Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Ford Mustang (2005 and Newer)

11718202223141

Comments

  • only if the bad guys were driving away in a black dodge shelby II :P
  • fdthirdfdthird Posts: 352
    I hear what a lot of you are saying about the "retro" look of the 2005 but I think that what Ford is doing is just what's happened a lot during the Mustang's life. The 67-68 was radically different from the 65-66 but there were the Mustang styling cues and I don't think a 67 Mustang could ever be thought to be anything but a Mustang. Same for the 69 thru 73...each was different but still obviously a Mustang. Even the Mustang II from 74-78...a very different car but still obviously a Mustang. The same could be said for the Mustang's cousin from 67-73 the Cougar.

    Now, if you remember where we were in 1979 it was the age of the "European" style. The Granada was a Ford "Mercedes". The sports type cars were also Euro based. I had a Capri in 1979 (Merc version of the Mustang) and that was obviously the styling direction. Now, the '88 Mustang convert that I had was an extension of that '79 and through the end of the Fox bodied cars we were working with that basic '79 Euro design idea.

    When the SN95 models came out, I think rather than retro Ford was just getting back to what had been the Mustang's heritage...variations of some very basic original themes (Do you remember the TV ads that morphed back and forth between a classic Mustang and a new one to show the heritage looks?).

    My 2000 Mustang convert is not really a retro look, but rather just a Mustang that contains many of those heritage touches. The running house in the coral (finally the horse was back to the Mustang after years of being put out to pasture), the triple segment tail lights, the double cove dash treatment, the side "C" look, and the simulated vents in the rear quarters - these are all classic Mustang elements and true to its original heritage they were re-incorporated in the design.

    I think the 2005 carries that even further but honestly I really don't think this is new ground for Ford. As someone who has loved the Mustang since it first debuted on TV the night before the March, 1964 intro date I like what I've seen of the 2005. I can't wait to (1) see one in the flesh and (2) see what the convertible looks like when they roll it out.

    Put aside a red 2007 or 2008 when its time to replace my 2000!
  • The Mustang is one of a very short list of American vehicles I would consider, and the only one that might sticker south of $30k.

    I may not be a true car nut, as I would never actually want to own any pre-90's car, since the maintainance and lack of safety engineering would scare me a bit too much. I like "retro meets modern" as a concept...bring back to life the best of yesteryear and infuse it with the best of now.

    I think current design trends are just ugly derivative styling attempts anyways. The BMWs are slipping. GM hasn't built a good looking car in 40 years (Cadillac's new stylings are not grabbing me.) Chrysler's best looking cars are just a little too kitsche for me. The PT Cruiser? The Prowler? The Crossfire? At least most Chryslers have a look...not just rounded corners on a dull 3-box chassis.

    The new Mustang looks great, so far. I think Mustang will benefit greatly from this redesign, as will Ford. Ford is doing what Mazda has already started - redesigning their entire lineup into a cohesive theme.

    I think the redesign is both classic and contemporary. Only the Mustang could pull off that look without everyone screaming foul, and it is a clearly great looking car.
  • Scarlettstang, I've moderated my position on jingoism, since I recently found myself complaining about the Germans requiring Chrysler to redesign their upcoming (now current) LX cars to accommodate Mercedes suspension parts. I fear the Germans' dictatorial rule of their American subsidiary will wreck Chrysler.

    Anyway, the point being, I am slightly more understanding of your sentiment regarding the GTO, although I still think it's a great car. I prefer the name Monaro (and it looks way better without the wing).

    You did mention that I was a bit off on Ford history: I'm usually pretty encyclopedic about car stuff, so I'd be interested to know what I was misguided about. (I can't even remember my post anymore. :)

    6thBeatle:

    I know what you mean about your keyboard and amp. Whether I get the GTO or Mustang, I'm going to have to re-learn how to cram a drum kit in a sporty two-door. (Current car is a '97 Avenger ES, which can actually fit my rather large kit [Bass drum, two snares, five toms and a half dozen or more cymbals].)
  • i hear ya. if i go for the mustang, i'll probably have to trade my 65 watt fender deville amp for a little 15 watt blues junior just so i can get all my other gear inside. and here i was thinking about getting a dog...

    then again, there's always the hemi magnum, but i'm not too impressed by the interior, kinda cheap lookin. the GTO and mustang kick some serious as far as cool interiors go.
  • I hate to say it, but I'm not much on the Magnum myself. I love the Hemi engine, which is an amazing engine (check out Popular Hotrodding for an article on just HOW GOOD the Hemi is (I'd put the link in, but they have a message forum).

    The interior is nice, but the plastic seems a bit lower grade. The exterior just doesn't do much, and you can't see out the bloody windows! Maybe you can find an 80's vintage Ford Country Squire -- I've had two of them, and they were great, other than the stupid 302 engine, with it's notorious oil pump problems.

    But if you get an old wagon, you don't have to worry about gouging up the interior of your Mustang (or GTO). Secondly, you can drive it during the winter too. Where in Canada are you from? I'm in Buffalo, NY... two hours from Toronto. It's a nice idea to have a winter car.
  • vancouver, three hours north of seattle. it rains a lot here (oct-april), so a RWD car like the mustang or GTO is actually not the best choice for a year round car, being pretty hairy to drive in the wet. also, i snowboard, so traction is an issue going up the mountains.

    least i don't have to worry about snow in the city much during the winter. this year was pretty unusual--we had two weeks of snow on the ground before it all got washed away by the rain. had to go buy a snow shovel, but everyone was sold out!

    lately i've been thinking of just getting something like a mazda 6 wagon as an everyday driver, because i've already got a '65 dodge for the summer. still, i know if i get a 6, i'll get that empty feeling inside everytime a new mustang GT goes by.
  • bxd20bxd20 Posts: 68
    Saw the 05 Mustang at the Cleveland Auto Show. Looked great, people were crowding around the turntable.

    Things I learned:
    0 to 60 in 5.2
    1/4 mile in 13.9.
    Trunk: 12.5 cu ft.
    52/48 weight distribution.
    From what I could tell the wheels were 17". C&D mentioned 18" option but maybe that idea got canned because I asked the guy about the options list and he didn't seem to think so. Doesn't matter too much, they fill in the wheel wells nicely the size they are.
    300 hp, 315 lb ft torque. 80% of torque available at 1,000 rpms. The guy said you'll peel into 1st and 2nd and then chirp into 3rd.
    Extra 150 pounds added to rear end to strengthen it.
    Absolutely loaded, $29,999 as a coupe. That has two tone leather, automatic, and the latest Mach (1200? I forget) stereo. As shown, it was a fairly basic GT, with leather, around $26,xxx.

    I'm excited. Keep the price down and no embarassing recalls Ford and you'll have a winner.

    Brian
  • I've seen where the 18" wheels are delayed for 6 months from the options list.
  • lt19c1lt19c1 Posts: 2
    Any word from Ford if they will again offer a Special Service Mustang?

    Thanks.

    Lloyd
  • john_324john_324 Posts: 974
    You mean a police interceptor model?
  • cankercanker Posts: 10
    80% of torque available at 1000rpms sounds really nice. Thats always been one of the problems with the 4.6l cars. They just don't have the torquey feel like the old 5.0s.
  • john_324john_324 Posts: 974
    Yeah, that is true. But I'm still undecided re which I like better. The 5.0s did get pretty weezy at high rpms, whereas you can really wind out a 4.6...
  • fdthirdfdthird Posts: 352
    Its been awhile since they offered one...wnyone know??
  • john_324john_324 Posts: 974
    Might be a smart idea for Ford. Camaros were the pursuit vehicle of choice in the 1990s/early 2000s, but with their demise, Ford should step into the breach...
  • fdthirdfdthird Posts: 352
    As I remember, I think Ford put the Mustang forward as a Police vehicle because the Crown Vic wasn't up to the task and business was going elsewhere (GM).

    Seems that with the problems you hear about the Crown Vic's gas tank, this might be a good time to re-introduce the Mustang to public service. Might also be a way to get a car back in the line like the 5.0 LXs from the last generation.

    A lot of folks talk about wanting a car like that again and I'm sure Police Departments would rather not be seen driving around in Mustang GTs!
  • andys120andys120 Loudon NHPosts: 16,388
    the low fastback roofline macks the new 'Stang impractical for police work. They need a notchback or hatchback to really make it work for the cops.
  • john_324john_324 Posts: 974
    Agreed re a de facto return of the hi-po LXs.

    But I dunno re the hatchback requirement; pursuit cars don't really need to carry much other than lots of tickets. You've got the regular patrol cars to carry all the equipment.
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,622
    The only thing you need for a pursuit car is speed and some electronics. This would be for state highway patrol mainly, not for regular beat patrols. But with the public frowning on high speed pursuits lately they may not go that way.
  • kratas101kratas101 Posts: 33
    Dunno if it's just me and my friends but when I saw the 05 Mustang at the Dallas Auto Show.....it looked pretty bad. Before I saw it in the flesh, I thought it looked cool and really retro but in real life, the proportions seems out of place and the front end design seemed weird for some reason. At least, it didn't look as good as it did in the pics. Not really sure if I would like to have an 05 now or not but im sure there will be plenty on the road when it comes out.
Sign In or Register to comment.