2010+ Info as far as we know
GT Member
Joined: September 20, 2008
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
zzcoop: There is a difference between a "refresh" and a "rehash":
The '67-'68 Mustangs were a refresh of the '65-'66 Mustangs.
The '69-'70 Mustangs were a refresh of the '67-'68 Mustangs.
The '71-'73 Mustangs were a rehash of the '69-'70 Mustangs.
The 2010 Mustangs pics are perilously close to a rehash of the '05-'09 Mustangs, but I have not labeled them that yet pending a personal examination of the 2010 in the sheetmetal.
Early returns are indicating that rehash will defeat refresh by an overwhelming majority...
I'm Greg "Eights" Ates, and I approved this message.
The '67-'68 Mustangs were a refresh of the '65-'66 Mustangs.
The '69-'70 Mustangs were a refresh of the '67-'68 Mustangs.
The '71-'73 Mustangs were a rehash of the '69-'70 Mustangs.
The 2010 Mustangs pics are perilously close to a rehash of the '05-'09 Mustangs, but I have not labeled them that yet pending a personal examination of the 2010 in the sheetmetal.
Early returns are indicating that rehash will defeat refresh by an overwhelming majority...
I'm Greg "Eights" Ates, and I approved this message.
GT Member
Joined: September 20, 2008
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
Whoops....we're supposed to be talking 2010.....i think it's a refinement of the '05. like the C6 is with the C5. It's going to be a distilled 2005 Mustang for the better,i'm already loving what i can see,especially the interior.
Also,once the C6 came out,i really dislike the C5 Vette now,i'm thinking the same with '05-09,with exceptions like the Bullitt and SGT. It's the same with the '99-04,it just made the '94-98 look so dainty and lame,except for the Cobras.
Also,once the C6 came out,i really dislike the C5 Vette now,i'm thinking the same with '05-09,with exceptions like the Bullitt and SGT. It's the same with the '99-04,it just made the '94-98 look so dainty and lame,except for the Cobras.
Bullitt Member
Joined: December 17, 2007
Posts: 410
Likes: 0
I would say the '69-70 is a rehash of the '67-68 and the '71-73 is a total train derailment. I love the '71-73 Mustang by the way,but starting in '69,The Mustang was losing its way and the big '71 finished that pony off. The original Mustang engineers hated how the Mustang had turned into a big gaudy muscle car,they said the Boss 302 was as close as it came to the original spirit of the car. That's from an old Mustang book 'Mustang-america's classic pony car' by Randy Leffingwell. It's a incredible book,lots of behind the scenes stuff you don't usually get,but quite old,i think it ends with the '94 Cobra.
Greg "Eights" Ates
Last edited by Eights; Oct 29, 2008 at 11:02 AM.
Mach 1 Member
Joined: July 24, 2008
Posts: 937
Likes: 0
From: Traverse City
Whoops....we're supposed to be talking 2010.....i think it's a refinement of the '05. like the C6 is with the C5. It's going to be a distilled 2005 Mustang for the better,i'm already loving what i can see,especially the interior.
Also,once the C6 came out,i really dislike the C5 Vette now,i'm thinking the same with '05-09,with exceptions like the Bullitt and SGT. It's the same with the '99-04,it just made the '94-98 look so dainty and lame,except for the Cobras.
Also,once the C6 came out,i really dislike the C5 Vette now,i'm thinking the same with '05-09,with exceptions like the Bullitt and SGT. It's the same with the '99-04,it just made the '94-98 look so dainty and lame,except for the Cobras.
Cobra R Member
Joined: September 26, 2007
Posts: 1,931
Likes: 0
From: Massachusetts
zzcoop: There is a difference between a "refresh" and a "rehash":
The '67-'68 Mustangs were a refresh of the '65-'66 Mustangs.
The '69-'70 Mustangs were a refresh of the '67-'68 Mustangs.
The '71-'73 Mustangs were a rehash of the '69-'70 Mustangs.
The 2010 Mustangs pics are perilously close to a rehash of the '05-'09 Mustangs, but I have not labeled them that yet pending a personal examination of the 2010 in the sheetmetal.
Early returns are indicating that rehash will defeat refresh by an overwhelming majority...
I'm Greg "Eights" Ates, and I approved this message.
The '67-'68 Mustangs were a refresh of the '65-'66 Mustangs.
The '69-'70 Mustangs were a refresh of the '67-'68 Mustangs.
The '71-'73 Mustangs were a rehash of the '69-'70 Mustangs.
The 2010 Mustangs pics are perilously close to a rehash of the '05-'09 Mustangs, but I have not labeled them that yet pending a personal examination of the 2010 in the sheetmetal.
Early returns are indicating that rehash will defeat refresh by an overwhelming majority...
I'm Greg "Eights" Ates, and I approved this message.
From what I can tell they are doing the same thing as 99'. They took the 05' and made it look more aggressive, sure the back end takes some getting used to but so did the back of the 05'!
Shelby GT350 Member
Joined: June 9, 2008
Posts: 2,061
Likes: 1
From: Rochester NY
Just put in that 400+ HP 5.0 and that rehash will turn into a refresh as soon as you mash the pedal. Candy cane tail lights? Cheap black plastic? Hips of an anorexic 12yr old? What you talkin about Willis?
Last edited by RedCandy5.0; Oct 29, 2008 at 01:10 PM.
Cobra R Member
Joined: September 26, 2007
Posts: 1,931
Likes: 0
From: Massachusetts
My one major criticism of the 10' Mustang has nothing to do with it's styling, it is that it is being rushed, like previous Mustangs. We get new styling, yet we get the old motor and tranny (1994 all over again).
Why oh why are cars like the Fusion getting a 6MT/6AT before the Mustang? Though I look forward to seeing the car I'm not going to enjoy seeing it get spanked by the Camaro in all the comparison tests! 2011 can't come soon enough!
Why oh why are cars like the Fusion getting a 6MT/6AT before the Mustang? Though I look forward to seeing the car I'm not going to enjoy seeing it get spanked by the Camaro in all the comparison tests! 2011 can't come soon enough!
Legacy TMS Member
Joined: February 8, 2004
Posts: 3,399
Likes: 7
From: Cincinnati, OH
Tony Alonso: Well, Tony, how can you explain the Porsche 911?? It has looked same ol' same ol' since around 1964 or 1965--Porschephiles are encouraged to post the correct introductory year of the 911 in this thread. It remains unmistakably a Porsche 911 even AFTER 911s dropped air-cooling for water-cooling!
Greg "Eights" Ates
Greg "Eights" Ates
The sillouette definitely is retained, but a comparison of model years would definitely see evolution and the inclusion of more features, interior refinements, as well as power.
In my opinion, the S197 Mustang brought new people who would never have considered the car as owners, but many of those owners might be of an age where the experience of interior and feature content is based on the past 15 years, rather than the much longer timeframe of the first models.
By the way, the water-cooled engine caused a BUNCH of outcry when it happened, but people adapted, espcially when those power outputs rose.
Last edited by Tony Alonso; Oct 30, 2008 at 09:04 AM.
SUPERCHARGED RED ROCKET ------------------Master-Moderator
Joined: May 11, 2006
Posts: 10,645
Likes: 2,512
From: Carnegie, PA
m05fastbackGT: Great posting--informative, persuasive, and concise! So persuasive, in fact, that I say we cut us some templates out of plywood of the '65 G.T. 350 fastback roofline, the '99-'04 roofline, and the S197 roofline. Then we lower the templates onto an S197 and compare the "fit" of the templates to the actual sheetmetal. 'Loser buys a twenty-four-bottle case of Negra Modello, and we both get shatfaced in the shade! Designated Drivers required!
I concede some points:
(A) the S197 is a significantly larger vehicle than a '65 Mustang fastback, so a '65 Mustang fastback rooline Sawzalled off a '65 and welded onto an S197 would look ridiculous, especially over the much-expanded rear seat area of the S197. To make it actually work, the '65-'66 roofline was "scaled up" a few percent to maintain the proper proportions on the larger vehicle
(B) the '65-'66 fastback roofline is different than the full fastback roofline of the '67-'68 Mustangs, and I am not claiming that the roofline of the S197 is a Xerox of the '67-'68 full fastback roofline. More or less, the '65-'66 fastback roofline is only a "partial" fastback, since it ends just forward of the decklid--and the decklid is flat. The '67-'68 roofline, however, extends to the rear of the vehicle and includes the decklid, a striking difference.
(C) the S197's roofline probably is a little flatter, as you say, since the '65-'66 roofline had to curve more to end just ahead of the decklid on what was a shorter car in its time--especially shorter in the rear seat area!
Nevertheless, if Ford had wanted to emulate the '99-'04 roofline, it woulda been easier and cheaper for them to do that because all the tooling was already in use for the pre-2005 Mustangs--especially the small rear windows on each side that are still used in the S197 convertibles. But in fact Ford went to considerable extra effort and extra cost to come up with a "scaled up" '65-'66 G.T. 350 fastback roofline to fit the larger dimensions & proportions of the S197 body. It was a brilliant styling touch, to be sure, and is one of the many superb features of the S197 that made the Mustang young again (the grille, the dash, the round headlights in recessed bezels, etc.)!
"Your Honor, the Defense rests its case."
Greg "Eights" Ates
I concede some points:
(A) the S197 is a significantly larger vehicle than a '65 Mustang fastback, so a '65 Mustang fastback rooline Sawzalled off a '65 and welded onto an S197 would look ridiculous, especially over the much-expanded rear seat area of the S197. To make it actually work, the '65-'66 roofline was "scaled up" a few percent to maintain the proper proportions on the larger vehicle
(B) the '65-'66 fastback roofline is different than the full fastback roofline of the '67-'68 Mustangs, and I am not claiming that the roofline of the S197 is a Xerox of the '67-'68 full fastback roofline. More or less, the '65-'66 fastback roofline is only a "partial" fastback, since it ends just forward of the decklid--and the decklid is flat. The '67-'68 roofline, however, extends to the rear of the vehicle and includes the decklid, a striking difference.
(C) the S197's roofline probably is a little flatter, as you say, since the '65-'66 roofline had to curve more to end just ahead of the decklid on what was a shorter car in its time--especially shorter in the rear seat area!
Nevertheless, if Ford had wanted to emulate the '99-'04 roofline, it woulda been easier and cheaper for them to do that because all the tooling was already in use for the pre-2005 Mustangs--especially the small rear windows on each side that are still used in the S197 convertibles. But in fact Ford went to considerable extra effort and extra cost to come up with a "scaled up" '65-'66 G.T. 350 fastback roofline to fit the larger dimensions & proportions of the S197 body. It was a brilliant styling touch, to be sure, and is one of the many superb features of the S197 that made the Mustang young again (the grille, the dash, the round headlights in recessed bezels, etc.)!
"Your Honor, the Defense rests its case."
Greg "Eights" Ates
As for one of your points, in which you conceded. For starters, I totally agree with point (A) So from that aspect, we're definitely both on the same page.
As for point (B) I'm fully aware of the fact, in which the 65-66 fastback greenhouse is different from the full fastback greenhouse of the 67-68 models. Which FYI, are my favorite Mustangs of all time.
I'm also fully aware that you were referring to the current 05-09 greenhouse, as a Xerox copy of only the 65-66 fastback greenhouse.
As for what I posted concerning the 65-68 fastback models. I clearly stated that the A pillar or windshield posts from the 65-68 models, were all shorter and also had higher forward angled slopes. Whereas the current 05-09 A pillar posts, are clearly longer and actually have lower/downward slopes. Thus giving the 05-09 greenhouse, it's taller and curvy shaped roofline. Otherwise the roofline itself, would've been much longer, and also have a much flatter curve.
Therefore, this was the only similarity between the current 05-09 greenhouse and the 99-04, in which I had pointed out.
For I didn't post anything, nor did I imply that you claimed the roofline of the S197 was a Xerox copy of the 67-68 full fastback greenhouse.
As for point (C) Refer back to point (B)
Once again, you misinterpreted my point. In which I didn't claim that Ford had emulated the 99-04 roofline. But had once again, clearly stated. The 99-04 greenhouse evolved into what we now currently refer to, as today's modern designed fastback. ala current 05-09 greenhouse. A.K.A your upscaled, 65-66 GT fastback roofline.
That being said, "Your Honor, the Commonwealth now rests it's case."
Last edited by m05fastbackGT; Oct 30, 2008 at 11:00 PM.
Cobra R Member
Joined: September 26, 2007
Posts: 1,931
Likes: 0
From: Massachusetts
Perhaps this may be off topic for this thread but, we are talking Mustang evolution. what do you think of Ford possibly offering an AWD system in a Mustang or a similar car based off the same platform?
I'm wanting a WRX/ STI like handling with the raw grunt of a Mustang, plus an all season car is great for daily driving!
I know this will never happen but a cool what if scenario.
I'm wanting a WRX/ STI like handling with the raw grunt of a Mustang, plus an all season car is great for daily driving!
I know this will never happen but a cool what if scenario.
Mach 1 Member
Joined: July 24, 2008
Posts: 937
Likes: 0
From: Traverse City
Perhaps this may be off topic for this thread but, we are talking Mustang evolution. what do you think of Ford possibly offering an AWD system in a Mustang or a similar car based off the same platform?
I'm wanting a WRX/ STI like handling with the raw grunt of a Mustang, plus an all season car is great for daily driving!
I know this will never happen but a cool what if scenario.
I'm wanting a WRX/ STI like handling with the raw grunt of a Mustang, plus an all season car is great for daily driving!
I know this will never happen but a cool what if scenario.
MOTM Committee Member
Joined: April 17, 2006
Posts: 9,201
Likes: 2
From: SoCal
Perhaps this may be off topic for this thread but, we are talking Mustang evolution. what do you think of Ford possibly offering an AWD system in a Mustang or a similar car based off the same platform?
I'm wanting a WRX/ STI like handling with the raw grunt of a Mustang, plus an all season car is great for daily driving!
I know this will never happen but a cool what if scenario.
I'm wanting a WRX/ STI like handling with the raw grunt of a Mustang, plus an all season car is great for daily driving!
I know this will never happen but a cool what if scenario.
Bullitt Member
Joined: December 17, 2007
Posts: 410
Likes: 0
Greg "Eights" Ates
Cobra R Member
Joined: September 26, 2007
Posts: 1,931
Likes: 0
From: Massachusetts
I think the $25,000 ADMs we saw on the GT500 and now the crazy overpriced KR prove that Ford has a market for those willing to spend over $60,000 on a Mustang. I saw offer a high end Mustang with all the high tech stuff, over time some may trickle down to the lower models.
Mach 1 Member
Joined: September 22, 2005
Posts: 1,327
Likes: 0
From: Kansas
So you have a huge problem with Ford adding optional whiz-bang gadgets to the Mustang, but are fine with them adding AWD to the mix? A feature that by its very nature fundamentally changes the definition of what a Mustang IS?
Not following that logic at all.
Last edited by zzcoop; Oct 31, 2008 at 12:22 PM.
Cobra Member
Joined: August 29, 2007
Posts: 1,093
Likes: 0
From: smallest state in the union.
personally, I think they should sell something similar to what the LX was to the fox body design. Just sell a stripped out mustang, 4.6L, manual, cloth seats, all plastic dash, AM/FM radio without cd player (maybe casette player), no cruise or tilt wheel, no bells or whistles, no body accents, two wheel choices, limited paint selection. And, only make a limited amount, I bet they would sell, especially if they were a set price since all of the options would be set, besides paint and wheels.