2015 Ford Mustang - General Discussion

[sumbrownkid]

Name, but I guess Ford would consider Mustang a brand with that logo.

 

[niky]

BMW have got it right with the M3. The Mustang started life like the "M". A faster, cooler version of a more modest sedan. But BMW tied the M3's styling more closely to the source material, so it could be modernized quite easily without customers getting all up in arms.

Well... they did anyway, because of the weight increases, but you can blame the entire car industry moving upmarket and dragging car classes with them for that.

-

The Mustang's original ethos was as a stylish two-door sedan variant of Ford's then current "compact" family car.

Car classes have moved on from there, but the Mustang hasn't. If it were even feasible for the new car to be ladder-frame, it probably would be. I was pretty happy Ford took the excellent LS platform and brought the Mustang into the 21st Century with the previous generation model, but at some point, they should probably start building the Mustang on something newer.

It's not impossible to build a rear-wheel drive car off one of Ford's newer modular platforms, and there are rumors the next car will have a Mondeo/Fusion platform as a base. Heck, I wouldn't be disappointed if the next car not only has IRS, but optional AWD. I imagine an Ecoboost V6 or V8 Mustang with AWD and AdvanceTrac RSC (reprogrammed to allow more slip angle and, by extension, lurid slides) would be spectacular to drive.

Sort of like a "cheap" GTR. And let's face it. The whole idea of Mustang (excluding rip-off priced Shelby and heritage models) is a combination of performance and style in an affordable wrapper.


Ford has the chance to do this now, when owners are more willing to accept new technology and ideas.

 

[analog]

Does the Mustang have any definable Mustang characteristics though? I.e. attributes that have remained constant through every generation?

Grille and rear lights have been similar I expect, but beyond that...

BMW does indeed keep some touches throughout its range, but it's not done in a "retro" way - a 3-Series doesn't really look anything like its ancestor the 1602/2002. Even the kidney grille is different, and there's only the merest hint of round lights with the now-square "angel eyes". The last truly retro BMW was... what, the Z8 maybe?

I didn't say BMW's were retro at all, just that they persisted with some key elements for decades (maybe the kidney grille wasn't a good example as it has been fitted since the very start but the Hofmeister kink is something they added later and have kept throughout since) making them recognizably BMW's whilst a lot of other brands have experimented with all sorts of styling directions in that same period, ofcourse this is a consistent brand identity and not just related to one single model like the Mustang.

The thing with the Mustang is that they went away from the evolution in styling of the first generations in the early seventies (until any visual link was eventually completely removed with the first Fox-series only to be brought back in the second Fox-series) so there is no real continuation like BMW.
The only thing that comes close to a defining characteristic for all Mustangs, apart from the first Fox, is the side scoop which is even present on the Mustang II.

I think when they'd gone retro for the 2005 model, they obviously deliberately took inspiration from those first generations of Mustangs (not just detailing like light treatment but overall proportions as well) as those are the cars most would think of first when the name Mustang is dropped and perceived to be the most beautiful by most.
And maybe it makes sense to start from there (those key elements) and conveniently ignore what came inbetween, for example Jaguar didn't try to evoke the XJS with their new F-Type, it takes some elements from the E-Type but in a subtle modern way, a nod to the past and paying hommage to their heritage without trying to make a modern version of an old car.

 

[boomee]

a bit of a muscle car feel but has sports car tendencies
a V8
affordability to the masses
tons of ways to modify and personalize

 

[homeforsummer]

I didn't say BMW's were retro at all

Apologies, I mis-read your post the first time around. I see we both essentially agree - BMW has kept a "BMW shape" and "BMW details" without having to literally design the same car each time. It has identity without being retro.

And I think we also both agree that a similar tack with the Mustang would be the right way to go? The car could be a clean sheet design, yet incorporate elements that are now recognisable as "Mustang". The three upright tail lights on each side are a good example, as is a nose-first grille design.

Though again, I'd say that the Mustang is far more about ethos than it is a set style. The Fox-body looks nothing like any other generation of Mustang, but it was cheap, was available with a V8 under the hood and the hot-rodders have taken it to their hearts, just as they've done with every other Mustang.

 

[analog]

Apologies, I mis-read your post the first time around. I see we both essentially agree - BMW has kept a "BMW shape" and "BMW details" without having to literally design the same car each time. It has identity without being retro.

And I think we also both agree that a similar tack with the Mustang would be the right way to go? The car could be a clean sheet design, yet incorporate elements that are now recognisable as "Mustang". The three upright tail lights on each side are a good example, as is a nose-first grille design.

Though again, I'd say that the Mustang is far more about ethos than it is a set style. The Fox-body looks nothing like any other generation of Mustang, but it was cheap, was available with a V8 under the hood and the hot-rodders have taken it to their hearts, just as they've done with every other Mustang.

That's exactly what I meant, a clean sheet design that still incorporates some key elements most people associate with a Mustang, the 2005 (and later) retro-versions (for the lack of a better description) are in my opinion a reminder to people what made the first Mustangs great stylistically, to get them excited again by playing on nostalgia.

Sometimes it's not that bad to look back before going forward again (basically what Peugeot is doing right now) and so the next step is to move away from reinterpreting an old shape into a modern looking example but perhaps imagining how the Mustang would've evolved if they had persisted with some key elements like BMW has done, basically ignoring the 'inbetween years' and kind of rewriting or writing a hypothetical past to go further (if that makes any sense).

Not sure the appeal of the Mustang is purely or mostly based on ethos though (although that might be true for some and is undoubtedly a large part of its appeal don't get me wrong) but you know times have changed since the first Fox was introduced and design or style plays a much bigger role these days (and the look of the first Mustang played a huge role in its success).
Also, cheap has another meaning now with increased petrol prices and though I'm sure they won't make the mistake again they've made with the Mustang II (V8's and high-performance versions will still be available) but perhaps the whole notion of what constitutes a modern muscle (or pony) car needs a complete rethink.

Low fuel consumption, high torque engine delivering smooth delivery and good all round performance, maybe a new Mustang might be a good way to introduce Americans to the virtues of a certain type of engine (I daren't even whisper its name ) Europeans are used to by now being fitted to coupés and high-performance models, you know, alongside the regular V6's and V8's obviously.

 

[Tornado]

Would the design of the New Edge Mustang count for something along those lines (not for now, obviously, but circa when it came out)? Because the way you're describing what Ford needs to do seems to apply to that when it was around, and I've always sorta thought something along those lines for that particular design anyway.

 

[analog]

I think the closest thing to what I'm describing would be the Giugiaro Mustang concept from a few years ago and not so much the New Edge one.
Yet it could go much further still into a new kind of shape that still retains the headlight treatment (in a new style ofcourse) of the earlier cars which isn't present on the New Edge one.

Here are a few other random examples I found which illustrate you can play around with those elements (not saying I necessarily like these examples though).

 

[homeforsummer]

Would the design of the New Edge Mustang count for something along those lines (not for now, obviously, but circa when it came out)? Because the way you're describing what Ford needs to do seems to apply to that when it was around, and I've always sorta thought something along those lines for that particular design anyway.

Yes, IMO. The New Edge Mustang was also a great example of how to successfully update the previous model (94 to 98, I think?). Largely the same shape, but New Edge really jazzed it up.

I thought it was quite a successful take on the Mustang, despite not being retro in any way. The Bullitt edition in particular is a genuinely good-looking car.

Edit: Regarding the Giugiaro Mustang, I've never been keen on that concept. There's little to complain about at the front, but the cockpit looks far too low and the back end is an uncomfortable-looking design.

Personally, I prefer quite a distinct cockpit area, which is why I've always preferred Mustang coupes/notchbacks to the fastbacks. It looks more pert and distinct, rather than being a large slab of sloping metal. Convenient for me also because the coupes are the less desirable ones, so if I ever wanted to own one it'd be cheaper

 

[OHM_fusion]

Yes, IMO. The New Edge Mustang was also a great example of how to successfully update the previous model (94 to 98, I think?). Largely the same shape, but New Edge really jazzed it up.

I thought it was quite a successful take on the Mustang, despite not being retro in any way. The Bullitt edition in particular is a genuinely good-looking car.

Yes! The New Edge is still the most successful modern interpretation of the Mustang IMO. I prefer it over the 5th gen. I'd almost say that, looks wise, it was more of a Mustang then the current ones because it was still recognizably a Mustang and not a caricature of the original.

 

[analog]

I also don't like the overall shape of the Giugiaro Mustang that much it has to be said, but there are some details I really appreciate.
I mainly used it as an example to show you can create a modern looking car which has echo's of the original without being retro.

 

[DeathSmiles]

I'm specifically speaking on the 2014MY design, and not it's performance, when speaking about what makes a Mustang a Mustang, for future reference.

But, I feel there is a fine line between maintaining a certain look for a car through forward design, and just taking an older design, and making minor changes to bring it into the current vehicle design needs, i.e. the 2005 Mustang's retro styling.

3-Series BMW's are an excellent example of moving the design forward, while retaining the "feel" of the car through the years. You can place an older 3-Series model next to the newer ones, and see the relation, or evolution if you will of the design.

The issue with the Mustang, is that Ford was never consistant with the design. The 65-69 all look related, but the second you jump to 71, it's a whole 'nother vehicle. Similar shape, but that's where the design resemblance ends. Same for the Forx Body, and then New Edge. Some minor elements were grabbed from various generations, but place a' 65 next to a '71, next to a Fox Body, next to a New Edge and there is very little, if anything at all that would say "...we are all Mustang's". And it's because Ford at times takes inspiration for their entire car lineup from random places at times, so there's no consistancy.

 

[homeforsummer]

That's not necessarily a bad thing though. Using the Corvette as an example, the first three generations could barely be less similar, but all are iconic designs. The C4 was different too, but since then the design has merely evolved.

And with the Corvette, people have started relying on the details to make the car look like "a Corvette". Witness the fuss in the other thread about it getting square rear lamps - it's just a detail change really. Overall it won't look any less like a Corvette than a C4, C5 or C6 did. It's a silhouette which has barely changed from the 80s.

Consistency isn't always a good thing. Buyers get complacent and when that happens, so do the designers.

Car buyers don't even really know what they want. Chevy or Ford could change the Corvette or Mustang completely (but maintain its core values, in each case) and it'd still sell.

People think they want exactly what they had before, but put something new under their noses and they'll lap it up. Nobody knew they wanted a Mustang, or a Mini, or an E-Type back in the 1960s, but they sure as hell bought them when they came out. Nobody knew they wanted an iPhone in 2007, and now Apple is the world's most profitable company. Nobody knew that they wanted a family car which was a bit less economical, a bit more expensive, and looked like an off-roader but couldn't go off road, and now crossovers are one of the fastest-growing market segments...

 

[Zenith]

^That.

I think that the car buyer cares a whole lot less about a model retaining features of its predecessors than some people think they do.

 

[boomee]

correction''new edge'' mustangs are 1999-2004 SN95 the 94-98 are not considered new edge due to there softer looks but carry the same code of SN-95. That being said I agree with what you said home I personally love the sn-95 cobras particullaly the new edge style ones and may get one in the near future.

Yes, IMO. The New Edge Mustang was also a great example of how to successfully update the previous model (94 to 98, I think?). Largely the same shape, but New Edge really jazzed it up.

I thought it was quite a successful take on the Mustang, despite not being retro in any way. The Bullitt edition in particular is a genuinely good-looking car.

Edit: Regarding the Giugiaro Mustang, I've never been keen on that concept. There's little to complain about at the front, but the cockpit looks far too low and the back end is an uncomfortable-looking design.

Personally, I prefer quite a distinct cockpit area, which is why I've always preferred Mustang coupes/notchbacks to the fastbacks. It looks more pert and distinct, rather than being a large slab of sloping metal. Convenient for me also because the coupes are the less desirable ones, so if I ever wanted to own one it'd be cheaper

 

[homeforsummer]

correction''new edge'' mustangs are 1999-2004 SN95 the 94-98 are not considered new edge due to there softer looks but carry the same code of SN-95. That being said I agree with what you said home I personally love the sn-95 cobras particullaly the new edge style ones and may get one in the near future.

Sorry, I think you misunderstood. I was referring to the cars which came after the 94-98 as New Edge

The New Edge Mustang was also a great example of how to successfully update the previous model (94 to 98, I think?)

 

[CodeRedR51]

Boss 302 Axed for 2014.

http://www.autoblog.com/2012/11/07/2014-ford-mustang-details-leaked-bye-bye-boss-302/

 

[Slash]

Boss 302 Axed for 2014.

http://www.autoblog.com/2012/11/07/2014-ford-mustang-details-leaked-bye-bye-boss-302/

See!! I told you all and no one believed me.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

It's mirroring the original Boss' run, and I'm fine with that. I expect well-kept ones to be worth a fair chunk of coin two decades from now.

2014's going to be a long year; I'm really curious how the celebrations will unfold with the new model / 50th anniversary.

 

[Slash]

It's mirroring the original Boss' run, and I'm fine with that. I expect well-kept ones to be worth a fair chunk of coin two decades from now.

2014's going to be a long year; I'm really curious how the celebrations will unfold with the new model / 50th anniversary.

Agreed.

I hope they do a Boss 429 or 351 next tho......

 

[Beeblebrox237]

Agreed.

I hope they do a Boss 429 or 351 next tho......

I think that's what the GT500 is for.

 

[Tornado]

Agreed. No reason to make a big engined Mustang when the GT500 is now a normal Mustang model.






What they should do is bring back the Boss handling bits and tuning, but call it something else. SVT Cobra R sounds good.

 

[Slash]

True, but if they did both the 302 and GT500 now as they did in the '60s I don't see why a 429 or 351 would be out of the question except for the fact that all Boss names were based on engine displacement in cubic inches. And since the big block is virtually extinct due to recent advances in technology, thats the only thing I could think of stopping it.

 

[Tornado]

Because in the 1960s the 428 Cobra Jet and Boss 429 were the Ford equivalents to the pricier, more exclusive and more bespoke GT500 (well, the Boss 429 wasn't really, but still).



In 2013, the Ford equivalent to the GT500 is the GT500.

 

[Beeblebrox237]

Okay, I realise that this is unrealistic, but why not make the GT model good enough so that there is no need for a Boss model? Or would that be too simple? And then, there could still be the GT500 model for those who want more speed. Also, if they did this, they could build a V6 model with 300+ bhp and perhaps a turbo four. Continuing on this note, they could give it the interior from a Bentley and the engine note of a 458...

 

[Exorcet]

Okay, I realise that this is unrealistic, but why not make the GT model good enough so that there is no need for a Boss model?

Price and styling.

Also, if they did this, they could build a V6 model with 300+ bhp and perhaps a turbo four.

Would need a much lighter chassis to put up respectable performance.

interior from a Bentley

Please no.

 

[Zenith]

As long as there's a track ready Mustang, I don't care what they call it.

Okay, I realise that this is unrealistic, but why not make the GT model good enough so that there is no need for a Boss model? Or would that be too simple? And then, there could still be the GT500 model for those who want more speed. Also, if they did this, they could build a V6 model with 300+ bhp and perhaps a turbo four.

Because Boss level performance costs more to produce than GT level performance. Most people also don't want the stiff Boss suspension or other uncomfortable Boss features like the lack of rear seats.

V6 if you're cheap.
GT if you're not.
Boss/equivalent if you're going to a track.
GT500 if you want power.

Continuing on this note, they could give it the interior from a Bentley and the engine note of a 458...

And then inflate the cost by 100% and completely miss the point of the Mustang?

 

[Exorcet]

I think the last bit may have been sarcastic. Still, a Bentley interior was something I had to say no to in this car.

Would need a much lighter chassis to put up respectable performance.

Actually, I forgot that the V-6 is 300 and not 400 hp, so I guess there would still be room for a 300 hp model. On the other hand, I don't think that they would want to leave the hp the same as the last car, so the V-6 equivalent many come in with 325-350 hp and probably around the same price (low $20,000). I don't think we'll see a model come in any lower than that.

 

[Nessy]

I think the last bit may have been sarcastic. Still, a Bentley interior was something I had to say no to in this car.

Yep i agree, well certainly from a quality standpoint anyway (can't imagine Ford using anti-fog hardcoated switches etc).

Thought i'd post a few early pics, of my interpretation of what a future Mustang could look like (already posted in another thread). Maybe it's too retro for some.. or maybe not enough for others.. It's a work in progress so it probably will change a bit. I'll refrain from posting anymore of these concept sketches, (in the other thread i usually post every single change ), but i'll post a pic of the finished design in this thread once finished.

(pics of sketches shown in order of which they were done.)

 

[buickgnx88]

Back end looks a little too much like the '67-'68 Camaro.