• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Pics of the next-gen Ford Mustang...

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
pictures never do justice of a car 1st thing. 2nd.

Does anyone find it odd that those pictures look straight outta a catalog??

"An eagle-eyed AutoWeek reader snapped these shots of the 2005 Ford Mustang"

Now go look at the pictures. It's like perfectly on the beach in the water against the rocks.

3rd, why would Ford have a 2005 car out and about at the beach without camo on like they do all their other cars? This car is 2-3 years away? Yet they already have a working convertible? Seems a bit odd to me.
 
is it possible to have retro styling that looks more bland than the original? 😕 I guess so...


foo-glay....
 
i remember when teh 99 one first came out I hated it...couldn't believe FORD came out with a car like that...but look at what I have now.

it will grow on you...btw those pictures look fake to me as well.
 
Originally posted by: FettsBabe
Ford has competed with the Corvette. It has a Supercharged Mustang that packs 390. Don't get me wrong, I like Vettes, but I know several "attorney friends" that have them and they stay in the shop all the time. If I buy a $40,000 car I want one I can drive. Therefore, I would sink my money in the Supercharged Mustang.

The Mustang has always built lower model cars (V6) for the kids who just turned 16 and can't afford a 30,000 car. It is also affordable with insurance, so mom and dad are happy.

They also have the V-8, which is $27000 to $30000. This is marketed to those graduating college. The Supercharger is marketed to the $35000-40000 crowd.
Click to expand...
I see your point. I think Ford would be more successful if they marketed the lower-performing mustang under a different name and then kept the Mustang name for the high performance $40k car (like Chevy did with the Camaro and Vette). Having 2 different performance levels with the same name dilutes the name.

"I have a Mustang."
"Those things suck! A V6, come one."
"No, no, no...it's the SUPERCHARGED model!"
"Oh!"
 
I can understand your point of having two different names, but people want the "Mustang" logo on their car.

This is probably Ford's thinking in regards to having several performance levels with the same name:

Its a way to build loyalty to the car and to the manufacturer from a very young age (15-16). Once you have one you are pretty much loyal for life. Most people stick to certain models.

I think that is one reason they stopped production of the Camaro. The loyalty to the car started to decline because they didn't market a big target audience. If they had the car would probably still be around.

As a note, I can't buy a supercharged Mustang right now. Can't afford it. However, if they changed the name of the tang' I would never buy the vehicle it changed its name to....I would wait until I could afford the one I wanted. By that time, I might now even want/need one.
 
Quote

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by: RagingBITCH

Quote

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by: scorp00

Quote

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by: KnightBreed
It would appear, in this case, by retro they mean boring. For a muscle-car, it certainly doesn't look muscular.

scorp00, the Autoweek article says, they're hoping to get 280hp out of the 4.6L V8.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Hoping for 280 is still sad. My car is 8 years old, and came with 275 hp from the factory.

But most people who buy cars just want something pretty even if it is a POS mechanically.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



It's been named one of the top engines by C&D for the past couple years. That's why there's the 400+ hp Cobra if you're looking for ball-plastering performance
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



400+ isn't exactly ball-plastering performance. It's decent, but not great.
Click to expand...

So the Z06's performance is only "decent"? Hell it's a tick slower than a Viper with 500hp. (The Cobra is a tick slower than the Z06)

And for the dumb@$$ who was talking about there's nothing to do to 4.6's - like notfred and Millenium both said - there's plenty.
 
This isn't even officially a concept car yet, so I wouldn't get too hung up on the styling details. I think the basic shape of this car looks better than the current Mustang.
 
Originally posted by: UnixFreak
You have no idea what you're talking about.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but I have to agree.

I have owned several mustangs, and helped build many others.

For one, most people keep the stock internals for the street. So to answer the question of who keeps stock internals, I would say anyone smart. The 4.6 on its own has a strong bottom end, and will hold up to most performance upgrades. You can throw a cam in it, ported heads, and a supercharger on it, it will hold up just fine. If you are building a 500+hp engine for racing, you certainly would junk the stock internals, but for most people, there is no reason to.

The 5.0 was a great motor, but the 4.6 is better, IMO. The shorter stroke and overall design is reminicent of the 289, and better suited for a stang anyway.

Just my opinion.
Click to expand...

Not to be insulting or anything, but you don't know what you're talking about either. The 4.6 is an OHC motor, meaning you can't just throw a cam in it. You need at least two cams (or four on the cobra). Also, the stroke on the 4.6 is longer than the 5.0. The 4.6 has a 3.542" stroke, whereas the 5.0 had a 3" stroke. Also, I don't see how you can say that the overall design is reminiscent of a 289. The difference between the 289 and 302 (5.0) was nothing but an extra 1/8" stroke (2.875" vs 3.000"). They were essentially the same engine. The 4.6 is a completely new motor. Hell, it doesn't even have pushrods. How is that reminiscent of a 289?
 
I both envy and hate those exec and engineer bastards that get to drive these cars a year or even 2 before they are scheduled for release. Man would I love to land a job like that but I have no one to inherit one from. 🙁
Nice car by the way, I love the exhaust through the bumper, I have always loved that look.
 
Some people read too many magizene's... Before you compare HP/Liter you guys need to get some facts in before you post stupid statements, if you are not sure ASK!! Some of us unlike all magizene editors can actually pop a hood and do some work... you know more then take a picture 😉

The LS1 vs the 4.6??? WTF are you people on? lets see, 5.7 liters @ 10:1 compression VS 4.6 @ 9:1 compression.... all I have to say is
rolleye.gif


I think the big thing most of the young crowd really has to learn is 98% of EVERYTHING in life has pro's and con's to it... you guys just need to stop being Biased and open your eye's.
 
Looks like ass to me. Then again, I'm not a big Stang fan at all. If I want American muscle, I'll go for a Z06 Vette instead. If I want a decent performing car that is cheaper than that Vette, I'd get a 350Z or a G35. I probably wouldn't look at a Mustang at all. Then again, I'm a 17 yr old high school student, so all I can do is read Car and Driver or Autoweek and dream, so it doesn't matter anyways.
 
Jebus what kind of crack is ford smoking.

First they fuglify the F-150s in the next generation, now they are doing the same to the Mustang.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top