2010-2014 Mustang Information on The S197 {GenII}

Is This The 2009-2012 Mustang - New Pic!

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Sep 23, 2006 | 08:41 AM
  #41  
Knight Rider's Avatar
Shelby GT500 Member
 
Joined: April 13, 2006
Posts: 2,752
Likes: 0
From: McAllen, Texas
It looks like a photoshop of a Camaro
Reply
Old Sep 23, 2006 | 11:15 AM
  #42  
Lalo's Avatar
I'm people, and I like.
 
Joined: March 13, 2004
Posts: 9,243
Likes: 0
From: PDX
Originally Posted by Boomer
The roofline/greenhouse (IIRC) are the only panels that will NOT change on the 2010
aw darn... that would make an important part of the car stagnent then. The whole redesign will have to revolve around making it look good on the same roofline.
Reply
Old Sep 23, 2006 | 11:46 AM
  #43  
future9er24's Avatar
Post *****
 
Joined: May 13, 2004
Posts: 18,616
Likes: 3
From: Berkeley/Redwood City, CA
so no hatch?
Reply
Old Sep 23, 2006 | 12:09 PM
  #44  
Lalo's Avatar
I'm people, and I like.
 
Joined: March 13, 2004
Posts: 9,243
Likes: 0
From: PDX
Originally Posted by future9er24
so no hatch?
Then can always shorten the lenght of the car, and keep the same roofline, but that will just look odd
Reply
Old Sep 23, 2006 | 12:47 PM
  #45  
Boomer's Avatar
I Have No Life
 
Joined: January 30, 2004
Posts: 10,446
Likes: 12
From: Canada
Nothing wrong with it... the roofline is great

They can make the rest of the car more aggressive
Reply
Old Sep 23, 2006 | 01:09 PM
  #46  
future9er24's Avatar
Post *****
 
Joined: May 13, 2004
Posts: 18,616
Likes: 3
From: Berkeley/Redwood City, CA
Originally Posted by thezeppelin8
Then can always shorten the lenght of the car, and keep the same roofline, but that will just look odd
maybe they can keep the lip of the decklid and incorporate it into the sape of the hatch?

and nothing agaist the roofline, i just have a thing for hatches
Reply
Old Sep 24, 2006 | 06:14 PM
  #47  
stangsimon's Avatar
GT Member
 
Joined: August 30, 2006
Posts: 160
Likes: 0
Don't freak. The silver R&T image is definitely a Photoshop over a Camaro concept, and the red image is Photoshop using the Mustang concept to alter the front lamps and hood.

I looked on R&Ts website, and you can see a close image of the Camaro that this was based on. Just look at the floor its sitting on and you can see the patten and reflections in the "Mustang" rendering. All they did was rotate the image.




Its not 100% the same perspective, but you better believe that for every picture shown in a mag, there are 5-10 others in relatively the same view in the overall set of proofs ( like when you get wedding pictures or modeling pictures and choose the one you want. ) And guaranteed its an R&T-owned image, so there are no copyright issues. But its definitely a Camaro- look at the windshield post and the crease in it, and what reason would Mustang use a slit-like air inlet in the same way the Camaro does?

I know someone who has done illustrations for magazines and is now a car designer, they use existing images as basis for renderings all the time now with the luxury of Photoshop and computers. What computers cannot copy, however, is design talent, which was definitely missing in this Mitsubishi Evo X -style interpretation. They didn't even remove the obvious Camaro references I mentioned earlier. For shame.
Attached Thumbnails Is This The 2009-2012 Mustang - New Pic!-camaro-mustang.jpg  
Reply
Old Sep 24, 2006 | 09:36 PM
  #48  
m05fastbackGT's Avatar
SUPERCHARGED RED ROCKET ------------------Master-Moderator
 
Joined: May 11, 2006
Posts: 10,645
Likes: 2,512
From: Carnegie, PA
I don't mean to offend anyone, but hatchbacks also have weaker chassis which was one of the main reasons why the 93 in the old fox platform was the last year ?? if you like fun and practicle ?? that's fine if your into 4x4's and SUV's ? However, the Mustang was never intended as a practicle car, it was intended as a muscle car...Just my $02.
Reply
Old Sep 24, 2006 | 10:31 PM
  #49  
future9er24's Avatar
Post *****
 
Joined: May 13, 2004
Posts: 18,616
Likes: 3
From: Berkeley/Redwood City, CA
i just think hatches are cool. and they are fun. isnt that what muscle cars are about? fun?
Reply
Old Sep 25, 2006 | 08:27 AM
  #50  
HOTLAP's Avatar
Cobra Member
 
Joined: December 18, 2004
Posts: 1,415
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by thezeppelin8
Ah yes!
As depicted in this timeless Mustang ad


OMG - what's a Pinto have to do with our beloved Mustang
Reply
Old Sep 25, 2006 | 10:20 AM
  #51  
Vermillion06's Avatar
Cobra Member
 
Joined: May 16, 2006
Posts: 1,322
Likes: 0
From: NV
Originally Posted by Moosetang
R&T and MT have never gotten their artists' guesses right on the stange. Remember the blue sketch that was basically a '69 fastback with square headlights and rounded corners? Or the S95 with the Rice styling treatment?

Nope, I'm waiting until we start seeing test mule shots before I'm even convinced the new design is finalized.
You're correct, sir! The magazines have never gotten their "renderings" of upcoming Mustangs correct. We won't know what it looks like until we see some real spy photos....
Reply
Old Sep 25, 2006 | 10:42 AM
  #52  
jacostang's Avatar
 
Joined: January 27, 2006
Posts: 3,613
Likes: 7
From: Mesa, AZ
Originally Posted by m05fastbackGT
I don't mean to offend anyone, but hatchbacks also have weaker chassis which was one of the main reasons why the 93 in the old fox platform was the last year ?? if you like fun and practicle ?? that's fine if your into 4x4's and SUV's ? However, the Mustang was never intended as a practicle car, it was intended as a muscle car...Just my $02.
The Fox platform lasted 14 years!!!!!! I think it did its Job and then some!!! Longer than any other platform!!!!! And Hatchbacks Are Fun!! and Practical and make the Mustang just that Fun, fast and Practical!!!
Reply
Old Sep 25, 2006 | 12:23 PM
  #53  
Vermillion06's Avatar
Cobra Member
 
Joined: May 16, 2006
Posts: 1,322
Likes: 0
From: NV
Originally Posted by m05fastbackGT
I don't mean to offend anyone, but hatchbacks also have weaker chassis which was one of the main reasons why the 93 in the old fox platform was the last year ??
If they did make it a hatch, they could always do what they did with the 350Z and put one of those support bars across the rear interior between the rear wheels to stiffen the chassis:


Of course this takes up a lot of room and makes it have about the same amount of cargo space as a non-hatch car with fold-down rear seats...
Reply
Old Sep 25, 2006 | 03:59 PM
  #54  
mach1fever's Avatar
Cobra Member
 
Joined: May 28, 2004
Posts: 1,141
Likes: 0
I love the guy who was talking about the ls series. Only the ls7 was beyond the scope of the mach 1. Trust me I beat them at the track all the time.
Reply
Old Sep 25, 2006 | 04:32 PM
  #55  
rhumb's Avatar
 
Joined: January 30, 2004
Posts: 2,980
Likes: 0
From: DMV
Of course this takes up a lot of room and makes it have about the same amount of cargo space as a non-hatch car with fold-down rear seats...
I always thought they should come up with some manual quick-release mechanism for the cross brace, that way, you could readily remove it for packing your gear for the big road trip then popping it back in when you get there, unload and head out for some backroad work.
Reply
Old Sep 25, 2006 | 04:41 PM
  #56  
marianeeli's Avatar
Member
 
Joined: September 25, 2006
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Hai,
I am marianeeli.I am new member to this forum.I love car driving
I want to know more information about all latest model cars.

Reply
Old Sep 26, 2006 | 09:30 PM
  #57  
future9er24's Avatar
Post *****
 
Joined: May 13, 2004
Posts: 18,616
Likes: 3
From: Berkeley/Redwood City, CA
Originally Posted by rhumb
I always thought they should come up with some manual quick-release mechanism for the cross brace, that way, you could readily remove it for packing your gear for the big road trip then popping it back in when you get there, unload and head out for some backroad work.
wouldnt that adversly effect the stability/rigidity the bar is in place for?

or would it be so marginal that it wouldnt even matter?
Reply
Old Sep 27, 2006 | 09:48 AM
  #58  
Moosetang's Avatar
Tasca Super Boss 429 Member
 
Joined: February 1, 2004
Posts: 3,751
Likes: 0
Any kind of quick-release mech would lower the bar's durability, the longer/harder you drove it the more likely the latch would be to come loose. An easy screw-on/off connector would make more sense, as you could just give it another twist or two of tightening if it's getting sloppy.
Reply
Old Sep 27, 2006 | 10:00 AM
  #59  
Vermillion06's Avatar
Cobra Member
 
Joined: May 16, 2006
Posts: 1,322
Likes: 0
From: NV
Originally Posted by rhumb
I always thought they should come up with some manual quick-release mechanism for the cross brace, that way, you could readily remove it for packing your gear for the big road trip then popping it back in when you get there, unload and head out for some backroad work.
Good Idea... For those few times when you'd need to haul something big and bulky, removing the cross brace wouldn't be too bad. It could be the best of both worlds
Reply
Old Sep 27, 2006 | 11:32 AM
  #60  
07ShelbyWanter's Avatar
Bullitt Member
 
Joined: March 31, 2005
Posts: 232
Likes: 0
dont like it either..
Reply



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:28 PM.