Are you saying to remain a viable model the Mustang needs to change with the times?

 

Don`t even think about it, Are we doomed to repeat the 1974 Mustang mistake again

 

What I'm saying is that during hard times(poor economic conditions and high fuel prices), people are don't spend on extravagances like sporty cars and are more likely to buy cars that are perceived as "practical".

But those are just some of the factors working against the 2008 Mustang. The others are increased competition (Challenger & Camaro) and just being a design that has been on the market for almost 4 years in a very fickle segment (sporty cars/coupes).

But yeah, changing with the times is needed. That's one of the reasons the Mustang is still around, that and listening to what the Mustang fans want.

People talk trash about the Mustang II, but that car was the perfect car for the time. The Mustang probably would not have survived the '70s oil crisis without it.

They could do something like that again with the next design but it would a lot better, due to the technological advancements over the last 34 years since the Mustang II debuted. Downsize the Mustang a bit (I'd like the 65-66 dimensions) and use Twin Force/EcoBoost technology.

 

+eleventy all around... I really like the idea of a new, original dimensions sized Mustang coupe.

 

Ford sold 385,993 1974 Mustangs, the 4th highest Mustang total, beat only by the 1965, 1966 and 1967 Mustangs. To put the #s in perspective that's almost 2.5 times the S197's best sales year.

Please explain to me how that makes the 1974 Mustang a mistake.

 

I tend to agree. IMO, if Ford had simply enlarged the fender wheels to accept 15" wheels and tires and offered an even slightly more powerful 302 in place of the 2bbl wheezer we got I'd be willing to bet the Mustang II would be remembered as a 70's performance legend Pinto underpinnings or no. Amazing how a couple of small issues can cast a shadow for so long.

 

The reason why the original 1960s Mustangs were such a success is that they were sporty cars that were also practical every day drivers.

Toy cars have always been and will continue to be a very limited market. To remain viable, future Mustangs will have to be the same thing that the 1965 - 1968 Mustangs were: Sporty cars that are practical every day drivers too. To be anything else will be the death knell of the Mustang.

 

How many of them do you see now days? Probably the worst of all mustangs for survivability and collect ability
I owned a 76, it was a mistake
Please don`t ask any more, I don`t want to go there.

 

The S197 is my daily driver and it's pretty practical for a sporty car. I can take my wife and two kids with me when I drive it and they're comfortable; they actually prefer to take weekend trips and drive around town in the Mustang rather than our F150 supercab. It's not too big and it's not too small, has a large trunk, plus it looks great and is fun to drive.

The thing is, it's not perceived as practical, but cars like a Camry, Corolla,or Fit or Aveo are, during these hard economic times.

 

People didn't make the effort save them.

 

Sales are down yes, but we still outsold Camaro and Challenger.

 

Part perception part reality.

While the S197 Mustang is incredibly improved over ALL earlier Mustangs, today's Mustang is still behind the power curve in terms of refinement and amenities. Although perception is worse than reality, the Mustang is a bit of a gas hog.

 

The housing bubble has burst. Home owners have lost a tremendous amount of equity in their homes. More difficult now to get that home equity loan to buy a new Mustang and use it as a nice little income tax deduction. And folks are worried about losing their jobs in a recession. JMHO.

 

My ex-wife wanted her first car to be a mustang. Her dad asked her what year she wanted. She said the year she was born (1977). She later regretted that decision.

 

to me, the point of the mustang is not be refined or have an abundance of amenities; there are other cars for that. again, to me, its a cool car with a heritage, respectable speed, good power, great looks and awesome sound. i think it would be best to keep it that way, otherwise it would lose some of its charm. also, in stop and go driving, i didn't get phenomenal results with both of my previous four cylinders, so i honestly think the mustang is not so bad in that department, considering i can now use regular fuel instead of premium.

 

Refinements and amenities sound more like "luxury" than "practicality". Do you mean electronic gadgets? Cup holders? Super squishy plastic in the interior? Those things don't equal "practicality" in my opinion. Practicality in my opinion (and probably most people) is

• adequate passenger space
• adequate cargo space
• decent gas mileage
• the "right" size (not so large that it's hard to park/manuever in tight spaces & not so small that you feel unsafe )
• good value for the price paid

To me , the S197 fits my parameters for practicality. Sure, it's doesn't have minivan passenger & cargo room or hybrid-like MPG, but for a sporty car, its not too bad. I knew there were some things I was going to give up buying it, but then I knew there was some things it has that a minivan and Prius don't (300 hp and classic looks, for example).

 

The problem is that unrefined vehicles with few amenities is an ever shrinking market.

As many people here on these forums have pointed out over and over again, without the V6 Mustang the V8 Mustang would not exist. The V6 Mustang, which is primarily purchased by regular people - not gearheads - needs to up it's game to stay competitive and keep all models of the Mustang viable.

Cool looks and respectible speed do not mean that refinement and amenities must be sacrificed. This is the 21st century, not 1965,

 

I'm primarily referring to NVH and ride quality, areas where the Mustang is lacking.

Secondarily the Mustang is lacking in the look and feel of interior materials. You may call it unpractical "squishy plastic" but compared to other similarly priced vehicles the Mustang does not make the grade. Time and time again surveys of customers after they made a purchase show that interior look, feel and appearance of quality make or break a large % of sales.

Another area where the Mustang is sub par is its brakes.

Nagging problems like gas tanks that are hard to fill, parking brakes that freeze up, etc. also don't help sales.

 

there's nothing wrong with 1965 brother i'd get a G35 if i were a fancy boy, but to me its mustang or broke... heated seats is pushing it! (i have the heated seats)

 

i'll just address this (though i don't have gas tank fill issue or a real problem with the brakes knock on wood). softer, better looking plastics are much more prone to scartches and scuffs. its one reason i just flat out prefer the mustang's interior to others.