jenks

I'm hoping they try to emulate the 69 and 70's body sytle when they do the redesign.

novicius

For the Mustang to maintain or increase its marketshare, one would think that it will get smaller in the future. The current design is an instant classic and a body style that will be spoken about glowingly 30 years from now, no doubt about that. But for the future, the 'Stang needs to become more efficient (both in size and in fuel consumption), more aerodynamic, and lighter.

Blasphemous thoughts, I understand...

rhumb

Makes eminent sense to me as I think a performance car ought to strive towards low mass (to benefit all dynamic aspects of performance), low drag (for performance and economy) and moderate size (to help with low mass and drag and to make it easier to place on a tight road).

The Stang seems to be on its second round of slow bloat, the first happening to the first four body styles (up to '73). The Mustang II was a drastic resetting of the size/mass dial but alas, the dial is moving ever upward to where the biggest, heaviest Stang's now are approaching the leviathan dimensions of the '71-'73 version.

I hope that the recent surge in gas prices will be a shot across the bow that the ever larger, ever more powerful approach is a dangerous dead-end and that a greater level of design and engineering discipline and rigor ought to be applied. Not that the current Stang is yet quite a pig, well, maybe the GT500, but the trend line is not encouraging.

Yeah, there are all sorts of reasons (excuses) for this, but I think it's whose engineers and designers can keep their performance cars slim and trim that will have the best long-term viability, especially with the specter of ever more volatile fuel prices.

m05fastbackGT

First off Jacostang ?? I'm well aware of the fox platform lasting 14 years!!! in fact, if you look at my signature you'll see for yourself that I previously owned 3 fox Stangs in which my last one was a 93 SVT Cobra!!..As for the reason why that platform lasted so long ?? was mostly because of how strong sales continued to rise even up to the very end of it's production run and I'm not knocking the fox stangs in anyway whatsoever!!! in fact I was very happy with all 3 of mine and never had any major problems with any of them!!! Therefore, if you like hatchbacks ?? I can respect that..However, I'm from the old school and one of the main reasons why I traded in my 93 Cobra?? was because the S-197 reminded me a lot of the original 65 fastback that I grew up admiring since the age of 8 yrs. old.. so again, I can respect your preference towards the hatchback but on the other hand?? my preference has always been the original 65-70 design and in my opinion ?? the Mustang was never intended as a practicle car !!..it was originally designed as a muscle/sports car which btw is my interpretation of what fun is all about ? I suppose the reason why I was never crazy about hatchbacks ? is because they look so much like Pinto's and later as Escort's.. therefore, I totally agree with HOTLAP on that one!!! I also owned a 78 Mustang II King Cobra and that's exactly what they remind me of..Anyway as I previously mentioned !!! I never intended on offending anyone..

bob

Its a 2+2 coupe, well except for the 1st run of Shelby's, they deleted the rear seats so that it could compete as a sports car. Anywhosit, anything other than a 2+2 coupe would be a mustang in name only and not really the same car. If I'm reading you right it would be better for Ford to make a dedicated sports car with its own name and history rather than cash in on the mustang's heritage

rhumb

I'd have to disagree with that. Sure, a lot of hatchbacks do look like econocars, but that's more a reflection of the design needs of economy cars, not anything inherent in hatchback designs. Indeed, my Probe GT hatchback is a very sleek design and profile, certainly as sleek and sporty as any Mustang design, if not more so. I think people need to let go of the reflexive but baseless presumption that any hatchback will necessarily look like a Honda Civic or Pinto. And good design and engineering can readily assure excellent chassis rigidity and light weight.

As for practicality of the Stang, that has been one of it's strongest features that have enhanced its longevity, the combination of good performance (at least the V8s and various turbo models) with good looks, daily driver practicality and high value and affordability. I think a hatchback design only enhances the practicality value significantly, especially for single-car drivers, without detracting from any other of the basic Mustang strengths.

Vermillion06

While it would be great for the Mustang to be about the same size and weight as the original '65-66, as long as it doesn't gain any more size and weight when compared to the current Mustang it should be fine.

Look at the Infiniti G35 coupe; it is nearly identical in curb weight, width, length, interior room,and power to weight ratio to the current Mustang GT. The automotive press loves the G35. It even gets nearly the same gas mileage with a V6 that the GT gets with a V8. Nobody in the press complains about the G35's dimensions, performance, or gas mileage.

Another thing that I don't think anyone has brought up is that the Mustang now also fills the position in Ford's lineup that the MN12 Thunderbird used to : a mid-sized coupe. I believe this is why the S197 is a few inches larger than the SN95 in most dimensions. It also has to be an entry-level affordable sporty car (V6) AND a mid-sized coupe and Ford's legendary performance leader.

SteelTownStang

You can speculate until you're blue in the face. No one will have a clue until next year. Even then, it'll change 100 times before it hits the show room floor. What ya think the 2020's will look like, will it have wheels? I heard that it'll drive itself... and fly over buildings in a single bound... no, really... it'll drive itself... and will also be equiped with lasers to shoot down those pesky Cameros...

MustangFanatic

Ford would be wise from an efficiency and performance stand point to reduce the size and mass of the S197 to a more sporty level since both aspects could be improved with such a strategy. It would truly be a win-win situation for those we seek improvements in both categories

GTJOHN

Ford claims safety & comfort is the reason for the added weight. GM is also struggling to reduce weight on the new Camaro.
I understand that more weight will be added, but 3500-4000lbs? Heck, some 4 door sedans don't weigh that much.

m05fastbackGT

When I made that statement about not being crazy towards hatchbacks ?? I was referring only to the Mustang II as resembling a Pinto and the Fox Mustang looking similar to an Escort !! the reason being ? the Mustang II was based upon the Pinto platform and the Fox Mustang was based off the Fairmont/Escort platform.. However, I wasn't referring to all hatcbacks as looking like econocars !!! and I assumed that you knew where I was coming from ?? But it appears that I was wrong and apologize for anything you may have taken what was said in the wrong way and should have been more precise, about my statement...Suppose that's what I get for making an assumption lol. As for practicality ? you once again misunderstood where I was coming from..I clearly stated that my preference was the original design from 64 1/2-73 was never intended as a practicle car, but that of a muscle/sports car..I wasn't referring to any of the Fox and pre Fox generation models !!!

viza

+10
the concept is definitely fugly. Ford designers need to stop thinking like pontiac/dodge designers.

Gaudy overstated design != muscular or cool. I'm all for further design refinement but the 2005-2007 design is a winner and should not be tampered with too much.

When it stops looking like a mustang it's not cool. Glad I got mine already

bob

GASP!!!!!!....mark my words, you will rue the day that you uttered deathscort in the same post as Mustang, now begone and start rueing!

Seriously though, I dont think the Fox chassis shared anything with the escort, save maybe a styling philosophy during the mid to late 80's. The Fox chassis was Fairmont, LTD, Thunderbird, Mustang, Capri, Cougar,Zephyr, Mark IIV, and so on.

m05fastbackGT

Other than borrowing a styling philosophy from the Escort, I stand corrected and shouldn't have selected such poor choice of wording..I suppose that after so many years that have passed by ? I sort of forgotten that the FOX platform not only consisted of both the Fairmont and Mustang but also the LTD, T-bird, Capri, Cougar, Zephyr and Lincoln mark VII which had nothing to do with the Escort platform although their were numerous occasions when certain people would mess with me and ask when I was going to get rid of that Escort looking Mustang and get a real one ? perhaps they were just jealous because at the time, I still had my 93 SVT. Cobra and they had just the regular GT even though it was the new SN-95 that just came out in 94 ? but who really knows as to why those comments were made ?? and now that I look back.. I shouldn't have got all caught up into their childish remarks to begin with...

rhumb

The Escort, Stang, Fairmont, LTD, etc of the era did follow a fairly similar styling DNA developed by Jack Telnack. It was a bit in response (recoil) from the overwrought, Baroque image of the early to mid seventies cars like the Stang II. The trim, crisp, modern and purposeful styling of the '79 Foxstang was generally a great breath of fresh air over the Stang II, as was the overall emphasis on modern(ish) engineering and functionality. Many people forget or never experienced how pathetic most performance cars were in the mid to late '70's.

Of course, it did loose most of the traditional Stang styling cues, but I think on balance, it was a huge step forward for the Stang as evidenced by the platform's (over?) long lifespan exceeding a quarter century.

bob

Although I was wee lad during the mid 70's I think the only bright spot on the domestic performance scene were the SD 455 Firebirds.

rhumb

The SD 455 was a pretty awesome motor, more so in that it survived in a genuine HiPo guise so late into the early emissions age (up to '73 I believe). Even with the necessary lower CR, it still had all the good stuff inside and put out impressive power and performance numbers. It eventually succumbed and was replaced by a station wagon 455 of some 200 weezing hp.

The T/A 400, up to about 220hp, was pretty decent and could dip into the 14's bone stock (which, for the mid-late 70's was like dipping into the 12's today).

That Pontiac station wagon 455 was replaced by the smaller but more potent T/A 400 which was pretty much duking it out solely with the L82 from Chevy in the Vette, though Dodge Little Red Truck fans might chime in here.

The L82, a bit like the SD 455, was a bit of a holdout from the muscle car days, what with forged internals, big(ger) valve heads and various other '60's'esque performance goodies but alas was down to about 210-230hp, depending on the year. Good performance for the day, basically neck and neck with the T/A 400 with 15 second flat 1/4s, at mid 90s trap speeds and about 132 top end.

Ford really didn't get back on the V8 performance kick again until the '83 Mustang GT "5.0" with a bigger 2bbl carb, marine cam and better exhaust. It only put out 157hp but was competitive with the 170-185hp Z28 by being several hundred pounds lighter. Sounded good for the day too as most cars sounded like vacuum cleaners then. The 5.0 gained 4bbl carb for '83 along with a 5 speed and, well, the rest is history.

05retro

Totally agree. The red one looks like they crushed the front end of the S197 like an empty soda can. And the silver one is a camaro redux. But I dont put faith in any of these renderings, they are usually pretty far off.

GTJOHN

I do expect a "Shelby-ish" front end on the 08 or 09.

BigBlock

I don't mind the Shelby like front end on the red one. Makes it look more like the show car did. Which is good. But that silver thing is butt ugly. Looks like instead of making it more like the king of style 69-70 mustang they went and grafted a fugly nose onto the back half of the 71-73 . Not the direction I wanted to see it go by any means. If that truely is a a ford design. Take that artist/designer out and put him/her out of there misery. I would say they should no longer be working at ford. Thats how bad it looks.