Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Ford Mustang (2004 and earlier)

191012141542

Comments

  • argentargent Member Posts: 176
    Well, there's an easy answer to why the Mitsubishi 3000GT/GTO, Toyota Supra, Mazda RX-7, and Nissan 300ZX all died -- they weren't selling anymore. The makers had gotten into a technology battle that pushed the prices beyond the reach of a lot of their previous customers, into the territory where buyers are more interested in snobbery than necessarily performance or value. (Which is why BMW's Z3, Mercedes' SLK, and the Porsche Boxster are doing just fine even though they're just as pricey.)
  • andys120andys120 Member Posts: 23,370
    I love arguing with kids who have no idea what the heritage of a car is and care even less. Apparently you have no idea that the first gen Mustangs (64-1/2-66) did not have even a slighty "Bad-[non-permissible content removed]" look. Most people then and now would consider them "pretty". They didn't have a performance look until the GT-350s came out and they were only a handful of early Mustangs.

    I don't get why a generation that thinks a Tiburon looks hot doesn't think the new 'Stang rocks.

    Everybody's entitled to their opinion.

    2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93

  • argentargent Member Posts: 176
    The ironic thing to me about the Mustang's original styling is that the first-gen Mustangs were, at the time, considered somewhat 'retro' (although that word wasn't used) in style. The long-hood/short-deck proportions were deliberately evocative of the big sports roadsters of the 30s. The Mustang's shape was heavily inspired by the respected but commercially unsuccessful 1955-57 Continental Mark II (although the Mark II was a much bigger car), while its detailing was reminiscent of the two-seater '55-'57 Thunderbirds. Although it was obviously popular, it was not considered especially modern-looking in its day. In the mid-60s, Pontiacs were generally the style leader of the American industry, and the original Camaro/Firebird were more 'contemporary' in style than the Mustang. It's interesting that while there were many 'pony car' competitors to the Mustang, and they generally had the long-hood/short-deck motif, very few of them really copied the Mustang's appearance. The only ones that really looked LIKE the Mustang were the original Mercury Cougar -- which of course shared much of the same body and chassis -- and the second-generation AMC Javelin, which did look quite a bit like the rather bloated '71-'73 Mustang hardtop from some angles.
  • gotenks243gotenks243 Member Posts: 116
    "I don't get why a generation that thinks a Tiburon looks hot doesn't think the new 'Stang rocks. "

    It may be just a vocal minority of my generation that doesn't think that it rocks. I drooled over the coupe enough in pictures, but once I saw it in person, I fell in love. The front end that looked questionable in pictures turned out to be aggressive, powerful, well sculpted, and overall "badass" in person. People I overheard who were not too many years older than myself seemed to agree.

    In my observation, more people in my age group are infatuated with sleek, performance-oriented 2-doors than with the Scions and Elements that are being marketed right at us. The car Ford should expect to be more popular with us, then, is not the practical, Element-ish stuff like the Freestyle, but the new Mustang. If the price is right, it could very well be the car that my generation goes for as soon as they get a decent paying job right after college. Just as my father bought a '65 Mustang new about a year after college, I plan on seriously looking into an '05 once they're out, a year or so after my graduation.

    Ford just might have a winner on their hands, assuming pricing is similar to the current model and the rest of my generation loves it as much as I do.

    Mike
  • daman82daman82 Member Posts: 7
    "the 04 stang does turn off younger buyers"

    I'm also 20 years old, but I love the way the way the coupe looks. I'm happy their going with a more sleeker look - the '03 mustang GT looks stupid and cheap with all those goofy curves and angles.

    Now the interior of the '04 fails in just about every aspect. I know the production model won't look anything like it, but why would you even show something that looks so dated and useless. My guess is because Ford is still unsure whether to put in a well-finished, well-built interior or the same cheap plastic crap that's inside right now. I hope they go with the former.
  • stangprincessstangprincess Member Posts: 1
    Oh my god! When I seen this car I about passed out! Ford how could you do this to all us loyal mustang fans out here! You totally ruined the car! What was a great car is now gonna be totally ugly! I just hope when sales don't go well with this you will realize you should go back to the normal stangs we all know and LOVE!
  • riggarigga Member Posts: 1
    Take a look a the 2004 car not concept pictures. Its modeled after the 1968 Shelby GT 500.look at the lights front and back . The grill and marker light set up,And the hood induction and side scoops behind door. Tell me what anyone thinks after looking at the two in comparison. don't think they ruined this car they just made it updated and they needed to get rid of the fox body.
  • hwyhobohwyhobo Member Posts: 265
    Now I am going to tick off a few people, but you can't possibly ruin the current Mustang. Whatever you do to it will be an improvement. The current version is misshaped, has big butt, stands too high, has idiotic decorations that belong in a trailer park, has pretentious rear lights, has front fender extensions that *always* look misaligned right from the factory... have I missed anything? Puhlease. Whatever Ford has done this time, it might help shed the "camaro image".
  • john_324john_324 Member Posts: 974
    All of this discussion about the new Mustang, both among enthusiasts (people here), and the general public makes me wonder if there's *ever* been this much controversy over a Mustang design change.

    The original was very well-received, the 1974 was well-received by the public (and roundly hated by fans), the 1979 marked a welcome goodbye to the unloved II and the retro 1994 was a hit.

    But the upcoming version really seems to have split BOTH the enthusiasts AND the general public. Interesting. Of course, we've never had such mass-communication ability before, so that might have something to do with it, but nonetheless...

    As for the Mustang's taillights, "pretentious" seems an odd choice of word...they evoke the tailight style used on the 1960s models, which I wouldn't think were thought pretentious.
  • andys120andys120 Member Posts: 23,370
    some see these tailights as very large and ornate
    compared to the small plain tailights that graced most Mustangs. Many(not all) of these people are unaware of certain aspects of the Mustang heritage. The GT concept cars are patterned after the '67-'68 Shelby Mustangs, not the standard Ford Mustangs. Hence they have the full width tailights, roll hoop and racing seats as well as no back seat.

    I'd be surprised if any of those features show up on the base or GT production models. We might see some, or all, on Cobra or Cobra
    R models (not til '06).

    I'm surprised that so many who call themselves Mustang fans dislike the new shape but I'll bet they are practically all under 25 and for some reason partisans of the current (ugh!) design.

    2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93

  • john_324john_324 Member Posts: 974
    It has been said somewhere that those under 25 really only know Mustangs as the Foxes they grew up with, so for them, that's "classic Mustang"...given that frame of reference I can understand their aversion to the current and new style.

    I like the taillights on my '02, and I suppose I thought the size increase was mostly due to evolving safety considerations over the years. But I can see the point raised. Still, I'd say they're better looking than say the slit-ed taillights on the early 1990s Fox GTs.
  • checkmecheckme Member Posts: 73
    I don't care for the taillights either, but so what? They're a minor detail. We'll all forget about them in about a week. The rest of the car is fantastic!
  • john_324john_324 Member Posts: 974
    A very good point. I've always been of the mind the true Mustang ethos is conceptual. Styling details are just that...details.

    As long as a Mustang has:
    -long hood/short deck 2+2 body style
    -rwd
    -more performance relative to most cars out there
    -an affordable price point

    it will do well regardless of other issues like the styling cues, colors offered, etc. And all of us will (more or less) in time come to accept it as a proper Mustang.

    But then again, these debates are part of the fun of having an iconic car with a continuous production and storied heritage. I doubt anyone gets that worked up over Taurus redesigns... : )
  • andys120andys120 Member Posts: 23,370

    2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93

  • sphinx99sphinx99 Member Posts: 776
    "I doubt anyone gets that worked up over Taurus redesigns... : )"

    You'd be surprised. The '96 Taurus is what kicked off the string of ineptitude that's characterized Ford decision-making for the last five years. No company on the planet understands better than Ford the importance of styling a mainstream vehicle correctly.

    Earlier I said that I didn't like the concept. I'm less sure now. Take a look at some of the new cars coming out. Mercedes has adopted some interesting angular styling cues on the CLK, ditto BMW on the 7-series, and Honda's been pushing this envelope for a few years now. Scoops and sculpting have disappeared from stalwarts (even the WRX is looking more polished) while aerodynamic considerations have led to refined and gentle front cowls. Wheels are being pushed out to the corners, and cars are taking on a heightened substantialness, almost like a slight puffing out of the sheetmetal. Quirky headlamps are now vogue. The hatchback style is now a premium look. These trends are real, I think, and they paint a picture of what futuristic vehicles will look like.

    The Mustang concept IMO actually does a servicable job of keeping some of the nuances of the Mustang while offering a very modern interpretation. The current Mustang's styling is nice, but I think it's threatened to start looking VERY archaic over the next few years, given what everything from Tiburons to Accords to Stratuses to CLKs to 350Zs are starting to look like. The concept suggests a car that will age much more gracefully when surrounded by a field of cars like the ones I just mentioned.

    So maybe Ford has something going here... just my opinion.
  • john_324john_324 Member Posts: 974
    "The Mustang concept IMO actually does a servicable job of keeping some of the nuances of the Mustang while offering a very modern interpretation."

    I couldn't agree more...that's what I've always thought should be the goal of redesigns for cars with significant heritage. Retro is useful to bring a straying concept back to its roots (the T-bird), but a Mustang just doesn't need that.

    But for godsake Ford, bring back the fastback style!

    As for the Taurus, you're right...I HATED the look of the '96 version. I esp. disliked the way Ford dealt with the SHO version, leading to the ignominious demise of a (once) really cool car.
  • americanflagamericanflag Member Posts: 400
    Right on!
  • americanflagamericanflag Member Posts: 400
    And the hockey stick on the side door, B Mayes says all the Mustangs have had the hockey stick pattern! It is a Mustang signature.
  • jmarinojmarino Member Posts: 19
    Hello guys thought Id chime in here for the first time. Ive been reading the other posts and have picked up some valuable information off here. Well I just bought a 2001 GT Premium (Red),all leather, Mach sound system, all highway miles, owned by and older dude, it has the Bullitt wheels also, used with 40,000 miles for $13,999 I couldnt believe the price I had to have it. I have owned 3 GT's over the past 15 years. Also owned 2 Monte SS's and just traded a Camaro in on this GT . I had to buy a automatic though so the wife can have an occasional drive, (The only way she'd let me borrow the $$ to but it )I have never really had any of my cars modified though so Im not real good at this. I would like to get the K@N filter and also a superchip for the car. My question is where is the best place to buy these items and can any autoshop install these or do I need a specialist ? Thanks for the help and enjoy those ponies !
  • demonspeeddemonspeed Member Posts: 75
    My advise... 'skip the chip' You can get a K&N from any auto store like Pep Boys or Advanced. Look to pay around $40 for it.
  • andys120andys120 Member Posts: 23,370
    Fox Mustang with the squared off styling '79-'93(?) lacked any side sculpting, that and the lack of any galloping pony insignia is why I say they did not look like real Mustangs.

    I owned an '86 for 12 years and got so frustrated by the lack of Mustang styling cues that I got a 25th anniversary badge (w running horse) and attached it to the dash. My '86 'vert went and sounded like a real 'Stang but it didn't look like one.

    2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93

  • hwyhobohwyhobo Member Posts: 265
    john_324, I don't mind slit lights, it's the angle of the lights that I find cheapening the whole image (combined with the big butt). I think a return to a simpler image with this latest redesign will help reinvigorate the fans.
  • john_324john_324 Member Posts: 974
    The "hockey stick" pattern?! I always thought that referred to the side decals on the old BOSS mustangs (which I hope are offered on the rumored BOSS for next year, along with that classic orange paint)

    But that kind of thing is what I mean by styling cues not being what makes a true Mustang. As pointed out, the Foxes lacked this feature but were still quite successful and well-liked. I like that cue (along with the pony motiff and badging), but that's just personal preference, and certainly wouldn't be a deal-breaker. But a fwd mustang (nee Probe) for instance would be.

    I like the taillights on the concept...remind me of the Fox LX lights. Clean is good.
  • john_324john_324 Member Posts: 974
    I concur. Also, when you're dropping in the K&N, yank the air filter silencer if it hasn't already been...the two "mods" together will give you a throatier sound and improve your throttle response a little.

    Sounds like a cool car, made even better by the deal you got on it.
  • checkmecheckme Member Posts: 73
    We shouldn't be too hard on the Fox bodies. It was the 80's, and terrible sacrifices had to be made in the name of performance. Fortunatley, Ford made exactly the right sacrifices.
  • jmarinojmarino Member Posts: 19
    Thanks for the info guys. Im curious though how easy is the K@N to put on, I am probably the worst mechanic in the Northeast.
  • john_324john_324 Member Posts: 974
    I grew up with the Foxes, so they've always had a special place in my heart. I still like the almost bauhaus "functional" look that they have. And "5.0" still sounds cooler to my ears than "4.6"

    I even like the Mustang II, if only for it keeping the Mustang flame burning (albeit very weakly) in some *really* tough times.

    But were it not for the Fox, we might not be in the Mustang golden age we're having now.
  • dbarsanteedbarsantee Member Posts: 1
    Guys and Gals:

    I just came back from the Detroit Autoshow and wanted to report back to you all. The 2005 Mustang is awesome to say the least. The are plenty of new cars at the show (GTO, GTP, New Audi, Subaru's, etc) but nothing caught my eye as much as the 2005 mustang. I must be be thinking right as it was named most significant design for this year's show.

    I have pictures if I could find a way to post...

    Also, I was standing the and one of the product managers was talking to another VP and he mentioned two items worth noting:

    1. It is a 2005 but will be pulled up top lauch early summer 2004

    2. Here is the good news... 400 hp in the GT...No not a typo 400

    Clearly Ford is pissed off about the GTO getting attention. The GTO design is clearly going after mustang owners.

    THIS CAR IS AWESOME!
  • john_324john_324 Member Posts: 974
    Nah...it's as easy as opening the hood, unscrewing the bolt (8mm socket I think) that holds the air filter housing onto the side of the engine bay, undoing the bezel clamp thing around the housing, swaping the filters, and then reverse to re-install. Piece o cake.

    But don't take my word for it...check this link out for detailed instructions and pics:
    http://www.mustangworld.com/ourpics/fcar/knln1.htm

    -John
  • ambullambull Member Posts: 255
    That would mean the supercharged engine will be standard on the GT.. I just can't believe that will happen. Maybe as an option though.
    Also, I am disappointed that they have to use an iron block and a supercharger to do what the engine in the Z06 does with aluminum normally aspirated. Anybody else feel the same way?
  • ambullambull Member Posts: 255
    www.carconnection.com reports that, at the Detroit Auto show:
    "According to the judges, this is the vehicle that must be built. It is the best in the show. The Mustang exemplifies innovation, emotion, refinement, and the ability to transcend the common. “The first time I saw the new Mustang, I wanted to buy it right on the spot – and I still do,” said Molinari. “It’s a real challenge to redesign such an icon, but its heritage has been successfully captured.”

    To me, it shows how great the design of the 1967-68 Mustang really was.
  • john_324john_324 Member Posts: 974
    Thanks for the field report! No doubt about it...it's a fine-looking machine.

    But I still doubt the 400 hp for the standard GT. It seems to me that would push the price tag pretty high (not to mention that the insurance on a car with that kind of power would be nothing short of usurious).
  • jmarinojmarino Member Posts: 19
    Thanks this site is great. Im picking her up tonight we'll see how it goes.
  • blacktalonblacktalon Member Posts: 203
    If Ford really wants to compete with the GTO, the Mustang needs to have IRS. If the Mustang GT has both IRS and a 350+ HP engine -- well, that's going to be an interesting shootout.
  • andys120andys120 Member Posts: 23,370
    It may not have the power of a GTO (340+) in stock form but it will be lighter and less expensive. It's 1964 all over again.

    See my post #154 (p8) for the dope on likely engine lineups. You'll need a Cobra (390-400hp) to stay with the Goat in stock form.

    See the Feb '03 MUSTANG MONTHLY for an amusing miscue on what the new 'Stang should look like. Their sketches show a conservatively styled car with heavy '65-'66 influence.... Doh! Maybe all the other mags and websites are wrong and J Mays is lying. Yeah right! What poor timing on the part of Mustang Monthly.

    2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93

  • demonspeeddemonspeed Member Posts: 75
    Yeah, very easy. To remove the silencer, just pull it out, it'll just slide out. If you want more info, check out http://www.stangnet.com and sign up there and check out the 4.6 forums. Good luck and have fun!
  • americanflagamericanflag Member Posts: 400
    shop put in my K&N and take off the air filter silencer. Great mods, though, and affordable. Thanks, John!
  • americanflagamericanflag Member Posts: 400
    is okay. One of the keys to the muscle car formula was always affordability. And isn't the GTO really a replacement for the Camaro/Firebird, although it's not being called that. At any rate, I think competition is good for the Mustang.
  • andys120andys120 Member Posts: 23,370
    than the Firebird or Camaro (or 'Stang). Educated guesses put the base price in the low 30s with optioned cars hitting over 35.

    The Buzz is that Ford will try to keep Mustang prices in the neighborhood they are now. That means that GT convertibles may come in just under $30k.

    2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93

  • john_324john_324 Member Posts: 974
    Seems to me like the GTO at that price will target mainly 1) "Next Big Thing" types who are intrigued by a new rwd large American car, and 2) GTO diehards, who have been waiting anxiously for this for years. They'll be the ones willing to pay that kind of price.

    I can't imagine F-body enthusiasts considering it a proper "replacement" for the Camaro/Firebird. As it is to, the proposed GTO design still looks to me like a more muscular Oldsmobile Alero...a far cry from the shark-like lines of the Camaro or the batmobile/hellspawn look of the Firebird.

    The Mustang will probably continue to target a much broader audience, and so will be more reasonably priced.
  • blacktalonblacktalon Member Posts: 203
    The GTO will probably come in about halfway between a Camaro and a Corvette -- which would put it up directly against the Cobra...
  • andys120andys120 Member Posts: 23,370
    and for sheer performance the Cobra (400hp) should be the winner.

    2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93

  • midlifermidlifer Member Posts: 21
    Anyone can do these mods. I used the directions on the link shown above,no problem. But i would recommend not to completely removing the silencer. You will see ,if you do, it looks as though a lot of the air will escape the intake, and just go into engine bay and heat up and be sucked in eventually all heated up,that is counter productive ,hot air is not your friend. Trim it back with a utility knife,its just soft rubber. Take enough off so its about flush with fender wall aprox 6-8 inches. You will grab Maximum air this way. Great sound improvement under full throttle conditions, which is everyday!! Enjoy.

    And by the way AmericanFlag, shame on you for not working on your beloved Stang yourself!!
  • demonspeeddemonspeed Member Posts: 75
    The amount of hot air entering the intake tract isn't much worse the the warming of the plastic intake itself... I would't ruin the silencer, but that's just me.
  • daman82daman82 Member Posts: 7
    The selling point for the Camaro & Firebird was that you could get a great engine for a decent price - while at the sacrifice of build quality. From what I've seen in the pictures, the GTO looks like it's put together pretty tight and the interior looks almost top grade. If that holds true, the price will definitely affect it. Not to mention the fact that supplies will be limited to 18,000 a year - also increasing price.
  • americanflagamericanflag Member Posts: 400
    was always an exclusive car I think we are sacrificing the muscle car formula for a good review from the Liberals at Motor Trend who hate American cars anyway.

    BTW, I don't think I have seen this mentioned yet, but one thing I like about the new Mustang rear end is that, while perhaps not as shaply as that of Jennifer Lopez, it does forgo the embossed Mustang name on the rear bumper. I am glad to have that left out, people should know it is a Mustang by it's hockey stick and it's taillights and looks in general and not by a gaudy embossed name in the bumper.
  • andys120andys120 Member Posts: 23,370
    "Hate American cars?" I guess that rag has changed a bunch but don't let DED Jr, catch you calling his magazine "liberal". He's to the right of Attila the Hun.

    2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93

  • andys120andys120 Member Posts: 23,370
    That won't be likely to carry over from the show cars to production cars:

    The flush mounted exhaust pipes look very cool but would quickly discolor the panel under the taillights and perhaps even melt it!

    The cool spare tire mounted under the backglass of the coupe is meant to recall the Shelby Mustangs and like most of the Shelby features (tailights, roll hoop)will likely be dropped.

    2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93

  • matrixxmatrixx Member Posts: 1
    Hello all,

        I have a 1999 mustang GT 4.6, and right on the dash and in the owners manual it "CLEARLY" states "regular fuel only". Heck, I put premium in my lawnmower for pete's sake. Why would you not want it in a performance car?? Can somebody please clear-up the mystery? Thanks
  • fdthirdfdthird Member Posts: 352
    Have seen the discussion several times on this site about not using a higher grade fuel then the engine was designed for. Premium burns hotter than regular and can actually produce less horsepower due to the fact that the computer controlled engine is designed to work with regular. Its all about how the engine is tuned to work.
Sign In or Register to comment.