Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see May lease deals!
Options
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
Heading home last night, spotted the first one from a ways back and passed it. Nice looking, although it had some strange proportions from one angle (passing lane, about 5-6 carlengths behind it). Both had manufacturer MI plates, I noticed a laptop open and running in the passenger seat of the V6.
I would assume they were doing some sort of high altitude testing, I saw them heading away from the mountains here in Colorado.
We also have a 66 red conv 6 cyl so they ought to look great side by side!
Now the new 911, on the other hand, is an example of a great interpretation of a classic look.
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Need help navigating? kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
Share your vehicle reviews
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '08 Charger R/T Daytona; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '08 Maser QP; '11 Mini Cooper S
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '08 Charger R/T Daytona; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '08 Maser QP; '11 Mini Cooper S
Bingo!! Responding in any way to comments you don't like can only lead to conversation degeneration.
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Need help navigating? kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
Share your vehicle reviews
The styling of both the new Mustang and 911 are based on an evolution of a classic look. The difference is one executed the evolution poorly (the Mustang), and another executed it brilliantly (the 911). The new Mustang looked watered down from the originals, so it's not a legitimate replacement for anyone who truly likes the orignals. You still need to go back to get the real thing. (Remember, I'm talking about styling.) The 911, on the other hand, improved on the originals, so it makes you not want to go back.
One might question if it's fair to compare a car designed for mass market against a semi-exotic, but I've always wondered why cheaper cars couldn't be wrapped in beautiful sheet metals to at least "look" expensive.
Given that some sort of 'freshening' of the styling is typically applied to most cars every couple of years, I am wondering just how Ford will "update" the Mustang's 'retro' styling.
- Ray
Updated Retro Styling = Oxymoron?
to each his own.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '08 Charger R/T Daytona; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '08 Maser QP; '11 Mini Cooper S
First, Ford could add a thousand pounds to the vehicle, introduce a really awkward rear roof line, drop its horsepower down to merely acceptable levels and paint it in drab earth tones. It would be just like a 1973 Mach 1.
Or, Ford could eliminate the V8 option, shrink the car down into a shadow of its former self and pay no attention to quality control. It would be just like a 1975 Mustang II.
:-)
To me, the 2005 Mustang looks quite good and should wear well for the next few years - which, by the way - is all the longer any body style should be around. So the lesson for Ford is: Don't let this platform/body style linger like the FOX did. Set a time line and replace the car in 5-6 years.
Every classic mustang fan that I've read about or heard thinks the styling is dead on and a home run. You're the only one I've heard who seems to think the styling is terrible. You're certainly entitled to your opinion but the vast majority of mustang fans disagree.
Like the 911, the classic mustang styling cues work just as well today as they did 40 years ago, only now they're on a modern chassis and drivetrain.
Apparently the ads will be digitized images pasted onto an actor dressed in "Bullitt"-style clothing.
This will be second time in recent years Ford has used McQueen in Mustang ads (the first was maybe a year or two ago with a short run of ads featuring Bullitt footage with Bill Ford doing a voice-over about how he loved that movie).
Should start to see them on tv this Sunday!
I'm new here.
Just test-drove 05 GT last Friday.
It was ugly dark green, so the outside did not impress me at all. However a silver, black or red will look awesome.
Here are my impressions:
1) The Ride is improved from previous models. However handling still feels too heavy, not a 350Z by any means. Will benefit from wider/lower tires for sure.
2) Performance: They only had the Auto model, so I can’t say much about the stick, but the auto is horrible!!! It is so sluggish when downshifting. It took almost several seconds (at least it felt like it) to downshift, when I floored it. Could not even break the rear tires into a spin (blame it on the traction control). I cannot believe that in 2005 a sports coupe does not have at least an auto-stick. Even my Maxima has one, and it is great. Ford is still behind everyone, technology wise.
3) Engine: More powerful that ever, and the good news is that there is a lot of room to work with, so if you want to put a supercharger or a cold air intake – there is plenty of room to do it.
4) Interior: The new instrument cluster is ok, retro is not my personal preference. The dash, and the controls look a lot better than before. Stereo system is very powerful. However, some genius stuck a 12V power outlet, right in the top middle part of the dash. What is it for: a radar detector maybe?? The power seat controls are taken straight from 1989 Ford Thunderbird. The back seat is TINY. If you are 5’11’’ or taller, forget about the back seat. I am pretty wide in shoulders, and the back seat was not comfortable at all. The front seat was awesome though.
5) Overall, not a bad start for Ford. But I have to question the fact that there are so many examples of what to do and not to do in the industry, and there are many great cars with great interiors and creature controls, why Ford did not look into those. Mazda 3 has better interior that 05 Mustang, what a shame. One more problem, where are the HIDs? 350Z, Mazda RX8, Honda S2000, Infinity G35 Coupe all have them, but 2005 Mustang doesn’t.
In 21st century Ford has finally build a good car for a 20th century. The rest of the industry is way ahead.
Legend lime is the only green offered on the '05 and it is a light green like the color of the inside of a lime.
The GT I drove was gray, the other one they had on the lot was light blue. I must have been blinded by the sun and the sparkling brand new 05 mustangs. And yes, it was the 05 Mustang GT,
Cheers
As for the auto-stick, Ford's been making one since 99 in the Lincoln LS and the Tbird and it's basically the same transmission as the Mustang. So you can't say they don't have the technology. They'll probably make it an option down the road, but I can tell you from experience it won't help with going fast in a straight line. It will help holding a certain gear for quicker acceleration but that's about it.
Given that most performance drivers want manuals and the majority of mustang buyers get the V6 auto models anyway they simply chose not to put resources into offering that feature now. They did the same thing when the Tbird debuted and they added autoshift a year or two later.
Overall it was nice, especially considering that one can do a lot of customizing. The body looks better in person than in pictures. I wish the back seat was bigger though.
In comparison, the 6-speed MTX 350Z gets to 60 in about 6 seconds. Mustang GT buyers aren't going to make the switch to a slower car just because of a difference in trannies.
Akirby is right, they'll buy the MTX if they want performance. In your case you'll just have to teach the wife how to drive a stick.
One of Mustang's core values is low cost of ownership, hence the engines that run on regular unleaded and NO HIDS that cost over $100.00 to replace the bulb.
Ford probably also saw this article.
http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/nissan_nj.html
What is the benefit of a HID again?
Mark
The seating position is definitely low. How ever, while I could never get comfortable in the 2004 because I would have to move the seat to close to the wheel before my feet the pedals, (I'm 5'8) I can get comfortable easily in the 05.
The rear seat may be bigger, but I wouldn't want to sit back there.
The truck is rather large about equal to a Taurus.
Someone said something about the speakers being in the wrong spot on the doors and it will get kicked alot, That person must drive a truck. you won't be able to open the door on this car with your foot, unless you are a gymnast.
Car is very tight on the road with none of the icky body shudder over bumps that you make recall from the 04.
Interestingly, the Battery is up against the firewall behind the front axle. I assume this contributes to the 52/48 weight distribution.
ANYWAY the first guy to test drive the car decided to hammer the throttle on a wet road and almost bought the car the hard way.
Whenever I read one of these nit picky posts by people who don't like this or that little detail about a car, I just chuckle. We have a saying in the car industry, "there is a butt for every seat." If you don't like this car. Don't be upset. We live in America and have lots of choices.
Cheers.
Mark
<<Whenever I read one of these nit picky posts by people who don't like this or that little detail about a car, I just chuckle. We have a saying in the car industry, "there is a butt for every seat." If you don't like this car. Don't be upset. We live in America and have lots of choices.>>
This is an old cliché, which does not make any sense. If you are willing to settle for a car that ALMOST keeps you happy, then go ahead. If I am spending this much money on a car, I’d like it to be everything that I want it to be. In this case, the Mustang has a lot of things that will become very annoying, once the novelty wears off.
I loved every new car, I’ve driven in the beginning, but some irritated the hell out of me, once I got used to them. The 05 has a lot of good stuff, don’t get me wrong, I’ll take it over the RX8 or the 350Z any day of the week, but still, I do have a full right to criticize it any way I see fit.
The reason why every domestic car magazine is giving it a great review, is because it is the only American car in that category that has survived. That’s why they are all excited. Think of this: this is a new generation car for a new generation people, with different demands and expectations.
If you expect it to be better than the 60’s or 70’s than surely it has surpassed your expectations. But for 2005, this is just another Ford.
HID’s are very expensive??? So were the first CD players and LCD or PLASMA screens. Everything is more expensive when it is a novelty, just like the new 300C, soon it will be selling under invoice like any other Chrysler, once the PDIDDYs and J-LO’s find themselves another toy to play with. Every gangsta wonnab has to have one right now!.
The only problem with HID’s is: when you don’t have them – you wish you did, every time you get blinded by those who have’em.
Take it easy, we are all entitled to our opinions.
We'll find out in the next 12 months.
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/LongTerm/articleId=10- 4507
As for the engines, modern V8s definitely aren't "quite what they were back then"...I'd say they're much better. The Ford modular V8s are high-tech wonders (the new ones even have, gasp, Variable Valve Timing), and there's no denying that the GM LS engines are absolute monsters. And though it usually isn't discussed among musclecar fans, these modern engines are able to deliver that power along with decent gas mileage and are a lot more emmissions-friendly than even economy engines were back in those days... That's a pretty good package in my mind.
Sure, they maybe aren't quite as, well, visceral, as a cabureted 351 Cleveland, but the performance is defintely there...
Hmmmm, I guess the first chassis change since the introduction of the Fox platform in 1979 is simply a "face lift". Geez, what would it take to qualify as a completely new car in your opinion?
Don't look for a new Camaro before, oh, 2007. No, make that 2008. Just IMHO.
That will take GM until the end of the decade to have one on the market....even if they started to design it this very instant.
Best to hope for would be a Camaro for the 2010 model year. But, GM has said time and time again, the Camaro/Firebird is dead and buried.
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
And I can't help but notice you did it on a holiday, probably counting on the fact that the hosts would not be around to quickly delete the message.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '08 Charger R/T Daytona; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '08 Maser QP; '11 Mini Cooper S
My sister is in the middle of buying one. She can buy a V6 or GT version for about $500 over invoice.
First of all, your pricing isn't going to sell many cars for you. Secondly, you are about to be "banned" for advertising here.
This may be a good time to consider a different career path, however....a carnival "barker" perhaps?
Shifty the Host
Shifty the Host
I think you and I have similar tastes in cars. Have you had any "seat time" in the Mustang? If so, your impressions?
Does the leather used in the Mustang crack?(easily?)
What do people think of the cloth?