2005-2010 Comparison
11/21/08, 10:05 AM
#42
I'll wait for the 2014 
(if they fix the rear end)
the 10 does have a "newer" look to it compared to the s197 now... but still not enough to sway me plus new engines in 2014 and 50th anniversary? yea 2014 ftw
(if they fix the rear end)the 10 does have a "newer" look to it compared to the s197 now... but still not enough to sway me plus new engines in 2014 and 50th anniversary? yea 2014 ftw
11/21/08, 10:27 AM
#43
Mach 1 Member
i see this new mustang as a comparision of the 66 to 67 designs. only a few could tell the difference but when you look at them, the 67-68 cars look more refined than the 66, but still holding the bloodlines that made it a mustang. also, with the 69-70 cars, same thing. then in 98 when ford changed the sn-95 to the new edge for 99 the basic shape was there, but instead of the round-ness they went with the straight edge break line thing and created a beast (at that time) looking meaner than the previous sn-95. now we have the 09 and 10 comare, same thing, they refined what we all were looking for, still keeping the cues from before but clearly distinguishing it from the previous models. i believe the new 2014 will be unbelievable when it finally comes out and we will either sit back and wonder in amazement or we will go what??the...
if this is the direction ford is going with the mustang i can only see nothing but good things coming down the pipeline. the only real decision like i said in previous posts is what to buy next? 2010, 2014, 1968, 1972 ??
too many choices... but only one color - metallic red!!!!!
if this is the direction ford is going with the mustang i can only see nothing but good things coming down the pipeline. the only real decision like i said in previous posts is what to buy next? 2010, 2014, 1968, 1972 ??
too many choices... but only one color - metallic red!!!!!
11/21/08, 10:54 AM
#44
Cobra Member
Join Date: May 16, 2006
Location: NV
Posts: 1,322
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think you nailed it perfectly; the 2010 update is like the change from the '65-'66 body to the '67-'68 body -- the '65-66 had straighter lines and sharp creases, while the '67-'68 was curvier & more rounded. However, the grille got bigger in '67 than in '66, while the grille on the 2010 got smaller than the '05-'09s...
11/21/08, 10:58 AM
#45
Mach 1 Member
Join Date: September 22, 2005
Location: Kansas
Posts: 1,327
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And I know it's insanely early, but I'm really really hoping that the '14 is a true fastback design like '67-'68.
11/21/08, 11:04 AM
#46
Shelby GT500 Member
Okay, this thread has pushed me more to the acceptance stage of "Change". While I still feel the '05-'09 look better, I'm warming up to the '10. Seeing the two together really opened my eyes. The car does look good, and I think over time the rear will grow on me (hopefully not my rear).
A great thread really.
).A great thread really.
11/21/08, 11:19 AM
#47
GT Member
Join Date: December 24, 2004
Posts: 184
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Okay, this thread has pushed me more to the acceptance stage of "Change". While I still feel the '05-'09 look better, I'm warming up to the '10. Seeing the two together really opened my eyes. The car does look good, and I think over time the rear will grow on me (hopefully not my rear).
A great thread really.
).A great thread really.
11/21/08, 11:27 AM
#48
Mach 1 Member
Join Date: September 22, 2005
Location: Kansas
Posts: 1,327
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The classic Mustangs were WAY more "euro" than the 2010 is.
11/21/08, 11:36 AM
#49
the picture in this thread really compliments the rear from the top angle i was just about to say it looked halfway decent, then i ran into this picture, dragging me back to the "Ehh" on the rear end
the pictures in this thread are taken at all the right angles i will give you that...
the pictures in this thread are taken at all the right angles i will give you that...
11/21/08, 11:46 AM
#51
Cobra Member
Join Date: May 16, 2006
Location: NV
Posts: 1,322
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To me, the 2010 is more "organic" in that it's curvier and more rounded; it's also more forward leaning and aggressive. The only thing that bugs me is the blacked out grille surround on the GT! The 2010 V6 front fascia to me looks better because it looks like an evolved '05-'09 GT500.
The '05 is more simple, straightforward, and sharp edged. I agree with you guys that said the '05-'09 reminds you of the early classic Mustangs more than the 2010 does. While I love the 2010, I just love the '05-09's styling more. At least for now...
The '05 is more simple, straightforward, and sharp edged. I agree with you guys that said the '05-'09 reminds you of the early classic Mustangs more than the 2010 does. While I love the 2010, I just love the '05-09's styling more. At least for now...
11/21/08, 12:13 PM
#55
Bullitt Member
Being outdated is not a bad thing; It's a good thing. The 05-09 captured the essence of the sixties mustangs, that why we loved em in the first place.......right???? I kind of like the idea that you can't go to a dealer and buy a 05-09 mustang made to order in the next few months. If you like that body style (05-09) your just going to have to get one used.
That being said I like the new stang GT I just don't like all the black plastic on it. I like paint more then unpainted plastic. I know why they did it (to make the car look smaller) I need to see this car in person to see if it really does make it look smaller
my 2 cents
That being said I like the new stang GT I just don't like all the black plastic on it. I like paint more then unpainted plastic. I know why they did it (to make the car look smaller) I need to see this car in person to see if it really does make it look smaller
my 2 cents
11/21/08, 12:16 PM
#56
Banned
Join Date: October 29, 2008
Posts: 407
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Being outdated is not a bad thing; It's a good thing. The 05-09 captured the essence of the sixties mustangs, that why we loved em in the first place.......right???? I kind of like the idea that you can't go to a dealer and buy a 05-09 mustang made to order in the next few months.
11/21/08, 12:18 PM
#57
Banned
Join Date: October 29, 2008
Posts: 407
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think that's an unfair comparison. You are comparing a body style change, not just a refresh. Perhaps a better and more accurate comparison would be the 69 and 70 cars. Think about it--front and rear ends were different, as well as some minor styling elements on the rest of the car.
11/21/08, 12:36 PM
#59
Mach 1 Member
Join Date: April 27, 2004
Posts: 551
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Comparing the changes between a 69-70 would be equal to comparing a 05 GT to a 07 GT500(same basic car just a new bumper and some trim). I realize the 2010 is on the same platform as the 2005 but the changes to the 2010 are very drastic and not really an slight progression in styling. IMO, I can dig 75% of the car. However, no matter how many cool shots I see of the front and side, I still know that ugly rear end is there. I just hope the aftermarket has a "good" fix for it.
11/21/08, 12:37 PM
#60
Cobra R Member
Thread Starter
2010 Compared to 169-70's
You win the "funniest post of the day" for this comment.
The '05 - '09 Mustang is SUPPOSED to look dated. It's a purely retro design. The whole purpose of the car is to bring us back to the glory days of the late 60's Mustangs. And that's exactly where the 2010 Mustang fails miserably. It's no longer a retro design, but more of a Euro-look bastardization of the '05 - '09 retro styling.
I'm just thankful that there are still new '09 Mustangs available. They will always be known as the classical retro styled Mustang. The '09 Mustang is the only new car I will probably ever own that I will not feel that I need to get a "newer" body style version of the car, just because of the fact that it's styling is timeless in a retro sorta way. Park any '05 - '09 Mustang next to a '69 Mustang and you can clearly see a very strong resemblance from any angle. Sadly, I don't think that's true of the 2010 model, especially from the rear.
Don't get me wrong...I'm not trying to hate on the new design. I just think it's silly of Ford to go to retro styling and then try to make the retro styling more modern. Then again, I guess it would have been weird to go from purely retro styling to ultra modern styling. I was wondering which direction Ford was going to go after the retro styling. Well, maybe I should say that I'm still wondering which way they'll go with the future styling of the car.
The '05 - '09 Mustang is SUPPOSED to look dated. It's a purely retro design. The whole purpose of the car is to bring us back to the glory days of the late 60's Mustangs. And that's exactly where the 2010 Mustang fails miserably. It's no longer a retro design, but more of a Euro-look bastardization of the '05 - '09 retro styling.
I'm just thankful that there are still new '09 Mustangs available. They will always be known as the classical retro styled Mustang. The '09 Mustang is the only new car I will probably ever own that I will not feel that I need to get a "newer" body style version of the car, just because of the fact that it's styling is timeless in a retro sorta way. Park any '05 - '09 Mustang next to a '69 Mustang and you can clearly see a very strong resemblance from any angle. Sadly, I don't think that's true of the 2010 model, especially from the rear.
Don't get me wrong...I'm not trying to hate on the new design. I just think it's silly of Ford to go to retro styling and then try to make the retro styling more modern. Then again, I guess it would have been weird to go from purely retro styling to ultra modern styling. I was wondering which direction Ford was going to go after the retro styling. Well, maybe I should say that I'm still wondering which way they'll go with the future styling of the car.
Euro Look Bastardization?
Lets Just See about that comment of parking a 2010 Next to a 69-70 Mustang, Glory Days and All!
