Howdy, Stranger!

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

Ford Mustang (2004 and earlier)



  • gt4megt4me Posts: 58
    Dealer oil changes are very affordable nowadays. That's where I've always taken mine.
  • Interestingly, looks like we are all of one mind on this issue. I too love the front and hate the rear. I understand that the new Mustang probably shouldn't be totally retro- the car does have to appeal to future generations, after all- but this is too much.

    Overall, the car is too bland (the sides are somewhat dull, nothing catches the eye) but acceptable (it does look clean; it might even be the best choice, though dull). The rear is atrocious, though. It does look just the old Mercury Capri! The front end is perfect with a capital "P".
  • john_324john_324 Posts: 974
    Given everything we've seen (the motortrend drawings, the autoweek pictures) it looks like Ford is going for a modern interpretation of the late 60s-early 70s Mustangs. This makes sense to me:

    - the 1994 redesign seemed a modern version of the original 1965 Mustang in terms of proportions and styling cues.
    - the 1999+ version gave that design a more muscular look as did the 1967 styling "tweak".

    So seems reasonable the new one will progress and incorporate updated '68-'70 cues (like that cool front end)

    However, this trajectory makes me wonder, esp. given the geopolitical situation in the Middle East and volatility of the energy markets, if the next redesign will be a modern Mustang II.... : (
  • john_324john_324 Posts: 974 you're sure of getting a good (Motorcraft) oil filter...I've heard that some of the other brands (Fram specifically) aren't the best in quality.
  • also, while at the dealership I can walk around and look at the Thunderbirds, Cobras, and (if they ever come out) Mach 1's.
  • 2004's. What's wrong with the current 4.6L? It's a fabulous engine. A bigger V-8 will tend to get worse gas mileage.
  • about the Mustang II, I am nervous enough about the change as it is :)
  • on getting a convertible or a coupe. i'm really not a big fan of coupes but i'll be making massive mods to the car when i get it and i think they will look weird w/ the conver. also someone said that the convertibles have more problems. can i get some feed back on which one to get. also yellow or silver?
  • Making it look stupid or performance mods? If your planning to put some big spoiler and tacky body kit on it then it will look weird with either body style. If your planning mostly performance stuff then the vert will look fine.

    The only problem with the vert is it will weigh more and the chassis will be less stiff since it missing its top. Sub frame connectors and a strut tower brace can probably take care of most of the body flex but if your planning to make crazy power then the coupe with the same setup will still be stronger and lighter.
  • john_324john_324 Posts: 974
    I bet they do go with a standard 5.0 V8 in the new GT. Ford recently unveiled its new 5.0 SOHC "Cammer" engine. My prediction is that we see it first in the final "heritage" car for the current design - the Boss 302 remake; it then appears in the '05 GT.

    After all, the "5.0" designation carries with it some pretty strong feelings and connotations (even if it really is only "4.9"). And "5.0" is cooler sounding than "4.6" unfortunately... : (
  • I absolutely HATE convertibles unless they're convertible hardtops. To each his own I guess.
  • by making it look stupid? body kits yes ... oversized spoiler no(they look funny). if you get the right body kit and you know what your doing ... trust me it doesn't look stupid. but not everyone likes that stuff. i dont think i'll be making performance mods cause i'll be trading this one in in about 5 years for the mustang i really want. but i guess 5 years is along time so maybe a few performance changes.
  • doesn't love a big block? But I have always had a place in my heart for Ford's small blocks, starting with the famous 289. As long as gas mileage doesn't suffer, a 5.0 would be great. But I will miss the 4.6L. Someone mentioned how the 4.6 loves to be driven hard, truer words have never been spoken.

    On the topic of rear views (I am talking about cars), I followed a 350Z today. I don't want to hear anything about the 2004 Mustang's back, it has to be better than that thing's rear, with it's nondescript slope and its two tiny dots for taillights.

    The Mustang has for the most part had a great rear in the past, with it's signature three vertical tail lights, it's right up with J LO's. Well almost.
  • the same basic engine as the 4.6l just stroked or bored?
  • ricing the mustang out step away and buy an import. Mustangs are made for performance. If you install mods that make the car look fast then most people wont show respect towards you. I can understang a few tastefull mods but I prefer if someone can back them up. Good luck on whatever you choose.
  • I agree with "the" gasguzzler, Mustangs weren't made for those "look fast" mods. The GT and Cobra comes to mind.
  • That's like putting ketchup on a fine steak. If you want to do that get a rice buggy and have fun. Better yet, don't do it all and just drive an ordinary car straight from the factory. The rest of us will appreciate it.

    Remember how long hair use to bother adults back in the sixties? Now the kids are doing the same thing with cars. If I see one more lowered Honda Civic...
  • New owners, as you know the new models call for the 5W-20 grade oil. But I have heard mixed reviews, that it may not offer enough protection. Are you guys using it?
  • Hey,

    I'm just posting to say I've been enjoying my 03 V6 Stang. She has 1400 miles on her now. No problems so far. The occasional rattle or vibration, but I'm thinking A)it's cold out and cars ride stiffer in winter & B)some of the roads around here are not that great. No big snowfalls yet. We had about 1.5" of snow last week but the traction control worked pretty good. Probably should have some Blizzaks though.

    I'm itching to put on a better sounding exhaust and a CAI. That will have wait until later.

    To Goofy10 - I agree with everybody else who said don't do exterior mods. Mustangs don't need them.

    Hondas, Nissans, etc - they need the exterior mods because they are boring to look (in my opinion)at right off the showroom floor.

    my .02 - Later - Jeffer2
  • it is truly a classic car you have! Good point on the exterior mods too.
  • on the 5W-20 oil...not enough protection? When i did my fist oil Change,my first thought was Exactly that,kinda thin for a American V8? Are the tolerances that tight? but i used it. I will be asking around before my next change, i'm still thinking about Synthetic? what have you heard.
  • sphinx99sphinx99 Posts: 776
    At least, that's the feeling I get from the convertible. Check out how steeply raked the front windshield of that convertible is. If the driver really is sitting that low with the front cowl that high, the driver isn't going to see much of the road. IMO, one of the current Mustang's biggest weaknesses (at least compared to other "performance" vehicles) is how difficult it is to see the front two corners of the car. Understanding that this is one of the costs to having big V8s up front, I was hoping for the redesigned Mustang to have a somewhat lower front hoodline.

    Poor visibility makes sense for high-torque boulevard cruisers, but if a car has performance aspirations then the driver needs to be able to see where the car is in order to put it where he or she wants to. I hope the convertible is more of a styling exercise (which I think it is - real test vehicles won't wear white powdercoated rims like that) than a glimpse at the actual '04/'05 Mustang.

  • is that the current view over the hood looks cool, it is one of my favorite things about the car, and I have heard others say this too. Maybe there is a compromise somewhere. An extreme example is the Mach 1's hood, that thing has a huge bulge which I would think would further inhibit the driver's view of the road, but it looks great, if I had a chance to get my hands on a Mach 1 I wouldn't complain!
  • some concerns on that front. Zues seems to have his doubts on the thinner oil. However, the dealership said using a different grade would void the warranty. As for synthetic, I have heard the best is Mobil 1. But Mobil 1 does not yet have a synthetic in the grade 5W-20. They have told me that in March 2003 they will be introducing a 0W-20 synthetic, which is designed for the new engines which call for 5W-20, and approved by Ford, which I will probably switch to at that time. It's really difficult to research engine oil, there are so many different opinions (check out the boards,wow!). I guess time will tell. Good to see your post!
  • check out Post #4720 on the Synthetics board. Some of the issues raised about 5W-20 are of concern to say the least.
  • It has anything to do with tolerances? I was always under the assumption that a lighter weight recommandation was due to very tight tolerances on the internal parts? If this is true i dont think you would want to use a heavy weight 20W-50? I always used castrol 20W-50 in my old 1967 289 and my 1985 5.0 but this newer 4.6 motor, who knows why they are recommending such a thin weight? It's either political or something major has changed. I do know this ,there are very few choices out there for the 5W-20 (that may tell you something i think ford has something going with a few oil makers lol) thankfully one company that makes it is my favorite ,Castrol. We will have to do a little more research i guess.

    I do know this ,by the summer i think i will be using that Mobile 1 Synthetic, i dont think that 5W-20 can handle this Nasty Houston heat!!!
  • on what you do about the oil; I agree, maybe there are sound reasons why Ford wants 5W-20. But if it is only because of EPA statistics or fuel economy... anyway, once the new Mobil comes out I'll for sure change to Mobil 1 0W-20 or I will go to Mobil 1 of a different grade.
  • What does everything you guys said have to do with what i asked? I'd didn't ask for opinions on what to do to my car. All I wanted to know is if the convertible was better or the coupe.
  • john_324john_324 Posts: 974
    Adding my two cents, I'm going to stick with 5W-20 for the time being. For now, my Mustang is mostly a daily driver...when the autocross season starts again, I might consider a heavier weight. I think the 4.6 *is* supposed to have been manufactured with very tight tolerances, which might be part of the reason for the light weight. But I'm sure most of it is to offset the V8 detriment to their CAFE target.
  • I am beginning to change my mind about the rear end. If you look at it closely, you will see that it does not drop off as precipitiously as you might think. It is hard to see beause of the rock beach behind it. It's not as bad as I first thought.
Sign In or Register to comment.