Well FYI, my previous 4 Mustang's were hatchbacks in which my last one was a Black 93 SVT Cobra and as for the Fox platform's 14 year run is concerned ? It was way too old, outdated and should had been replaced back in 1989-90..

And if hatchbacks are so wonderful as far as extra space, utility and convenience are concerned.. Then why hasn't Ford offered a hatchback model in a Mustang since the Fox platform was discontinued back in 93..


Well here's some logic for you, when Ford introduced the SN-95 back in 94 their reason for not offering a hatchback for the SN-95 platform was due to pillar and body strength related issues and those words were spoken from Ford engineers themselves..


Although hatchbacks such as the current Focus and Fiesta are much better designed over the previous Focus platform, such a platform could not withstand 420+HP without having serious body and chassis problems..


As for the Corvette ? IIRC it was a glass hatch only, as the rest of body panels remained intact !

 

Assuming the camo's zippered opening for the trunk matches the car, it isn't a hatchback.

 

Maybe that's what they want us to believe. We`ll know for sure soon.

 

Have you seen the new Corvette? The problems you mention were solved years ago. Looks like more than glass to me, and the car starts at 460 HP in base form.

http://bloximages.chicago2.vip.townn...0a36.image.jpg

 

Also FYI I had a 2002 Acura RSX Type S hatchback that was the most rigid car I've had. It used hydro formed rails for the frame and I could jack up one side of the rear and the other side would raise at the same level. All for 23k. It's just all about proper engineering.

 

Yes ! I've seen the new Corvette and it does not look anything like a traditional hatchback at all.. Perhaps Ford should consider taking a page from GM's design book, but then again there's a very huge difference between a $70k + Corvette over the base $25k Mustang, heck not even the current Camaro was designed as a hatchback for whatever reason GM decided against it..

Just as you said, it's all about proper engineering and knowing Ford's track record, chances of you seeing the upcoming S550 in a hatchback are pretty much slim to none and more than likely due to the bean counters !

 

What do you mean about the problems being solved years ago ? Only the glass portion of the C7 Corvette was the actual hatch !

 

Sorry, I meant by other car companies. Subaru WRX STi , Nissan 370z come to mind as powerful hatchbacks that have been out for many years.

 

Sorry, wrong again.
http://image.automobilemag.com/f/201...arge/trunk.jpg

 

There is absolutely nothing about the camo prototype that says "hatchback" to me. It'll be the same basic shape as the S197 cars, a traditional coupe layout.

 

As for the SN-95 not retaining a hatchback, that was probably likely for two reasons, they couldn't meet contemporary body strength standards with what was a basic chassis/body still largely based on the ancient Fox chassis, and that many Mustang buyers were already reflexively anti-hatchback, equating that feature too strongly with only foreign econocars. Many core Mustang buyers are pretty conservative/regressive/reactive when it comes to engineering and technology and don't take readily to new-fangled, furrin anything.

Also, I recall the SN-95 was sort of an on-the-cheap, stop-gap hack job on the old Fox chassis after the plan to develop a new FWD deservedly hit the rocks. There just wasn't the engineering money to properly develop a more complex hatchback so hence the reversion to a simpler, easier and cheaper trunk-body update of the old Fox chassis. Remarkably, it would be another 10+ years before a proper redesign of the Stang would take place. Who ever would have guessed back in '79 that the basic underpinnings of the then hot new Stang would still be creaking around a quarter century later.

Thus the '94 Stang was offered only in a trunk form with the ensuing loss of space and utility.

Certainly the Focus or Fiesta couldn't withstand 400+hp, they never were intended to and being hatchbacks or not have little to do with that (I don't think the 4-door Focus would be any happier with a 5.0 than the 5-door version.). Of course, that says nothing about whether a hatchback Stang could be built to readily handle 400+, or even 600+ hp.

That all said, I doubt Ford will go the hatchback route with the '15, regardless of how desirable that feature would be to many, especially newer, younger buyers weaned on and comfortable with hatchbacks.

 

My bad, I guess it was the C5 or C6 Corvette and not the C7 !

 

I've looked at these pix posted on the camoflaged 2015 Mustang, and I am thinking it is the GT-500 replacement...which we've recently seen is likely to be a Cobra or something other than a Shelby nameplate. I think this is the top Mustang based on the brakes. Check out the fronts which carry a monobloc caliper of a sizable dimension; they sure look big enough to be six-piston! Also, I think those may be 2014 GT-500 rear rotors. Of couse, you can see the rear caliper has moved to the 2-3 o'clock position, but remains a sliding caliper, probable single-piston. But, again, that front caliper looks pretty robust and those rotors may be 15"...but only if they are 20" rims; the gap looks a bit big between the rotor and rim. The rotors may be 14" (?). I suppose Ford could just test the brakes on any Mustang mule, but I like to think it's the SVT Mustang model. Regardless, I cannot freaking wait!!!!

 

Look at Jaguars XK, thats a hatch isnt it?

Even Z's as well. And i know theres a good amount of high powered Z cars and they seem to handle power just fine

 

If it had a hatch I wouldn't mind it being like the C7 hatch.

But I'm mostly opposed to hatches in Mustangs. I wouldn't own a hatchback Fox. Probably why I don't own a 93 Cobra.

 

The weight penalty of a hatch runs directly counter to the weight-savings they're after.

 

But it can still be offset by lighter materials throughout the body as well as mechanical components. I agree that it wouldnt be very cost effective to research lighter materials only to add weight in the final product

 

Very cool! Now we won't have those awkward y-turns at busy stations either! And the aftermarket filler cap folks will double their income!

 

I guess we are never going to be free from that cheap plastic honey comb grille?

 

Gotta leave something for the aftermarket companies