2010 VIDEO IS UP!!!!!! and is REVEALED
#341
GT Member
Join Date: April 11, 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 154
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I like the front end, hood, hips, glass roof, and interior. Hate the rear 'plastic' bumper and the taillights. Small HP increase (is a 5.0L coming?). Overall, I like it nice refresh but I don't see myself trading in the 05 just yet.
#342
legacy Tms Member
just another opinion...really dont care for the taillights at all, the frontend just dont seem right(small buckets + the 'droopy eyes' look on the fogs like the Challenger- but I like it on the Challenger...) and the side crease behind the rear arch dont quite click with me for some reason...not only wouldnt I trade in our 06 or 07, after seeing the reveal we called and found a matching Vista Blue 09gt/stick we should be picking up monday- I really think the 05~09 will be 'the next 69' 20 years down the road, so looking at getting one just to store away. a lot of folks will love the '10 I'm sure, but gotta predict within 3-6 months the hoopla will die down and they will be offering incentives, unlike the 05 that was a PITA to get at msrp for almost 2 years...I just dont see that happening with the '10- dont get me wrong, I truly hope for Ford's sake it sells better than ever, but I cant see one in my driveway (certainly wouldnt want 3 of them- but its just one opinion). I'd love to hear Hau Tai-Tang's unofficial comments on the '10- but personally I think his crew captured the 'mustang' look better 5 years ago... the tapered taillights especially look out of place- perhaps a aftermarket bumper/lenses will come along, but again, time will tell.
gotta say the interior looks freakin great- wonder how many 05~09 guys might retrofit the dash into thiers- I mean it should be fairly easy to update at least the plastic right?
gotta say the interior looks freakin great- wonder how many 05~09 guys might retrofit the dash into thiers- I mean it should be fairly easy to update at least the plastic right?
#343
Member
Join Date: October 25, 2008
Location: Danvers, Ma.
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is it me or does that red interior look like it belongs in 1978 ?
Looks like probably same tranny just nicer handle. Leather is def easier on the hands on cold New England winters. Notice the OD On\Off under the interlock, just like my 95 T-Bird
Last edited by 2K6-GT; 11/24/08 at 04:36 AM.
#344
By the tone of some of the comments about the 2010 Mustang you'd think that Ford should've simply stopped making it. Keep in mind that the 2010's looks have to be based on the successful 2005 model, as it was so well accepted, and there's no doubt the 2010 looks "similar" to the 2005. It's supposed to, and that should keep most 2005-2009 owners happy as well as entice new interest in the brand to future first time buyers of the Mustang (which it will do). It's a good thing that Ford designs the cars and we comment on forums such as these. I'd hate to see what some of you would come up with.................Ford knows exactly what it is doing when it comes to the Mustang and where its going. How else would it have survived all these years?!
No, Ford doesn't know "exactly what it is doing when it comes to the Mustang and where it is going"--and the models I mentioned shows how lost they were in much of Mustang history.
How else would it have survived all these years? Two things: 1. It is affordable performance in a really good car, and 2. GM, Chrysler, and AMC had no clues at all--they were just imitating a phenomenom they could not understand. They're so clueless that they're doing it again!!!
A decade from now, anyone strolling through the graveyard of bygone car companies will find this epitaph inscribed on the tombstones of GM and Chrysler: "But WE built Mustangs, too!!!"
Greg "Eights" Ates
Last edited by Eights; 11/24/08 at 10:36 AM.
#345
"just another opinion...really dont care for the taillights at all, the frontend just dont seem right(small buckets + the 'droopy eyes' look on the fogs like the Challenger- but I like it on the Challenger...) and the side crease behind the rear arch dont quite click with me for some reason...not only wouldnt I trade in our 06 or 07, after seeing the reveal we called and found a matching Vista Blue 09gt/stick we should be picking up monday- I really think the 05~09 will be 'the next 69' 20 years down the road, so looking at getting one just to store away. a lot of folks will love the '10 I'm sure, but gotta predict within 3-6 months the hoopla will die down and they will be offering incentives, unlike the 05 that was a PITA to get at msrp for almost 2 years...I just dont see that happening with the '10- dont get me wrong, I truly hope for Ford's sake it sells better than ever, but I cant see one in my driveway (certainly wouldnt want 3 of them- but its just one opinion). I'd love to hear Hau Tai-Tang's unofficial comments on the '10- but personally I think his crew captured the 'mustang' look better 5 years ago... the tapered taillights especially look out of place- perhaps a aftermarket bumper/lenses will come along, but again, time will tell."
ford4v429: Your posting says it all--the 2005 is the next classic Mustang body style, and joins the '65 fastback (officially the "2+2"), the '67 fastback, and the '69 fastback (which might officially be the "sportroof") and will be the one collectors seek out by the time the 2005s have been around as long as these three legendary ancestors! Somebody send up the Batsignal to bring Hau Thai Tang back to Gotham City!
Greg "Eights" Ates
ford4v429: Your posting says it all--the 2005 is the next classic Mustang body style, and joins the '65 fastback (officially the "2+2"), the '67 fastback, and the '69 fastback (which might officially be the "sportroof") and will be the one collectors seek out by the time the 2005s have been around as long as these three legendary ancestors! Somebody send up the Batsignal to bring Hau Thai Tang back to Gotham City!
Greg "Eights" Ates
Last edited by Eights; 11/24/08 at 02:23 PM.
#346
Mach 1 Member
Join Date: January 14, 2008
Location: Maryland
Posts: 581
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#347
Honestly... I'm dissapointed in a way. I mean the front looks like a camaro in a way. The back.... Uuuggghhh.. I dont even know. The tailights?? eeewww.. The interior is alright. But honestly... I think they need to go back to the drawing boards AGAIN! come up with some sort of A TRUE fastback with factory striping. IT seems they are getting worst.. BUT I gueSS!
#348
Tasca Super Boss 429 Member
You were just looking in the wrong places, I bought mine for $500 over invoice in December 2004.
#349
Mach 1 Member
Join Date: September 22, 2005
Location: Kansas
Posts: 1,327
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"just another opinion...really dont care for the taillights at all, the frontend just dont seem right(small buckets + the 'droopy eyes' look on the fogs like the Challenger- but I like it on the Challenger...) and the side crease behind the rear arch dont quite click with me for some reason...not only wouldnt I trade in our 06 or 07, after seeing the reveal we called and found a matching Vista Blue 09gt/stick we should be picking up monday- I really think the 05~09 will be 'the next 69' 20 years down the road, so looking at getting one just to store away. a lot of folks will love the '10 I'm sure, but gotta predict within 3-6 months the hoopla will die down and they will be offering incentives, unlike the 05 that was a PITA to get at msrp for almost 2 years...I just dont see that happening with the '10- dont get me wrong, I truly hope for Ford's sake it sells better than ever, but I cant see one in my driveway (certainly wouldnt want 3 of them- but its just one opinion). I'd love to hear Hau Tai-Tang's unofficial comments on the '10- but personally I think his crew captured the 'mustang' look better 5 years ago... the tapered taillights especially look out of place- perhaps a aftermarket bumper/lenses will come along, but again, time will tell."
ford4v429: Your posting says it all--the 2005 is the next classic Mustang body style, and joins the '65 fastback (officially the "2+2"), the '67 fastback, and the '69 fastback (which might officially be the "sportroof") and will be the one collectors seek out by the time the 2005s have been around as long as these three legendary ancestors! Somebody send up the Batsignal to bring Hau Thai Tang back to Gotham City!
Greg "Eights" Ates
ford4v429: Your posting says it all--the 2005 is the next classic Mustang body style, and joins the '65 fastback (officially the "2+2"), the '67 fastback, and the '69 fastback (which might officially be the "sportroof") and will be the one collectors seek out by the time the 2005s have been around as long as these three legendary ancestors! Somebody send up the Batsignal to bring Hau Thai Tang back to Gotham City!
Greg "Eights" Ates
By the way, where do you guys get your time machines? 'Cause I want one too. I feel left out not knowing exactly what's going to happen decades from now.
#350
You're right. Ford should have stopped updating the Mustang's design in 2005 and just let it stagnate for another fifty years. That's the way to sell cars.
By the way, where do you guys get your time machines? 'Cause I want one too. I feel left out not knowing exactly what's going to happen decades from now.
By the way, where do you guys get your time machines? 'Cause I want one too. I feel left out not knowing exactly what's going to happen decades from now.
What you see in the 2010 is not an improvement--it is "change a little this, change a little that" with no real cohesion in the update. The '70 Mustang--loser to the '69 in "Best Mustang Ever", which proves the point--is a case in point: Dorky fake bi-level scoops were placed in the front fenders where the '69 Mustang had its headlights. OTOH, Ford removed the dorky scoops off the tops of the rear fenders in '70 to clean up the extra-busy rear fenders of the '69.
Change for change's sake is bullshiite. Change that actually produces a measurable improvement is progress. It actually takes time to learn this--even I was as flakey in my criticisms when I was your age. Now--older and much wiser--I appreciate the classiness of getting it really right and then refusing to f**k with it thereafter.
I ain't Raymond Leowy (an architect by trade, but who designed the timelessly clean Studebaker Avanti) or Hau Thai (Mus)Tang, but I coulda done better than the "designers" who did the 2010 if assisted by a techie type who could photoshop the changes as I described what needed to be done to the 2005 to make it even more of a blockbuster classic (such as: (a) trash that effin' faux gas cap and leave a smooth, body-colored panel between the taillights; (b) replace the hockey sticks on the sides with the classic "C" scoops of the '65s; (c) replace the plus-sized full-figured fat chicks--I mean taillights--with six separate units three to a side (as in '67, '68, and '69); replace the side mirrors with body-colored true teardrop side mirrors from earlier Mustangs & Torinos; restore the classic rear fender kick-up--as was actually done in the 2010s, thankfully; and I woulda had Ford spend the extra bucks to put that nasty antenna into the glass (as many cars did in the last century). At least Ford's "designers" had their heads outta their a***s far enough to move the dorkstalk to the passenger rear fender (I hope it's retractable, at least). Inside, I woulda put bigger wheelwell tubs to allow rear tires so wide that they nearly touch each other, and I woulda kept the round center HVAC vents. Other upgrades by Ford--materials, stitching, lighting, etc.--meet with my approval.
You don't seem to get what I and others are saying here. You must be very young. You're forgiven.
Yeah, I'm a *****, but mediocrity p****s me off. I can't help it--I'm that way.
Greg "Eights" Ates
Last edited by Eights; 11/25/08 at 09:50 AM.
#351
Mach 1 Member
Join Date: September 22, 2005
Location: Kansas
Posts: 1,327
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And a bit of a geezer, if you ask me!
#352
Shelby GT350 Member
zzcoop: Coop, although you seem to be seeing the words OK, you miss the message yet again (sighs audibly here...).
What you see in the 2010 is not an improvement--it is "change a little this, change a little that" with no real cohesion in the update. The '70 Mustang--loser to the '69 in "Best Mustang Ever", which proves the point--is a case in point: Dorky fake bi-level scoops were placed in the front fenders where the '69 Mustang had its headlights. OTOH, Ford removed the dorky scoops off the tops of the rear fenders in '70 to clean up the extra-busy rear fenders of the '69.
Change for change's sake is bullshiite. Change that actually produces a measurable improvement is progress. It actually takes time to learn this--even I was as flakey in my criticisms when I was your age. Now--older and much wiser--I appreciate the classiness of getting it really right and then refusing to f**k with it thereafter.
I ain't Raymond Leowy (an architect by trade, but who designed the timelessly clean Studebaker Avanti) or Hau Thai (Mus)Tang, but I coulda done better than the "designers" who did the 2010 if assisted by a techie type who could photoshop the changes as I described what needed to be done to the 2005 to make it even more of a blockbuster classic (such as: (a) trash that effin' faux gas cap and leave a smooth, body-colored panel between the taillights; (b) replace the hockey sticks on the sides with the classic "C" scoops of the '65s; (c) replace the plus-sized full-figured fat chicks--I mean taillights--with six separate units three to a side (as in '67, '68, and '69); replace the side mirrors with body-colored true teardrop side mirrors from earlier Mustangs & Torinos; restore the classic rear fender kick-up--as was actually done in the 2010s, thankfully; and I woulda had Ford spend the extra bucks to put that nasty antenna into the glass (as many cars did in the last century). At least Ford's "designers" had their heads outta their a***s far enough to move the dorkstalk to the passenger rear fender (I hope it's retractable, at least). Inside, I woulda put bigger wheelwell tubs to allow rear tires so wide that they nearly touch each other, and I woulda kept the round center HVAC vents. Other upgrades by Ford--materials, stitching, lighting, etc.--meet with my approval.
You don't seem to get what I and others are saying here. You must be very young. You're forgiven.
Yeah, I'm a *****, but mediocrity p****s me off. I can't help it--I'm that way.
Greg "Eights" Ates
What you see in the 2010 is not an improvement--it is "change a little this, change a little that" with no real cohesion in the update. The '70 Mustang--loser to the '69 in "Best Mustang Ever", which proves the point--is a case in point: Dorky fake bi-level scoops were placed in the front fenders where the '69 Mustang had its headlights. OTOH, Ford removed the dorky scoops off the tops of the rear fenders in '70 to clean up the extra-busy rear fenders of the '69.
Change for change's sake is bullshiite. Change that actually produces a measurable improvement is progress. It actually takes time to learn this--even I was as flakey in my criticisms when I was your age. Now--older and much wiser--I appreciate the classiness of getting it really right and then refusing to f**k with it thereafter.
I ain't Raymond Leowy (an architect by trade, but who designed the timelessly clean Studebaker Avanti) or Hau Thai (Mus)Tang, but I coulda done better than the "designers" who did the 2010 if assisted by a techie type who could photoshop the changes as I described what needed to be done to the 2005 to make it even more of a blockbuster classic (such as: (a) trash that effin' faux gas cap and leave a smooth, body-colored panel between the taillights; (b) replace the hockey sticks on the sides with the classic "C" scoops of the '65s; (c) replace the plus-sized full-figured fat chicks--I mean taillights--with six separate units three to a side (as in '67, '68, and '69); replace the side mirrors with body-colored true teardrop side mirrors from earlier Mustangs & Torinos; restore the classic rear fender kick-up--as was actually done in the 2010s, thankfully; and I woulda had Ford spend the extra bucks to put that nasty antenna into the glass (as many cars did in the last century). At least Ford's "designers" had their heads outta their a***s far enough to move the dorkstalk to the passenger rear fender (I hope it's retractable, at least). Inside, I woulda put bigger wheelwell tubs to allow rear tires so wide that they nearly touch each other, and I woulda kept the round center HVAC vents. Other upgrades by Ford--materials, stitching, lighting, etc.--meet with my approval.
You don't seem to get what I and others are saying here. You must be very young. You're forgiven.
Yeah, I'm a *****, but mediocrity p****s me off. I can't help it--I'm that way.
Greg "Eights" Ates
#353
Mach 1 Member
Join Date: September 22, 2005
Location: Kansas
Posts: 1,327
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Greg love you rants. You make this board so much more entertaining. I check this board often just to see if you have posted. You may be like everyone else on here regurgitating the same ole crap over and over just on different posts as i do also but at least you do it with flare and thought.
#356
Step two is to get them to actually think about what they've read, and then imagine what the Mustang I'm describing would look like--my lack of photoshop skills doesn't help my case, unfortunately...
Changing things is something anyone can do--improving things is what designers should do! The 2005 Mustang was a vast improvement in design over all the Mustangs since the 1970 model. The 2010 Mustang is a 2005 with styling gimmicks--beveled corners, effin' cladding, a hood bulge, nasty turnsignals in the headlight bezels to match nasty taillights with backup lights in the taillight lenses! It'll be remembered as the J.C. Whitney Mustang--there's a mis-matched item from every page in their catalog...
It would be funny if it weren't so tragic.
Greg "Eights" Ates
#357
Well said, Zoomie! I may not get people to agree, but it's a start if I can at least get them to listen (well, read, actually...).
Step two is to get them to actually think about what they've read, and then imagine what the Mustang I'm describing would look like--my lack of photoshop skills doesn't help my case, unfortunately...
Changing things is something anyone can do--improving things is what designers should do! The 2005 Mustang was a vast improvement in design over all the Mustangs since the 1970 model. The 2010 Mustang is a 2005 with styling gimmicks--beveled corners, effin' cladding, a hood bulge, nasty turnsignals in the headlight bezels to match nasty taillights with backup lights in the taillight lenses! It'll be remembered as the J.C. Whitney Mustang--there's a mis-matched item from every page in their catalog...
It would be funny if it weren't so tragic.
Greg "Eights" Ates
Step two is to get them to actually think about what they've read, and then imagine what the Mustang I'm describing would look like--my lack of photoshop skills doesn't help my case, unfortunately...
Changing things is something anyone can do--improving things is what designers should do! The 2005 Mustang was a vast improvement in design over all the Mustangs since the 1970 model. The 2010 Mustang is a 2005 with styling gimmicks--beveled corners, effin' cladding, a hood bulge, nasty turnsignals in the headlight bezels to match nasty taillights with backup lights in the taillight lenses! It'll be remembered as the J.C. Whitney Mustang--there's a mis-matched item from every page in their catalog...
It would be funny if it weren't so tragic.
Greg "Eights" Ates
The interior of the '10 truly seems to be "improved", although I will reserve final judgment until I can get first-hand experience with it. The exterior seems to just be "changed".
While I acknowledge that it was the appropriate time to update the car, I can't help thinking that they could have done better. Seems like too much change for the sake of change and too little styling.
$.02...
#358
Shelby GT350 Member
#359
goesfast: Oh, yeah...Ford really built winners with the leviathan '71s thru '73s, which sported more overhang than Dolly Parton. How 'bout those cutesy '74s thru '78s? The drab Foxes sure set the world on fire, too! And is it the "SN95" that looks like a two-door Taurus with a "C" scoop and a crease down each side?
No, Ford doesn't know "exactly what it is doing when it comes to the Mustang and where it is going"--and the models I mentioned shows how lost they were in much of Mustang history.
How else would it have survived all these years? Two things: 1. It is affordable performance in a really good car, and 2. GM, Chrysler, and AMC had no clues at all--they were just imitating a phenomenom they could not understand. They're so clueless that they're doing it again!!!
A decade from now, anyone strolling through the graveyard of bygone car companies will find this epitaph inscribed on the tombstones of GM and Chrysler: "But WE built Mustangs, too!!!"
Greg "Eights" Ates
No, Ford doesn't know "exactly what it is doing when it comes to the Mustang and where it is going"--and the models I mentioned shows how lost they were in much of Mustang history.
How else would it have survived all these years? Two things: 1. It is affordable performance in a really good car, and 2. GM, Chrysler, and AMC had no clues at all--they were just imitating a phenomenom they could not understand. They're so clueless that they're doing it again!!!
A decade from now, anyone strolling through the graveyard of bygone car companies will find this epitaph inscribed on the tombstones of GM and Chrysler: "But WE built Mustangs, too!!!"
Greg "Eights" Ates
To say that the 2005 design will be the classic of the future? Well, that's a stretch! I don't have a crystal ball to determine this, but go ahead and buy all you can for the day when they pop in price and make you countless dollars of profit. Good luck with that one............
I normally don't do this, but your advanced years of knowledge have left you stuck in some particular time in a car design era, claiming to know exactly what is needed or lacking in the next great model. By all means offer yourself and talents up to the car gods as we await the next revelation from you. It's obvious to me at least, that you've never been on a design team and seen what regs and stips you have to dodge/comply with to bring about an effectual and acceptable change that you can firstly sell to the company's higher-ups, then costed-out to the production floor, and finally to the consumer, not to mention SAE concerns.
The 2010 Mustang represents a mild tweaking from the 2005 model which is exactly what it was supposed to be. There is more to come, but you'll have to wait.
#360
Cobra R Member
zzcoop: Coop, although you seem to be seeing the words OK, you miss the message yet again (sighs audibly here...).
What you see in the 2010 is not an improvement--it is "change a little this, change a little that" with no real cohesion in the update. The '70 Mustang--loser to the '69 in "Best Mustang Ever", which proves the point--is a case in point: Dorky fake bi-level scoops were placed in the front fenders where the '69 Mustang had its headlights. OTOH, Ford removed the dorky scoops off the tops of the rear fenders in '70 to clean up the extra-busy rear fenders of the '69.
Change for change's sake is bullshiite. Change that actually produces a measurable improvement is progress. It actually takes time to learn this--even I was as flakey in my criticisms when I was your age. Now--older and much wiser--I appreciate the classiness of getting it really right and then refusing to f**k with it thereafter.
I ain't Raymond Leowy (an architect by trade, but who designed the timelessly clean Studebaker Avanti) or Hau Thai (Mus)Tang, but I coulda done better than the "designers" who did the 2010 if assisted by a techie type who could photoshop the changes as I described what needed to be done to the 2005 to make it even more of a blockbuster classic (such as: (a) trash that effin' faux gas cap and leave a smooth, body-colored panel between the taillights; (b) replace the hockey sticks on the sides with the classic "C" scoops of the '65s; (c) replace the plus-sized full-figured fat chicks--I mean taillights--with six separate units three to a side (as in '67, '68, and '69); replace the side mirrors with body-colored true teardrop side mirrors from earlier Mustangs & Torinos; restore the classic rear fender kick-up--as was actually done in the 2010s, thankfully; and I woulda had Ford spend the extra bucks to put that nasty antenna into the glass (as many cars did in the last century). At least Ford's "designers" had their heads outta their a***s far enough to move the dorkstalk to the passenger rear fender (I hope it's retractable, at least). Inside, I woulda put bigger wheelwell tubs to allow rear tires so wide that they nearly touch each other, and I woulda kept the round center HVAC vents. Other upgrades by Ford--materials, stitching, lighting, etc.--meet with my approval.
You don't seem to get what I and others are saying here. You must be very young. You're forgiven.
Yeah, I'm a *****, but mediocrity p****s me off. I can't help it--I'm that way.
Greg "Eights" Ates
What you see in the 2010 is not an improvement--it is "change a little this, change a little that" with no real cohesion in the update. The '70 Mustang--loser to the '69 in "Best Mustang Ever", which proves the point--is a case in point: Dorky fake bi-level scoops were placed in the front fenders where the '69 Mustang had its headlights. OTOH, Ford removed the dorky scoops off the tops of the rear fenders in '70 to clean up the extra-busy rear fenders of the '69.
Change for change's sake is bullshiite. Change that actually produces a measurable improvement is progress. It actually takes time to learn this--even I was as flakey in my criticisms when I was your age. Now--older and much wiser--I appreciate the classiness of getting it really right and then refusing to f**k with it thereafter.
I ain't Raymond Leowy (an architect by trade, but who designed the timelessly clean Studebaker Avanti) or Hau Thai (Mus)Tang, but I coulda done better than the "designers" who did the 2010 if assisted by a techie type who could photoshop the changes as I described what needed to be done to the 2005 to make it even more of a blockbuster classic (such as: (a) trash that effin' faux gas cap and leave a smooth, body-colored panel between the taillights; (b) replace the hockey sticks on the sides with the classic "C" scoops of the '65s; (c) replace the plus-sized full-figured fat chicks--I mean taillights--with six separate units three to a side (as in '67, '68, and '69); replace the side mirrors with body-colored true teardrop side mirrors from earlier Mustangs & Torinos; restore the classic rear fender kick-up--as was actually done in the 2010s, thankfully; and I woulda had Ford spend the extra bucks to put that nasty antenna into the glass (as many cars did in the last century). At least Ford's "designers" had their heads outta their a***s far enough to move the dorkstalk to the passenger rear fender (I hope it's retractable, at least). Inside, I woulda put bigger wheelwell tubs to allow rear tires so wide that they nearly touch each other, and I woulda kept the round center HVAC vents. Other upgrades by Ford--materials, stitching, lighting, etc.--meet with my approval.
You don't seem to get what I and others are saying here. You must be very young. You're forgiven.
Yeah, I'm a *****, but mediocrity p****s me off. I can't help it--I'm that way.
Greg "Eights" Ates
You Wanna Talk Cohesion in the Design of the 2010 Check this out.
http://forums.bradbarnett.net/showthread.php?t=474658
or This:
I'll try to explain. First of all the corners of the rear were beveled off that way to try and reduce the overall visual overhang of the rear end, just as the designers beveled the headlight buckets back, up front on the 05's which also carries over to the 2010. To me this adds some design cohesion, tying the front and rear end together.
Another reason they beveled, or cut the corners off was to wrap the Tail Light slightly around the side, so it can be seen from the side of the car without loosing the traditional "Mustang Look" from the rear without having to literally Wrap it around the corner as on the Fox Body's and the 98-04 SN-95's.
To answer your question, "Why Am I Here?" This Dip gives the point where the lens starts to bend out and forward some design interest. As I pointed out in my post "I Don't Know If Anyone Noticed" It looks to me as if the designers had a Theme going on, using the overall shape of the Dash Trim that they translated to the shape of the Tail Lights/Decklid Center Panel, and in turn they repeated the shape of the Tail Lights themselves in the shape of the Mirrors, as well as the Door Panel Inserts. Just Check out the attachments below.
As for the 9 inches of Black Plastic, this again was done to reduce the overall visual height of the back end so it wouldn't look so thick top to bottom. The Diffuser also serves to hide the Big Mufflers Hanging Out from under the back as they do on the 05-09's, which is something my Mom actually Loathed about the 05's when she first saw them. She got over it quickly.
If you really wanna know why, just look at the Grabber Blue Falken car with all of this trim painted Grabber Blue. I believe they could have executed it a little better, but overall it's growing on me.
Being a Designer Myself, which is why I picked up on the Theme, In general I think the designers wanted to do something fresh without diluting the Mustangs DNA. Personally I Really Like What I See, but As others have posted we all have our opinions.
As for bringing Raymond Loweys name into this I'm a Big Fan of his Guidance and Inspiration, but He was Not the Designer of the Avanti. It was a team of designers that designed this Classic. Tom Kellog, John Ebstein and Robert Andrews are the True Designers of the Avanti, Lowey only got the Credit, as he was the one who gathered these three together in a rented house outside Palm Springs California, where they designed the Avanti in a Record Breaking Week!
Believe Me, I know More About Avanti's than Most People Alive, Including the fact that they were still in production until last year, being built on a Modified Mustang, S-197 Chassis.
I've Owned an 83 Avanti and My Brother Currently Owns a 63 R-3 Supercharged Avanti with a motor Hand Built by Andy Granetelli, of Paxton Supercharger Fame.
This is A BMW Concept that Raymond Lowey Himself Designed, before the Avanti, but Nowhere Near the Classic the Avanti is.
And yet Another Studebaker that Lowey was Credited as Designer , but Didn't Actually Design, the 53-55 Studebaker Coupes and "Starliner" Hardtops, which were actually designed by Bob Bourke, working for Lowey's Design Studio.
As for your Vision of a "Blockbuster" Followup to the 05-09 Mustangs, Getting rid of that "Effin Faux Gas Cap" would be getting rid of a Part of Mustang Heritage, and isn't referred to as a "Gas Cap" It's a Medallion, AKA Badge. The C Scoops You would incorporate only represent part of Mustang Heritage, as the 69-73's Have No C Scoop, and You Yourself Love to Point out the 69's were voted "Best Mustang Ever". Your Wheel Well Tubs are Fine for a Modified car, but Production reality? C'Mon Man Get Real! The same goes for the "Teardrop Side Mirrors from a 70's Mustang or Torino" Do you have any Idea How Out Of Place that Would Look on a Modern Car? As for Keeping the Round Center HVAC Vents, Again this is just another of my posts you missed, as the Center HVAC Vents on the 2010 were changed to Rectangular for 2 Reasons, For One, they did this as a Heritage cue from the 67-68 Mustangs, Secondly the Most Obvious Reason was to Incorporate the New Larger Nav Screen further up to Improve the Ergonomics of the 2010's Cockpit.
The thing I gather most from You, as well as most others that Dislike or Hate the 2010, is Simply the fact that you are Clinging Too Desperately to the Past. If You Really Love those "Pure Mustangs of the 60's and 70's Then Buy One of Them, if You can Find One let alone Afford One in Nice Condition! This is a NEW MUSTANG! Designed for Today, not the 60's. It is Something Fresh and Modern with All of the DNA of the Mustang Still Intact. It has all of the Safety and Convenience Features of a Truly Modern Car, while still having the overall Look and Feeling of the Classics, Without Being a Direct Copy or Clone.