http://www.fool.com/investing/genera...mentsBoxAnchor

 

No, they didn't.

/endthread

 

This.

 

Comments were fun to read! Article itself sounded like it was written by someone at GM. It was a hit piece.

 

They certainly didn't "mess it up," however, I think they were just a touch too conservative with the styling -- should have gone a bit more EVOS -- and should have been trimmed and lightened even a modest amount (100lbs lighter), both for performance and efficiency reasons. Heck, Ford was able to trim, what 500-700lbs off the F150, 100 lbs off the Stang ought not to have been undoable.

I suspect the 2017-18 refresh will be a more modern interpretation, even beyond just maintaining stylistic pace, especially if it does well globally.

 

I guess the point of the article was to bring an issue to the front that people have been complaining about for years now and while Ford had the car under the drawing board, they failed to address the issue.

 

By making the entire body aluminum. That's how they lightened it. But make no mistake. if it works out, once they have perfected it. All their cars will go aluminum bodied. The sheet metal is already so thin on the new cars, they might as well go to aluminum if they can learn how to paint them properly.

 

"Why was ford reluctant to make big changes", isn't the entire 2015 completely new!? They have to keep some of the original styling like the front end and rear lights so people know it's a mustang.

 

Couldn't do the mustang in aluminum because of cost. Easier to spread the tooling costs and increased build costs over close to a million F150's they sell every year compared to the 80,000 mustangs.
Most people complaining about the styling seem to be mad it doesn't look like a 60's.

 

[COLOR="blue"FORD[/COLOR] did a fine job as always with the new car.
People are only passionate about the things they love.
FORD is certainly pleased with all the rethoric, the Mustang will always be on-top.

 

+2

 

^^+1

 

I wouldn't be too dismissive of the article. For me, I think that Ford has generally done a good job with the Mustang. The fully independent suspension is certainly a plus. I like the addition of the ecoboost engine; although I'd love to see a more powerful ecoboost: (convert the 3.7 V6 to an ecoboost with 400+ hp?)

Mostly, the car retains a lot of its "Mustangness." The character lines on the side, the taillights and the roofline all shout "Mustang!"

I think the front end of the car is a little bit of a miss. I don't hate it, but I don't love it, either. I think the grill takes away some of the Mustangness of the car. I also don't like that the GT doesn't come with big foglights in the grille to distinguish it from other models. The whole shape of the headlights and the way they interact with the front of the car seems wrong to me. It's not ugly. It's modern. It's corporate. But it's not Mustang-y.

Overall, I think the car is a step in the right direction. Ford needed to move away from the Retro-stang look of the 2005 -2012 models. The 2013/14 moves away from retro very slightly, and the 2015 moves a little farther away from retro and into modern. But, still .... that grille.

Perhaps the front end of the car will grow on me. I'm anxious to get in one and take it for a test drive. I'm sure I'll love the car, overall. I certainly don't think Ford "messed up" the Mustang. However, I do agree with the article that the new Mustang is more evolution than revolution. I think its the car that the public wants, and I think it will sell in big numbers.

Still..... that grille.....

 

The power of suggestion


Seems like a hit piece


Maybe a disgruntled member here

 

This, if Ford sold 200 plus thousand Mustangs a year they could have done it.


Although they could have certainly taken the same tack as Toyota with the FR-S and the New Miata which is said to be 200 pounds lighter and just capped power at 300 or so horsepower.


The Miata is coming with 155 horsepower in the new model I believe so they could take some serious weight out of the car.