What are some improvements you want to see in the NEXT GEN redesign?
10/16/13, 09:26 AM
#801
Cobra Member
Join Date: October 12, 2004
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Posts: 1,188
Likes: 0
Received 7 Likes
on
4 Posts
I would love to see a fully automatic convertible top that can be lowered AND raised from the key fob.
A real integrated tonnaeu (sp?) cover would be great as well.
Finally, let me have additional trunk space when the top is up.
A real integrated tonnaeu (sp?) cover would be great as well.
Finally, let me have additional trunk space when the top is up.
10/17/13, 08:43 AM
#803
Cobra Member
Join Date: October 12, 2004
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Posts: 1,188
Likes: 0
Received 7 Likes
on
4 Posts
I'm torn on that point, going back and forth hoping they do and hoping they don't go hard top. Maybe they can offer both like Chrysler did/does with the Sebring/200.
Because, on the one hand it does make that car much more quiet and "all season" ready than a soft top.
But it adds a lot of weight and cost. Plus I haven't seen a 4 seat hard top vert that didn't have a proportionally long trunk. The pony car formula has always been long hood short trunk.
Finally I still want some trunk space when the top is down. So if they do it, I hope they are clever with the packaging.
Oh and Ford - if you are going to have the trunk tip back (hard top or soft), please use the backup sensor to ensure there is sufficient clearance like the VW Eos does. It's such a nice feature and, if the car already has the sensors, then its just some code to activate them and do the check. Just let me over ride it since it might catch something off to the side (like my garage wall) that isn't actually in the way.
Because, on the one hand it does make that car much more quiet and "all season" ready than a soft top.
But it adds a lot of weight and cost. Plus I haven't seen a 4 seat hard top vert that didn't have a proportionally long trunk. The pony car formula has always been long hood short trunk.
Finally I still want some trunk space when the top is down. So if they do it, I hope they are clever with the packaging.
Oh and Ford - if you are going to have the trunk tip back (hard top or soft), please use the backup sensor to ensure there is sufficient clearance like the VW Eos does. It's such a nice feature and, if the car already has the sensors, then its just some code to activate them and do the check. Just let me over ride it since it might catch something off to the side (like my garage wall) that isn't actually in the way.
10/26/13, 12:24 AM
#804
Member
Join Date: October 22, 2013
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It sits inside the wheelbase for better protections and doesn't intrude into the passenger cell. The battery's location does still provide some benefit to handling since it is closer to the center of the car even if it is up high.
Mounting it lower in the front would have most likely forced the battery into the wheel well and intruded into the passenger cell reducing the size of the foot area. Same with the trunk on the current car, the SRA takes up a fair amount of space and some people insist on having a spare tire so mounting the battery in the trunk would have meant a substantial for Mustang loss of space.
The S550 might not have these issues with its IRS but the Mustangs trunk is still a small one and might preclude the battery in the trunk even on the new car.
Ford could always go the hi-tech route and start using an LI battery to reduce size and weight, added bonus, it increases the probability of the car burning to the ground like certain Italian exotics seem to do of late.
Mounting it lower in the front would have most likely forced the battery into the wheel well and intruded into the passenger cell reducing the size of the foot area. Same with the trunk on the current car, the SRA takes up a fair amount of space and some people insist on having a spare tire so mounting the battery in the trunk would have meant a substantial for Mustang loss of space.
The S550 might not have these issues with its IRS but the Mustangs trunk is still a small one and might preclude the battery in the trunk even on the new car.
Ford could always go the hi-tech route and start using an LI battery to reduce size and weight, added bonus, it increases the probability of the car burning to the ground like certain Italian exotics seem to do of late.
I don't know that the battery under the drivers seat would give that much better weight distribution. I would say right behind the rear axle. Too far back and you can get a pendulum effect going hard around a corner. The lower the battery weight, the better the center of gravity. Why mount a battery just below the base of the windshield as in the current Mustang ?
Battery in the engine bay is cheaper, and not by a small amount. It's a high cost to move the battery to the trunk, both from a parts perspective but also tooling, labor, warranty, etc.
10/26/13, 11:16 AM
#805
Cobra Member
If it is so expensive to put the battery in the back of a car, how come the lowly Dodge Magnum has a battery in the back ? If the ZL1 can have a battery in the trunk , a buyer of a high end Mustang should at least have the option of getting a battery in the trunk. If a buyer is willing to pay for such an option, Ford should be able to come up with a way of making money on it.
10/26/13, 01:59 PM
#806
Member
Join Date: October 22, 2013
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If it is so expensive to put the battery in the back of a car, how come the lowly Dodge Magnum has a battery in the back ? If the ZL1 can have a battery in the trunk , a buyer of a high end Mustang should at least have the option of getting a battery in the trunk. If a buyer is willing to pay for such an option, Ford should be able to come up with a way of making money on it.
10/26/13, 05:03 PM
#808
Cobra R Member
Join Date: September 22, 2012
Location: Ontario, California
Posts: 1,691
Likes: 0
Received 17 Likes
on
17 Posts
I had a 87 BMW 325is that had it in the trunk. In 2001 the battery cables cover wore out and my baby caught fire. I've been a little weary of trunk mounted batteries since. Yes, I realized many cars have them with no issues. It's just my preference.
10/26/13, 07:49 PM
#809
Member
Join Date: October 22, 2013
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That is one of the primary reasons that batterie mounted in the trunk are difficult. High warranty risk or recall. Battery cables are the number one cause for vehicle fires. Starter takeout is always live/hot. When you put that in the trunk, or cabin essentially there is a safety risk.
10/27/13, 10:34 AM
#810
Cobra Member
Just disconnect the battery cable before you replace the starter. How can a company like GM that had to take taxpayer money to survive can then afford to offer Camaros with the battery in the front or back ? They must have found a way to make rear battery installation cost effective.
10/27/13, 06:10 PM
#811
Bullitt Member
10/29/13, 05:39 AM
#812
legacy Tms Member MEMORIAL Rest In Peace 10/06/2021
Join Date: September 16, 2009
Location: Clinton Tennessee
Posts: 3,377
Received 125 Likes
on
101 Posts
I have a 'green light' from my wife to 'maybe' buy a 2015 or 2016 Mustang GT if i like the new body. I was just playing around on the Ford 'build' site and built me a 2014 GT just for fun. I have to have an automatic transmission because of a messed up left leg and lower back pain 
. Why in the hell is a 3.15 (if i remember right) rear gear ratio the only option for an automatic GT . My 2011 V6 had 3.31's (changed to 3.73) from the factory. So for 2015 the thing i want the most are "More Options For Gears Ratio's From The Factory For The 2015 GT Automatic Mustang"............
. Why in the hell is a 3.15 (if i remember right) rear gear ratio the only option for an automatic GT . My 2011 V6 had 3.31's (changed to 3.73) from the factory. So for 2015 the thing i want the most are "More Options For Gears Ratio's From The Factory For The 2015 GT Automatic Mustang"............
10/29/13, 04:12 PM
#814
Join Date: January 30, 2004
Location: DMV
Posts: 2,980
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not that top speed beyond, say, 150 is actually very useable beyond bragging rights, but the supposedly sleeker 2015 (GT) with a touch more power would probably be able to do that with the proper gearing. With the improved aerodynamics and IRS you won't have to steam clean the driver's seat cushion after a top end run either.
Of course, the mega-power GT500 can already see the far side of 200mph.
Of course, the mega-power GT500 can already see the far side of 200mph.
Last edited by rhumb; 10/29/13 at 04:14 PM.
11/2/13, 08:29 AM
#816
Legacy TMS Member
Given better aero and the Coyote's rev range that's probably very doable, might take a country mile or two to get there but I can't see why it wouldn't.
The 07-09 GT500's were capable of 180 mph or so if that's a useful frame of reference.
The 07-09 GT500's were capable of 180 mph or so if that's a useful frame of reference.
11/3/13, 05:56 PM
#817
Member
Join Date: February 7, 2008
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think to many here want the geek or fat cat stuff. I do not want to add weight, in fact the new car is suppose to be some 200-400lbs lighter. Prob-ally most comes with the standard engine being a 4-cylinder....
We know pretty sure the IRS rear end is IN and the Live Axle is OUT....Sorry drag race fans...
The car is also suppose to be 15" shorter, yes...and 4-6 inches narrower. This makes since for a European car, they are much smaller then our cars, as they are a leaner/less fat people. America is really starting to explode around the mid-section..
The 2.3-2.4L 4-cyl is suppose to make like 305-310HP....Not bad for a small displacement engine like that. The rumor of a Turbo V-6 is just that....a rumor. The turb V-6 is a ways off if ever, there talking 2017 now. The 5.8L was suppose to be out....I have heard this many times and it made since. The engine is very expensive for Ford to build and it's fuel economy is horrible. I understood the engine would not physically fit in the car...but now I hear contrary to that, so how knows. I would think the engine would not fit, as the new car is much shorter and narrower. The hood is much shorter, and looks lower...SO, who know's.... The plan was to get to the point that the V-8 was only offered in up-market vehicles. They were looking at bring back the Mach 1 or Boss 302, and the 5.0 V-8 would be the engine...but output was suppose to be in the high 400 to 500HP!!! Ford has revises there thoughts on this new car. the First rendering, and approval was for a more European look, like the Eoss concept car. That wa latter stooped and they were told to go more mainstream, so a redesigned was made and a more Mustang like car was seen.
Ford is behind on the time table, and many things have been pushed back, till latter date to implement. Ford got a scare that the new Mustang would not sell well, and that re-design cost them time. The original Ford Mustang was released as a 1964 1/2, and Ford was suppose to do the same for the 50th anniversary mole. Release a 2014 1/2, only 1000 vehicles with this special year. Most will demand a premium and are destined to be collector cars. This was still the plan , last I heard..
The new 2015 will dabue as a softer model, the 5.0L V-8 is now suppose to be on for the first 2 years. The Turbo V-6 is for now pushed back and off the table? Ford was suppose to make a clean break with Shelby and the name...replacement names where GT 350 last I heard. The Boss 302 will go away for at least the first 2-3 years if not more. I say two years in , Ford will have the data on weather they want to discontinue the V-8 platform or not.....
Transmission wise....you will not see a dual clutch in a Mustang. It may one day get into a up-market car, but never a Mustang. The 2015 will have paddle shifters, but only to control the standard 6-speed automatic. Report is Ford will replace that with the new 10-speed auto they are working on, in 2017.?. ???
Personally I want to see a better interior...mainly better materials. Keep an eye on quality control and not loss to much of the Mustang we have come to know.
We know pretty sure the IRS rear end is IN and the Live Axle is OUT....Sorry drag race fans...
The car is also suppose to be 15" shorter, yes...and 4-6 inches narrower. This makes since for a European car, they are much smaller then our cars, as they are a leaner/less fat people. America is really starting to explode around the mid-section..
The 2.3-2.4L 4-cyl is suppose to make like 305-310HP....Not bad for a small displacement engine like that. The rumor of a Turbo V-6 is just that....a rumor. The turb V-6 is a ways off if ever, there talking 2017 now. The 5.8L was suppose to be out....I have heard this many times and it made since. The engine is very expensive for Ford to build and it's fuel economy is horrible. I understood the engine would not physically fit in the car...but now I hear contrary to that, so how knows. I would think the engine would not fit, as the new car is much shorter and narrower. The hood is much shorter, and looks lower...SO, who know's.... The plan was to get to the point that the V-8 was only offered in up-market vehicles. They were looking at bring back the Mach 1 or Boss 302, and the 5.0 V-8 would be the engine...but output was suppose to be in the high 400 to 500HP!!! Ford has revises there thoughts on this new car. the First rendering, and approval was for a more European look, like the Eoss concept car. That wa latter stooped and they were told to go more mainstream, so a redesigned was made and a more Mustang like car was seen.
Ford is behind on the time table, and many things have been pushed back, till latter date to implement. Ford got a scare that the new Mustang would not sell well, and that re-design cost them time. The original Ford Mustang was released as a 1964 1/2, and Ford was suppose to do the same for the 50th anniversary mole. Release a 2014 1/2, only 1000 vehicles with this special year. Most will demand a premium and are destined to be collector cars. This was still the plan , last I heard..
The new 2015 will dabue as a softer model, the 5.0L V-8 is now suppose to be on for the first 2 years. The Turbo V-6 is for now pushed back and off the table? Ford was suppose to make a clean break with Shelby and the name...replacement names where GT 350 last I heard. The Boss 302 will go away for at least the first 2-3 years if not more. I say two years in , Ford will have the data on weather they want to discontinue the V-8 platform or not.....
Transmission wise....you will not see a dual clutch in a Mustang. It may one day get into a up-market car, but never a Mustang. The 2015 will have paddle shifters, but only to control the standard 6-speed automatic. Report is Ford will replace that with the new 10-speed auto they are working on, in 2017.?. ???
Personally I want to see a better interior...mainly better materials. Keep an eye on quality control and not loss to much of the Mustang we have come to know.
11/5/13, 08:42 AM
#819
Cobra Member
FORGED INTERNAL OPTION PACK for those who wish to superharge. Make it a $1500 option beef up the rods, better pistons...... Assuming 450 or so NA ponies, I likely wouldn't use it. But, I know many of my Mustang Bretheren would likely go ape sheet over this. I don't have any real sense for what kind of production line issues this would cause, but it seems like if you put a price tag on it......it might happen. Likely not in demand enough to make it a profit item. C'est la vie!
11/5/13, 10:25 AM
#820
Shelby GT350 Member
FORGED INTERNAL OPTION PACK for those who wish to superharge. Make it a $1500 option beef up the rods, better pistons...... Assuming 450 or so NA ponies, I likely wouldn't use it. But, I know many of my Mustang Bretheren would likely go ape sheet over this. I don't have any real sense for what kind of production line issues this would cause, but it seems like if you put a price tag on it......it might happen. Likely not in demand enough to make it a profit item. C'est la vie!