zxmarekxz

I'm not a fan of this one

Hawaii 5.0

Nice to think theyre goin with the modern times. Maybe next would be a suede wrapped steering wheel, suede inserts in alcantara leather seats with soft touch materialsnin the dash, mode switches somethin like selective ride on the vettes, but i hope they keep refining that good ol manual gearbox. Nothing beats rolling through the gears on some twisty backroads

Nidan

the 50th anniversary model sounds like it is going to be something else .

FastRedPonyCar

I agree with all this. You can spot a 911 a mile away (AND you can recognize it's exhaust note).

I'm scared that they're hinting at departing from the retro/classic look because in my mind, that's what the mustang IS.

I don't care for aerodynamics or sleek lines. The mustang to me is all about a muscular squared off front end with the tip of the hood extending further than the bottom of the bumper (which I think the black front splitter should be mandatory) and big broad rear shoulders~1/4 panels.

They missed that in the 2005 remake and I was pretty bummed to see that omission from the design because in my eyes, that step up that the rear section makes over the back end really is what gives it a muscular look.

I was glad to see it come back in 2010 and while I do prefer the more squared off look of the 05~09 back end, the shoulder arches I like more than I dislike the 2010+ back end.

I think that if anything, ford needs to make them a bit more defined. Example.

The current side profile. Instantly recognizable.




But look at what more emphasis on the shoulder arches make on the challenger and camaro.







I will be blunt here. I think that the new challenger is the best looking American car since the Mid/late 60's mustangs. I think that the new challenger is pretty much modern muscle car design perfection from an aesthetics point of view. I just hate that it's more or less a Chrysler 300 with a body kit. That spoils it for me. The new camaro got about half it's looks done right. Front end is hideous, all the way back until you get to the bumper/tail lights is allright but again, sucks to drive, however, it's broadened back end really gives it's design a mean and muscular stance and THAT is what defines the back half of these cars. Ford really needs to beef it up and widen it a hair so they can pack wider tires in the back.

Final (and best looking example)

Twin Turbo

I'm pretty much with you 100%. It won't happen, but if Ford could modernise the '69 Sportsroof in the same vein that Dodge modernised the '70 Challenger into the new Challenger, that'd be my all time favourite Mustang

Itravelalot

I like the Challenger, and I love the retro in the stang. When you consider the last 50 years, Ford probably should have used some different designs some of those years, but it honestly could not have stayed that true to the 60s designs for this long and kept selling this many for so long if it had. The car has to keep its appeal over the years to many more people than just the Mustang enthusiasts. The will eventually come a time when retro has be rehashed as much as is practical, and modern with classic elements takes its turn. I was born in the late 70's, but it is really only the mid 80s on that I remember. Many younger than I have never really seen the great days of the big old cars. How old will many of the people on the forums be in 5 to 10 years from now when the redesign has been out for a while? What about 20 years from now? The M3 certainly should not be called a Genesis with BMW styling. There is such a thing as a modern powerful and light sports car. The Mustang has to retain certain styling elements, but if it does this too much, it will definitely die a slow death. More people will buy the v6 version of the redesign. Ford needs the enthusiasts, but it needs everyday drivers more. The current design has remained similar since 2005. It will soon be time for a change. Creativity is like many things in life. You have to keep changing in order for it to not become stale.

FastRedPonyCar

ehh...I agree that things do have to get changed up but not necessarily for the bad and they don't have to be drastic changes either and some of May's vocabulary leads me to believe that the design changes are going to be drastic.

Porsche again is a prime example of not messing with a good thing. The 911 looks virtually the same only with very minor changes in aerodynamics, little tweaks here and there but overall, the early 90's 911 turbo was only a couple hundred pounds lighter than the newest 997 turbo, they're the exact same height, new one is only 2 inches longer wheel base, virtually the same width, etc..

They have an iconic design formula that works incredibly well and though they do get knocked a bit for NOT changing it enough (top gear had a pretty good laugh at that expense) but they've stuck with their "if it's not broke, don't fix it" mentality and they aren't exactly losing customers.

I don't mind if ford changes up other cars in the lineup but there are some things that are just not to be messed around with and timeless designs of cars is one of those things. 2005's redesign was the best thing to happen to these cars and there is no rule in the car world that you HAVE to come up with something different. You can still satisfy all the safety regulations and what not without messing with it.

All ranting aside though, I've got the 2012 being built because I think it's the "rightest" (lol is that a word?) design that Ford has gotten so far in their attempt to conjure up the iconic shape that made the car what it is.

Itravelalot

No one wants bad changes, and any drastic changes are going to be looked at by some to be bad. How can you compare the Mustang and the Porsche though? The Porsche has a very different customer base than the mustang. Jeep Wrangler has not really had much happen to the design, but other than that, cars that are within reach of the general average car buyer do change. I love the look of the current Mustang, but it is not some design that does not change much like a Porsche. I am also getting a 2012, and love it, but this is not a design that should never change. The Fox mustangs and the 70s mustangs might not be as popular, but they too do add to its history. The Mustang is a car for the people, and one that can change from decade to decade. Despite the fact that there are a lot of die hard Mustang owners that would always keep buying the same modern version of a 60s design, it does have to appeal to a fairly large market, for hopefully 50 more years. Can anyone realistically say that any one of the Mustang designs, even as great as they are, can go for another 50 years in a state that would largely remain unchanged? I just do not think that is realistic. It would slowly die because it would appeal to fewer and fewer non Mustang enthusiasts. If we can get an "iconic" design that would not change much, then what would it look like?

Edit: If you do get a 3200 pound Mustang GT with 425+ horsepower and the handling and suspension to take on the M3 even more effectively than the current GT does, then it can look like whatever it wants and I will buy one.

FastRedPonyCar

I compare the porsche because it has not changed because porsche realizes that it's an iconic symbol. Aston martin is pretty much the same way.

sure they have other models and that's great.. they can make changes to those all day long but they always leave the 911 alone save for different paint, stripped interior, spoilers, etc..

I just don't see any reason why they have to mess with it. I think that someone at ford woke up one day and realized how far they had strayed from the look that makes the mustang the mustang and we got the 05 remake as a result of said awakening... at least that's how I like to think of it.

Like someone woke up one morning, looked at the current gen body and was like "guys... WTF are we doing here?" Lets redo this how it should have always looked from the beginning.

People don't turn their heads when a SN95 drives by... lets be honest here. If a 60's mustang drove by, even if it was old and ragged, people would notice. It's a shape that is always visually pleasing. So many of the muscle cars back then shared the same basic exterior design elements and I think that's a major reason why they all just plain looked so good. There was a certain elegance to their design simplicity and I'm afraid with all these aerodynamic crazed engineers having their way, a lot of cars are losing their good looks from the engineers trying to squeeze 1 or 2 mpg more out of the car.

I'm not saying that good gas mileage is bad, far from it.. but when good exterior design elements are scrapped in favor of better mpg, that's when I get frustrated.

Playing the other side of the table though, this is PRECISELY what happened with the Shelby Daytona coupe. They had hit a speed barrier in their roadsters and needed to re-design the body to go faster and beat Ferrari and when what's his name from GM stepped in and offered up this radical body design change to improve aerodynamics, people hated it but it kicked *** in the national championships and it's considered an iconic sports car image.

With that being said though, I still stand by my thinking that the original 60's mustang design should always be the template closely followed with the mustang design until the end of time. If ford wants to re-invent something, they have countless other car designs to choose from but I sincerely hope that the right people at ford consider the iconic shape that they've turned back towards to be "hallowed ground". People will always buy the mustang no matter what it looks like because it stands for affordable performance and as long as it delivers that, the looks of the car won't matter to the average consumer.


Edit to your edit: what if it looked like a remake of the mid 70's mustang II?

Hawaii 5.0

Ok im going tonhave to disagree with you on that on. I own an sn95, 2002 gt to be specific and im not giving a biased opinion here at all. Im turnin plenty of heads in my car wherever i go. My car is just nicely maintain with a couple tasteful mods. Nothin drastic, just mach 1 grill delete, chin spoiler, and black saleen rims. A few things to make the car faster and sound a little meaner but thats it. In the parking lot and i see plenty of people looking at it and ive gotten many comliments on my car. And some people may look at an old beat up 65 and they look at it wondering how someone could let an icon like that get in that condition in the first place. Most sn95's on the road are pretty beat up or just not really taken care of. But the ones that have been kept in shape always draw look. Wheter its a saleen s281, roush, cobra, or a regular gt, it all matter how well you take care of the car and what youndo with it. Thats hw it is with almost all cars

Automagically

I have to agree. Now my opinion may be a little biased as I am a car guy but when a nice SN95 is around I notice. I like the SN95's. All it takes is a nice cleaned up appearance to catch an eye. I look at Foxes with a future project in mind and keep thinking, what in the he&& am I getting myself into. But then think of what you have said about being in the right condition. It's true. Seeing most of the SN95's and Foxes as brutally abused, it's tough to see the pure gold that they can be. I got passed by a beautiful 03 Cobra this morning and I thought, that is a very relevant and gorgeous car. I respect that. I hope that when I resto mod the fox that people will respect mine.

socalwrench

The only facts we know, at this point, is that the next Mustang is getting smaller, and getting IRS (going global now). With that said, it would be tough to hack off 12" of the car and keep it looking like the 69/70 style cars. I suppose it could look more like the 65/66 cars, but... again, Ford is saying it's getting a new gen. design.

To be honest, just my opinion here; all Ford needs to do with the 2014 is make it smaller (perhaps 12" shorter, 6" narrower) and get rid of the 2010 lower black plastic.