I was thinking about if Ford should bring back the "Fastback-Sportsroof-Hatchback" body style in 2009 for the new Mustang. From 1964 until 1993 Ford gave us the choice of three body styles, the Coupe, Convertible, and "Fastback-Sportsroof-Hatchback"(forget about the convertible ban back in the early 70's). In 1994 Ford took away the "Fastback-Sportsroof-Hatchback" body style Mustangs and stuck with the coupe and convertible. Seemed from 1994 until 2004 that the Mustang wasent a fan favorite anymore. My opinion people got sick of the same look ,it just seemed better with that extra chioce.what do you think ?

 

I think the LX notchback is the best looking mustang from 1970 to 2004. I haven't seen a rendering of a fastback concept that I've really liked yet though.

 

personally I don't like the look of the hatchback or the fox's the new couoe is already a fastback, fastback reffered to the back window glass being angled not wheater or not it was a hatchback

 

Fastback good, very good.
Hatchback not so much.

Pic's I've seen have a shorter trunk. History repeating.
Agian.... nice.


Mike

 

Notchbacks rule! The hatched foxes are pretty cool too, just not as cool as the notch!

 

The S197 is a fastback. I don't know how the roofline on the current car could look a notchback coupe. Look at the '65 and '66 fastbacks and then '05-'07s. The rear glass, roofline and trunk shape are nearly identical.

 

hey man that`s not nice..........my hatch can kick your notch butt......lol

 

+1 The S197 IS indeed a fastback, if you look at the very first fastback mustangs to compare. Automotive journalists have referred to the S197 as a fastback since it first debuted.

The S197 GT is a modern fastback muscle car (literally, down to meeting the unofficial 12:1 weight to power ratio requirement to be considered a muscle car).

 

Well Said....Fastback all the way.

 

Agreed! The notchbacks look flatout bad***

 

I agree that the 05+ mustang is a fastback by 65-66 standards, but by all the other model years they are more like half/fast-back. Starting for the 67 model year the Fastback went all the way to the rear of the car, leaving no horizontal at all. I believe this is what is being referenced when people state that the want the "fastback" back. In my opinion it is just an evolutionary design that will return. Hopefully the hatch will not return, but I do hope for a 67esque fastback. It won't happen in 2010, but maybe the next Model Change.

 

I guess a bit of disambiguation here:

Fastback: very sloping rear aspect of the passenger cabin ending at or near the rear end break, like the current hardtop Stang.

Hatchback: a fastback that fully opens from roof to rear end, as opposed to having just a small trunk opening.

Notchback: having a rather vertical rear upper body and a trunk opening.

Covertible: like I need to explain.
The first three gens of Stangs had three body styles: convertible, notchback coupe and fastback coupe with a trunk opening. The Mustang II had just two: the notchback and a hatchback/fastback. The Fox cars went back to three, though now the fastback was a fully opening hatchback design. The SN95 then regressed back to two configurations: a convertible and a non-opening fastback, as is now the current Mustang.

OK, history and definition lesson over. What about '09? Likely the same as now: a vert and fastback (with trunk), though there have been a few rumors of the fastback going to a fully opening fastback configuration. Given the added engineering expense and Ford's pitiable financial state, I think the '09 will be as modest a makeover as they think they can get away with, i.e., just a freshening of easily and cheaply modified sheet metal and end caps but no real deep engineering changes of any substance. Think of the level and scale of updating the '99 model got over the '98 as an indication.

As for what I would like?

Hatchback? Definitely! That just makes the car sooo much more practical while retaining the sleek, sporty slope-backed fastback profile -- basically having your cake and eating it too. Need to pick up a chair at IKEA or stow a weekends worth of triathlon gear for two? No problem! I've done both the above in my smaller Probe GT, which has even sleeker, lower and sportier styling (if you define sporty as being low and sleek) than the Stang. And with proper design and engineering, a hatchback need not necessarily weigh any substantial amount more nor have any less structural rigidity, as a comparison between my Probe and it's be-trunked chassis mate, the MX-6, well illustrated.

Notchback? Naw. If I wanted a car to connote tall, upright rectitude of a sedan, I'll buy a old tall, upright Volvo 740 sedan. To me, performance and sportiness are reflected on low, sleek, taut aerodynamic lines of a fastback/hatchback, not the blunt, stiff, upright stature of a notchback.

Vert? Well, duh, of course.

 

I like the current S197 GT's fastback profile without the spoiler. It reminds me of the C5/C6 Corvette. I'm 6'3" and don't have a HUGE problem with the legroom in the back. However I do have a problem with the rear headroom. If I sit upright, my head pushes into the roof. I have to sort of lie back and lean my head near the rear windshield.

The front headroom isn't the best either. I have to drop my seat all the way down or else I will smack the roof with my head. However, the Mustang is a sports car, so there are some tradeoffs versus a full sized sedan.

 

Hatchbacks are for Pintos, Hondas. Not muscle cars.

 

... and DB8s, M-Coupes, ZO6s, Vipers, Mustang Cobras, XKRs, RX-7s, Caymans, 928s ... nothing but a slew of dray, gas-sipping grocery-getters

 

Yea.. this looks like a ricer to me?

 

Keep in mind the Japanese ricer cars are mostly RWD. They're FWD here in the US because the American buying market likes FWD.

I'm not terribly fond of hatchbacks. Even on the aforementioned cars, it looks goofy.

 

The notch was Bad A$$ as mentioned but the sight of a 1987-1993 GT just puts me in awe. That was an incredible looking car.

 

Big fan of the fastback... I liked the fox hatchback

 

+1!!