touche

 

It's not a NEED, it's a WANT and mustang owners will ALWAYS WANT.

 

Its probably not even designed to handle an output close to what the coyote makes although to be fair, Toyota and Subaru might be making extensive use of the so called super steels that the auto industry is converting to allowing the FT-86 to be lighter than it normally could.

 

 

Love the lean, long, low proportions of the GT350 here, especially the light and airy greenhouse and ample glass area. The 2005 Stang looks positively pudgy, heavy and tall in comparison.

 

Re: height: Well to be fair... the GT350 is lowered to the extreme on prob 15" wheels.

 

But still, the s197 is about 4 inches taller, 5 inches wider and 6 inches longer than a stock '65 Mustang.

 

I prefer the S197 to a 65. Plus that 65 would fail completely any crash test probably worse than a Mini or Fiat 500.

 

Well, yeah, 46 years of advances in automotive engineering should make safer cars these days

But the Mustang could be made the size of the 65 or the fox body (which are nearly the same size) again. We don't have to a have keep getting taller , wider and longer Mustangs.

Toyota and Subaru have just come out with a car that is nearly the same height and width as the original pony car but is a foot shorter because of being designed for a flat-4 instead of V8. And it passes today's crash standards.

I'm not saying a want an exact clone of a '65 Mustang for the next generation chassis. I want one that is the size of a '65 or Fox body, as long as it looks good and looks like a Mustang should.

 

I'm sure that's not the only reason. Has anyone seen/sat in the back seats yet?

EDIT: After just seeing pics of the trunk/back seats...that's how it's so short. There's no real space in that interior.