Many get it painted. Correct me if I'm wrong, but The 13+ are painted plastic.

 

Sharktales car looked pretty badass once he got the fenders to work. 10-12 in the front and 05-09 in the back. But I kinda agree with Frankie here a little bit, 10-12 has the better front end but the 05-09 side profile and rear can be le sex.

 

I dunno guys I think the '05-'09 cars look terrible? Personal preference of course.

That's another reason I shy away from the '15…while the first year of a new body style might look hot, it ends up looking dated. Think of how the '13-'14 Mustangs (or you could really say all '10-'14 cars) look so much better; personally I'll only ever compare an S197 to the other S197s, so if I get what I think is the last/best of the body style, it will look good forever to me because I'll never compare it to newer models. But, if I buy a '15, when the '18, '19, '24 rolls out I know I'll just be looking at those which inevitably will be a lot nicer with a lot more features put back in standard (think xenons etc.). Likewise I'll never compare a '15 to a '14.

So for me personally, while it's nice to be the first kid on the block with the hot ticket new body style and the new chassis technology, all the bugs that go with it aside, I just don't like how early years of any body style from any manufacturer tend to age poorly.

Again personal preference and we are all lucky to have any of these cars.

 

I disagree that the early years tend to age poorly on most cars, on the contrary. For example I'd offer the first year of the Datsun 240z, or the early Jaguar xk-e type. These became longer, heavier, and more unwieldy as model years progressed. It's like the original designers had a vision that was distorted in later years, where they made changes for the sake of changes. I like the Porsche philosophy, don't make changes just for sh*ts and giggles. It should always be function over form, not the other way around.

 

I like everything better on the 13-14. HMMMMM.......guess that's why I own one !! Scott

 

I am thrilled with the way my 2010 still looks since I got it in 2009. Amazingly, it has not aged in my eyes - no grey hair, no wrinkles, no stomach over the belt

The 2010 GT - the forgotten S197 Mustang GT that looks the same as the 2011 GT, even though it got the 5.0L. Haha!

 

I think this could apply to our significant others.

:shiftyeyes:

 

Amen!

 

Great feedback all around. I totally understand that there are those who prefer the earlier and/or later bodystyles. There's no accounting for taste

The black plastic thing-- This was done early on as an effort to visually "slim" the profile of the car along with other styling tricks that were intended to make the Mustang seem smaller...and they worked. The thing that I notice from the side view of the '13 style, particularly the lighter colors, is that they look chubby...just too much "wall of car" going on. Some prefer this...that's fine. Ideally, the profile of the car would be lean enough to not need this (see 1969 style for a perfect example of a properly proportioned car, IMO)...but it was the best they could do.

Refreshing a body style by painting over black trim is a standard change. MANY models employ this over their life cycle... the black accents are part of the original design/appearance and often look better.

The halogen headlights were mentioned. Personally, I think the front end looks best with the base headlights. The HIDs look goofy to me, particularly when sitting next to halogen fog lamps on the GTs. Again, this is personal taste and the HIDs likely work better but aesthetically, they're a miss IMO.

 

Go ahead and call me biased, but I prefer the looks of the 10-12s. I think the back end is cleaner looking. I don't care for the blacked out tail lights with the red outlines & when someone mentions cheap looking plastic on a mustang, I immediately think of the plastic encompassing the GT medallion & the stuff the brackets the license plate on the 13-14s. The front end is another issue entirely. Putting GT500 front ends on V6s & GTs is the equivalent of when the army started issuing everyone berets. Special Forces earned those berets & they were a sign of something extraordinary, not something found everywhere you look. Were I a GT500 owner, I imagine I'd feel similarly about seeing my front end on a vehicle that costs half the price. All that being said, I'm pleased with the way that the apperance of my car is aging & I'm glad that I didn't purchase anything else (in my price range).

 

+1 with the sleek to mean comparison. What id really like to do is get a 2013 rear end conversion, bumper and tailights and all. And add on 2013 headlights witha 2012 gt front fascia with the halo rings in the fogs to accent the led strips in the 13 headlights. Add on roush side splitters and a gt/cs rear diffisuer and i think that would be pretty much set. Oh and a gt/cs pedestal wing and MMD aluminum rear window louver. To me that would be a perfect exterior look

 

Great topic!
I have a 2014 on order, and I love the way they look (especially compared to the 2015)
But I think the front end on the 2010-2012 is better (cleaner), but I like everything else better on the 2013-2014. IMO
A lot was actually changed cosmetically and mechanically on the 2013-2014, all making a better car (except for maybe the front end)

 

I really wish it would be easier to swap a 13 interior into a 12. The gauges and track apps screen would be awesome! I know theres a thread on this but it all seems really complicated especially with the track apps program

 

I think the wider body, lower line and fastback of the 2015 with '13-'14 tail lights and the '12 front end. I mean come on!

 

Great thread. I love the look of 11-12 (add in 10 for Tony!). That's why I bought one. Mean is the look, from all angles. IMO, the 13-14 front end looks rounded, not mean. When Ford installs the HIDs, they move them inboard, too close to the fogs. That's where the 'cross-eyed catfish' comment comes from. With the 10-12 standard halogen lights, they are moved all the way out to the sides, with the orange turn signals inboard. To me, that looks much better. Of course, the actual lighting itself is superior with HIDs, no question. As for the black-out along the entire bottom of the 10-12, I happen to like it very much, and those pieces hold up very well against rock chips, versus a painted version (rocks get kicked up onto our roads and racetracks here in Nevada). They do also (IMO) make the car look slimmer. And the contrast on some paint colors looks great (see my 2011 Race Red GT for example!). Lastly, I think the rear taillights on the 13-14 are awesome, day or night. Great job there. However, I do not like the blackout center panel or the license plate area. So I added more than $.02, so kill me!

 

GT I prefer 10-12 styling. Gt500 and Roush I prefer 13-14.

 

I'm another 10-12 lover (go figure). I like the more aggressive muscular look of the front along with the leaner appearance provided by the black lower body accents.
IMO the black lower body parts that are unpainted are a godsend as my previous cars were always a PITA to keep this area looking good.
When the `13's first came out it was a love hate thing in regards to the changes. I researched the notion of swapping the tail lights but decided I didn't want to turn the car into a cobble of parts from different years. That and being a rare color means it should probably be left alone.
Over time you learn to appreciate things more and while I love my GT I could be persuaded to swap it for a `13 SBY Boss. Or maybe I'll just have one of each...

 

I agree wholeheartedly with the analogy of the Army giving the black beret that was a tradition of the Rangers to all soldiers with Ford putting the GT500 front on the 13+ GT. I don’t think they should have done it, but what is done is done. That being said I don’t get why people love the look on the GT 500 but don’t like it on the GT.

 

I like the gt500 grille and hood. The styling cues all around I like. The 13 gt I don't care for it. However, swapping the grille with say the roush inserts makes the gt look better. I've even see a Shelby front end conversion on a gt and it looks great. That's why my opinion is such.

 

Thats funny as that is how I feel...I think it is the shape of the fog lights on the GT500 which makes less of a Harpo Marx look in the front...I actually do like the looks of the front of my 12 better than the 14 and also wish the 14 had the black trim rather than the painted as I agree it makes the car look fatter....but I had to have the V8!!!!