If the aftermarket can come out with different head and tail lights so quickly (sure there is the issue of scale as not EVERY Mustang owner is going to buy the same aftermarket light package), then Ford should be able to handle making a running change before releasing the final version. Alll they need to do is make sure they fit in the same whole and test out ok for service/safety, etc. Remember, these things are made in sections then "glued" together so it could be as easy as a redesign of the just a few sections and ramping up that production.

Who says Ford does't already have an alternate design ready and they are only showing one version on the mules running around. As for the headlights, I could see Ford easily having a slightly modified design already in the works for SE models anyway.

I can see why Ford is keeping the rest of the body under wraps. Sheet metal would be harder to change and I think they are totally set on those changes. But headlights, tail lights and other trim do-dads "could" be modified if Ford gets enough of a negative feedback.

Don't pinch me, I don't want to wake up from the dream I just described.

 

Man, I love that drift car. It sounds amazing.

 

5.0 4v w/ ITBS at 9k rpms = better than sex.

 

Ford ( and all OEMs ) must meet more stringent internal and federal regulations which require significantly more testing time. Also, lights are not made in "sections" and "glued together". I may not be an expert in design, but I can tell you the lead time for the injection molding tooling for a headlamp or tailamp can, lens, filaments, and electronic harnesses is at least 48 weeks. This of course is 48 weeks for prototype testing, not for production. The cars you see now are confirmation prototypes, ( CP for short ), which are built from final production data signed off over 18 months ago. This means the tailights were finalized and signed off sometime in Feb-Mar 2007. Next will be PP ( production prototypes ) and finally Job1 , which is the production date.

Ford has to test production pieces. A mule with a fake tailight design serves no testing or validation purposes.Changing the design now, even if they decided was necessary, would be significant cost, because all the tooling would need re-cut, at a cost of literally $100,000 or more, and of course the supplier already has contracts with all their sub-suppliers of reflectors, filaments, electronics, etc, so if you break all that apart, the supplier is going to jack up the price of the light and charge rush timing to meet the testing a production schedule. Its a real mess.

The aftermarket can get away with more stuff, because its done "after purchase", and by the owner, instead of sold that way by Ford. There are many things the aftermarket can get away with that Ford's internal regulations for safety, warranty, etc or federal regulations will not allow. Also, certain companies like Roush or Saleen will get production data before the car is out so they can begin building their pieces. There's no magic wand to make a car.

 

watchdevil here may be on to somethin'...

 

I've been through 3 or 4 different threads today in the forum that are specifically talking about the tail light assembly and everyone's take on it. Instead of clogging the other threads about the same ol' arguement, someone needs to move these tail light posts into one thread and call it: "2 Wrongs make a Light". Geez. Talk about obsessing over something so insignificant! LOL

 

I guess it depends on who you're having sex with.

 

Agreed!

 

TXBLUOVAL: The lines are timeless, but they made too many omissions--chiefly the rear-fender kick-up of the first three Mustang editions and the full "C-scoops" on each side.

The "oblique-L"--or hockey stick as some call it--needs to be completed to the full "C".

And those taillights need to be six individuals like the '67-'68 Mustangs. The '64-'66 taillights looked dreadfully cheap, an embarrassment to the rest of the car--it was that chromed stamped beer can frame around the taillights more than it was the taillights themselves, however.

Back in the day, some improved the '64-'66 taillight frames a bit by cutting out the center two
"dividers" leaving only an outer frame and a square "undivided" taillight. Others painted them black, but that really only worked on black Mustangs.

Chrome front and rear token bumpers weren't too slick, either, but every car had chromed front and rear bumpers until the '68 GTO introduced a body-colored front bumper--the only legacy of the GTO that survived to still be seen on cars today.

Greg "Eights" Ates

 

KGray571: They're like a massive wart on the face (or other part) of your favorite centerfold. Doing it right the very first time may not be important to you, but it is to most of us...

Greg "Eights" Ates

 

Ah....you might think its a wart, but without seeing the rest, it could actually be a sexy Cindy Crawford style birthmark/mole.

I just wish everyone would wait and see the car in totality before freaking out that the tailights/headlights are different than 2005-09, ( esp. when its the only thing you can see.....) Of course they're going to be different, this is the new 2010 model !!!! It's like trying to decide if you like a house when all you see is the doorknob and going, "well, that doesn't look like my doorknob." Yes, it might look like crap on your door, but it may be awesome once you see the rest of the different door on which its placed. Sheesh.

 

I think the 2005 was right for the times. It was a clean way to re-introduce the classic lines of the 60s. I remember reading the chief designer Jay Mays ( sp? ) worked at VW and the straight lines and clean appearance sort of reminds me of my daughter's Jetta or the VW Beetle. Not a copy like the Challenger, but a "reminder".

But now, everything has a little more action. BMWs Nissans, even the Camaro have curvy swoopier looks. So its wise if the Mustang anticipates and moves forward while still carrying the Mustang bloodline. I'm glad they are doing a significant update to the front and rear as well as the interior ( which they left out on the 1999 update ) Even if bits and pieces look odd because they're different than the 2005-09, let's all be happy that Ford is not leaving our beloved horse forgotten in the stable, and actually realizes it must keep ahead of the competition to keep its crown.

 

I never said that it wasn't important to me, trust me nothing could be further from the truth. This reveal is going to clear up a major purchasing decision for me once it happens. That being said, we don't need 3 or more threads talking about the same issue that has already been beaten to death.

 

I couldn't agree more! People need to let go of the 05' body style. I feel if you don't like the new one don't buy it. Don't get me wrong I do like the current model but for me it has run it's course. I remember the last gen fox body car of 87-93 being cool but by 93' the car looked way too dated. The same would happen to the Mustang if we didn't get a major update.

I think 09' Mustangs are gonna sell at huge rebates (like the 04' model). I may spring together some cash on one of these if I can get one for the right price.maybe even a GT500, but now I guess i'm getting a little off topic......

 

That's why 09 will be a short model run.
So they won't have a massive ammount on the lots before the 2010 gets revealed and sold.
Smart that way, and still leaves a small remainder for the people who see the 2010, not like it, and want an 09

 

+1 very well said!!