So what would you consider necessary cues that we would expect?

I can think of tri-bar taillamps as one. I'd love to see a modernized running pony finally replace the logo like it started to in 2010.

 

Yep, the tail lamps are a given.

A shark-nose forward sloping front end.

Round headlamps. Happy for them to be more modern.......but still round.

Full fastback (as per '69/'70)

A c-scoop is obvious. Personally, I'd prefer a feature line that runs from the front fender into the rear hip (yep, just like the '69/'70).

The current rear side window is a pretty unique Mustang styling cue....but the time might be right for the '69/'70 side window treatment.

Yeah, the '69 is my favourite Mustang

 

I would like to see them continue with the complete modernization of the technical and engineering side. I would like to see the car get shorter (6") narrower (3"), lower (3") and lose weight (3200lb for V-8 model.) I think they have found the right styling DNA and should continue to evolve the car in that regard (a la 911.)

 

In my opinion, the general public (not Mustang enthusiasts) should be able to recognize the car as a Mustang from 50 feet away without any badges. I'm going to **** some of you off, but here it goes. From 1971 through 2004 this was not true. Those cars had their merits. Some were great (Terminator Cobra). But, none looked enough like a Mustang to be recognizable to the public without badges.

Mays admits the styling lapse in the video. If they make the 2014 look like a Genesis Coupe with three bar tail lights, they will kill it.

 

Those specs, and styling that wasn't extremely offensive to me, would be my dream. I have high hopes for the new Mustang, and it is one of the reasons I'm holding off on getting a new 5.0 in the next couple of years. If things leak out that it will continue with the larger and heavier theme which has been going on since 1979 or so, I'll go ahead and pick up a 5.0 in the next year or two.

 

Wait for the next one...It will be lighter and the dimensions will be smaller...and the coyote will be have a little more bite!

 

I think the Genesis Coupe is a bad reference and we should probably release that image from our minds about the future Mustang.

Genesis Coupe is fine in its own right. I don't think the Mustang is going to be a Genesis coupe.

Does anyone remember in 1994 when the Mustang brought back the tri-bar tail lights and tied it to the Mustang heritage? Though it didn't take them long just to turn them right side up and make it more recognizable.


Edit: Even better!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nE4xTt8SEFw

 

I know the 2010+ rear has been a point of complaint, so I hope some thought goes into the new one. Long hood, short rear deck (no fastback because of the convertible), nice wide muscular rear haunches, move the wheels out further to the corners, and put some solid tech into it.

 

BAM!
Just like that.


The only reason I thought a possible fast back is that it could pull off the muscular rear haunches and wider rear frame better. That's my thinking. Though I see where you are going with the convertible. Though there are hatches that are convertibles as well. So it's still doable.

 

I kinda agree- but at least a block away with my eyes a 65-70 or 05-11 I can pick them out oncoming...

of course, 65-70 and 05-09 following too

as for J Mays, I'm still upset about him saying it was on track till about 69...that was 'THE' mustang to me, and I believe a high percentage of folks would agree the 69 fastback-especially the bosses- were the most recognizable and best looking of them all. if Fords lead stylist didnt like the 69 fastback I cant see that as being a good thing in any way regarding the future designs...I'm hoping(seriously) he said that to throw off the GM guys- if the camaro looked more like a 69 RS instead of the hodgepodge looking thing it turned out as, Mustang coulda had some good looking competition.

 

Now if only they built a fastback (hatch) and a coupe...the coupe would share rear quarters for the vert...

 

TN, are you gonna touch up that pic black bullit was working on?

 

6" SHORTER? And 3" LOWER? That would be almost like a go-kart. 6" shorter would reduce headroom to almost nothing. Even bringing it down 1/4" is a big deal. And 3" lower would have zero ground clearance. It might sound good on paper but in reality that would never happen. That is almost Corvette low.

 

im excited to see what they come up with. I love the fox body days, hopefully somewhere along the lines of looking like a 2014 fox body like design with few changes.

 

I also agree that it needs round, "glaring" headlights. Personally, I'd rather see something like a '67-'68-style fastback with a slope that ends abruptly at a concave taillight panel.

 

One other thing I'd like to see is some sort of headlight accent lighting. Hate to say this, but the halos of the Camaro do look pretty sweet at night.

 

Headlight halos are played out. Audi style LEDs now we're talkin

 

completely disagree with you...your gonna tell me with the millions of fox body mustangs that the general public doesn't know there a mustang when they see one?




about same size as a fox..nice and light...and a modern 5.0

 

The 2014 Mustang (in 2013) is all ready in progress, or it's already past the stage where the direction they've chosen to go with cannot be reversed (discounting any drastic economic blips).

However, we need to remember that with Falcon doesn't "need" to be redone until 2016, so effectively they're at a point in time where they haven't chosen the finer detail of it's design.

This is what Mulally said “We are going to have great rear-wheel drive platforms, and the vehicles that we have them on are on global platforms."

That's more than one platform. But they'll be sharing a lot.

 

I don't think you're really understanding what he is saying. 6" shorter in length, not height. 3" lower in overall height. The dimensions he gave are pretty close to that of the Fox body Mustangs.