Ford Mustang Forum banner

1 - 20 of 23 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
344 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Seems this is the rallying cry for those folks complaining about the spy photos that look anything like the Evos concept. I agree, it doesn't look like an old Mustang. But why is that bad?

We have had this "retro" generation since 2005, and that's been fine, but it's the first time EVER that a new Mustang looked like an old Mustang. Let me be a little more blunt.

Many of us on this forum own Fox bodies. I want you to tell me ONE THING about a Fox Mustang that looks anything like any other Mustang generation, ever. Think about it. When the Fox came out for the '79 model year it featured marvels like door window frames, strut front suspension, a really screwy rear suspension designed to save Ford money, FOUR-lug wheels, door handles mounted near the floor, box-on-box styling, no Mustang grill, square headlights, no performance model (the Turbo 4 with 140 HP hardly counted) . . . . shall I go on? And yet no one screamed "It doesn't look like a Mustang II!" Indeed, it didn't. But it sold like hotcakes, and turned out to be a pretty memorable generation, to say the least. No arguing with a 14-year run.

So lighten up, already! Maybe the best Mustangs ever are going to have Fusion grills. I think I can learn to love that. Assuming they are the best Mustangs ever.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
233 Posts
I'm sure people have said that about every new generation. Times change and they have to keep up with newer designs. I'm sure they won't leave a huge a Mustang base with a bad looking Mustang.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,080 Posts
I'm with Old5Oh on this one. The Fox's looked nothing like a "Mustang" yet many of us loved them, in fact cut our teeth on them.

Except for the rear tail lights, the SN95's didn't look very "Mustang-like" either, yet they have a rabid following (I'd still give a body part or 2 to get a really nice, low mileage Terminator).

Our s197's are beautiful cars. I happen to have a soft spot for 10-12 style (I have a 12, so imagine that, right?) My brothers red 06 GT was a beautiful car, too.

Things do change, and the way cars look, well that's purely subjective, right? Some people are going to love the new cars, and others, not so much. I can understand why some don't like the looks of some of the renderings we have seen so far, there are things about them I don't like, either.

That said, we really won't know until we are actually standing there looking at one in person. I was like that when the 13's came out. There were aspects of the front grill/ back fascia that I just didn't like in pictures, that ended up looking really cool on the real car as it was driving down the road.

We really shouldn't knock the new car until we actually see it. And drive it. It looks like they will be offering something for everyone: A turbo 4 for the old SVO crowd, a V6 for the having the cake and eating it too crowd, and a V8 for those of us in the must have the ground pounding sound club. Less weight and more power, too.

I am looking forward to it myselfcoolbeans.gif
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
561 Posts
From what I've seen of the 2015 renders, they look a LOT like the current Mustangs. Just a lot sleeker. Every time Ford has come out with a new Mustang they have been radically different from the previous model. S197 included. The '05 looked a lot like the old 60s Mustangs but nothing like the '04. I think this is the smallest amount of change they've done between generations (on the over all outside appearance).
Oh, and I screamed that the '79 didn't look anything like a Mustang. alone.dk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
344 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
From what I've seen of the 2015 renders, they look a LOT like the current Mustangs. Just a lot sleeker.
Some of the renders do look like S197 Lite. I hope those are wrong. I am rooting for the full-Evos, rounded rear quarter look. Really hard to tell from the Camo'd prototypes. Ford is doing a much better than average job of hiding the real car. Seems like we knew pretty much what the 2005 would be by now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
83 Posts
I think when people say "it doesn't look like a mustang", they mean it doesn't look like "muscly". Like an American muscle car. It looks more European with more curves. That at least is how I feel. Don't get me wrong I like the way the new one looks, but do notice less of a muscle feel in its design
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
215 Posts
Someone above hit the nail on the head-
Nearly every new generation stang has been meet with some opposition.
I personally recalling disliking many of them at first until they "grew" on me.
The growing on me problem will be fixed when this newest generation is released as I plan to buy a hard top immediately.
Tim


Sent from AutoGuide.com Free App
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
561 Posts
I think when people say "it doesn't look like a mustang", they mean it doesn't look like "muscly". Like an American muscle car. It looks more European with more curves. That at least is how I feel. Don't get me wrong I like the way the new one looks, but do notice less of a muscle feel in its design
Cars in the 90s had a much sexier look to them. Including the Mustang. Then in the last decade, cars started to have to be more aggressive looking. This got more and more so and today cars have to be very aggressive looking or they're ugly. Maybe Ford can bring sexy back. There's nothing wrong with a sexy pony car, especially if it can blow the doors off everything else.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
727 Posts
I think this is more of a "generational" thing. Those of us who have had (and still have) several generations of Mustangs are open to the new model, where those who have only had the current gen are tearing their clothes because the car is changing.

I grew up with the Fox and love them, and contrary to many here, even though it doesn´t "look" like a first gen Mustang or any previous one, it still is 100% Mustang, the body proportions are there, the way they drive and handle, the seating position, the fun to drive etc.

I currently have 3 Mustangs, a 1981 302 V8, a 03 GT and a 10 V6... despite all the advance in technology and size differences... you´d be surprised that ALL drive like Mustangs.

I love the current gen, save for the fact that its too big and heavy, and I can´t wait to see the 50th anny car, I´m sure it WILL be the best Mustang ever, just like every new generation has gotten better than the previous one.

So far all there´s out are renders and heavily masked spy shots. Its difficult to say if you like it or not.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
12,436 Posts
Cars in the 90s had a much sexier look to them. Including the Mustang. Then in the last decade, cars started to have to be more aggressive looking. This got more and more so and today cars have to be very aggressive looking or they're ugly. Maybe Ford can bring sexy back. There's nothing wrong with a sexy pony car, especially if it can blow the doors off everything else.
I'd agree...all it takes is one look at that new Jaguar, also why can't Ford have two sports cars? Keep the "retro" design and newer rolled out as another classic name "Cougar?", how about another T bird?

Personally I'm looking more and more at that new Scion..small, quick, tuned, great revving mpg 4 banger, 6spd and best of all it's around 25K...tons of parts coming for it? Sounds more like a Mustang than the Mustang, not to mention I'll bet the new Stang will look eerily like it...just bigger, just like 94 when everyone thought "oh no, it's a Celica"...nothing ever changes folks
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
300 Posts
I'd agree...all it takes is one look at that new Jaguar, also why can't Ford have two sports cars? Keep the "retro" design and newer rolled out as another classic name "Cougar?", how about another T bird?

Personally I'm looking more and more at that new Scion..small, quick, tuned, great revving mpg 4 banger, 6spd and best of all it's around 25K...tons of parts coming for it? Sounds more like a Mustang than the Mustang, not to mention I'll bet the new Stang will look eerily like it...just bigger, just like 94 when everyone thought "oh no, it's a Celica"...nothing ever changes folks
its a simple matter of, nobody was hardly buying the 2011+. not in the numbers they needed to to support an entire factory to it. especially with milennials. they just weren't interested in the retro look.

theyre a business, they need to turn a profit. the simple fact of the matter is, if the majority of people out there wanted the retro look mustang, they would have bought one instead of genesis coupes, Camaros, and brz's
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,816 Posts
Have you ever tried on an FR-S? They're very tight and hard to take off (as in exit). Oh, and they require premium.
Maybe if you're a little pudgy. Even at 6'2" I fit in one fine and it was quite easy to get in and out of for me. As far as premium, most of us on here run it anyway. It's only a few dollars more per fill up.

Sent from AutoGuide.com Free App
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,816 Posts
its a simple matter of, nobody was hardly buying the 2011+. not in the numbers they needed to to support an entire factory to it. especially with milennials. they just weren't interested in the retro look.

theyre a business, they need to turn a profit. the simple fact of the matter is, if the majority of people out there wanted the retro look mustang, they would have bought one instead of genesis coupes, Camaros, and brz's
Kids today generally aren't interested in cars no matter what they are.

Sent from AutoGuide.com Free App
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
295 Posts
I grew up with the Fox and love them, and contrary to many here, even though it doesn´t "look" like a first gen Mustang or any previous one, it still is 100% Mustang, the body proportions are there, the way they drive and handle, the seating position, the fun to drive etc.
I agree! As long as the new car is 100% Mustang it'll be all good! I'm like you. I think every generation as a certain "Mustangness" to it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
215 Posts
The Fox worked because it had no real competition. The Chevy was overstyled too long, too flexible and too much overhang and was hundreds of pounds heavier. The Fox also had under-styling, it was simple and tough looking.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
364 Posts
Cars in the 90s had a much sexier look to them. Including the Mustang. Then in the last decade, cars started to have to be more aggressive looking. This got more and more so and today cars have to be very aggressive looking or they're ugly. Maybe Ford can bring sexy back. There's nothing wrong with a sexy pony car, especially if it can blow the doors off everything else.
Mustangs have been good looking and they've been, well let's just be charitible and say "less" than their best.

It all comes down to personal taste and which of the manufacturers have the "edge" in any given year.

I bought a '14 GT because, for me Mustang is the clear "winner" right now vs Chevy and Chrysler..... I considered waiting but was concerned for what the '15 may look like......... that said recent photos look "OK" and I probably was worrying too much.

Still, it has't been all that long since Mustangs were so weak on performance and appearance that I don't remember a time when I wouldn't have even considered buying a Mustang. The 1990s were a tough period for Mustang, IMO. The '95 my brother owned was incredibly weak in comparison to the '96 Z/28SS I bough just a few months later.

In the 1990s? Sexy is not how I'd describe the appearance of Mustang but that's just my opinion..... more objective? Mustang performance vs LT1 and LS1 powered Camaros performance advantage.....it was a tough time to be a Ford buyer. The Camaro handled better and was considerable faster.

2003-2008 left you with no options......it was Mustang or nothing.

2009 gave us the first competetive choice since '02.

These new Coyote powered Mustangs have both the appearance and power advantage over the Chevrolet offerings today. That's a wonderful change vs the '90s and it's likely to continue into the next generation!:worship

About the only thing to recommend in a Camaro over Mustang now is the IRS. After 2015 even that may no longer be a debatable point.

Assuming they don't screw it up on appearance the 2015 could well be an awesome car......... might even make me regret not waiting! slapfight.gif
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
364 Posts
its a simple matter of, nobody was hardly buying the 2011+. not in the numbers they needed to to support an entire factory to it. especially with milennials. they just weren't interested in the retro look.

theyre a business, they need to turn a profit. the simple fact of the matter is, if the majority of people out there wanted the retro look mustang, they would have bought one instead of genesis coupes, Camaros, and brz's
Pricing in a tough economy matters too.


I love my new car but loaded up and with the track package it had a $42,000 price tag attached.......even after negotiation and rebates........ it was still damned near $37,000 to take it home......and that was only accomplished by pitting 3 dealers against each other.

These cars have serious competition at lower price points. Many of us think of this as a GM vs Ford vs Chrysler world where RETRO rules but few of the younger buyers feel nearly so limited. The reasonable priced "performance car" market is pretty niche in appeal and there are a lot of competitors now. So yeah, genesis coupes......even Hyundai offer BIG HP numbers in a coupe with mid range pricing.

Ford has been offering a GREAT CAR in the Mustang recently........they just don't have the pony car market all to themselves as they did for 5 years or so in the middle of the last decade. I expect the big sales numbers will be harder than ever to get to or sustain if they do get there.
 
1 - 20 of 23 Posts
Top