I love reading all the rocket scientist remarks under the pics on Autoblog. All the authorities seem to believe the Mustang ABSOLUTELY NEEDS independant rear, meanwhile it continues to outsell everything out there that HAS an independant rear.

Some people just don't get it.

 

Everyones a critic

 

cant beat that live axle!

 

flush mounted signals..look close, the cammo is on the bumper but smooth all accross and they look bigger, but that probably an illusion

 

"to start production in January of 2009, with an on-sale date early in the first quarter of '09"

on sale march 09...oooo only 19 months left

 

want me details!

 

hrm... interesting if true.
That would mean the 09s are a short run (July - Dec)

but kinda scary considering the 05 is still new to me and a LOT of people...
4 model years in, it still turns heads

 

Asshats that probably have zero seat time in a mustang, people are told that SRA is bad and they just regurgitate what they have been told, I can tell you that it does pretty good on several surfaces as well as a bumpy two lane country road over 100 mph, and thats from experience.

 

I hear its bad so it must be true...that's how it works

 

If it's a engine test mule, why hide the front? Why not just use the current front end?

 

You usually want to use as much of the cooling and inlet ducting from the production car as possible when testing the engine, so you get an accurate picture of how it will perform in the finished engine. If you're just running the engine to run the engine, you're better off in a dyno.

 

Ah I see. Makes sense now.

 

I dunno. I have found that when hitting a bump in mid corner the rear end of the current Stang can get a little twitchy. Nothing too unsettling, mind you, but definitely dodgier than my previous cars (all of which had IRS).

And that's from experience.

 

Well, we've seen the only exercise of IRS in the 03-04 Cobra. I can remember looking at an '04 Cobra vert in my local dealer's showroom. $39,000 for that car. I mean, nice car, but it's still an SN95. Great engine yea. $39,000?? I don't think so. I understand that alot of that is engine and convertable but IRS does definitely factor into that. If you could do a reliable IRS for $1,500 great. If not, I'll do without.

 

IRS simply doesn't cost that much. During that last survey that Ford conducted online about the next gen Mustang - and what people wanted - they asked if buyers would be willing to spend an extra $700 (I believe it was) for IRS. That was after HTT had tried to convince everyone that adding IRS to the current Stang would have meant something like $5000 more for every car.



Must've been some of that Ford beancounter "fuzzy math" they're so fond of. Either way, it was a tacit admission that the argument IRS is SO expensive is a complete snowjob. 95% of the cars on the market today have it - the basic R&D costs have LONG since been amortized by manufacturers. Hell, a Honda Civic econobox has IRS. The reality is that Ford can significantly increase their profit MARGIN by using SRA, not that IRS HAS to cost the customer that much more. In truth, we're probably paying way too much for the SRA that's in there.

 

I was told yesterday by a reliable source that we will see the 2009/2010 Mustang at the Detroit Auto Show. I hope this is true.

 

That soon eh?
Concept I take it?

Probably to try and take away the buzz from the Camaro and Challenger
I mean, we already know what they will look like....with minor tweaks.

 

I was thinking the same thing. Try to steal away some of the Camaro's hype.
The source was a Ford Engineer, and he said that he likes the new design, but prefers the current models rear end design better.

I know a couple other Ford employees that went up to that "employees only" show in Detroit, and they prefer the current model design. But, he said since I prefer a more aggressive look, that I may like the 2010 better. The interior & Dash are different too. How it was described to me, is that the dash looks closer to the 69-70's.

Things change daily at Ford, so we will have to wait see for ourselves.

 

You aren't the first person that's said that either about the rear....
...but one of the comments by one person was that they loved the rear end and the front was ok, just a more aggressive.

I would take a guestimate and say the front will have the lines of the Guigiaro (not the actual dimensions) and apply the dimensions of the current car.
Add hips...and that new back end...
I think its gonna look pretty **** cool

 

IMO, since 1982 Ford has always done a good job improving the appearance of the Mustang. I can't see them messing things up now, especially after the home-run they hit with this current car.