"Though it managed a higher average g on the figure eight than the Boss 302 -- which we'd still feel confident calling the best Mustang ever -- the 2015 Mustang didn't feel as nimble or competent as the Boss;

It's a bit unfair to be comparing a loaded to the gills regular GT with a specialty, track-oriented variant.

The mass produced versions of the car (Eco, GT) will be the best driving Mustangs ever made when compared to their counterparts from the previous generation.

And I expect the Boss will be thoroughly outclassed by the upcoming GT350, which will probably have a similar mission (track performance) and a price in that same ballpark (probably a little more expensive).

And yes I realize Ford stated that the Boss was their target when testing the GT with performance pack.

It did match the figure 8 time of the Boss and pull a higher g. I don't think anyone said the car would be faster in acceleration than the Boss, just that it would be quicker around a track. And that remains to be seen since we don't have any real track times yet.

Also, Motor Trend is just one review. And they were easily one of the most negative reviews out there.

I'd read Road and Track's write-up. They have the car in the Performance Car of the Year testing and provided impressions from several of their writers and editors.

Current: 2015 Ford Focus SE

Former: 2007 GT, Satin Silver
Wildcat07GT is offline  
GT Member
 
Radioguy's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2010
Location: Saint Louis
Posts: 1,569
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Old5Oh View Post
Oh, I think you're wrong. Two reasons. One, MT is just about alone in their opinion, really harsh compared with some of the others especially Motor in GB, which is probably less influenced by who they plan to name COTY.

Second, you are comparing an absolutely loaded, every option in the catalog 15 GT with a Boss, which was as stripped as they come. So the 15 is 100 pounds heavier? Let's weigh a 15 GT PP without the Premium interior, the Shaker Pro and all the gee-gaws. I think that 100 pounds disappears.

Nope, three reasons. The PP is still a GT. The Boss was never intended to be the mass-market car. It has a sharp an edge as Ford could grind onto the old battle axe. Compare 14 to 15 GTs and there will be no comparison. You can already see that in the reviews. No one has yet actually compared track times. The closest I've seen to that is MT's own Figure 8, where the PP just made mince meat of the Boss. "Squishy feel" or not, I am very anxious to see some lap times on real tracks.

Oh. And just to put an exclamation point on it, I think the GT 350, the "sharp edge axe" version of the S550, may make all this discussion sound like yesterday's news. Wouldn't want to drive one every day as I will drive my GT, but it'll be a heck of a weekend toy.
Motor Trend does some of the best "unbiased data gathering" among the trade mags. Not much chance the "stereo and quality leather" is going to add 100 lbs to the car Motor Trend said:
"Now for what you've been waiting for: the new 2015 Mustang GT accelerates from 0 to 60 mph in 4.4 seconds, and gallops through the quarter mile in 12.8 seconds at 112.2 mph. That's just a tick slower than the last performance-pack-equipped 2013 Mustang GT we tested. The old S197 model ties the 2015 model in a race to 60 mph and completes the quarter mile a tick faster at 12.7 seconds, with a 111.7 mph trap speed. Big six-piston Brembo front brakes help the new Mustang come to a stop from 60 mph in 107 feet, a yard shorter than the outgoing model."

Read more: 2015 Ford Mustang GT First Test - Motor Trend

That was a comparison of PP car to PP car. Even on 0-60, slower then the S197 in the quarter by .1 sec and faster then the S197 in the figure 8 by .3 seconds (Tied with the BOSS).
"The new Mustang GT rips 'round the figure eight in 24.7 seconds, pulling 0.84 g average in the process. That's not only quicker than the last Mustang GT (25.0 seconds at 0.77 g average), but it's also a better performance than the last Mustang Boss 302 (24.7 seconds at 0.78 g average) we tested. Though it managed a higher average g on the figure eight than the Boss 302 -- which we'd still feel confident calling the best Mustang ever -- the 2015 Mustang didn't feel as nimble or competent as the Boss; it didn't feel like the front and rear ends were talking to each other. Turning in off-throttle resulted in moderate push (understeer from the front end), which needed to be corrected with the throttle. This, in turn, caused a bit of slushy oversteer that, while manageable, slowed the GT down a bit. While that's not bad per se, we were expecting a bit more from the new IRS-equipped Mustang.

Read more: 2015 Ford Mustang GT First Test - Motor Trend

I don't think "mince meat" is quite accurate I agree that it will be interesting to see some more quantitative data on the new Mustang. However, given the early data, I doubt many people will really push the new Mustang around the track any faster then the previous 11-14 Mustangs of similar configuration. And it looks like it will be a little disappointing on the street and strip.

2013 Mustang GT Premium Convertible
Candy Apple Red, Auto, FRPP Tune, GT500 Axlebacks, KONI Yellow Sport (adjustable dampers), FRPP Front and Rear swaybars, Custom Removable 4 Point Roll-Bar, BOSS 302 Low Expansion Brake Lines, Roush side splitters, GT500 spoiler, Redline Tuning hood struts,18" Ford Chromed Aluminum Wheels (9R3Z-1K007-A), Michelin Pilot Super Sports - 235X50X18
2011 Mustang V6 Premium Convertible - Gone
Radioguy is offline  
Apprentice
 
14MustangV6's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2013
Location: Essex County
Posts: 154
 
Unless the old and new car were tested side-by-side, it's tough to just look at the numbers and say one is better than the other. So many variables that can impact performance can vary day-to-day and location-to-location.

I'm surprised none of the publications seem to have tested a 2014 and a 2015 at the same time to get a better comparison.


Current: 2014 V6 Mustang Premium, Automatic Transmission, Oxford White, Safety & Security Package.

Previous: 2006 Chevrolet Cobalt LS, bone-stock except for automatic transmission.
14MustangV6 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
 

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Ford Mustang Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a VALID email address for yourself, otherwise you will not receive the necessary confirmation email needed to confirm, validate and activate your new AFM member account.

Failure to provide a VALID email address, will result in the cancellation of your new AFM member account registration.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome
 


Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.1