Man, I Really Wish the Rear of the 2010 Would be Different
12/1/08 | 08:05 PM
#81
Cobra Member
Joined: September 8, 2004
Posts: 1,250
Likes: 0
Feedback is valuable. Strong opinions are the result of passion. There will always be room for improvement and the Mustang will continue to evolve. It is OK to disagree, just acknowledge that everyone has a right to an opinion.
12/1/08 | 08:08 PM
#82
Cobra Member
Joined: February 10, 2005
Posts: 1,064
Likes: 0
From: New Jersey
exactly, its just the passion i have for mustangs and i agree there is room for evolving and improvements. every has a right to an opinion, no harm should come from it
12/1/08 | 08:09 PM
#84
Bullitt Member
Joined: February 17, 2008
Posts: 323
Likes: 0
12/1/08 | 08:13 PM
#85
Cobra Member
Joined: February 10, 2005
Posts: 1,064
Likes: 0
From: New Jersey
i dont remember exactly but i have to say that i "believe". let me repeat. i """"""""believe""""""""""
it was a common complaint for the 05-09's
dont quote me on that though
12/1/08 | 08:27 PM
#87
Bullitt Member
Joined: June 21, 2005
Posts: 235
Likes: 0
Even Seven = troll
You have a right to an opinion, but you've done nothing but pollute the 2010 threads with your constant complaining. You hate the 2010, we get it, you've made it quite clear, now move on with your life and stay in the 05-09 threads. Quit being such a negative Nancy.
You have a right to an opinion, but you've done nothing but pollute the 2010 threads with your constant complaining. You hate the 2010, we get it, you've made it quite clear, now move on with your life and stay in the 05-09 threads. Quit being such a negative Nancy.
12/1/08 | 08:40 PM
#88
Cobra R Member
Joined: June 6, 2008
Posts: 1,666
Likes: 2
i love every mustang and if i didnt i wouldnt even waste my breath.... i like almost everything about the 10' but the rear end, the interior is great the front is pretty nice (v6 is nicer) and got a few tweaks to the suspension..
12/2/08 | 12:42 AM
#89
Cobra R Member
Joined: January 30, 2004
Posts: 1,725
Likes: 3
From: Florida
Even Steven = troll
You have a right to an opinion, but you've done nothing but pollute the 2010 threads with your constant complaining. You hate the 2010, we get it, you've made it quite clear, now move on with your life and stay in the 05-09 threads. Quit being such a negative Nancy.
You have a right to an opinion, but you've done nothing but pollute the 2010 threads with your constant complaining. You hate the 2010, we get it, you've made it quite clear, now move on with your life and stay in the 05-09 threads. Quit being such a negative Nancy.
12/2/08 | 05:28 AM
#90
Banned
Joined: October 29, 2008
Posts: 407
Likes: 0
Even Seven = troll
You have a right to an opinion, but you've done nothing but pollute the 2010 threads with your constant complaining. You hate the 2010, we get it, you've made it quite clear, now move on with your life and stay in the 05-09 threads. Quit being such a negative Nancy.
You have a right to an opinion, but you've done nothing but pollute the 2010 threads with your constant complaining. You hate the 2010, we get it, you've made it quite clear, now move on with your life and stay in the 05-09 threads. Quit being such a negative Nancy.
12/2/08 | 07:05 AM
#92
Tasca Super Boss 429 Member
Joined: May 18, 2004
Posts: 3,657
Likes: 2
From: San Antonio, TX
It's like being asked at the airport if anyone put something in your bags without your knowledge. If they put it in there without my knowledge, how would I know about it?
12/2/08 | 09:17 AM
#93
Banned
Joined: October 29, 2008
Posts: 407
Likes: 0
If I read various posts by Mr. X that bothered me for whatever reason, then I wouldn't continue to read his posts. I would just skip over them or ignore them.
See, is that so difficult? No, I didn't think so...
12/2/08 | 09:17 AM
#94
Banned
Joined: October 29, 2008
Posts: 407
Likes: 0
12/2/08 | 09:22 AM
#95
Mach 1 Member
Joined: September 22, 2005
Posts: 1,327
Likes: 0
From: Kansas
Read what? Are you asking specifically? Okay, let me help you out with my own common sense:
If I read various posts by Mr. X that bothered me for whatever reason, then I wouldn't continue to read his posts. I would just skip over them or ignore them.
See, is that so difficult? No, I didn't think so...
If I read various posts by Mr. X that bothered me for whatever reason, then I wouldn't continue to read his posts. I would just skip over them or ignore them.
See, is that so difficult? No, I didn't think so...
I'll bet you're a riot at parties.
12/2/08 | 09:24 AM
#96
Banned
Joined: October 29, 2008
Posts: 407
Likes: 0
Thanks a pantload for the explanation there big guy. But apparently, you've once again taken something humorous and twisted it into some sort of literal analysis. You know exactly what I meant. If you don't, well then I feel sorry for you. Grow a sense of humor, dude.
I'll bet you're a riot at parties.
I'll bet you're a riot at parties.
No problem there, skippy. And yes, I'm usually pretty funny at parties, thank you very much.
12/2/08 | 11:16 AM
#99
GTR Member
Joined: October 18, 2006
Posts: 5,553
Likes: 11
From: England
Look at those hips, those tribar lights, the way the back end is stretched around the wheels, the concave 67-style trunk .
There are plenty of people here who LOVE the new rear end design, and if you check most of the automotive media, they criticize the front end more as not being different enough. To me the 2010 rear end makes the 2005-09 look very plain and old-fashioned.
The designers did a spectacular job of making the car look wider from the back, less long from the side, and adding more shape and sculpture to the back end while working with the same structural architecture underneath ( bumper beams, sheetmetal inner stampings, etc.) I am sure they would have loved to do a full fastback with a different greenhouse and trunk size, but this is a re-skin, not a clean sheet of paper new car. The 2010 looks new and modern but still a Mustang. And the tri bar lights that fire sequentially, do you think that just happened? There was some real thought and effort that went into this.
The 65-66 was more geometric, the 67-69 more sculptural and angular. Same with 2005-09 and 2010. You won't convince diehard 65-66s that a 67 is better or the other way around. That doesn't make either one ugly. You have your preference, that's fine. But for me, the new rear is the best part of the 2010 exterior design.
I think continuous posting about how much you dislike the '10 in the 2010 forum while there is a 2005-09 forum is a much better definition of dumba$$.
If you really don't like the 2010, how about stop posting in the 2010 forum?
I'm with you right there......well other than the last line, and this isn't directed at you, it's directed at a number of people getting very hot under the collar. Everyone's entitled to their opinion, whether they like the 2010 or not. What this forum doesn't need is the childish behavior in the name of "debate" that we've seen over the last few days. There is no right and wrong, beauty (or maybe just acceptance!) is in the eye of the beholder.
It's great that there's so much passion for the Mustang, but lets just try and get along, please.
12/2/08 | 12:17 PM
#100
Cobra R Member
Joined: January 30, 2004
Posts: 1,725
Likes: 3
From: Florida
Originally Posted by gnat-sum 
http://forums.bradbarnett.net/galler...ar_vidcap2.jpg
http://forums.bradbarnett.net/galler...ar_vidcap3.jpg
Look at those hips, those tribar lights, the way the back end is stretched around the wheels, the concave 67-style trunk .
There are plenty of people here who LOVE the new rear end design, and if you check most of the automotive media, they criticize the front end more as not being different enough. To me the 2010 rear end makes the 2005-09 look very plain and old-fashioned.
The designers did a spectacular job of making the car look wider from the back, less long from the side, and adding more shape and sculpture to the back end while working with the same structural architecture underneath ( bumper beams, sheetmetal inner stampings, etc.) I am sure they would have loved to do a full fastback with a different greenhouse and trunk size, but this is a re-skin, not a clean sheet of paper new car. The 2010 looks new and modern but still a Mustang. And the tri bar lights that fire sequentially, do you think that just happened? There was some real thought and effort that went into this.
The 65-66 was more geometric, the 67-69 more sculptural and angular. Same with 2005-09 and 2010. You won't convince diehard 65-66s that a 67 is better or the other way around. That doesn't make either one ugly. You have your preference, that's fine. But for me, the new rear is the best part of the 2010 exterior design.
I think continuous posting about how much you dislike the '10 in the 2010 forum while there is a 2005-09 forum is a much better definition of dumba$$.
If you really don't like the 2010, how about stop posting in the 2010 forum?
http://forums.bradbarnett.net/galler...ar_vidcap2.jpg
http://forums.bradbarnett.net/galler...ar_vidcap3.jpg
Look at those hips, those tribar lights, the way the back end is stretched around the wheels, the concave 67-style trunk .
There are plenty of people here who LOVE the new rear end design, and if you check most of the automotive media, they criticize the front end more as not being different enough. To me the 2010 rear end makes the 2005-09 look very plain and old-fashioned.
The designers did a spectacular job of making the car look wider from the back, less long from the side, and adding more shape and sculpture to the back end while working with the same structural architecture underneath ( bumper beams, sheetmetal inner stampings, etc.) I am sure they would have loved to do a full fastback with a different greenhouse and trunk size, but this is a re-skin, not a clean sheet of paper new car. The 2010 looks new and modern but still a Mustang. And the tri bar lights that fire sequentially, do you think that just happened? There was some real thought and effort that went into this.
The 65-66 was more geometric, the 67-69 more sculptural and angular. Same with 2005-09 and 2010. You won't convince diehard 65-66s that a 67 is better or the other way around. That doesn't make either one ugly. You have your preference, that's fine. But for me, the new rear is the best part of the 2010 exterior design.
I think continuous posting about how much you dislike the '10 in the 2010 forum while there is a 2005-09 forum is a much better definition of dumba$$.
If you really don't like the 2010, how about stop posting in the 2010 forum?
I'm with you right there......well other than the last line, and this isn't directed at you, it's directed at a number of people getting very hot under the collar. Everyone's entitled to their opinion, whether they like the 2010 or not. What this forum doesn't need is the childish behavior in the name of "debate" that we've seen over the last few days. There is no right and wrong, beauty (or maybe just acceptance!) is in the eye of the beholder.
It's great that there's so much passion for the Mustang, but lets just try and get along, please.
It's great that there's so much passion for the Mustang, but lets just try and get along, please.
With Both of You.And as you said Gnat,
"You won't convince diehard 65-66s that a 67 is better or the other way around. That doesn't make either one ugly."
I Prefer the 67 over a 68 Even if they are Basically the same car. I Also prefer a 69 over a 70, and a 71 or 72 Over a 73. To be Quite Honest, the Only Mustangs I Really Dislike are the Hardtop Coupes of Any Year, again with the Exception of the 67's. That's the Only Hartop I would Ever Consider Owning, for the simple reason I like the way the Recessed Rear Window looks. I just Prefer the Fastback Styling Better. , But I don't Hate Any Of Them.