2015 Ford Mustang - General Discussion

[RandomCarGuy17]

Easiest example of similarities to me would be RC F and say the RS5

Really?

They don't look that alike to me.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

I have not written off an entire continent and I want that made very clear! You need to stop twisting my words and actually reading and understanding what I'm saying. Detroit I have written off. Yes, they can make great cars, like the C7 Corvette, but most of their cars are awful. Outside of Detroit, though, it's a different story. I want you to know that I regard the Tesla Model S as one of the best cars on the market. Period. no caveats. Just a brilliant example of world class American engineering. Not all American cars are bad. But most of them are.

I'm not twisting your words Detriot is N. America's car industry. If Canada or Mexico (who build U.S. domestics) had their own mainstream manufactures I'd limit it to region. Saying you like the C7 is great but then you complain about every other car. You say I'm twisting your words, I'm not, I just simply don't understand how you and MFT seem to think America is so archaic in the car industry. I already know you're regards on the Tesla I saw them when the thread was quite active. Also I know you'll at least find one or a few cars good here but I'm saying that by in large you don't have hope in this area of the world in regards to car building, nor would it be the first place you'd look I venture to guess.

Yes, you are the only person on this forum that I know of who argues this way. You are either very dumb or are deliberately not understanding my posts. Not only that, but in almost every argument you've been in you make it personal. And you have a reputation for this, I'm not the only one who feels this way.

Why would I deliberately not understand your posts, either this is something in them that isn't clear that is perhaps a difference in culture or there isn't, I would be the first person to get into arguments of this degree with you. I do recall you and McLaren going at it quite frequently. Also I love your alternative a person has to be dumb or just not trying to understand you as if your some paragon of clarity...okay

I never said that. You're putting words in my mouth again. Quote me correctly or don't do it at all. And I'd like to point out that you really haven't mounted much of a defence other than trying to claim that I'm biased. If you want to argue with me, make a cohesive argument about why American cars are generally good and why this Mustang is a great car.

Where? All I'm saying is you say these things to give your self credit (driven or read up on them), and making it seem in your post that I'm just some guy wanting to personally argue an educated car enthusiast.

I don't nor can't make an argument about why the Mustang is a great car because one, we really haven't had the opportunity to test them yet and were still waiting for comprehensive reviews on them as well. We don't know their full line up either as far as upper trim models go, but it has the making of something good because they're trying to accommodate to what the world has said rather than region.

Your first post directed at me in this discussion. Now you see why I feel it's a slightly personal matter? You started this discussion by attacking me, rather than using logic to convince me that I would want to own this car.

Directed at you in this discussion? I've been on the Mustang thread several times and have already complained about the car among other things and given it some positives, however I don't see how it is personal other than me wanting to respond to a post I disagree with. You happened to be that person, sorry. Also I'm basically saying it is illogical to try and convince you other wise because you don't have much hope for the area to begin with. I'm glad you like the looks of the car it's quite nice I agree.

1971 Pontiac Grand Prix:

1970 Chevelle SS:

1970 Dodge Challenger:

1970 Ford Torino:

The Grand Prix is ugly, but cool. The Chevelle and Challenger are awesome designs, and the Torino does it to an extent but I think it'd look really good interpreted for a modern day car with a centre stack and console, and bucket seats.

See what I'm getting at? On these cars the dashboard wraps around to give the interior a more focused feel. It looks great and could have easily been incorporated into the Mustang. I'd like to see soft touch plastics and leather, and real metal trim, not plastic. Metal trim would be really nice. I'd like to see visible stitching that looks good, and tasteful amounts of chrome trim (yes, in places like around the gauges). I think it should have a more driver-centric design since it's supposed to be a pretty good driver's car now. Also, the black area and raised dashboard section in front of the passenger looks cheap and silly.

So you do want lap belts and bucket seats or bench seats? All you did was show me pictures really and comment on the dash, is that the fault you see in most American cars or what?

I'd say the Chevelle with a modern interpretation would be great and the Grand Prix gauges, the other two and the grand prix just look to block driven and boring and I don't see how a modern version would look all that good. Especially when you put in a satnav screen. Which some people already think is too bulky in current style dashes these types would make it more obvious I think.

Thinking about it, they've designed it to be very easily made as a RHD car, which shows cheapness in the engineering of the interior. And that doesn't make me feel confident about the quality of it, if they were willing to cheap out like that.

How does that make it cheap? That sort of the point to Engineering things is making it easy to change the style with in the budget and still make it nice but doesn't mean cheap (in looks or design). I don't see how making it easy as in the plan (since it was going global) is all that bad.

I really don't see how it's funny, I mean I'm actually asking you questions. You just said in this post I'm quoting you say use logic to convince and it's hard to when I don't see the big issue you have to start with. You complained I'm twisting your words as well, but I'm actually asking to get your view on something I don't see due to differing perspective so I can then try to logically convince you even if I don't see much hope.

Really?

They don't look that alike to me.

To me they I thought that had similar designs as well in the B-pillar back. For the front face I though the grill was similar to Audi just more dramatic like the Quattro concept and then some. Head lights when I first saw them looked a like as well, but better incorporation by Toyota to go with the grill. Front brake ducting aero design as well seemed alike even though Audi was more dramatic. Like I said that's just me, I do feel many are trying to copy the Germans while still being their own group.

 

[McLaren]

Easiest example of similarities to me would be RC F and say the RS5

Beyond the large grilles & shape of the B-Pillar, I don't think there's enough to say Lexus is trying to be like Audi, arguably at most, taking a couple visual cues. The car is built on a GS platform which stretches it a bit & the large grille is now the face of Lexus' F-Sport line. Beyond that, things like oversized brake ducts I believe are just mere coincidences, things that will obviously needed to be integrated to cool the massive rotors.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Beyond the large grilles & shape of the B-Pillar, I don't think there's enough to say Lexus is trying to be like Audi, arguably at most, taking a couple visual cues. The car is built on a GS platform which stretches it a bit & the large grille is now the face of Lexus' F-Sport line. Beyond that, things like oversized brake ducts I believe are just mere coincidences, things that will obviously needed to be integrated to cool the massive rotors.

I should clarify that I'm not trying to see that the overall shape is trying to be like Audi, but there are some visiual ques that suggest that it was inspired by what is popular on the market. The Market leader tends to be the Germans, so others look to see why it is and thus make changes accordingly to sell with them while doing separate things that they think will help them perform better.

I'm glad you agree with the other example

 

[Beeblebrox237]

@LMSCorvetteGT2 You're just being stupid now. You're obviously not reading what I'm saying and are just making comments without thinking or comprehending. You're not worth my time. If you decide to stop being so aggressive and thick, then I'll resume this discussion. As it is it's like talking to a brick wall.

However, before I go, I'd like to point out just how you're twisting my words.

the interior has some of the worst packaging and ergonomics I've ever seen, and the materials and general feel of the car is very cheap. On the plus side, it feels solid, while every GM car I've known feels like it's about as sturdy as soft tofu. Additionally, the seats were excellent in the Focus, it drove well apart from the gearbox, and the fuel economy was excellent.

Becomes

"well it looks bad as usual to American cars" or "the materials are plastic for the interior and cheap" as if Germans and Japanese are using the finest woven silks and leathers.

I commented that

The biggest problem for me, though, is the interior design. Not only is it incredibly ugly, but it's very unimaginative. When they introduced this car they made many radical changes, but essentially kept the old interior and made it a bit uglier. They could have made a really, really nice interior that harked back to the glory days of the muscle car. A very driver-centric design would have worked wonderfully, and would have enhanced the car as a whole.

From which you take:

So what exactly would you want lap belts and bucket seats with chrome trim around the gauges, I'm just trying to understand from the other perspective (as I've always have) on what specifically they should be doing? Is there a certain design you can point to or actual materials you'd like to see rather than "not plastics that seem cheap"?

To which I responded:

1971 Pontiac Grand Prix:
IMG

1970 Chevelle SS:
IMG

1970 Dodge Challenger:
IMG

1970 Ford Torino:
IMG

The Grand Prix is ugly, but cool. The Chevelle and Challenger are awesome designs, and the Torino does it to an extent but I think it'd look really good interpreted for a modern day car with a centre stack and console, and bucket seats.

See what I'm getting at? On these cars the dashboard wraps around to give the interior a more focused feel. It looks great and could have easily been incorporated into the Mustang. I'd like to see soft touch plastics and leather, and real metal trim, not plastic. Metal trim would be really nice. I'd like to see visible stitching that looks good, and tasteful amounts of chrome trim (yes, in places like around the gauges). I think it should have a more driver-centric design since it's supposed to be a pretty good driver's car now. Also, the black area and raised dashboard section in front of the passenger looks cheap and silly.

And yet you still don't understand a thing I'm saying:

So you do want lap belts and bucket seats or bench seats? All you did was show me pictures really and comment on the dash, is that the fault you see in most American cars or what?

I'd say the Chevelle with a modern interpretation would be great and the Grand Prix gauges, the other two and the grand prix just look to block driven and boring and I don't see how a modern version would look all that good. Especially when you put in a satnav screen. Which some people already think is too bulky in current style dashes these types would make it more obvious I think.

And I NEVER commented on the quality or cheapness of the plastics in the new Mustang.

Is there a certain design you can point to or actual materials you'd like to see rather than "not plastics that seem cheap"?

The rear view is epic, a great look which is modern and yet still pure Mustang. The front, however, looks very ungainly. Perhaps they figured that most cars would only see the back of it anyway . The biggest problem for me, though, is the interior design. Not only is it incredibly ugly, but it's very unimaginative.

Which you twist into:

I'm glad you like the looks of the car it's quite nice I agree.

I did not comment on whether I like the looks of the car as a whole.


I said that

My experiences with American cars have always been fairly negative.

But you claimed that

you're going to write off an entire continent of car manufacturing I guess there is no hope for N. America to you guys.

I made it clear that

I have not written off an entire continent and I want that made very clear!

And yet you said that

you don't have hope in this area of the world in regards to car building

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

@LMSCorvetteGT2 You're just being stupid now. You're obviously not reading what I'm saying and are just making comments without thinking or comprehending. You're not worth my time. If you decide to stop being so aggressive and thick, then I'll resume this discussion. As it is it's like talking to a brick wall.

How exactly, I'm asking pretty simple questions to understand and you seem to be taking another users school of thought and wording almost on equal. I'm reading what you've said, if you can't see that you yourself are being bias and thus put your own proverbial foot in your mouth and then walk off as some higher than thou, how is that my issue?

I've yet to call you any names or resort to personal insults and yet some how I'm aggressive and thick because I actually want to see where you guys are coming from on how these designs are bad or cheap? How dare I do such a thing and ask or potentially challenge if not outright. Sorry if me asking you what exactly you want to see can descriptively be depicted, I mean you did just show me old school stuff with lap belts and seats and you did just pretty much talk nearly exclusively about the dash configuration (though there's more than that to the interior).

However, before I go, I'd like to point out just how you're twisting my words.


Becomes



I commented that

From which you take:


To which I responded:

And yet you still don't understand a thing I'm saying:



And I NEVER commented on the quality or cheapness of the plastics in the new Mustang.




Which you twist into:

I did not comment on whether I like the looks of the car as a whole.


I said that

But you claimed that

I made it clear that

And yet you said that

I'm not going to do a song and dance of selective quoting like you've just done. I've explained why I posted what I did, the wording I used for say plastics seems to be a common theme from those against american design, I also felt it was appropriate when you used it as a portion from a top gear video you said you agreed with that pointed exactly to that on the Chrysler 300. No you didn't say it word for word, nor did I say you did, what I said is you seem to be a type that tends to go along with stereotypical reasons to why American cars in design are bad.

Now if I claimed that you did say these things I could see why you'd be frustrated, yet it seems your frustrated because you just simply don't like me due to past disagreements, and are upset that I dare argue with you again. You know what could have saved us from all this silly bs trite? Not claiming or expecting it to turn into what it has, if you have that set in your mind because you are equally as aggressive or stuck to your views then that is what will happen.

Now if you told me why the C7 is a much better car than the majority as you put it (paraphrase), say a comparison of what you've seen in the Vette to what you've seen in the Mustang. I'd probably have understood you far better than "you're twisting my words, and you're an angry person just out to get me, blah blah blah" type stuff.

EDIT: oh and since this is now off topic and you probably don't plan to give me the time of day to simply answer stuff, if you want to keep this going or settle any issues pm like I tell anyone else with problems.

 

[Slash]

Motor Authority is reporting that the 2015 Mustang will be getting a 10 speed automatic in the near future.

 

[Azure Flare]

Motor Authority is reporting that the 2015 Mustang will be getting a 10 speed automatic in the near future.

"That's my car."

 

[CodeRedR51]

Fuel economy ratings anyone?

http://www.autoblog.com/2014/08/21/2015-ford-mustang-fuel-economy-ratings-leaked/

"Although the V8 model is not among them, we can now see how the EPA has rated those models with a half dozen pistons or less. The Mustang EcoBoost with the turbo four and a manual transmission has been rated at 22 miles per gallon in the city and 31 on the highway. The V6 manual gets 17 city and 28 highway, while the V6 automatic squeezes out a bit more in the city at 19 mpg but carries the same 28 highway rating."

 

[GranTurismo916]

Motor Authority is reporting that the 2015 Mustang will be getting a 10 speed automatic in the near future.

 

[Omnis]

I was hoping for better highway economy than 31. At least it gets better than 20 city.

 

[SVT Cobra GT]

Motor Authority is reporting that the 2015 Mustang will be getting a 10 speed automatic in the near future.

Hmm.

10? 10 Speed Automatic?

Sounds familiar.

 

[catamount39]

That's as stupid as that bloody Jeep with a 9 speed gearbox. I would never buy a car with more than 8 gears.

Stop adding gears! 7 is the maximum of sanity!

 

[Badasp5.0]

That's as stupid as that bloody Jeep with a 9 speed gearbox. I would never buy a car with more than 8 gears.

Stop adding gears! 7 is the maximum of sanity!

I guess you don't have hills or mountains around you.

 

[Omnis]

They probably chose 10 for the stang so they could adapt it to their trucks. Going from 6 to 10 only requires an extra gear set or two. No big deal in a big car like the mustang.

 

[catamount39]

I guess you don't have hills or mountains around you.

I'm in Vermont...no **** we have mountains and hills (8-10% grades at worst anyone?). Our car has a 5 speed auto and it works fine thank you very much.

 

[Dennisch]

Fuel economy ratings anyone?

http://www.autoblog.com/2014/08/21/2015-ford-mustang-fuel-economy-ratings-leaked/

"Although the V8 model is not among them, we can now see how the EPA has rated those models with a half dozen pistons or less. The Mustang EcoBoost with the turbo four and a manual transmission has been rated at 22 miles per gallon in the city and 31 on the highway. The V6 manual gets 17 city and 28 highway, while the V6 automatic squeezes out a bit more in the city at 19 mpg but carries the same 28 highway rating."

For the Ecoboost,

It averages 26-27 mpg. That's 42km per gallon. Little under 11 km per liter.
That's not fuel efficiency.

 

[YSSMAN]

I'd look at it this way, I guess; As an owner of a mid '90s Toyota "sports coupe" that was given a rating of 19/26, and regularly averages 25-26 MPG, I'd be no worse off with a newer Mustang with more than double the power of the car I have. In fact, the EcoBoost Mustang gets give/take the same kind of fuel economy that most family sedans do, and I'd consider that to be pretty impressive - especially for a 300+ BHP "sports coupe."

I mean, what is the Mustang supposed to get to be considered good? Wind the clock back 10 years and the most-common form of Mustang, the V6 with a 4-speed auto, did 17/25 for 20 MPG combined. That's pretty decent progress while doubling the power output.

 

[Dennisch]

You have to see it through the eyes of a European, since we'll be getting the Ecoboost too. It's pretty much pointless to bring the 4 pot here if it will be in the same tax group as the V8, which it will most likely be. It looks like another case of the engine being to small for the weight.

For us, 11km is pretty poor, and the V8 will probably get something like 7-8km.

I am pretty sure that the V8 will outsell the 4.

 

[Beeblebrox237]

Generally speaking, Ford's EcoBoost technology is great for power but delivers pretty poor fuel economy. That said, 27 MPG from a Mustang isn't too bad.

 

[CodeRedR51]

Generally speaking, Ford's EcoBoost technology is great for power but delivers pretty poor fuel economy. That said, 27 MPG from a Mustang isn't too bad.

I filled up my GTi this morning with 91 octane fuel and calculated the average at 27mpg, and that's with a 25 mile commute (one way) to work which is 90% 60mph highway speeds.

If Nissan doesn't make the idX, an Ecoboost Mustang is definitely a consideration for me in a couple years and if it averages about the same, it wouldn't be so bad.

 

[Beeblebrox237]

I filled up my GTi this morning with 91 octane fuel and calculated the average at 27mpg, and that's with a 25 mile commute (one way) to work which is 90% 60mph highway speeds.

If Nissan doesn't make the idX, an Ecoboost Mustang is definitely a consideration for me in a couple years and if it averages about the same, it wouldn't be so bad.

In the US 27 MPG is excellent. Petrol is dirt cheap so the Ecoboost Mustang is a lot more appealing. In Europe petrol prices approach $10 a gallon so 27 MPG isn't really good enough to justify buying it over some sort of hot hatch which would be more practical and likely cheaper to run.

 

[Badasp5.0]

I mean, what is the Mustang supposed to get to be considered good? Wind the clock back 10 years and the most-common form of Mustang, the V6 with a 4-speed auto, did 17/25 for 20 MPG combined. That's pretty decent progress while doubling the power output.

Yep Take it back ten years to my mustang '95 240hp 5.0 that gets 15/20 Its a big jump in HP and mpg#s.

 

[TheCracker]

You have to see it through the eyes of a European, since we'll be getting the Ecoboost too. It's pretty much pointless to bring the 4 pot here if it will be in the same tax group as the V8, which it will most likely be. It looks like another case of the engine being to small for the weight.

For us, 11km is pretty poor, and the V8 will probably get something like 7-8km.

I am pretty sure that the V8 will outsell the 4.

We're unlikely to know which version will sell best in Europe until they're both reviewed on our roads, prices are announced and mileage figures are published.

Tax based on official mileage/Co2 figures is a big decider when a lot of cars in this segment are bought by people who get an allowance through their jobs. A majority of these cars will be bought by people who are not big enthusiasts, they just want 'a nice car' so won't really care, within reason, what's under the bonnet. There just aren't enough Mustang enthusiasts in Europe to make it successful otherwise.

 

[Keef]

I don't see how most are and the looks are subjective, especially when most American and Japanese sedans nowdays try to mimic/emulate German counter parts. E.g. Lexus trying to be like Audi, Cadillac trying to be like Mercedes. To me this sounds nothing more than the likes of a European bias that you'd see on Top gear or Fifth gear, that is a counter to that of "America is best!" crowd. Both are quite fringe in nature and exaggerate their preference

If anything, Lexus is more similar to Mercedes in that they're a luxury brand for old people which has finally embraced exciting design, and Cadillac is like BMW in that they're building a reputation for performance driving dynamics. Nobody is really trying to be like Audi, the oddball company known for AWD and LED valve stem caps. Audi is strange.

As for the RC F and RS5, the only real similarity is the fact that they have two doors. Besides that, they look completely different, the 5 having a very sedan-like long greenhouse with usable rear seats while the RC has a rearward-shifted greenhouse with useless rear seats, the 5 is AWD and the RC is rear, the 5 has Audi's typical transverse engine layout while the RC has Lexus's typical longitudinal layout, the 5 is already known to be lacking in the handling dynamics department because of Audi's typical chassis design while the Lexus promises a very sporting personality heavily influenced by the LFA.

It's like comparing a Mustang to the 370Z, except the Audi and Lexus are actually more different than that. They share very few similarities.

These just popped up on my FB feed.

It could be a competitor to Cadillac's forthcoming coupe.

Problem: Lincoln keeps taking frames designed for Ford. What Ford needs to start doing is design frames for Lincoln, as in make them very high quality, and then let them trickle down, instead of the other way around.

If Lincoln used the Mustang frame they would need to work hard to make the car look basically nothing like a Mustang. While these renders give you an idea of the shape of the car, it looks far too much like a Mustang. I'm talking even the side window glass and complete greenhouse and trunk lid and every single body panel on this car needs to be different than a Mustang and be 100% Lincoln-designed. The windshield glass shouldn't even be the same.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

@Keef, well that's my point though either way it was an example not a "they're exactly alike" what I'm saying is I agree with the user that German influence in sedan and sport cars or better yet European influence is seen heavily in other regions. I still see more CLA in the new CTS than anything BMW related, if your comparing company models that's great but I was going off of design ques here and there.

If feel Ford is trying to do this European mesh with American ques like GM has been at for the last 8-10 years in Cadillac and Opel/Buick. I think the effort alone is showing that they're trying to bring a better car with more civilized equipment than they had before, and I'm saying this before they announced the 10 spd.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

RE: Fuel economy - Am I missing something here?

I recognize the methods have changed since 2011, but the V6 has really dropped 3mpg and some horsepower?

 

[niky]

You have to see it through the eyes of a European, since we'll be getting the Ecoboost too. It's pretty much pointless to bring the 4 pot here if it will be in the same tax group as the V8, which it will most likely be. It looks like another case of the engine being to small for the weight.

For us, 11km is pretty poor, and the V8 will probably get something like 7-8km.

I am pretty sure that the V8 will outsell the 4.

Can't say much until the NEDC figures come out. And chances are they will be wildly different from the EPA figures.

 

[Badasp5.0]

RE: Fuel economy - Am I missing something here?

I recognize the methods have changed since 2011, but the V6 has really dropped 3mpg and some horsepower?

Could be. Sometimes carryover engines lose HP/efficiency when changes are required to fit a new model. The 5.0 lost 10hp between '93 and '94 due to small changes.

 

[Omnis]

RE: Fuel economy - Am I missing something here?

I recognize the methods have changed since 2011, but the V6 has really dropped 3mpg and some horsepower?

Some guy on ecomodder has his 3.7 Mustang doing over 40mpg. All he did was install a flat underbelly and an air dam blocker. I'm surprised the V6 was so detuned.

The ecoboost I think is weird because the city and highway numbers are rather close. I think it must mean that they're using a really tall final drive. I mean maybe it's cruising at well over 3krpm. I wonder if you could get much better economy with a final drive gear that brings it down to just over idle.