My philosophy as well. I don't care much for Mustang styling from '71 to '78, but, I still embrace them all.

I'm just saying give it a chance. I don't plan to "upgrade" either.

 

+1

 

Change simply for the sake of change isn't necessarily a good thing. Some people may think the changes for 2010 are subtle, and therefore not a step in the wrong direction (while still not being a step in the right direction, how can that be?). That is just not so for many of us. Even the "subtle" differences between the 1969 & 1970 Sportsroof Mustangs have always been very distinct to me.

I DID not like it in 1971 when Ford made that "drastic" design change and I still do not like it. In many peoples opinion, they didn't get it right again until 2005. Sure people put up with them, but basically Ford never recovered from 1971-2004, that is 33 years of really not so good looking Mustangs...

People buying them is not necessarily an indicator of how good they look. Come on after all many thousands of people bought Pintos, Gremlins and Pacers, and none of them were even the least bit good looking.

Those 33 years of not so good looking Mustangs may grow on some people, but they have never grown on me, and I am far from the only one.

From What I can see of it I don't like any of the changes for 2010. Not the tail lights, not the panel (deck lid) between, certainly not the rear valence, not the Euro look to the new headlights, not the square vents in the dash.

Ford hit an absolute home run with the 2005 body style, I have thought and said this right along, there really is no place to go from here but down.

I like Ford(s) I have always been a very loyal Ford customer, Fer crying out loud, I even bleed Ford Blue, but I am not going to be their cheerleader when they do not get it right.

 

Change is necessary. They build the cars to sell them. People would not buy new ones as often if they didn't change them from time to time. I disagree about sales not being related to looks. That is the number one reason people buy cars - the image. Why do you suppose so many of the S197s were sold? (Hint - they look great). It shore ain't for the gas mileage or the seating/trunk capacity.

Looks are subjective. I actually liked the styling in the Fox body era. I owned a '79 Cobra and a '93 GT. OF the more recent era, the '99-'04 are the best looking (IMHO). They still turn my head when I see them on the street. I could see my buying a nice low mileage convertible GT someday.

I agree that the S197 body style is the best of all (to me even over the '60s cars). However, there were a ton of people on here saying the same things you are about it. Many people hated the look. They swore they would never buy one. I bet a large percentage of them now own them.

My point was: give the car a chance. We haven't even seen it in full glory yet. As we all know, they look better in person than pictures, especially camo'd pictures.

 

After the 30K plus production for the GT500 it's time for a face lift. The positive is the new model will create distinction for the '07s - '09s.

The '10s will likely be upgraded, I am all for it. I'll be happy for the lucky ones who can get their hands on one and good news for those who have been waiting for reasonable prices on the current gen.

 

Speaking of upgrades, any news on the suspension for the new model? Is IRS a possibilty?

 

Doesn't sound like it. Chassis and suspension fundamentals carry over.

I would suspect, however, tweaks to the current setup.

I, too, don't understand those who say they hate the 2010 body style. It's not a full model change like going from 1970 to 1971. More like the difference between '66 and '68; an evolutionary step forward. Greenhouse remains the same, chassis remains the same, proportions remain the same; still has the side scallops and tri-bar tail-lights, just modified a bit. And I DO think the specific level of interior fit & finish and creature comforts in the '10 will be significantly ahead of the '05-'09 car, judging from what we've read and seen in pics.

It's speculated that the '10 GT500 will get a bump in HP, too...and have the new, more refined interior. I would venture to say that the '09 - '13 GT500 may be the version to have - it will likely represent the final pinnacle of the true, traditional muscle car. Who knows if Ford-produced Shelbys will carry on past 2013 at all.

 

[quote=Hollywood_North GT;5633509]............ More like the difference between '66 and '68; ....../quote]

wouldn't you mean difference between mean '67 and '68 ?

The '65/66 to '67/68 had much more change than
'Greenhouse remains the same, chassis remains the same, proportions remain the same; still has the side scallops and tri-bar tail-lights, just modified a bit.'

Not that it matters that much.
Many people think the rendering of the '67 Mustang was better than the '68. As has been said change for the sake of change isn't good. Another example of that was the changing of the '57 Ford styling for '58. An exercise in making a good design ugly.
I don't think the the 2010 Mustang will be necessarily be 'ugly', though I like the '05 - '09 better in the way I like the '65-'66 compared to the '67 - '68. (That wouldn't stop me from owning a nice '67 or '68 Mustang though)

 

IIRC, the chassis was originally designed to accomodate IRS.

 

Yes it was. Don't think we'll get it, though, somehow. And an IRS for 500+ HP would require significant robustness and refinement...probably significantly upping the purchase price (notice I said purchase price, not cost ).

 

Honestly, the way I drive my car, I don't miss it. It occasionally skitters a little, but, I don't drive it real hard and never track it. Someday, I'd like to try some track events. I may wish it had it then.

As a Gran Touring car, I like the way it is. I'm going to North Carolina in a few weeks. I'm going to get a chance to drive some awesome roads. I just hope the weather is good.

Hopefully the cost of the 2010 GT500 won't be as bad as the last run. MSRP will likely be higher, but, the "only chance to get a modern Shelby" should not be nearly as much of an issue now that there are a bunch of modern Shelby choices such as SGT, SGT-C, GTH, Terlingua, GT500, GT500KR and whatever else. Wasn't there also a Barrett-Jackson edition SGT? I think we will see some early ADMs that die out quickly.

Wow, just like the old days. New car speculation, disagreement on said speculation, discussion about IRS and ADM all in one thread. I miss those days.

 

I am looking forward to the second, modern GT500 iteration; even thinking about taking the plunge myself. Unlike my GT - which I do love, BTW - the Shelby I would keep for a good long time...if not the rest of my life.

 

At auction, I have seen them go for 33K as repos and 20-25K as salvage.
I bought my 2006 GT with 30K miles for 11K and added a new front end with a touch of fresh paint for 1K. Paid 800 for tires and rims, sold old ones for 400. Add springs and front end alinment. Yes it's a salvage, and it's been over a year and she runs strong.
I just could not afford a GT convertible in the 22-28K range.

Reguardless of the title, this car is fun to drive and it's staying in the family , six more years and my son will get it. He won't know the differance.

 

I purchased My 09 GT500 with 2,800 miles for $36,500. It was a destressed owner. Love the car. I suspect prices will be hurt for a few years due to the performance of the new Gt's. Still think the Shelby is superior but a new car is always nice. Sunbutter

 

07 GT500 Coupe, Black with Red Stripe Appearance Package, 1600 miles, $38,950...

http://www.bowenscarff.com/preowned-...975346881.aspx