A Cougar would do very well if they did it right. Nissan seems to be able to have both a 350z and G37 Coupe. Why couldn't Ford to the same thing with a Mustang and Cougar. The upscale Cougar could have all the luxury items that type of buyer would want plus IRS. Then allowing for an optional IRS for Mustang buyers.

 

No one is going to pay Infiniti money for a Mercury....Mercury only sells 120,000 vehicles total per year. That's less than the Mustang's 150,000. You wouldn't be able to charge enough for the car to justify the new tooling to change it into a Cougar. Because is not just bodypanels on a chassis in 1967, you'd only be able to change front fenders and hood.... Mercury's today only get different headlamps ( same shape ) and grille, as well as tailights ( same shape ) from Ford's with the same interior in different colors.

Finally, if they can't afford IRS in the $50,000 GT500, then they wouldn't put it in a $35,000 Mercury.

Not saying the 350Z-G37 setup is bad, just don't see it plausible @ FoMoCo. Now if they made a convertible version of the Lincoln MKR.....

 

+1000!!!!

Good luck w/ your degree! I assume you're at ArtCenter or Academy in SF. Just remember have a thick skin in this business. Be confident and realize not everyone will like your stuff and that is not the point. The point is to create the best you can considering the limitations. We want to be artists, and people think we are, but we don't get free reign- there cost, safety, manufacturing etc limitations- not to mention the taste ( or lack thereof ) of your client or management! Just hope you get that wonderful alignment of the planets where everything lines up and you can be part of a sweet-*** product!

 

Once again, great points!!!

 

as antagonizing as the wait has been and rediculous as it may seem i agree.... ford took the right steps in not releasing to early, as the design wont look as dated as others..

 

Thanks man! And yeah, I'm at the Academy of Art, just started this semester. Used to be in Mech Eng, but this sort of fits me more.

I know for a fact I won't be getting that perfect job right away, but I'll do whatever it takes to get there Thanks once again for the advice and kind words

 

Hey man hope to see you there next year
i PLAN TO ENROLL FOR THE INDUSTRIAL DESIGN!

 

Trust me they'd sell a lot of Cougars. It's not going to be in the same volume as the Mustang. It wasn't like that back in the 60's either. It would be a great car to relaunch the Mercury brand.

 

Not when they're trying to re-launch Merc as a premium small-car brand.

 

[quote=gnat-sum;5633189]You've got to be kidding me...

quote]

I don't need any of you to preach to me about car design. I have studied it for 3 1/2 decades, well before many of you were conceived and I know exactly what goes into designing and engineering car.

Also I don't need anyone tell me whom I should or should not respect. Of course I should have expected this from today's attitude of an entitlement society. Respect must be earned. No educational, intellectual, social or monetary status entitles anyone to respect. If I am working to for monetary, business gain or even artistic expression or admiration then I may earn the respect of others. However it is not entitled to me.

There is a consequences in taking an artistic risk. Many famous designers, artists and musicians have had hits only to follow up with a bomb or a disappointment. Negative criticism comes with the territory. If a designer cannot handle the criticism then they need to find something else to do.

I made a saterical point that illustrated that the 2010 Mustang's rear end looked to me like it was chopped on MSPaint by a 6 year old. I did not do it because I was genuinely trying to respresent my own skill. It's not to say that any designer lacked the skills to design a Mustang. The satire just represents the lack of imagination of finding something harmonious and attractive to do for a particular detail of the taillamp instead of using a ruler to draw two rudimentary asymetrical straight lines angled down to meet a point at the bottom of the taillamp thinking that would be an attractive advant garde design. Like many of us have said, it looks to us like a few things were changed for changes sake and were determined to do something different whether it looked good or not. Some people will find these changes wonderful while some will not. However we all have the right to discuss it without being censored by people who don't want to hear about it. I would suggest if you don't want to hear about it then stop reading the threads or skip the posts you don't want to read.

No one is attacking anyone who is praising the 2010.

Please spare me the comments that insist I need to wait for the zebra camo to come off. The objectionable details that have been fully exposed such as the front turn lamps, taillamps, massive Dodge Ram nose and hood on the Shelby are not going to change with the camo off. With the zebra camo on, I can see the body design details well enough to determine that the majority of the body lines are okay the way they are changed.

The majority of the body design changes look fine with a few exceptions.

I am all for the evolution of the Mustang into attractive forward thinking design elements that depart from copying exact details of the original classic models as long as it beautiful, sensual, harmonious, retains the right hallmarks and doesn't end up looking like it is some angry ugly transformer running in a death race during the apocolypse.

 

Today I seen a 1968 Cougar that had been running around for years in original condition in what appeared to be the original pale yellow paint. Today I saw it completely refinished in a beautiful white paint. The car was restored flawlessly and it looked beautiful. All the chrome was perfect and the electric shaver grille was elegant. I lived at the time to understand the allure of the early Cougars and I remember it well.

 

They were unibody cars back then too... Not bodypanels sitting on a chassis... That would be a body on frame car...

 

I never said I could design a better Mustang. I posted a pictorial satire to poke fun at the seemingly rudimentary effort put into redesigning the bottom of the taillamps and it was not some representation of work I had created to show anyone that I could design better.

Like I stated before, I fully understand and know the process of designing and engineering a car and how the Mustang had to be redesigned around all the same hard points. However with most redesigns based on an harmonious existing design they never really look as good as the original designs they were based on because of designing around the hard points.

The only offensive details of the 2010 are not because they and to be designed around the existing hardpoints. It's because of the exceution of a couple of exact details that are not pleasing. You can say all you want that designers know what they are doing but they take a big risk thinking that what they are doing will be a sensation or a bust. A failure doesn't mean that they have no intelligence or skill. All it means that their idea is not what people want.

However designers in the past have managed to facelift most Mustangs sucessfully and beautifully without resorting to offensive styling quirks. It's something for them to think about before the launch of a new car. After all there were enough people who disiked small details of the Focus and Ford responded by changing them.

I also understand the process of a musician since my brother is one and I have worked with him doing some writing. However if you write a song and it doesn't sound good, no matter how much you have involved yourself in the process or practiced to be perfect it may never be a good enough song to get applause and accolades. People know what they like when they hear it or see it so if they dont like something you can expect criticism and little or no applause. However it's egotistical, immature and self centered to get upset and lash at someone because they may not like what you have done.

 

As beautiful as it would be there is really no market for such a Lincoln nor more than it would be for a Cougar. Unless economic times rebound and everyone resumes their self indulgence, such risk taking will not happen at Ford. The Mustang will have to serve all buyers for now.

 

No one is trying to censor your posts.Where is that even coming from? Also, I never had a problem with this thread. Its full of a lot of good posts with content, I don't see what suggesting I skip threads has to do with anything

The point we were making was that your attempt at humor did nothing but trivialize the amount of work that went into something very complex. You moved beyond a legitimate criticism of someones work when you decided to say "hey look, a 6 year old can do this guys job, and I can too." I was not saying HEY LOVE THIS CAR ITS AMAZING! I was saying that you weren't qualified to design this car and that the people who are designing it ARE.

I've made no effort to tell you the car is more appealing than you find it. If you or anyone else doesn't like it, who am I to tell you otherwise. Personal preferences are all different. My commentary was based on your

And please don't flaunt the "I've been around for X number of years" deal. As you said yourself, no one is entitled to any sort of respect, they must earn it. Just because you have been around for a while doesn't warrant respect either. I really doubt that you have the credentials and ability to do any better as your post seems to imply with the " I've done this sincce before you were born" mentality. Last I checked you weren't designing the new Mustang. I'm fairly sure theres a reason for that


And on a side note, hope to see you here next year Edson. The facilities at the Academy of Art are amazing, and the staff is top notch. Definitely the best place I can think of to go for ID

 

Intelligence and qualification has nothing to do with making a bad design choice. The best of the best have been known to make poor judgements. That vulnerability resulted in such wonderful things as the Edsel, the FWD Mustang that became the Probe, the 1980-82 Tbird that absolutely bombed after three of the most successful years on the market, the Ford Five Hundred VW Passat look-a-like that was rebadged a Taurus with a new front which they are now scurrying to replace as soon as possible.

Yes I was deliberately satirizing a bad design choice to illustrate what a truly lame, ugly and uncreative design the bottom of the taillamps have. If it get changed by the time the car hits the showroom then great. If not then the Mustang will just suck with ugly taillamps. If the cannot do an attractive taillamp then they should have went the route the 1970 Mustang did and modestly change the taillamps into something alternate that geuninely looked good.

 

I can trivialize the effort that went into the taillamps because in my opinion it does looks like something restyled in five minutes by a six year old using MSPaint. If they spent that much time designing that look with two angled straight lines then they are not very creative or artistic. I am sure much engineering, time and expertise that was not rivial went into making that taillamp look like crap.

An educated experienced designer can design all they want but what matters if what he does looks good or not. No one will be impressed on how much expertise when into engineering an ugly taillamp if people dont like it.

I was not demanding nor asking for respect as you put it. I could genuinely care less if I have it from any of you. The only reason I made the statement about being around so many years is that I don't need anyone to tell me what's involved in car design when I already know and have studied it since my childhood. So here are people on here half my age who don't even know me assume I don't know anything about car design and want to preach to me with a preconception of what they think I do not know.

Designers can be a real pain in the butt asserting that some of the crap they dole as design is gold just because their egos decree it so. It always fun to watch those egos crush when their "show" is cancelled.

 

 

lol wow this thread is gonna start a brawl

 

My take on the rear end of the 10' is that it is the most changed part of the car. I remember that one of the few criticisms that the 05' had at launch was the big, blocky back end. Ford, listened to critics and addressed the issue by mixing it up. For good or worse we asked for a different back end and now we got it.

Since I am not a 5th gen owner maybe I have less of a bias than the current 05-09 owners. In my opinion the car isn't all that different looking. I'm amazed that such a minor refresh is being criticized by people who own the current car. This refresh keeps the same retro cues that everyone seems to love with a slightly more "upscale" look. People are complaining about the tail lights of the 10' car, yet the current 05-09 tail lights are not to hot either. We managed to live with them.

Ford is in a tough spot with the new Mustang. No matter how great the design is the car will not be as successful as the 05' car. Gas prices, poor economy and plenty of new competitors will ensure that sales numbers won't reach the level we saw in 05', and 06'.