2015 Ford Mustang - General Discussion

[homeforsummer]

80's Granada front styling aside, the foxbody shares enough shape and size with the Mustang II for it to be a believable evolution. The biggest leap it made style-wise, IMO, was between the 4th gen and the original retro 5th gen. That only worked because it reminded the general pop of the original well-loved car.

Really? I thought the Fox looked a bit like a glorified Ford Escort Mk3, but that's just me... certainly looked nothing like the original Mustangs, and only a vague similarity with the Mustang II.

I'm a former Ford lover, now the Mustang (in current form) is one of the few Ford vehicles I like. If they kill it, or turn it into a generic looking 4 cylinder car in an attempt to please the Japanese and Europeans, then there won't really be anything for me to like about them anymore.

As I speculated before though, everyone seems to be taking the word of one single journalist a little too seriously. I'd be quite surprised if the next 'Stang was a dead ringer for the Evos (and even more surprised if it was 4-cyl only - Ford is a bit slow sometimes but it's not completely insane), but I can certainly see how a genuinely new (i.e. not retro) Mustang with some Evos styling cues could work.

 

[sumbrownkid]

If they only make it a 4 cylinder then Ford may as well shoot one foot and load the next shot.

 

[Adamgp]

Not really about pleasing Japanese or europeàns as much as saving people at the pump.

Ford is aiming to sell the redesigned Mustang in Europe and Japan as well as the US. The current Mustang, no so much.

homeforsummer
As I speculated before though, everyone seems to be taking the word of one single journalist a little too seriously. I'd be quite surprised if the next 'Stang was a dead ringer for the Evos (and even more surprised if it was 4-cyl only - Ford is a bit slow sometimes but it's not completely insane), but I can certainly see how a genuinely new (i.e. not retro) Mustang with some Evos styling cues could work.

I wasn't taking his word exactly. Hence why I said:

If the Evos rumor is true, the Mustang might as well be sent to the glue factory.

 

[Exorcet]

Without the 'Mustang' styling clues, i don't see any point in continuing with the Mustang name either. If you are looking to the future with the car's exterior design - and no doubt looking to the future with a more modern chassis design and power plants that would appeal to all markets, not just North Americas - then why continue with a retro name which doesn't mean much in other parts of the world?

The car does not need to look like it came from 1960 to have Mustang styling cues. What about most other cars, that look different than their originals? Do they have no right to use their own name? I would consider a small V-8 RWD Ford a Mustang with little concern over what it looks like on the outside, because the small V-8 RWD part is what I think is honestly most important part. The Mustang could look exactly like one of the older ones, but if it's FWD drive, it will be a totally different car.

I don't understand why a car has to look ancient to look good. I honestly think that the 2005 Mustang was a disaster, and it wasn't until the car gained some modern details that it began to look OK. Nothing is wrong with liking the current car of course, or even the original basic 2005 models, but it seems a bit silly to me that ditching retro is equated to killing the car. The car has only been retro for a few years, and IMO it's still not really bettering something like this

Saleen's fixing the front bumper of the previous generation pretty much removed any flaws it had. And actually that only applied to the low end cars, the SVT had a nice front end.

 

[Omnis]

The car does not need to look like it came from 1960 to have Mustang styling cues. What about most other cars, that look different than their originals? Do they have no right to use their own name? I would consider a small V-8 RWD Ford a Mustang with little concern over what it looks like on the outside, because the small V-8 RWD part is what I think is honestly most important part. The Mustang could look exactly like one of the older ones, but if it's FWD drive, it will be a totally different car.

I don't understand why a car has to look ancient to look good. I honestly think that the 2005 Mustang was a disaster, and it wasn't until the car gained some modern details that it began to look OK. Nothing is wrong with liking the current car of course, or even the original basic 2005 models, but it seems a bit silly to me that ditching retro is equated to killing the car. The car has only been retro for a few years, and IMO it's still not really bettering something like this

Saleen's fixing the front bumper of the previous generation pretty much removed any flaws it had.

Until you take a peek inside.

The original try at the retro stang was a disappointment, but this last MY they'ved fixed most of beef I had with the exterior. Even the interior is a lot better, but it's lipstick on a pig.

 

[homeforsummer]

That's something they need to get right actually. The interiors on any of the retro pony cars at the mo are far worse than the exteriors. None have the elegance of the originals, even though they copy some of the styling cues.

 

[TheCracker]

The car does not need to look like it came from 1960 to have Mustang styling cues. What about most other cars, that look different than their originals? Do they have no right to use their own name?

Not got a problem with Ford using the Mustang name on any US domestic car, because it's still relevant. What i have an issue with is if the next 'Mustang' is designed to be sold outside of North America, ie Europe, Japan etc, if it doesn't look like a traditional Mustang - the sort of car a non-petrol head equates to the name, than why call it a Mustang at all?

To a none car person outside of N America, this is a Mustang:


This could be a Daihatsu for all they know:

 

[Bottoz]

I'd take it... but I have a 2015 Mustang wish list. Lighter, Smaller, 3.5L TT ECOBOOST, IRS.

 

[sumbrownkid]

This could be a Daihatsu for all they know:

That car is an insult to Diahatsus.

 

[dsgerbc]

I think I'll just post this photochop here and hide.

 

[homeforsummer]

I think I'll just post this photochop here and hide.

Err, yeah. Neither one thing nor the other, that one.

However, you've got the gist. Something that looks vaguely like the Evos, but with recognisable Mustang cues, would be just right.

 

[shmogt]

The thing is its called mustang. It should be easy to identify as one. If it looks totally different than just cancel it and start a new line. I think they should just take the current version and lighten it up a bit. Everything is very chunky and block like while the original compared to other muscles cars wasn't. Another option is like someone else said try to retro a different design like the fast back. Or what I think would be the ultimate coolest is literally take the old design and just make it again with new technology and a couple design fixes to make it better. Selling cars that look almost identical to the original with updated parts would be a first and bring huge attention to Ford.

 

[TheCracker]

Or what I think would be the ultimate coolest is literally take the old design and just make it again with new technology and a couple design fixes to make it better. Selling cars that look almost identical to the original with updated parts would be a first and bring huge attention to Ford.

With aerodynamics/fuel economy, pedestrian safety regulations and crash tests all needing to feature on modern cars, i doubt an older Mustang shape would cut the mustard.

 

[CodeRedR51]

I'd take it... but I have a 2015 Mustang wish list. Lighter, Smaller, 3.5L TT ECOBOOST, IRS.

I think Ford has proven that they don't need IRS.

In any case, if they decide to go that route I think a IRS Option would be better for those who absolutely think they need it.

 

[Dennisch]

They can build a base that can fit a 4 cilinder, but also a V8.

I like the concept in the Op, but that shopped Mustang on the last page is just wrong. New style back end, retro front? Doesn't work.

 

[OHM_fusion]

I hope that rumor is true and they finally ditch the retro styling. Nothing is ever going to come close to the original Mustang's looks anyway, and slapping some retro details on a fat, bloated car like the current Mustang just doesn't work IMO. It looks like a caricature of itself. That concept posted in the OP is also hideous.

I would love if they look at the 99-04 styling (which looked aggressive yet modern) and evolve that design. But most will disagree so whatever.

 

[homeforsummer]

I think Ford has proven that they don't need IRS.

They may not need it, but it makes sense to go with it if starting from scratch. Particularly if they can parts-share with other vehicles to keep costs down.

Okay, here goes.

Disclaimer: I'm rubbish at photoshop (and this was a fairly quick, lazy attempt). But it's looking more Mustang-ish already:

 

[Slash]

If it's going to be called a Mustang, it better look like a Mustang, as in easily recognizable. I can live with that shopped front end ^^^ but the rear in both pics is horrible.

EDIT: Quick image search got these. Most don't look too bad.

[/IMG]

 

[E28]

The thing is its called mustang. It should be easy to identify as one. If it looks totally different than just cancel it and start a new line. I think they should just take the current version and lighten it up a bit. Everything is very chunky and block like while the original compared to other muscles cars wasn't.

And there's been no mustangs over the 48 or so years it's been in production that haven't 'looked like mustangs'? Also, why try to market what the public will see as an all-new model, when you can stick the mustang name on it and people will see it's the new mustang. There'll even be people who buy it because it's a mustang.

Another option is like someone else said try to retro a different design like the fast back. Or what I think would be the ultimate coolest is literally take the old design and just make it again with new technology and a couple design fixes to make it better. Selling cars that look almost identical to the original with updated parts would be a first and bring huge attention to Ford.

You can do that yourself. There are numerous companies (including Ford) selling brand new shells of early Mustangs, made using modern steel, but visually exactly the same.

 

[GTPorsche]

If it's going to be called a Mustang, it better look like a Mustang, as in easily recognizable. I can live with that shopped front end ^^^ but the rear in both pics is horrible.

EDIT: Quick image search got these. Most don't look too bad.

Now, why would someone photoshop a Holden Coupe into a Mustang?

 

[homeforsummer]

If it's going to be called a Mustang, it better look like a Mustang, as in easily recognizable. I can live with that shopped front end ^^^ but the rear in both pics is horrible.

Yeah, I'm not skilled enough to get rid of the big rear arches, which don't suit the Mustang look. Tried to give it a notchback look though.

As for those renders, I actually like the white Auto Express pic most, works quite well. Hint of retro perhaps but it's sufficiently different to the current model.

 

[CodeRedR51]

I'd be ok with that. ^^

 

[Slash]

I don't mind the front I just wish the back end would be a little different.

 

[RocZX]

EDIT: Quick image search got these. Most don't look too bad.

* pics of next mustang *
[]

Mostly all except one or two of those have a retro style to them and basically look like the current gen.

I'd be ok with that. ^^

👍

 

[hawkeye122]

I wouldnt mind the idea of a new Mistang so much if it didn't look like history repeating itself. What happened in the mid to late 70's? Gas got expensive, so they needed to make the cars more efficient. Thats when we start to get the garbage. Only in 2005 did they finally decide to make something "Cool" again. It's a cycle, I reckon. Look for the 2040 Mustang to be really freaking awesome.

 

[Zenith]

It wasn't just gas getting expensive that led to things like the Mustang II.

An oil embargo affects prices and the attitude towards oil much more greatly than prices rising a bit.

The Mustang II's terribleness is therefore attributed to the flood of Japanese economy cars Ford was trying to force the Mustang to compete with and the fact that the engineers were unable to squeeze a good car out of the new climate they were dealing with.

The conditions that led to the birth of the Mustang II were completely different than what Ford is doing with the car now.

 

[Slash]

I honestly think the Mustang II wasn't that bad. Great mpg too, up to 34mpg on a 4 cylinder.

 

[Zenith]

I honestly think the Mustang II wasn't that bad. Great mpg too, up to 34mpg on a 4 cylinder.

Nice! What did it get on the V8? Oh yeah that's right...

(Yes I know it came a year later and there was that thing with Mexico)

 

[Joey D]

I'm over retro styling on cars so I'd gladly like to see the Mustang move away from it. It would be a good way to buck the trend that is on the decline in favour of something else. The Evos looks great and those styling cues would really help make the Mustang a classier, American sports car. The generation that grew up with the Mustang is getting older, so they are probably starting to look for a car that is more refined and not just something that a teenage buys and puts a poorly fitted exhaust on.

Automotive companies can't keep producing the same thing over and over again, their products go stale and they end up in the same situation they did prior to the bailouts. Being the first one to buck the trend is risky, but Ford knows how important a well designed Mustang is. Plus if they really work at it, they could sell it on the world stage and have it be a contender elsewhere than just America.

I'm all for dropping the V8 too, it's just not necessary anymore, especially with the EcoBoost technology. Focus on making the Mustang a lighter vehicle and Ford will achieve greater performance without having to increase the engine size. The 3.5L V6 EcoBoost out of the F-150 is a good start. I know Ford wouldn't drop the V8 due to marketing reasons because for whatever reason people think that it's sacrilegious not to have a V8 in the Mustang (the horror!).

I'd say reserve the V8 engine for the GT500 model and use a heavily reworked EcoBoosted V6 for the GT and the standard 3.5L EcoBoost for the base model. Ford would end up with three rather potent cars that way and satisfy everyone at the same time. Add in lighter weight and a new chassis and it would be a serious contender in the sports car market.

Ford hasn't designed a bad looking vehicle this generation, so I can't foresee them making the Mustang look anything less than stellar. I guess I won't know till Detroit next year though since I'm going to guess it would be shown at the auto show here in 2013...barring the Mayans haven't killed us.

 

[shmogt]

With aerodynamics/fuel economy, pedestrian safety regulations and crash tests all needing to feature on modern cars, i doubt an older Mustang shape would cut the mustard.

That's why I said a couple of design changes. So it wouldn't be identical but super similar rather than retro looking

And there's been no mustangs over the 48 or so years it's been in production that haven't 'looked like mustangs'? Also, why try to market what the public will see as an all-new model, when you can stick the mustang name on it and people will see it's the new mustang. There'll even be people who buy it because it's a mustang.

You can do that yourself. There are numerous companies (including Ford) selling brand new shells of early Mustangs, made using modern steel, but visually exactly the same.

No that's what I'm saying virtually all the mustangs previously have looked like mustangs and you can tell what it is. If they are going for this new EVO look that looks so different they mine as well just kill the mustang name make a new brand. Call it something cool like Stallion so people know its a branch off.

I'm not saying identical just update so it matches all today's specs but looks super similar not 100% identical or new but retro.