Everyone *****es about the Camaro but wants the Mustang to look like its twin. The only difference im sure the interior will be better quality.

 

ford woesn't lying when they said the camaro looked a lot like the concepts they'd drawn up for the mustang. i wonder how the '10 would've looked if they hadn't had to make changes...

 

Herein lies my dilemma. My father fits fine into his 1972 Mach 1. His is 6'1" at 325. The mach's roof is about 4" lower then my roof, but my father has to squeeze into my car. So you look inside. the seats on the 05 are waaaaaaaaay thicker then the 72, more comfy yes, but the 72 never felt uncomfortable to me. The 72 has about 2" more ground clearance then my car as well. So the interior of the the car is theoretically 6" narrower (top to bottom) then my 05, yet someone 6'1" 325 is more comfortable in the 72??????

Granted all the electronics and airbags and whatever have to go somewhere, but make the car smaller and engineer more room into the interior. different foam in the seat that absorbs shock but takes up less space, reduce the size of pwr seat motors, high tension steel for the seat supports welded to the floor to reduce the support size, telescoping wheel to adjust for smaller/larger drivers, the list can go on and on.

My only other ? is why the huge trunk. I know many people love it. but why do I need to be able to carry four golf bags when I can only carry two golfers?

 

The trunk (and interior) are the perfect size for my family (5 year old daughter, 5 month old son, 1 wife ). Alfie's pushchair just fits in the trunk with all the other bits young kids need

Oh, and '72 or 2010? I know which one I'd rather have a crash in

 

The '72 may cost less to repair the car, but the '10 would cost less to repair you.

 

Not sure I get the crash comment???

The 72 is larger then the 2010 in every category but height. and height wise the 2010 is definitely worse considering what that 4" does to the center of gravity.

If your talking airbags and 21st century materials, then my question still holds, why so tall?

What's a push chair (i have three boys and never heard of that)?

 

Never mind the airbags, the crumple zones and passenger safety cells have moved on leaps and bounds in the last 30 odd years.....you've got much more chance of surviving a crash in the newer car. Sadly, that means cars will always be much bigger than they used to be

Oh, don't forget I'm for across the pond. We call 'em pushchairs (you know, what you put a baby in when you wanna push 'em). Do you fellas call them strollers or something?

 

Yeah, strollers, over here. My mother in law is from Braughty Ferry (sp) Scotland, but I was unfamiliar with the term. Sorry about that. add that to my list. While i'm here, she says in the UK the term Jobey (jobie) mean sharp, pointy, prickly, etc. Is this true or did she just make that one up? (she has a tendency to make stuff up)

 

But why taller????the crumple zones are mainly front and rear, so longer would be understandable. I worked in the body shop for Subaru for 3 year welding bodies together, but the current stang is shorter and narrower then the 72, so the crumple zones don't really apply to the size. if the current stangs height was shortened by 2-4 inches then the stance would be much better and the car would appear much smaller, yet wider. The loops ( or rings as subaru calls them) that support the roof can be designed taller or shorter, stiffer or softer, dependant on the material, weld type, weld location, material, stamp pattern, etc.

As far as longer goes, the bumper foam is pretty thick on the 05 compared to that on other cars i've had the bumpers off of. Cutting it in half could reduce the lengthe of the front and rear by 4 or 5 inches. Only real down side to that is that at 15 mph you'd have to replace the bumper support as well as the foam core.$$$

 

I think the difference is in the more engineering-tricky realm of packaging efficiency rather than the engineering-easy expedient of just making the darn thing ever bigger -- qualitative vs quantitative engineering if I may. Rather than big plush Barcalounger seats, make trim, light, well-designed seats that are comfortable and supportive without 6" inches of padding and 75 lbs of electric adjustments. Rather than a six-page option manifesto of every gadget that marketing department research says must be included to make for a desirable interior, pare it down to a few well focused elements that are superbly engineered and executed.

 

+1, my gibberish eloquently stated!

 

Last off-topic reply, I promise

Never heard of Jobey.....although if your MIL is Scottish, that would explain it. The Scots, Welsh and Irish often have their own words for things. I'm from the south east of England, so often can't understand what they are on about. Vice versa too, I'm sure

Now back to topic....here's another P/shop. A great looking car, just not so sure it's a great looking Mustang

 

What's your definition of "everyone?" Aside from a post or two contained within this thread, I've yet to see anyone, anywhere that's enamored with the "green sketch."

 

You can fit four golf bags in your trunk???

 

In my 05 yes, my 04 carries 3. Snug fit, but oriented correctly 4 will fit. We did it in our parking lot at work the other day after a comment was made that I had a four "body" trunk.

 

Just my opinion- the rear end on those black and white sketches are awful.

 

Oh I think it's great. Granted, I think I'm still partial to the green one. But this is what I'm saying. Ford needs to stop being conservative. Build some wild styles. None of this gradual crap. Put a design out there that is so unmistakenly bad ***, sleek and modern. When everybody saw the 2005 concept, the vast majority were like OMG.....Awesome! Heck I'm 42 and no spring chicken anymore, but I'm certainly not dead either. I still have a pulse. Ford needs to get it in gear and come out with some game changing designs. I swear Ford, even most car companies, build cars for old people. Quit thinking in the past, in regards to sytle, back to some glory days of the 1960's. Like I said, I love my 2006 GT, but would have much rather preferred the sleek concept.

 

the bad thing is that what will be considered ultra modern and sleek is that eventually the design will look dated eventually

 

Here are a few Mustang sketches I've been playing around with:

The side profiles are a bit short on these because I was drawing them in class sideways on my paper, but you get the idea hopefully.





This set is the original of the ones posted above - the last three show how the sequential turn signal would work.

 

Looks like Shelby GR-1 concept.