It is obvious in these two previoulsly posted pics. Note the upper seam of the bumper cover on the '10 is above the upper arch on the rear wheels. Also Note on the '05-'09 that same seam is about the same height as the center of the rear wheel arch.

This is the physical difference that changes the lines on the rear of the new car. Like it or not, it is obviously physically different, and thus people identify with the line changes, either positively or negatively.

Everyone has the right to like or dislike a vehicle. Probably why this is a Mustang forum and not a "car" forum.

 

Absolutely the opposite in my mind. The taper of the '10 taillights really screws up the rear's looks, IMHO. The old 69's had more of a square taillight/rearend, MUCH more like the 05-09. I'm not saying that change is bad, but they are SO tapered, that it looks foreign-inspired to me.















Now looking at the profiles, the lines of the rear looking at profile show the top of the taillights at a more severe angle on the 10 than the 05-09:














You add up the tapered taillights and the more severe angle of the taillights and get this at the corner on the 10:




The whole rearend looks terrible to me. It's just my opinion. I'm not jealous of your 10. Great car in EVERY way, but that rearend is a deal breaker for me. I personally like the looks of the 05-09 better, and even the Camaro and Challenger better overall than the 10. Again, just my opinion. The fact that this gets posted and noted by other people just means I'm not alone. Doesn't make anyone "right" or "better", it's all subjective.

 

The Camaro rear looks better....? Put the crack pipe down man!

 

I was talking about how the black trim goes all the way around. Not just in the center of the bumper. It has an Audish look to it. However, you post should remind people the current trend is to have a black area of the rear bumper on a lot of nice performance cars.

 

Absolutely it does, especially how it flares out over the wheels from the back window area with that flat surface, much like the 69 Stang in that regard:

 

No one cares. Why are you in the 2010 forum again?

 

Absolutely it does, especially how it flares out over the wheels from the back window area with that flat surface, much like the 69 Stang in that regard:

 

That's the concept Camaro. The production rear doesn't look near as good as that.

 

It's been buggin' me. I can't help it. Someone said "dont' see a honda." Well, this is what I meant by 'hondaized'. Note the shape, overall:


I still dunno what the upward flare is about on the tail lamps at all.

/Maybe it's just me, but that's what I keep seeing on the 10s.

 

I agree with you. The rear of the 2010 design has got to be the ugliest rear end design since the tail lights of the first Ford Fairmont, and to add insult to injury the Chevy Camaro hood has simply GOT TO GO !!!!!!!!!

Very easily, they could've kept with the retro theme and did a 71-73 tail light section and a 71-73 NASA-type ram air hood and the car would've been AWESOME (and that's what a lot if us were honestly hoping for). With the design that car has now, you'll never see one parked in my driveway.

 

I can't even believe this topic is still going. Why don't we just start up an SRA vs IRS thread again while we're at it?!

I've said it before, and I'll say it again...most of the people who can't stop whining about the rear are 05-09 owners and have little to no Mustang experience beyond that model. They think it looks bad just because it's different than the previous car (what they're most used to), which is funny because the 05-09 rear is FAR from perfect!

Those who have more experience with ALL of the previous designs, and are more aware of the entire history of
the look of the car know that there are always going to be design cues that aren't perfect, or are a departure from previous years, but are more open to it.

If you want to see bad tail lights, look at the 71-73, or the Mustang II rear. Those are some BAD rear end designs...but some departures from the norm work and some don't, and some people will always love what other hate. It's all perceptive, and when you come from a more limited one, I think you're more likely to be negative towards change.

Just my opinion.

 

That's quite a broad stroke you're painting with there. I don't think you have to have any Mustang Experience to have a opinion about what you yourself thinks looks bad. I've never owned a Porsche but i think i'm in the right to say that new Sedan they make is quite horrible looking!
I have "Mustang" Experience so i'll say....
'65-66 rear-looks good
'67-68-Perfect
'69-good
'70-great
'71-73-Love it,love it all
'74-78-Mach 1 hatch looks good
'79-82-okay
'83-84-okay
'85-86 GT-perfect
'87-93 GT-hate cheese graters
'94-95-love
'94-95 Cobra-love the goofy wing
'96-98-okay,kinda eh
'99-04-Perfect
'05-09-okay,looks good on Shelbys
'10-11-better,not perfect,but better
...........................yeah,i'm bored and this thread is stupid......

 

FINALLY! A thread about the rear end! Praise Jeebus!

:somebodyshootme:

 

To the original poster, I am not certain that Ford would make a redesign in the form, given the way the sheetmetal and plastic parts come together. The time an testing necessary to make that change midway through would most like be expensive and divert people away from the work being done on the next Mustang. However, this is my opinion.

I didn't like the way it photographed, but in person at some angles, I do like the effect. I will say its taken some time to warm up to it. Seems like every generation Mustang has one or tow of those things that draws a lot of discussion and dissenting opinions.

 

The opposite of love isn't hate, but rather, indifference.

That this is still being kicked around, like the IRS thing, should be taken as an indication of the interest and devotion people have regarding the Mustang, whether the things they love about it or the things they hate. Its when the simply don't give a whit anymore that Ford should be concerned.

I am well aware of the lineage of Mustang design and am more than open to good change (as distinct from simply change for changes sake). Not all new designs are better or improvements and to dislike a new design is not the same as not liking any new design or change.

While no design is perfect, I too find the '10 rear end not to be very good for various reasons, none of which have anything to do with the '05-'09 design, which I thought was pretty good, if imperfect.

My main gripes is that the overall design lacked the coherence, clarity and crispness of the previous design or what I would want from any design. It seemed more a group effort amalgamation of elements that lacked a singular vision necessary for great design. The result is a somewhat busy, fussy and lumpy rear end that appears somewhat heavy and discordant in its elements.

I'll avoid going into analyzing specific elements other than to say the whole could use a cleanup. However, that is unlikely to happen though not impossible (look how Pontiac redid the GTO's rear end after but one year, including going to a full split dual exhaust system, no small effort there -- not that it was enough to save the GTO).

Again, let's not take it for granted that people care enough about the Stang to fuss and fume about just about any and every aspect of it -- I certainly do -- but rather, hope that Ford too takes these criticisms from its more ardent fans to heart and build us the Stang we want them to build and to buy rather than just the Stang they want to build and sell. That may seem like an overly subtle bit of sophistry, but if Detroit had build the cars we want to buy rather than the ones they wanted to sell, the whole era of rebates (bribes), sales, gillion dollar marketing budget, etc. -- all to come to naught -- would not be necessary.

Ford, with the Mustang, does seem to be "getting it" a lot more lately -- perhaps at the lash of real competition now, but that's fine -- as evidenced by all they did get right and better in the '10 and now with the advent of the '11, V6 which is suddenly becoming a real driver's car, and the soon-to-be-announced that too looks to be a major step forward in both motor and chassis.

Any, new and different isn't necessarily new and better and if not, well, give 'm heck if you care enough too. Ford does seem to be listening a lot more these days, and actually acting on it, so perhaps they'll keep the surprises coming and clean up some of those bumps and lumps and whatnot on the Stang's stern for '12.

Now about that lack of an IRS...

 

rofl

 

To me, this is the only decent lookiong 2010 rear end.

I think it's the black cover saleens throws on the trunk lid that let's it all match instead of that weird convace lid (where did that come from). now if saleen only took the extra folds out of the lowefr plastic we would have a winner in my eyes.


that's sexy.

 

I dont mind it to much until you get to the lower rear fascia, which is something they could change every year since its just some molded plastic.

I've yet to see somebody do a solid improvement on it (unlike the front fascia, IMO Roush has the best snoz out there) but I'm hoping somebody will hit on something (Saleen might be onto something with its lower rear fascia).

 

GT500 lower facia looks awesome and is cheap.

 

GT500 is by far the bast looking rear end and would not stop me from buying one.

The spoiler and the diffuser at the bottom really make it look good to me. And the GT500 spoiler really helps with all the rear lines with my eye at least.

What's not to like about this shot...