Or they could have done it right and designed it with some coherent style... and preferably Mustang cues - not JapaEuroMaro.

 

I don't get it. Because Ford opted against the "same old," it automatically makes it Euro trash? Because it's not flat, dull, plain, boring, it's somehow Japanese-inspired? I can understand people not liking the design, that's fine. Don't buy the car. But to think that for some reason Ford dropped the ball big time because you personally don't like the design reeks of arrogance to me. I don't know, maybe I'm missing something?

 

I think the camaro is good looking, on the exterior. The interior is just terrible. That candy red GT though, I may have just switched my mind from kona blue to candy red.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by MARZ

I don't get it. Because Ford opted against the "same old," it automatically makes it Euro trash? Because it's not flat, dull, plain, boring, it's somehow Japanese-inspired? I can understand people not liking the design, that's fine. Don't buy the car. But to think that for some reason Ford dropped the ball big time because you personally don't like the design reeks of arrogance to me. I don't know, maybe I'm missing something?

I never said anything about designing it dull and boring. In fact I suggested the opposite. But the Mustang has always been a maverick and marched to its own tune - that's part of what we Mustang owners love.

There is no reason for Ford to have copied *** ends from Euro & Japa cars - or the Maro. Even the magazines comment on the controversy Ford created within its fans by the confused rear that doesn't know if its smiling or frowning. Some design flow. Some marketing research.

As for arrogance, geez I left the 'trash' tagline off the end like I usually post. Maybe I didn't get the message, but if posting an opinion is now considered arrogance, then no wonder TMS post count has fallen off the cliff. Are we becoming too obamaized to speak our opinions freely and without fear of the thought police knocking on our door?

Just my opinion... others like it.

brb. someone's at the door. time to lock and load...



Motor Trend: The 2010-'11 Mustang's beveled, multisurfaced rear visage is polarizing; some like it, some just don't.

 

I don't think the Mustangs have ever been a knock-off of other designs. Despite all the changes over the years, you can still see the original in all of them.

 

With Rhumb on this one.
I'll take my rear end version over fords box stock version

 

Good job, dude! So if one were to evaluate production feasibility, do you think there would be any issues with the curvature, the rear backup lights, or anything else?

Thanks for your comments!

 

And what is your take on how it would look from the side view, straight on. Thanks!

 

Man, that does look awesome! Like Tony said, though, making a terrific-looking artist's rendition into a production vehicle with every and all conceivable constraints in place are two completely different things. Could Ford have integrated the black plastic better without affecting rear-crash metrics, without adding a fortune to the production tooling, etc? Those are questions that none of us know the answer to. I think Ford should hire you to design the 2013-14 Mustang, though -- or at least be a part of the design team.

 

Why couldn't Ford have hired you to design the rear.

 

No, I wasn't criticizing anyone's opinion. And I wasn't speaking to you directly. If you took it that way, then... There are some, though, who are pretty full of themselves. "I, personally, don't like the design, so that means Ford's designers are crap." That's what I have a problem with -- that's what I consider arrogance, and that goes beyond what I deem an "opinion." And then there are those who think their opinions speak for everyone. Really, outside of a couple of forums (who hardly represent a fraction of Mustang's fans, let alone sales contingent), I've heard absolutely nothing regarding the rear end. Most all of my friends ( all two of them ) and co-workers seem to love the new design with nary a mention of the new rear end except to mention the sequential tail lights.

Personally, I'm glad Ford opted against the "same ol';" if that makes it Euro or Japanese, then so be it. It's not as if the 2005's rear end (or the car as a whole), or any model before it, featured some groundbreaking design and sales of the 2009 model proved Ford obviously had to do something. The black plastic itself should have been integrated better, in my opinion, but I don't know what kind of constraints the design engineers had to work in. I know people would be complaining, no matter what Ford would have done. Had they painted the entire back portion, people would be complaining that it looks too tall. Had Ford's designers chosen to forgo the "hips" to negate the high-rear-end, then people would have complained about that, an so-on. It's just a part of it, though, as I remember myself complaining about the then-new 2005's too-vertical front end; I recall many complaining that the design was too plain and needed some scoops, etc.

The 2011 model year ushers a new era for the Mustang. I'm just happy it's still around, and it's as good as it is. It's never been a car without its share of faults, but a 412 horsepower 5.0L V8 Mustang GT with a world-class interior, superb handling and ride characteristics more than make up for its few shortcomings, in my opinion.

 

well same here... I was concerned my post might have come across too emphatic. Didn't mean it to read that way.

I don't think the redesign had anything to do with 09 sales. Low 09 sales was due to $4 gas (thanx to our friendly Arab Cartel), sub-prime mortgage melt down, wall street & bank implosion/partial nationalization, jobs evaporating, and outright fear in the hearts of consumers.

I don't understand why it is even there.


Long live Mustang my friend!

 

I was just giving you a hard time. I know where you're coming from in regards to your post.


I'm sure the high gas prices had a lot to do with the decline in sales for not only the Mustang, but for virtually every vehicle at the time. It's not as if the Mustang's sales were linear up until that point, though. My point being, Ford obviously had to offer the re-freshened Mustang in light of stagnated sales and impending competition from Chevy and Dodge.



I think it, along with the chamfers and various cut lines, have something to do with Ford's designers attempting to make a car of the exact-same size as the outgoing model appear smaller. I could be wrong, though. Also, I'm sure it's easier and much cheaper for Ford to just change out the black plastic "diffuser" portion for its various Mustang models than it would be to have different rear bumper cover assemblies.

 

To be honest Tony I'm pretty confident about the side and very confident about the dead on view but I haven't given it any real consideration for production as it's just Pie in the sky. Ford couldn't care what I think. If someone aftermarket guys want me to iron out all the details then I'll worry about it. As for the backuplights I don';t think it would be a problem where i have them but I'm not 100% sure of the law. They were in about the same place on the c4 corvette.

 

Hey im sure we will always have a gripe about something. Not everything is going to appeal to everyone and everyone is allowed to their opinion. People cried about the lack of HP in the Mustang since '71. Thats all i heard was why cant they give the Mustang some real HP and it was the thing that made the 05-09 a disappointment because with the new design everyone thought a 350 hp engine was on the horizon. Im sure we will hear complaining when the '14 comes out. Its to small, to euro sports coupe like, not retro enough, hate the IRS ect.
You have people that ***** about the same thing others love. Ford is here to sell cars. With the combination it has now and the more retro/modern design it may appeal to more people who would not think of buying a Mustang before this model.

 

Just to be clear, I don't begrudge Ford for redesigning the rear, indeed, I often think Ford is at times a bit too repro than retro with the Mustang. My complaint is not in redesigning the '10's rear but in the execution of the redesign itself.

Nor does good design necessarily ape either Japanese or European cues. The current '10 rear end does in fact remind me more of some earlier Japanese or Korean efforts in being very fussy and busy -- European designs tend to be very clean and well detailed and proportioned (not always, but usually).

Nor does a clean, well proportioned and finely detailed design necessarily have to be a boring, bland design -- that gets into the "quantity" vs. "quality" trap, where one thinks they have to throw every design element and cliche at a car to make it exciting or interesting. Look at, say, any number of Aston Martins or a Lambo Gallardo to see that a very clean, well proportioned design can be anything but boring. Or look at the rear of a '69-'70 Stang for another excellent example. Or an '09 GT500, which I think is the best of the 1st series S197 butts. The '10 simple looks lumpy, heavy, saggy and fussy in comparison.

In any case, love it or hate it, we're probably pretty much stuck with it until the NextStang rolls around in a couple years. Perhaps an SE (Boss, Mach I?) will graft on some cleaned up front/rear facias, but given the money Ford's sunk into the drive train lately, I can't see the bean counters coughing up much more money in the interim for stylistic changes.

 

Please we can end up with something like this next gen.

 

Sure - understand...do you have a side view handy? If not, I still would give you the thumbs up on the design for sure!

 

Couldn't agree more!

 

I love these rear end discussion threads. They make me feel all warm and fuzzy. And dizzy. And constipated.