Eights

Twin Turbo: Nope, 'didn't know you were British. Interesting! I assumed British auto enthusiasts pretty much take a Jeremy Clarkson view of American vehicles in general and American musclecars in particular. Not that Clarkson's wrong--but he strikes me as the very last person to believe that a 2011 Mustang GT Premium could go mano a mano with a 2011 Competition Package BMW M3 and win the comparo by a hair. I'm mildly startled myself!

Times have changed, and at least Mustangs have, too. The new Camaro and the new Challenger are still trying to relive past glories of forty years ago--big-engined, bloated vehicles on ill-handling, overweight body/frames just like the originals so very long ago.

I grew up with big V8s--I was a coupla months past my sixteenth birthday when the first Mustangs hit the dealerships. I once owned a 1969 Mercury Cyclone CJ428 with the 335 HP 428 CID Cobra Jet V8 hooked up to a C6 automatic. I traded it for a 4-cylinder, 1600 cc '73 Datsun truck after a time and have never regretted the trade. But I was twenty-five by then, and I had changed. I've only owned one V8 since then--my current daily driver is a 1966 Ford Bronco with a 289 CID V8 hooked up to a three-speed manual and four wheel drum brakes. I don't measure my stopping distances in feet but in counties crossed. Never, ever get in my way!

But I digress...V8s are great! A different version of the 289 in my Bronco powered a Ford GT to an outright win at LeMans in 1968 and the same chassis (P1075, I believe it was) won the race again in 1969--only the second time in history that LeMans has been won twice by the same vehicle. But the GT500 is gonna need something to set it apart from the supercharged TiVCT 5.0L V8 in the new GT350 and from the two models of 2012 Boss 302s--and some version of the SOHC two-valve 6.2L V8 offered in Ford trucks is insufficient. Ditto for the current 5.4L modular V8, even though it is now all-aluminum. What's readily available is the V12 Ford produces for the Vanquish and other Aston Martins. Unless that engine is proscribed from use in Fords by the terms of the contract Ford has with AM, I say USE IT! It would be so awesome they'd have to sell 'em by lottery! Regular Mustangs continue with the V6 and the 5.0L V8, GT350s continue with the supercharged 5.0L V8, but the GT500 goes for the title of baddest musclecar ever devised!

Greg "I am too damned passionate" Ates

xlover

im not anti v12 but the aston version is not that great of an engine. it gets high marks for sound but for a 6.0 V12 in a 200k plus super car its not that powerful it does not have variable valve timing it is basically 2 3.0 duratac v6s (remember those) strung end to end.

Twin Turbo

Greg - thanks for taking the time to post. I know where you're coming from with the Camaro/Challenger harking back to the (rose tinted) take on musclecars and being rather blunt instruments. They might not be as "good" as the Mustang, but they are still packed with that all important ingredient..........character. It's something that's missing in all too many cars today. I've driven a Lamborghini Gallardo. Impressive, yes, but it didn't make me smile the way that my simple 'ol Mustang does every time I drive it. Most European and Japanese companies have engineered the fun out of their cars in the persuit of perfection.

Whilst I'm really glad the 5.0 can go head to head with the M3 around a track, it'll be a sad day if it were to lose the fun factor in the process. We're not there yet, but I hope the next-gen Mustang keeps that DNA that makes us love them.

As for Clarkson? He's an entertainer and will give the audience the material they want. And it's easy to reel out the old cliches

As for the V12 in a Mustang? Perhaps we should just agree to disagree

Cheers
Paul

bob

I dig it, the GR-1 is a pretty sexy car, kinda wish Ford would do an actual corvette fighter with that one.

And as for more than 8 cylinders, I'd still ike to see a V10 Mustang. The Boss 351 mule was a killer car.

Desi

I don't remember where... but I swear I remember reading somewhere that they said the next gen was also going to be be "closer in size to the Fox-chassis Mustang", I wish I could remember were I saw it.

Clino

I don't know if it has been officially stated anywhere, i think it might just be what people are wanting/expecting. The HP wars can only go so far. It's not exactly 1972, but with people becoming more and more concerned with fuel economy, and regulations getting tighter, it is impossible for things to keep on the current path they are on (size and HP both increasing) for much longer.

I know a lot of people will disagree, but I think the Mustang has strayed from it's roots. It should be a small, affordable, sporty sedan with good bang for the buck performance, offered in sedan, vert and fastback. I honestly think a Honda Civic is closer to what a modern interpretation of the original Mustang would be like, and I also believe that the Fox was the last Mustang that was true to it's roots. I'm not talking about superficial design details. These don't make a Mustang a Mustang. You can put triple tail lights and a running pony on a minivan but it won't be a Mustang. I'm talking about it's overall character, and it's basic features.

It's become too many things to Ford since the Probe and Cougar were discontinued. It's become a cross between a sports car to fill the gap left by those cars, and a muscle car to cater to the nostalgia of the 60's. Neither of which it originally was. It's a pony car and I hope the next model brings it back to it's roots.

Moosetang

Just for semantics's sake, a Sedan is 4-doors, Mustang would be a coupe. Other than the word "sedan" everything you just described is exactly what the V6 Mustang is. I don't know why people just can't accept the fact that inflation has done as much as any decisions by Ford to drive the price of the Mustang up. There is no such thing as a V8 for $20K anymore, and V6s are pretty **** scare.

I'm sorry but you're mad.

Yes, Mustang covers alot of ground. But I don't see how that's a negative. The $22K base Mustang is benefiting from the work done for higher-end models. And the need to keep the base grounded at a reasonable level has prevented the Mustang from ending up in the same place Camaro has gone.

97GT03SVT

A V12 GT500 would be pretty interesting. Rumors suggest that Dodge may put the Viper's V10 in the Challenger.

V12 GT500 vs. V10 SRT10 Challenger......... who wins that one?

yeahyouknwit

Answer: Everyone

bt4

Ford doesn't need the AM V12. If Ford were to go with extra cylinders for a special Mustang, a Shelby GT500, they already have the motor that ties into the Shelby legend quite nicely.

Project Daisy, was wrapped around a 6.4L (427 CI) V10 that generated 605-HP and around 500-ft lbs of torque. Though I doubt it would be very practical, dropping a 427 into a Mustang, would be a very 'special' SE. I have no idea of the weight differential between the 5.4 AL block with a blower and the N/A 6.4 V10 amounts to.

However, I'd like to point out again--it will be cost, economy of scale, that will be the demise of the 5.4 AL. The current 5.4 is no where near the limit of its performance. Aftermarket tuners are offering blown 5.4's with 675-HP and a 3/36 warranty. That should tell you the current GT500 is very conservative with its stock tune. The performance of the current GT500 is not limited by the 5.4.

Eights

Everyone's postin' such good stuff!

I don't foresee a V12 Mustang, nor even a V10 Mustang. I just hope the 5.0L TiVCT V8 doesn't get the axe somewhere down the road for the inability to meet CAFE regulations or the inability to meet emissions regulations or the inability to meet radon level regulations or whatever they may come up with in Effington, DC.

A GR-1 inspired Mustang would be great as long as they swap out the GR-1 grille for an '05 Mustang grille (that partitioned grille of the GR-1 was its greatest styling weakness), but I'd really prefer the 2005 front end (forward of the doors) grafted onto the cab and rear end of the Giugiaro Mustang concept of several years ago.

Hell, I'd be ecstatic if they'd just give the Boss 302 Laguna Seca the identical paint jobs of the "regular" Boss 302s. That silver with sections of red paint sorta randomly placed around the grille, on the roof, on the sides, on the tops of the side mirrors, on the spoiler, or wherever is a crime against nature and should be punished accordingly. The black with red is a little less random in appearance, but give me the regular Boss 302's paint job in Competition Orange with black graphics (or no graphics at all). I can do without the side exhausts, too...

And I believe Motor Trend felt the fun factor in that Bimmer-swatting 2011 Mustang GT Premium was higher than in the awesome M5 because of the low-end torque in the 5.0L TiVCT V8. No matter how you swing it, beatin' one of the ten best vehicles of all time just has to be a kick!

If we disagree whether V12s should or should not be in Mustangs (see www.wmsracing.com), then we absolutely gotta disagree that the Camaro & Challenger have "character", unless we need two fat lady characters to sing at the end of the thread so we'll know that the thread is officially over. They are no more nor no less than two rather pish-poor Mustang imitations hastily cobbled together (Have you ever counted all the quality problems the new Camaro has had?) to try to scramble for some of the crumbs dropped from the Mustang's table. That's the way it was forty years ago, and that's the way it is right now.

A decade from now, when you stroll through the graveyard of defunct automobile companies, you'll find these words engraved on the tombstones of Government Motors and Chrysler Corporation:
"But we built Mustangs, too!"

Greg "Eights" Ates

Twin Turbo

I know the Guigiaro concept wasn't universally liked (bit of an understatement there!) but I did see it in person at the Goodwood Festival of Speed a good few years ago. Whilst there were a number of areas I wasn't keen on, in the metal it was truely stunning.

Whilst I liked the rear end, I prefer the rear end of one of the early Guigiaro sketche,s as it's much more faithful to the '67/'68 cars.




I do think we're going to see a return to the '69/'70 rear side window treatment though. Perhaps a little like these old sketches.......this, with perhaps the concave rear end of the sketch above, with a mildly modified 2011 front end, would do me fine

Eights

Twin Turbo: "I do think we're going to see a return to the '69/'70 rear side window treatment though. Perhaps a little like these old sketches.......this, with perhaps the concave rear end of the sketch above, with a mildly modified 2011 front end, would do me fine "

The '69 Mustang fastback (officially the "Sportroof", wasn't it?) is one of my four all-time favorite Mustangs--the '05 fastback coupe being number one, the '65 fastback coupe being number two, the '69 fastback being number three, and the '67 fastback being number four.

OTOH, I don't care much for the '69/'70 little "C" pillar windows--I much prefer the '05 coupe/'65 G.T. 350 fastback with the Shelby "C" pillar windows. But I prefer the '67's full-length fastback to any other production Mustang roofline. That being said, the roofline of the Giugiaro Mustang concept beats 'em all, and by a whole bunch!

I sure hope that the next real edition of the Mustang (not another facelift of the current S197 as Ford did for 2010) is a body & chassis fit to carry the amazing DOHC TiVCT 3.7L and 5.0L engines! The Giugiaro concept gives me hope!

Greg 8s

Eights

bt4: "Project Daisy, was wrapped around a 6.4L (427 CI) V10 that generated 605-HP and around 500-ft lbs of torque."

Actually, bt4, it was a 390 cubic-incher, made from an aluminum DOHC 4-valve modular 4-valve with two cylinders added in the middle of the block and a combustion chamber added into the middle of each cylinder head. The engine's cylinders were spray-bored (or whatever that earlier process was called) with ferrous material to allow the maximum displacement possible. Why they didn't just cast the 6.8 V10 in aluminum is an utter mysterybut they didn't. Go figure?

Calling a 390 a 427 is lame, even if it did have 605 HP, but then Pontiac called the 389 in a GTO a "6.5 Litre". Deceptive advertising laws must have loopholes that allow some "creative displacement labeling". I would love to see pics of that engine disassembled!

Greg "Eights" Ates

bt4

You're right, the Project Daisy was a 390 CI V10. My bad, I was confusing it with the 427-V10 that Ford debuted in the 2003 427 Concept. That was listed at 7L. Though I think the HP rating was nearly the same as the Project Daisy motor, @ 590-HP and 509-ft lbs of torque. It looked good too. Ford seemed to tinker with the format (the Boss 351 V10, Project Daisy, the 427 concept) quite a bit, but never pulled the trigger on one.

Eights

"No harm, no foul--play on."

Greg "The good ref" Ates

2011GTCS

I'm really diggin' these. Ultra modern styling, yet still instantly recognizable as a Mustang.

This is way cool...

Wolfsburg

Slim it down to make it look less squat and chunky and add the rear valance Twin Turbo posted, and it wouldn't be too bad.

mach1fever

Du must dich erst einmelden vor sie diesen site sehen kanst.

Roger

wirewilly

I talked to a Ford "BIG WIG" at Carlisle back in June and he said they won't come out with the next gen. Stang
until they know where the government sets the mpg standard at. He said that if I like "BIG" Mustangs than buy one soon because he sees the car getting smaller, a few hundred pounds lighter, and back in the 300 hp
range for the GT. Less weight will require less hp. That's what I was told. One more slight body styling change
in 2012 or 13 be fore the big change. He wouldn't give me an answer on the fate of the Shelby but he did say
that they have too many V8s and will probably be getting rid of at least one. NOT the 5.0.