From Igor @ BON
#1
From Igor @ BON
you will get about half of it before the Challenger has time to even get up to speed with new engines, new interior, updated interior next year. The engines will be 3.5l V6 and probably 5.0l V8 .. then other special edition engines like the TwinForce 3.5l V6, 6.2l V8, 5.4l V8 all automatics will be 6speed. Dual zone, GPS etc .. are all going ot be there.
The more advanced stuff - IRS, etc .. 2011 calendar year 2012 model Year when the all new huntsmen Mustang debuts. I am not sure about the shorter and wider piece .. we shall see ... I think the mustang is short enough ... it does not have much interior space .. I would rather have them focus on making the car with similar dimensions, but lighter.
anyways - with the approval of GRWDP in spring,Ford is truly going full speed ahead with Mustang .. times will get tougher with competition again ... but Mustang will do well..
hmmmmm
The more advanced stuff - IRS, etc .. 2011 calendar year 2012 model Year when the all new huntsmen Mustang debuts. I am not sure about the shorter and wider piece .. we shall see ... I think the mustang is short enough ... it does not have much interior space .. I would rather have them focus on making the car with similar dimensions, but lighter.
anyways - with the approval of GRWDP in spring,Ford is truly going full speed ahead with Mustang .. times will get tougher with competition again ... but Mustang will do well..
hmmmmm
#3
Tasca Super Boss 429 Member
Join Date: February 1, 2004
Posts: 3,751
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Igor's not been the fountain of knowledge he used to be recently, this isn't a whole lot "new." Good to see further confirmation of the 5L and 6-speed, though.
The Huntsmen platform cometh...
The Huntsmen platform cometh...
#4
I Have No Life
#5
shorten the rear overhang by 8 inches
Other people want the Mustang to be made into a sedan, others want it made into a BMW Z3 wagon ("shooting brake") . Might as well go all the way and make it a cross over.
Somehow making the Mustang over in these ways gets rid of the "redneck stigma"
Heck do these people even know what a Mustang is?
Here's what a Mustang should be:
- 4 passenger
- 2 door Coupe/convertible -- NOT a 4 door sedan, SUV, crossover, station wagon, or "hot hatch"
- Rear Wheel Drive
- long hood/short deck
- approximately 9 ft (~108 inch) wheelbase
- 4-V6-V8 capable chassis
- engine/drivetrain performance
- Styling
- handling
- comfort/convenience
#8
GTR Member
That thread is hilarious. It's started by some guy with a rally Focus as his avatar. He wants the next Mustang to be made into a eletronic gadget laden Focus-like "hot hatch".
basically chop off the trunk...
Other people want the Mustang to be made into a sedan, others want it made into a BMW Z3 wagon ("shooting brake") . Might as well go all the way and make it a cross over.
Somehow making the Mustang over in these ways gets rid of the "redneck stigma"
Heck do these people even know what a Mustang is?
Here's what a Mustang should be:
basically chop off the trunk...
Other people want the Mustang to be made into a sedan, others want it made into a BMW Z3 wagon ("shooting brake") . Might as well go all the way and make it a cross over.
Somehow making the Mustang over in these ways gets rid of the "redneck stigma"
Heck do these people even know what a Mustang is?
Here's what a Mustang should be:
- 4 passenger
- 2 door Coupe/convertible -- NOT a 4 door sedan, SUV, crossover, station wagon, or "hot hatch"
- Rear Wheel Drive
- long hood/short deck
- approximately 9 ft (~108 inch) wheelbase
- 4-V6-V8 capable chassis
- engine/drivetrain performance
- Styling
- handling
- comfort/convenience
#9
#10
THE RED FLASH ------Moderator
Being as the 67-68 fastback is my favorite Stang ! I often wondered how the current S-197 would look, if it were a true fastback ? However after much thought and debate. The lines just wouldn't look right (in other words) The roofline would look way too boxy and flat ( no gradual curve/slope) especially in the rear glass and trunk area. IMHO the car would look more like the 71-73 sportsroof/flatback, from the side and rear profiles..
#11
I'd think that they could just keep the roof line as it was, and just reduce (eliminate?) the trunk area and continue the roofline slope further than it currently goes. That'd certainly reduce functionality, but I think it'd look pretty good.
#12
THE RED FLASH ------Moderator
But once you eliminate the trunk area ! you also eliminate the rear overhang as well..Then you end up with a car, that looks as though it's a$$ end was just chopped off..
#16
Join Date: January 30, 2004
Location: DMV
Posts: 2,980
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Never could quite understand the visceral aversion to any hatchback -- though I think a lot of it is that people reflexively think econocar for some reason -- as the styling can be made every bit a sleek and sporting as a fastback with a trunk but with the added bonus of greatly enhanced utility. And with proper engineering, it not need end up being significantly heavier, more expensive or weaker.
In my mind, a hatchback is like having your cake and eating it too, the best of many worlds. My Probe 'ol GT is as sleek and as sporty in styling as any car short of a Gallardo -- the Stang profile looks like a breadvan in comparison -- yet has a beautifully integrated hatchback design that is stiff, light and cheap. And the icing on the cake is that I can fit an incredible amount of stuff in there -- a weekends worth of triathlon gear - for two, bikes included, inside -- for example. I just don't see the downside if properly done.
In general though, I'd like to see the Mustang a touch smaller and lighter -- not much, maybe taken in 5-10% at the seams and lose 150-200 lbs. Both would improve overall performance and, ever more important these days, efficiency. The current Stang seems in an early-'70's -ish death spriral of ever bigger motors in ever bigger and heavier cars, and we all know how that turned out -- the Mustang II placeholder.
In my mind, a hatchback is like having your cake and eating it too, the best of many worlds. My Probe 'ol GT is as sleek and as sporty in styling as any car short of a Gallardo -- the Stang profile looks like a breadvan in comparison -- yet has a beautifully integrated hatchback design that is stiff, light and cheap. And the icing on the cake is that I can fit an incredible amount of stuff in there -- a weekends worth of triathlon gear - for two, bikes included, inside -- for example. I just don't see the downside if properly done.
In general though, I'd like to see the Mustang a touch smaller and lighter -- not much, maybe taken in 5-10% at the seams and lose 150-200 lbs. Both would improve overall performance and, ever more important these days, efficiency. The current Stang seems in an early-'70's -ish death spriral of ever bigger motors in ever bigger and heavier cars, and we all know how that turned out -- the Mustang II placeholder.
#17
It is!
Personally, I think it looks way better, but to each his own. To me the trunk area aft of the rear window, as it exists now, detracts from the car overall. While my rendition isn't perfect by any stretch, I do think it'd be important to maintain the current roofline, or at most, just slightly alter it. Otherwise, I imagine it would indeed look too much like the '71-'73s, as m05fastbackGT noted.
Also, if they could make a hatch back that looked like a fast back, I wouldn't be opposed, I guess. Just never have been a fan of how a traditional (stereotypical?) hatchback looked.
Personally, I think it looks way better, but to each his own. To me the trunk area aft of the rear window, as it exists now, detracts from the car overall. While my rendition isn't perfect by any stretch, I do think it'd be important to maintain the current roofline, or at most, just slightly alter it. Otherwise, I imagine it would indeed look too much like the '71-'73s, as m05fastbackGT noted.
Also, if they could make a hatch back that looked like a fast back, I wouldn't be opposed, I guess. Just never have been a fan of how a traditional (stereotypical?) hatchback looked.
#18
Never could quite understand the visceral aversion to any hatchback -- though I think a lot of it is that people reflexively think econocar for some reason -- as the styling can be made every bit a sleek and sporting as a fastback with a trunk but with the added bonus of greatly enhanced utility. And with proper engineering, it not need end up being significantly heavier, more expensive or weaker.
-- yet has a beautifully integrated hatchback design that is stiff, light and cheap. And the icing on the cake is that I can fit an incredible amount of stuff in there -- a weekends worth of triathlon gear - for two, bikes included, inside -- for example. I just don't see the downside if properly done.
In general though, I'd like to see the Mustang a touch smaller and lighter -- not much, maybe taken in 5-10% at the seams and lose 150-200 lbs. Both would improve overall performance and, ever more important these days, efficiency. The current Stang seems in an early-'70's -ish death spriral of ever bigger motors in ever bigger and heavier cars, and we all know how that turned out -- the Mustang II placeholder.
The Mustang II was the right car for the times (the 70's) and it's sales record shows that. Ford had gotten really lucky in starting work on downsizing the Mustang in 1970 and debuting the Mustang II right when the Arab oil embargos and the gas crisis hit in 1974.
#19
As long as it was not shaped like the current "hot hatches" like the Focus hatchback, the Golf GTi, or Peugeot 206 GTi and instead looked sleek like a Mustang should, I agree.
#20
Legacy TMS Member
Somehow making the Mustang over in these ways gets rid of the "redneck stigma"
Heck do these people even know what a Mustang is?
Here's what a Mustang should be:
- 4 passenger
- 2 door Coupe/convertible -- NOT a 4 door sedan, SUV, crossover, station wagon, or "hot hatch"
- Rear Wheel Drive
- long hood/short deck
- approximately 9 ft (~108 inch) wheelbase
- 4-V6-V8 capable chassis
- engine/drivetrain performance
- Styling
- handling
- comfort/convenience