-September 2024 Special Lease Deals-
2024 Chevy Blazer EV lease from Bayway Auto Group Click here
2024 Jeep Grand Cherokee lease from Mark Dodge Click here
2025 Ram 1500 Factory Order Discounts from Mark Dodge Click here
2024 Chevy Blazer EV lease from Bayway Auto Group Click here
2024 Jeep Grand Cherokee lease from Mark Dodge Click here
2025 Ram 1500 Factory Order Discounts from Mark Dodge Click here
Ford Mustang (2005 and Newer)
there's not a lot of feed back on the new 05 ford mustang. not the 2005 ford GT
Tagged:
0
Comments
There always was and always should be a base level Mustang with an adequate engine for average buyers.
http://www.fallscitymustangclub.com/images/othercars/05%206.jpg
http://www.fallscitymustangclub.com/images/othercars/05%201.jpg
But I agree with 3.1 on the inner headlights. In fact, I think back in the late 1960s, Ford had to stop doing that because of DOT restrictions on headlight placement. Resident history experts?
This is the production Mustang.
I don't know why Ford couldn't produce a Mustang that looks ALMOST EXACTLY like the concept. I understand needing to change a few minor things, like not having the exhaust pipes integrated into the middle of the rear bumper, but come on! The 2 concepts had me excited about the Mustang for the first time in years! The prototypes in the spy pics are a bit less inspiring.
Oh well, all we can do is wait to see what it actually looks like...
What you are thinking about is the Shelby that started the year with the grill headlights side by side dead center but had to move the lights to the ends of the grill after producing only a few because of (I believe) several states' motor vehicle regulations.
Re the concept-to-reality problem, yeah, I totally understand. I go to auto shows and think "I would so drive that". But I guess most people actually wouldn't...so things get toned down. I guess most of the market is pretty conservative in its tastes. Too bad.
Though I think the Viper actually went from concept to reality relatively unchanged though...
please say no...
The platform itself is a shortened and cheapened (read: steel instead of aluminum) verison of one Ford uses now for Jaguars and Lincolns (LS I think??), so pretty state of the art (but I love that my 2002 rides on a 1978 platform nonetheless).
John
Maybe too soon to know or not but does anyone know if the ragtop will be coming out at the same time as the other Mustangs? Thanks
The biased auto press will hate the live axle, but then what Asian car sold here has a V8 and RWD besides the luxo boats??
Ford's explanation that IRS costs too much is really lame. Even KIA and Hyundai use IRS. To be fair, RWD IRS costs a bit more, but even stamped steel semi-trailing arms would be better than a live axle.
An independent rear suspension would be a welcome addition, but given the current bean counter mentality a live axle seems all to predictable.
If you don't like live axle, get a Kia or Hyundai then and watch everyone ignore the car.
The real issue here is UNSPRUNG weight, which is one of the reasons a live axle handles so badly on broken pavement. Not only are the wheels moving, but the entire axle and differential is along for the ride too.
V8 torque:
The IRS on the Dodge Viper seems to be able to deal with 525 ft/lb torque, so I don't see reason why Ford can't deal with the 325 ft/lb or so that the V8 Mustang will produce.
Final thought: are there _any_ other vehicles currently being manufactured with a live rear axle other than taxi cabs and pickup trucks? Very few. If a live axle is inadequate for midsize family sedans, what business does it have on the back of a "performance" car?
I understand the importance of keeping unsprung weight down. However, some pony car fans may appreciate measures to keep overall weight under control. Keep in mind that I find an IRS superior to a live axle in most instances, including this one.
For those of you concerned about durability, it doesn't seem to be an issue for the current IRS equipped 390hp Cobra.
Why in the world would Ford build the all new Mustang with a solid rear axle? Forget about all the excuses like weight, cost etc etc, and build the car in the modern idiom. Ford, Are you there? Are you listening?
Mustangs have rarely been the pinnacle of pony car performance...rather, they succeed by being good at a number of things, rather than great at just one.
I like my Mustang precisely because it is such a dinosaur...there are plenty of very good sport coupes out there, but there's only one choice if you want to experience the musclecar ethos of old.
Perhaps Ford does have the right idea after all: if total performance is your goal, pick up a Cobra and you've got it. But if you want performance combined with some nostalgia, get the GT. That's what I did...
In the race that counts in the real world, the sales race, the F bodies were killed.
Armchair magazine racers scream alot, but don't put down $$$ to buy the machines they so ferociously defend.
Also, the GTO is meant to compete with the Cobra, which has IRS by the way. There is no "base V6 GTO" at all.
No matter how much some scream, Mustang buyers are not looking for a Celica or Eclipse clone.
I think it unfortunately comes down to economics and manufacturing. Same reason you can't get a DOHC 4.6 as an option on your GT. : (
I suspect the we can't do that anymore due to production economics. Ford probably has to keep things as streamlined as possible in assembly, otherwise the costs get prohibitively expensive. So we have to get option "packages" not
picking and choosing what we want.
On the plus side, just as in the 1960s, you can get pretty much any Mustang feature over-the-counter from Ford to install yourself. Including the DOHC engine. Reading through the Ford Racing catalog is a hoot, just to see all the stuff available.
I agree with you re the scoops/wing, but we should consider that fake scoopage has been a part of Mustangs since the early days. The 1969 GT has a very prominent hood scoop that is, alas, fake. Nobody minded then...
Best you could do now would be to find a Bullitt edition: no wing, no side scoops, just the hood one. Plus Bullitts are the coolest-sounding Mustang of recent years (yes, that includes the Mach 1)...
Also to maintain quality. The Japanese learned that restricting options reduces complexity in production.
For most people, the packaged groupings are just fine, and as pointed out, I'd definitely hate to have Mustang quality drop *further*... ; )
And it seems to me that with the advent of leasing, and the general affulence of the avg. new car buyer, everybody simply gets the "loaded" package anyway. I think the avg. GT out there is a premium edition with leather, the Mach stereo, etc. I bought a "regular" GT because those things mean nothing to me...but I'm in the minority I know.
Seems most people want all the luxury comforts in addition to performance these days. I see way more Infinity G35 Coupes than Nissan 350Z track models on the road, new Porsches have cupholders, and Jaguar hasn't built a sportscar since the early 1970s. It's enough to drive a semi-purist crazy (there was a great discussion here not too long ago about what constitutes a "sportscar" and therefore a "purist")