Ford Mustang (2005 and Newer)

newbuyer31

Thanks everyone for your input. As I stated on the Camaro board, my Mustang is a 97 with 55,000 miles V6. Nothing is wrong with it but I am just considering making a change. I just wondered about the Camaro vs. Mustang as this is the first Mustang I had and never owned a Camaro.

I just am looking at all options and thinking about what I will do.

I am considering trading it for new or used (model within 2-3 years). Also, I am thinking I would like to upgrade now to V8. I also am interested in waiting for the 05 Mustang or maybe going GT.

Or, I could just keep the current and save up more money for later.

I also have heard somewhere you should not by the redesign of an auto until at least after 2 years to give the manufacturer time to discover and correct any flaws.

Just wondering if a used will do until the new Stangs are reviewed for a year or two. I am just looking into my options right now, it is not an urgent matter at the time as nothing is wrong with my current.

I can say I really do like my Mustang even though it is only a 6, I luckily have not had any problems with it, it is fine.

I just would hate to go with the new and spend the money on one that has not had time to work out the flaws and could cause a headache if my current or a newer would be a better option for a few years until we see what happens.

Thanks again for listening and any advisements you may offer. take care all.

theo2709

The new Camaro is coming out in early 2007, for those who are interested.

snakerbill

I have heard that the Camaro will be re-born in 2006. (late 2005) Do not know which is true. But it will be interesting.

exalteddragon1

As we speak, ford Motor is a dying company...
They just need to get this car right, it is almost as important as the F-150 to re-establishing fords cred on the street scene. I saw the spy shots you guys posted, thx. They are dulling up the 'Stang! Not since the 80's Nova Mustang have ford shot themselves in the foot like this...
If you still want to see a Ford motor company (not owned by a certain Japanese or German automaker) then e-mail the hell out of them! Tell them to keep the aggressive style of the concept. They cannot afford to loose this car. Besides, if they made the concept to a production, I'd be into one too

3point1v6

i dont know what your problem is...with a few exceptions the concept is basically the production model. i mean...did you really expect a glass roof? the quarter panels have to be glass because of safety reasons. and the tail lights look better now. other than that, its the same mustang.

snakerbill

I think the production car is the best looking Mustang ever, and thank heaven no more stupid fake scoops. When I get my GT if it has that wing on the back I will take it off as soon as possible. Clean cars always look better longer. I think Ford has gotten it right and I hope they sell every one they can make starting with me.

snakerbill

For a person who did not know that the Camaro was no longer in production, what FACTS were you going to impart to me? I stand behind my initial statement that the 6 cyl Mustang leaves a lot to be desired and is viewed by many as a fake Mustang or a girls version of a sporty car. Make any excuses you will but it remains that the 6 cyl Mustang is an old platform with an old tech engine that lacks the power one would expect in a sporty car. Again, Consumer Reports stated that the V6 Mustang makes more noise than power, and is not in keeping with the sporty image of the Mustang, and they recommend that the V8 is the engine of choice in the Mustang. You do not seem to know that a 90 degree V6 is basically an unbalanced device that is a V8 with two cylinders removed to save money and use old tooling to make the car cheaper, and if you want a cheap car, buy a Hyundai. The only good thing one can say about the base Mustang is that it is rear wheel drive, but the engine lacks the power to exploit that feature. It lacks the good suspension of the V8, and the wheels and tires are inferior and not speed rated, and the car is electronically speed limited to 106MPH. Why drive a fake car that even lacks a limited slip rear axle when the V8 is not that much more expensive??? If Ford would upgrade the 6 cyl to a DOHC 60 degree engine, then the base car would begin to make sense, but as long as that old 3.8 is the only 6 offered it does not seem to a good value. I think that Ford will offer a better 6 for 2005, and if so, it would be hoped that the wheels and tires and suspension would also be subject to the upgrade. Maybe.

john_324

Are we back on this again?! I can't believe we're still arguing about this.

Snaker, how fast do you usually drive? I mean a 106 mph-limited car is simply not going to cut it for you?!

And I'd hardly say Consumer Reports is the best source when it comes to evaluating performance characteristics of automobiles. If you read the review you reference a little further, you'll find that the magazine admits it can't understand why the Mustang sells so well. I think this speaks for itself.

newbuyer31

Ok, Snaker. I see your review, I said before I am not as up on the car topics. And in fact I do own a Hyundai, lol. It is my second for driving in the snow. Also, just wanted to say John, at least we have someone on here who condusts himself with a little bit of class. I am not arguing with anyone, is not my intention. Snaker I don't know what your problem is but I am just talking about cars and asking the questions to be the most informed. I said this was my first Mustang, I test drove at that same time back then the GT and sure it is better I never said it was not. But you are bashing the V^ I drive, and I just don't know why you seem to dislike them so much? Just because you say they are cheap and weak? If so, that is fine, I am just saying my 6 is ok for what i use it for. But, give me an advisement on my previous post to help me with my decision. Wait for the 05 or upgrade to GT? That is all. Thanks.

fdthird

The Mustang was made to be a red convertible. Just listen to Bill Ford..his favorite car, a red Mustang convertible!

I have a red Mustang convertible..you folks with other color convertibles or coupes are just pretending. If you want to buy a closed car, why not a Yugo???

In short...a red drop top or nothing. That's your choice unless you want to drive a fake Mustang.

Makes as much sense as some of the other arguments, no?

exalteddragon1

Im saying that aggressive cars sell (AKA CTS) the concept mustang was aggressive. I wish they would keep that look with out adding fake scoops, just make the dam production as close to the concept as humanly possible.
So it looks good in red...

rctennis3811

Well, making it really muscular wouldn't appeal to everyone. What about the college girls?? Not all of them want a car with huge fenders or huge hoodscoops. That's why Ford will release the higher line Mustangs like the MACH, etc. Those are for the enthusiasts!

ballpark

I saw the concept at the recent California Auto Show a few weeks back. The car was drop-dead gorgous (gorgious...gorjus? it looked good)It was the only car with a perpetual crowd standing there gawking at it. I went there specificly to get a look at it cause I was contemplating purchasing a new Mach (23K is too good to ignore) One look and the Mach idea was history. So now I'm seeing photos of production models that are not quite the same as the concept. So what? The basic lines of the concept are there. You're only an "aftermarket" hood and front fascia away from regaining the concept look. If that's what you really want. I'd bet my bottom dollar that scoops, spoilers, ground effects etc. are ALREADY in production. Concept tailights? I probably won't have to wait long to get a set from my local Mustang Shop.

Ford will likely offer a more masculine "concept like" version in the near future. The shelby version will likely be that car.
As an aside to those of you lamenting the changes in the production model Vs. the Concept, the 99 up Stangs are very similar to the "Rambo" version shown to focus groups when Ford was finalizing it's decision on what the 94 Stang should look like.
Eventualy the "Arnold" design was selected for the 94 debut. (There was also a very tame looking "Jenner" variant)
Also the best color, bar none, for the new 'Stang will be Black on Black (hardtop) and Red with white interior (ragtop)

snakerbill

Good grief; I was not trying to knock your ride,and I thought that you wanted to know why you should get the V8 next time. I tried to let you know why the 90 degree V6 is not the engine to buy. I never intended to make my diatribe an attack on your person. If you took it that way I am sorry, as I do not want to offend anyone, but sometimes I just get carried away and perhaps I sound pompus or didactic, but I really was trying to bring you up to speed on performance cars. In answer to your question, I would wait for the 05 Mustang, and see what engines are offered in the new iteration, then decide if the V8 would better suit your needs without regards to my opinions. I can tell you that I am going to get the GT, not the Cobra or other super performance versions. I think that the GT is probably the best value in the Mustang lineup, and is the most well rounded car. By the way, think really hard before you buy a used performance car. They are almost always beat to death, even if they look good cosmetically. If you have any other questions, just ask, and I will do my best to give you a shorter answer. (:

snakerbill

I know, I know, but I just can't seem to control my fingers. The reason I hate electronic speed limiters is the same reason that I do not want big brother telling me what to have for dinner or what books to read. I do not need an electronic nanny watching over me even if I never drove over the posted limit. It just rubs my snakeskin the wrong way when I spend my money for a car I want to have one that is limited by the wind or my good sense, or lack thereof. (:

mondo540

New poster here....dropped in to see what Edmunds had on the Mustang. Been reading the last several posts and if I may, NB31, offer my suggestion. I've owned both Z28's and Mustang 5.0s and now have an '03 10th anniv. Cobra.

I'd wait for the new car bugs to get sorted out before buying the new style. Ford's track record is horrendous in launching new products. Some of the issues with the current model have been around for a few years and Ford either can't or won't fix them....and that platform has been with us for more than 20 years...Additionally, and this may have been pointed out, demand may exceed supply for awhile on the new car so pricing may not be discounted right away.

I'd upgrade to a v8 if you want a bit more power....buy a used, low mileage GT and be happy until '06 sometime. You can find used GT's anywhere and they are plentiful and cheap.

My .02...good luck wth whatever you decide.

newbuyer31

Ok, thanks for your advisements, I appreciate them. I will take into consideration.

john_324

I personally like the new "production" 2005 Mustang even better than the concept...the lines seem tighter and more "compact" (it's hard to describe).

Regardless, it's going to be a hit. And I'm sure the V6 will be much improved, technologically speaking. : )

I've always been very happy with my 2002, but seeing the final look of the 2005, I'm beginning to feel an occasional pang of regret. : (

But here's a question to get everyone going again: What's up with the "changeable color" gauge cluster in the 2005?? Am I the only one who thinks something like this belongs on a Lexus or a VW Beetle (esp. a Beetle!)...but not a ponycar like the Mustang?

I'm having a hard time understand who exactly Ford is going after with this...

john_324

Oh Snaker re your list of cars owned...that's quite an impressive collection! I really envy your being around/participating in the musclecar years (I vaguely remember the very tail end)...must have been some great times, auto-wise.

And I'm not just a domestic muscle car fan (in fact, my first love is little British sportscars)...the Preludes were good cars (I esp. liked the last gen. design). They just got too expensive and high-tech for the market.

snakerbill

I probably should not tell you this as it will probably give away my age, but my first performance car was, get this, a 1950 Olds 88 Club Coupe, the first olds with the Kettering engine. Hot stuff for its time. I really loved that car and I put around l35000 miles on it, and only sold it when the HP race started. The list goes on, but the fastest car I ever had was a 1972 Ford Pantera with a blueprinted 351 engine. I scared the devil out of myself with that car and got rid of it before it killed me. I actually sold it for more than I paid for it. More later if you are interested.

ballpark

I don't know guys. The "production" photos seem an awful lot like a current-gen Mustang with a "body kit" on it. Are we certain were not looking at some decoy "mule" Ford is trotting around? The roofline is different but easy enough for a company with Fords resources to do. The concept T-Bird was almost spot-on with the production version, and we've been told by everyone in and out of Ford that, at least on the exterior, there would be extremely little difference between the production model and the concept. Heck, last night on Hot Rod TV a Ford spokesmouth was talking about how the new stang would retain the hood scoops etc, all this while standing in front of and pointing at the concept.

Hold the phone.....

Well, now that I'm looking at a side view the difference is a little more pronounced. Interesting how Ford was able to lower the hood profile while keeping the 4.6.

On third thought....

I don't know....there's something a little too familiar about the car in these pics.....

3point1v6

thats the production model. look at the forums at brads mustang site and they have the concept and production versions side by side. they are almost identical.

akirby

All the Feburary rags have huge articles on it. They are supposed to be embargoed until after the Detroit Auto show unveiling but copies leaked out and have been scanned and posted. That IS the production car. The V6 will use the 4.0L explorer SOHC engine until the new 3.5L is available.

john_324

Keep in mind too that the autobuying public tends to be fairly conservative when it comes to styling.

Though people go ga-ga over radical concept cars, when it comes to actual purchasing, they like things that aren't so totally divorced from what they're used to (esp. when the current style is pretty pleasing by most accounts...)

So it fits that the production 2005 Mustang would look something like the current model.

akirby

I've seen the concept and production side by side and overlaid and they're VERY close. Remember the concept was actually built on a Lincoln LS/Tbird platform - not the actual production platform. A lot of other changes are necessary to allow it to be built on an assembly line. All things considered I think they came as close as possible and I think it turned out great.

Rumor also has it the Cobra IRS rear end would be an easy swapout on the GT. It may also show up on a model between the GT and Cobra.

babicka

Looks like based on the 2004 february issue of MotorTrend the 05 Mustang wheelbase is about 7 inches smaller and the overall car length is ~ 7 inches shorter when compared with the LS, however what is so great about the Mustang is the 300 hp V8 with 5-speed manual and the price tag! Can't wait to see the official Detroit auto show pictures!

newbuyer31

Just one more question, GT and V6. What type of auto insurance increase can you expect? If you know. Just want to know what I'm in for!!!
Thanks, again. Also, keeping in mind I am a bit older not a youngster, but I have made a mistake or two let's say.

Thanks again.

ballpark

Just not AS good. I'll reserve final judgement when I acualy get to see one in person. If I get one, which is probable, I would either get one in Black and just drop it a bit, or with any other color I'd start looking for a new hood ala the concept, amybe a new decklid with a molded in spoiler ala the California special circa 1968, and some Shelby style side scoops and some skunk stripes running the length of the car. For sure I'd take it the body shop to get those headlamp buckets color matched to the body. Looks too much like a raccoon with them black. (One reason black will probably be the desired color for this car. Hopefully Ford will not slap silver buckets on the black models.)

Actualy, with black racing stripes on a red car those black headlamp buckets would be a nice touch.

By the way, this car has it's own platform. That comes staight from the horses mouth so to speak. Some time back, about 2 or 3 months, we had one of the Ford guys on a conference call at one of our Mustang Club meetings (guest speaker). He said to forget about all that talk about a shared platform with the LS and the T-Bird. That was all a PR smokescreen. According to him the car rests on a Mustang specific platform with no interchangeable parts. (That's a first) We peppered him with a lot of questions he wouldn't answer, but when I asked him if there would be a Mach 1 version he said no. Boy was I dissapointed. He also quashed our hopes that a 5 liter modular would be available. And the horsepower range he "hinted at" was more in line with the current gen 4.6, and definately not close to the magical 300 HP level. I don't know the guys name ( I can get it) but he did have "hands on" in the design of the car.

akirby

There is very little of the dew98 platform left. Some of the floorpan and the fuel tank and a few other bits and pieces. Dew98 is a great platform but a) it's way too expensive and b) it's not rigid enough for a convertible with rear seats. Since the Tbird has no back seat they added bracing to compensate but you can't do that on the mustang.

I don't understand the comment about power being on par with current 4.6L mod motor. The base V8 will have 300 hp and 315 lb ft of torque on regular gas. That's more than the current base 4.6L engines. That's even more than the highly tuned, premium burning DOHC 4V 4.6L in my Aviator.

Don't believe everything you hear......

john_324

My thoughts:

- An "old school" insurance company (i.e. Allstate, State Farm) will probably give you better rates than a GEICO. That's what I surprisingly found when I bought my GT. Plus GEICO was quite pushy (even called back the next day to try to get me to insure with them), whereas the others were perfectly happy to let me get back to them at my leisure. One guess which I chose.

- The insurance differential between the V6 and the GT probably isn't as big as you might think. When I ran the numbers with my agent before buying the car, we found it was only slightly more to insure the GT. My agent theorized that it's because though the GT has more power, it also has more standard safety features (traction control and abs). He did however add "you're not thinking of getting a Cobra, are you?" ; )

In short, yeah with a Mustang you'll pay more than if you're driving a Camry (my insurance went up about $400 a year over my old Chevy Beretta), but it's not nearly as bad as popular perception would lead you to believe...

john_324

Interesting re the platform. If so, this will be the first time in Mustang history that the car rides on a platform of its own...

I guess I had always believed the platform would be "dew-lite", basically a modified dew-98 made of steel.

280-300 hp for the V8 is what I've always predicted. The fanboys sneered "no way...it'll have at least 400 hp!" Wishful thinking I suppose.

Still, things are still pretty sketchy right now. Perhaps I have a lack of faith, but I'm waiting until it's on the Ford website before I really believe anything...

akirby

No way the GT would get 400 hp. You need a logical progression from the V6 to the base V8 to the 'tweaked' V8 models (bullit, mach1, boss, etc.) to the Cobra (or Shelby?). 300 hp is perfect for an entry level V8 and there's plenty of headroom for higher performance models. Remember Ford has a naturally aspirated 5.0L Cammer based on the 4.6L block sitting on the shelf that makes 400 hp.

Also remember that Ford has been underrating their engines since the Cobra fiasco. So the GT may really be more like 320 anyway.

ballpark

I'll believe 300 HP on "regular" for the 4.6 when I see it. With "premium", maybe, but there isn't a car on the road today making 300 hp (or even 280) running "regular". I test drove the Z-28 in 99 before buying the 'Stang. No way my GT is making anywhere near the kind of power of that Chevy 350. (which uses "premium" by the way)

Nosirree Bob. Mark my words. The new GT will run on regular and have hp ratings only moderately higher than the current GT. The ability to run on "Regular" pump gas is paramount. The GT will need to appeal to the broadest possible customer base. I'm afraid "Premium" fuels would hamper it's appeal. Not to worry though. We all know there will always be a "Top End" variant for those who want big HP numbers.

One last thing. I notice that a few previous posters lamented the fact that the car still has a live rear axle Hey, that's a plus bro'. Thank God Ford still listens to the enthusiast. So what if it skips out from under you on rough paved curves. It kicks butt when merging and passing

akirby

4.6L SOHC 3V V8
9.8 compression ratio - regular fuel
Variable Cam Timing (VCT)
300 HP @ 6000 rpm
315 lb ft torque @ 4500 rpm
6250 rpm redline

It's already been published in Motor Trend and all the other rags. I just read the scanned images to get that data. They're embargoed until after the unveiling at the Detroit Auto Show but some copies leaked out.

This is a totally new engine. It shares 40 percent with the new 5.4L truck engine, 30 percent with the old 4.6L and 30 percent is specific to the mustang.

Read it and weep.

ballpark

Seems like a lot of compression for regular. Again, I'll believe it when I see it. Great if it's true.

qbrozen

I agree, 9.8:1 is too high for regular gas. Maybe my thinking is too conventional, though. We'll see what happens. Typically, though, anything over 8.5:1 requires higher than regular to get full power to the best of my knowledge.

john_324

What sort of gas did the classic high-performance Mustangs (Mach 1s, Boss 302s) require?

I'm assuming premium...wasn't the Boss' compression around 10:1?

akirby

The article clearly says 87 octane and 9.8:1 compression. Could be a misprint but I doubt it. They probably just retarded the timing to compensate. If so I bet using premium would allow the timing to be advanced automatically yielding more power.

My Lincoln LS 3.9L V8 has a 10.5:1 CR and you can use 87 without damaging it although performance and mileage will suffer.

andys120

Any of those classic HiPo Mustangs required premium fuel (@ about$.40/gal in 1968-69)

john_324

That's what I figured, but wasn't sure.

.40 (1969) works out to about $2.00 in today's dollars, so shouldn't be too much of an issue if the new GT requires premium.

Of course, the public gets all up in arms when the NOMINAL price of gas creeps toward $2.00, not realizing that they're paying more per gallon for the bottled water they drink...

But people who buy Mustangs probably have a higher willingness-to-pay than your average Taurus driver... : )

andys120

20 gallons of bottled water per week :^)

Your point is a valid one, tho.

ballpark

I had my compression set lower so that I could run on tap water

akirby

This looks like the official press release out a bit early. It talks about getting 300 hp with a higher than normal compression ratio with regular fuel.

http://www.car-data.com/xpage.preview/pre.template.asp?mfg=ford&a- mp;model=mustang

snakerbill

My agent, State Farm, said that it makes no difference how fast the car is, but such things as theft of vehicle, price, and safety equipment are usually the items that determine rates. When I traded my Mustang GT (01) for a Z28 (02) the premium only changed 30.00 per year. Of course your driving record and claim experience also make a difference. I think that the difference between the 6 and the V8 in the Mustang would not amount to enough to influence a decision. Get the V8, you will love it. Remember, you can always drive a big engine slow, but you cannot drive a little engine fast. (:

andys120

Far more so than any Fox-platform 'Stang.

ambull

I've read MotorTrend and skimmed the HotRod article at the library yesterday, and it's much improved all around. Looks to be the most bang for the buck out there. I'm impressed with 300 hp on regular gas, the exterior, interior, stiffness, the whole package! Much improved in all areas. It'll be a very popular car - nearly as popular as the original!

andys120

as much as I look forwqard to the '05 Mustang, that's highly doubtful in today's competitive world. It's like imagining another music act as popular as the Beatles.

ambull

Okay, I'll grant you that, considering the HUGE popularity of the original, and the number of competitive models, but it'll sell a lot more than the current model.

ambull

Ford says the current production is 140,000/yr and the 2005 will be 180,000. I say that will not be enough. I think there are a lot of people out there who would buy a decent modern GT car built in America.

akirby

just maybe they won't have to introduce a new vehicle with incentives. The closest competion is the new GTO and it's butt ugly compared to the new stang. I think Ford just hit a homerun.