giddy_up

s197 ftmfw you can t mess with perfection.ford needs to leave well enough alone.

AWmustang

Yes but if Ford stands still while the rest of the industry adapts and innovates, there won't be a Mustang at all. No matter how much you love it it will look dated to the majority of people after 4 or 5 years, so change must happen.

97GT03SVT

I agree, why would I buy a new stang if I can get a low mile used GT for a fraction of the cost!? I really like the current gen car too but it's getting a little old. "Perfection" is a bit of an exaggeration I like retro looks but we ain't in the 60s any more. I hope to keep some retro looks but make the car more modern. I know i'm gonna get some ridicule for speaking my mind on the current gen but not all of us are baby boomers who want their old 60s muscle car back.

Vermillion06

Here's a picture illustrating the size I'd like the see the future Mustangs reduced to:


The '65-'66 size would be perfect; at that size, I think they'd be able to get weight down to around 3200 lbs.

KGray571

+1!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

gnat-sum

The 2005 is the same size as a 65-66, but with the extra space for airbags, door impact beams, rollover crush protection, front and rear impact zones, speaker woofer chambers, sound deadening, electronic harnesses, and additional thickness of unibody construction. And of course, the clearance zone for the solid axle requires more roof height to accommodate rear passenger positioned above it.

Not to say you can't do it, but I think it'd be alot smaller inside. Look at how wide a 65-66 console/hump is compared to the 2005. Its like double the width. I also think the average American butt is also double the width since 65-66!

hiznherponies

IDK about your 65-66, but mine is alot smaller than my '07, and its a unibody car with a solid rear axle just like the '07 (well, almost just like, leaf springs vs 3-link). I do agree with all of the extra stuff like wiring harnesses, subwoofers and safety stuff. I like the size of the car right now, just wish it was a little lighter!!

karrnutt

I love the appearance of the s197 ,but would like some tasteful improvements to freshen the car .My greatest desire would be for some modern comfort and convenience items , such as those found in the interiors of upscale fusions and even f150's . After all ,our beloved steed is a little short on interior comforts. I can live very nicely with 300 horsepower, but would not be too upset with a few more ,like 75 or a 100 connected to a six speed auto or manual tranny.

V10

model . length. . width. . weight
69-70.. 187.4 . . 71.3 . . 3550 - Mach 1, 351, 4 speed manual
S197... 187.6 . . 72.1 . . 3425 - GT manual

jsaylor

There is a lot of room for improvement with the S197 Mustang. That said, the overall size of the car doesn't need to change much. The cross section could stand to shrink a little, but overall length and wheelbase can't be moved much without compromising the dynamics of the design or altering the ponycar ethos. The 'if the Mustang had evolved like the 911 it would look like this' approach to looks doesn't really need to change either. Mustang is like very few cars in the world being so 'right' in concept and execution from the very beginning that major changes weren't necessary or helpful (I would argue that the 67-68 models were the definitive ponycar/Mustang) The basic concept should have simply been refined and improved all along with every major deviation from the basic recipe being an obvious step in the wrong direction.

97GT03SVT

I think it was and still is impossible for a volume seller like the Mustang to constantly evolve from the original model. Unlike the 911, the Mustang has had to shift numerous times to go with the trends of the buying public. While the Mustang was the original pony car it did have to follow trends of other cars on the market (getting bigger to fit bigger motors 69-71) and a drastic change in size from 74-78. I know almost everyone here knows the history of the Mustang but I guess what I am trying to say is that if the Mustang continues to remain in production it will go through all kinds of changes. I'm predicting Mustang II size in the next full refresh, though with better performance.

coldfsn66

The Mustang MUST evolve if it is to remain competitive with arch rival GM. I finally got a good look at the new Camaro on the Edmund's Inside Line web site and I signed off a little worried for the Mustang. In my opinion the Camaro has the look and the specifications to make quite a splash in the marketplace; its retro-chic interior and exterior trade on the same styling cues that still resonate with devotees of the late 60s Camaros but the hardware, a DI V-6 producing a claimed 305 hp and IRS, is completely contemporary. I think the s197 is a smashing design but Ford should not assume that brand loyalty is written in stone. The 2010 Mustang must be palpably better than the current offering or Ford may have a few defectors to the GM camp.

jsaylor

I disagree. We have no evidence that there was ever a time that the Mustang 'had to' shift from the original formual to compete. The first major deviation was made by the 71-73 models, and while I personally have a soft spot for these cars, they were a sales disaster. The Mustang II which followed sold very well initially, but went flat later nearly taking the Mustang name with it in the process. While there is no way to definitively know how a Mustang more closely following the formula of the original would have fared during those same time frames the reality is that the most successful Mustangs all around have been the models which did closely adhere to the original formula. And generally the more closely each car has adhered to that original formula the batter it has fared. Given this, the only thing we can logically conclude is that every step taken which distances the Mustang from the original concept has been made in error.

coldfsn66

Porsche has stood foursquare behind the basic shape of the 911 for four decades and the world has embraced this car as it has few others. The consumers believe in the 911 because Porsche obviously believes in it. Ford must proclaim boldly the design language for the Mustang for the next decade and deviate little from it. If Ford embraces the masculine linearity of the s197 as the distillation of the best design cues from the mid to late sixties Mustangs then the public will respond favorably to such decisiveness. The economic perils of the age underscore the importance of this approach. A corporation that confidently exploits its heritage will retain the loyalty of consumers looking for direction. If Ford dares to lead we will follow.

justgreat

there's so much ground that the writer of the article covered, it's hard to know where to start. but, the biggest, single overriding factor that MUST be addressed by all vehicle manufacturers is weight...it's that plain and it's that simple. vehicles have become way too heavy and it's not all the fault of the ever increasing safety systems that the feds mandate must be included in all models sold. the cost to the manufacturers' will be substantle but it must be done...without reducing the weight of a vehicle the designers are tied to ever larger engines to maintain the level of performance that the public demands.

but the biggest advantage to a reduction in vehicle weight will be the option of using 3/4 cylinder engines to extract the best fuel economy out of the vehicle and still have some level of performance acceptable to the general public. there's no way around it: without reducing the weight, then the designers must stay with the large displacement engines that the dealers can't give away when gas is selling for 4.40/gallon. alll the talk and b/s about putting a 4 cylinder engine in a pony car andnot being able to sell the vehicle is ridiculous: maybe the gear heads on these forums wouldn't buy the 4 bangers, but do you really think that suzie creamcheese and joe sixpack would turn their nose up at 30 mpg simply because it's a 4 cylinder engine?

and speaking of 4 bangers: to make any comparison between the 4 cylinder engines from the 80's and the current generation of 4 cylinder engines is ludicrous: take a look at the 2 liter 4 that gm puts into their pontiac sports car and the saturn version...this thing will give some serious competition to alot of 8 cylinder equipped cars.....and how much that do those two seaters weigh?.....


jackg
06 sts6

97GT03SVT

I guess we have to agree to disagree. You don't think that Ford made the Mustang more of a Muscle car after it was getting spanked by the GM F-Bodies? The original Mustang was marketed as a chick car. In my opinion a 69-70 Mustang is dramatically different from the "cute" 65-66 model. Even the 71-73 cars that get so little love today were fairly stylish and heading toward the luxury end of performance cars, that was kinda the trend of the early 70s. If not for the gas crisis these cars would have been strong sellers.

As far as the Mustang II is concerned you are wrong. The sales numbers of the Mustang II were strong throughout it's entire run. It's worst selling year was 1977, and it still moved over 153,000 units. The last year of the Mustang II sold nearly 200,000! I don't see these cars as any worse selling than the later 3rd, 4th and even 5th gen cars. I guess it's hard for any Mustang model to live up to the volume sellers of 64-67.

97GT03SVT

I understand what you are saying but what about the Mustangs of 79-04? These cars have as strong a following as the original 60s Mustangs. I feel the Mustang should also embrace the styling and heritage of these cars as well. I for one prefer the 4th gen car's looks to the newer 05-09 cars. I do like them but at the same time I'd prefer a more modern approach in the next generation Mustangs. The 60s have come and gone, I feel as long as the Mustang has a chrome pony in the grille, three bar tail lights, long hood, short deck then we still have a Mustang. I don't need a 65-70 mustang history lesson .............just my .02

coldfsn66

I agree with justgreat. Absent a fundamental correction in the price of gasoline automobile design will be influenced by the necessity to maximize fuel efficiency. This represents a challenge for those who design and engineer the Mustang
but the public and especially the "gear heads" must be willing to consider alternatives to large displacement engines for their favorite car. Engine management and metallurgy have come a long way since 1984 and Ford now seems more willing to cull the best technology from its European arm to field products in NA. In today's environment an Ecoboost powered Mustang might exceed all expectations. We must keep an open mind.

m05fastbackGT

Wrong !!! The 2005 is NOT the same size as the 65-66 models. As a matter of fact, the current Mustang is also slightly larger than the 69-70 models.

Overall Length: 65-66 (181.6")
Overall Width : (68.2")
Overall Height: (51.1") Coupe (51.2") 2+2 Fastback

Curb Weight: (2556 lbs. Coupe
(2606 lbs. 2+2 Fastback


Overall Length: 69-70 (187.4")
Overall Width : ( 71.8")
Overall Height: ( 50.3")

Curb Weight : (3571 lbs.)


Overall Length: 2005-09 (187.6") Coupe (188.0") Convertible
Overall Width : ( 73.9") Coupe ( 73.9") Convertible
Overall Height: ( 55.4") Coupe ( 55.7") Convertible

Curb Weight: (3425 lbs.) GT Coupe, Manual

watchdevil

I just reviewed old production figures from 1965-1979 and they were quite interesting. From 1965 the installation of a V8 was 64% over the 35% for a Six. By the late 60's V8's were 81.6%. In 1973, V8's were 94.2% with only about 5.8% choosing a 6-cyl.

Then 1974 came around... No V8 Mustang. 55.9% chose the 4-cyl while the V6 got 44.1%.

1975 saw a shift from V6's to V8's with V8's at 25.1% for 1975 and 25.6% for 1977. The 4-cyl's through 1978 were always about 50% or higher. 76 and 78 had 17.6% and 17.9% respectively for V8's. Then in 1979, after the change to the Fox body Mustang, 4-cyl production was 62.3%. V8's were 19% while V6's dropped over 1/2 the previous year to 18.5%. What is proven is how much of a demand there was for 4-cyl Mustangs even after it switched to the Fox platform in 1979.

The true muscle car segment dried up in the 1970's due to emission regulations and safety concerns. Traditional Mustang buyers were not all the same buyers in 1974. They either moved to the more efficient Mustang II or indulged in a personal mid-sized luxury car. Back then it was a true aspiration for many to own what was then the most elite status symbol american luxury cars like the Thunderbird, Eldorado and Riviera. Buyers moved to the hot new mid-sized personal luxury car segment started by the Monte Carlo, Grand Prix and Cougar which had the same glam as the full sized personal luxury cars but with a much lower price. When Ford downsized the Thunderbird in 1977-79 on the Torino platform with a much more affordable pricetag, it sold in numbers like the original Mustang. . With the castration of V8 muscle cars, trends went toward the superficial glam of the disco era cars... The Mustang almost moved to a Torino sized platform to compete in the popular mid-sized car segment along with the Cougar that actually did.

Iacocca was smart enough to see a growing segment of small sporty 4-cyl cars that was an emerging market with the Capri, Celica, 240Z... Iacocca responded with the Mustang II and it sold to a youth market desiring efficient cars and was right for that time. Some people missed the V8 so Ford's response was to shoehorn a V8 II and make some spoiler and tape options including the Cobra II. However Ford still lost sales to the macho image Camaro Z28 which was resurrected in 1978 as well as an increased popularity of 1977 Trans Am's thanks to Smokey and The Bandit. Meanwhile the Thunderbird was the hottest sensation for Ford. The popularity of GM's F-cars took off with the macho crowd while Ford continued to chase the thrifty minded.

For 1979, the Mustang was redesigned on the Fox body platform. Sales rose again to 1974 levels... After 1979, Thunderbird sales tanked considerably with an unsuccessful redesign for 1980 sending those buyers to GM's more sucessful downsized mid-sized personal luxury cars. The macho image of the Mustang would not start to recover until 1982. By then the GM F-cars got a then sensational redesign leaving the Mustang looking more like a stodgy small 2-door sedan than a sports coupe. Mustang GT's sold to Ford loyalists on the 5.0 engine alone. Resumed popularity of the Mustang began while popularity of the Thunderbird would not come back until the 1983 Aero redesign which won back its traditional buyers.

Adding Mustang convertibles for 1983 played a big part in the Mustang's re-popularity and the GT 5.0 was the icing on the cake.

At some point preference for Mustangs again overtook the popularity of Thunderbirds and by the mid 1990's the Mustang was the personal performance car of choice as the Thunderbird was in a dead market with buyers going for either the new retro-modern macho Mustangs, or Mustang convertibles, four door Tauruses and Explorers... and the new segment of luxury imports in general... Even GM by then had four door counterparts of it's personal luxury coupes.

The Mustang regained it's loyal cusomer base while adding a new generation and so here we are today encouraging the tradition. If there was no Mustang in Ford's lineup, I would ever buy another Ford.