You have nothing to apologize for concerning this thread Adam

 

I totally agree as the angle should slope downward completely from the base of the rear glass through the tail end of the trunk.. This pic should illustrate in more detail what I'm referring to..

[IMG][/IMG]

 

Thanks Sonic. Did he think I would just make up a claim like that? lol

Anyway, if you look at the bottom of the bumper on both the pictures I posted you can see a similarity.

 

Ford stated they benchmarked the 911 for performance, not design (as was mentioned above). There are similarities in the lines of the hips and roofline, but that's about it...

 

For performance? lmao They missed the mark my friend. There's no way Ford could get comparable performance from a front engine rear drive V8 Mustang as compared to a rear engine, rear drive flat six Porsche. The handling dynamics alone are quite different. Sounds like just a marketing claim. I could see the styling claim with the sloped rear end and the bulge along the bottom of the back bumper. But performance? No way.

 

That was done two years ago. The new Mustang is supposed to beat the Boss around a road course.

Start at 4:55.

 

I think you missed my point. It's not that a Mustang can't hang with a 911. That can easily be achieved. Heck they could make a Mustang that would smoke a 911 if they really wanted to. The point is that both cars achieve their performance in very different ways. A front engine V8 Mustang is going to have very different driving dynamics than a rear engine flat 6 Porsche. The weight distribution alone is entirely different. The suspension geometry as a result is completely different with one accounting for the heft of the car being in the front and the other accounting for the heft in the back.

If the contention is that Ford used the 911 as a benchmark with respect to having a Mustang get around a road course as quickly as a 911 than they might as well say the real benchmark was any car that could achieve a road course time of X was a benchmark for the Mustang. There are a lot of cars out there that can hang with the 911 from a simple racing performance standpoint. Why not say they used the Corvette as a benchmark while they were at it. The Corvette could easily hang with the 911 too.

 

Now this opinion seems much more on the mark to me! A Porsche rear look on the S550 ='s On Crack! :-)

 

Now see wildsailor, this is the kind of guy you are talking about. The guy who can't just have a differing opinion. He has to have a differing opinion and additionally dispense the petty, juvenile, myopic insults to anyone that doesn't agree with his point of view. He's that guy.

 

Yep this makes me sound like one of those guys!?! Sounds like a very mature response to me?

 

I think your paragraph 2 is more accurate. My response to paragraph 1 would simply be "it doesn't matter how we get there, as long as we get there first". Modern Mustangs prior to the new Boss 302 are not well known for their "factory" road course ability, without serious modification. Since handling and track prowess are concerns for the Mustang team now, they need a standard of comparison to measure their success. If that happens to be the 911, that's a significant challenge. Of course they can't make the Mustang feel like a 911 but it's entirely possible to benchmark it's results.

With regard to the Corvette, if they benchmark the 911 and succeed, they get the Corvette by default. It's not a bad problem to have but it doesn't need to be explicitly stated.

 

I can see that. Personally if that being the case, I wouldn't have benchmarked anything. I would have just let the car speak for itself and let the media draw comparisons. That's what they did with cars like your Boss and it is a well respected car as a result.

 

Yes, clearly I should have responded with "Dude, you're on crack." lol

 

I love the Iacocca. It's slick, clean design. In profile, it's more like the 1972-73 Fastback. The flat tail panel of the Iacocca gives more effect to that comparison. It also creates a broader, heavier profile as viewed from the side.

I think with the S550, the designers were targetting the 1967-70 retro design cues. They almost got there with the roofline and haunches but the sagging curve across the trunk creates that low, weak rear end effect that diminishes the overall design, IMHO. The S550 haunches seem to give it a powerful stance in profile but it needs a stonger body line across the trunk panel to match that effect.

 

It's all good! Just having a little fun with you! :-)

 

Actually, the Boss 302 project benchmarked the BMW M3. By all accounts, they have succeeded and now it's Porsche's turn in the bull's eye.

 

I thought the M3 comparison was purely a media thing?

 

I agree with the benchmark. If you're not trying to out do a competitor than you won't advance or get better. The new Mustang is quicker on a road course than any other Mustang before it! :-)

 

Your problem is that you don't get enough biscuits.

Here.