Heres one of the things I find most funny about automotive design. Some designer(s) spend a long time on an original design. Get everything balanced and in harmony. Then when they decide to do a facelift they screw it all up. Those tailights are hideous. The current ones work well with the shape. There is no reason to change them unless you improve them. But designers (and trust me I know since I am one) always feel this urge to tweak stuff that DOESNT need tweaking. My favorite example is the 'Predator' from the film of the same name. The original deisng , created in 1986 was perfect. Flawless. In every sequel since they have felt the need to screw it it and it has never looked as good as it did in the first film. Designers are funny creatures...
The new camaro looks great on the road. I work just up the street from the GM Tech center so I have been seeing them just about every day for the past 2 weeks on my way home from work.
I'm not a big fan of most convertibles... that said, I think the new Mustang looks how the Nissan GTR should have looked. Nice spotting James
+1 I'm clueless as to the idea of changing the taillights so dramatically. The car is still retro in styling so keep the rear similar. Still not a fan of the new 'stangs.
I own an 07 GT, and prefer my rear end to the new rear end.... yes, I realize how that sounds. I'm not sure if I like the new front end more than mine, but I do like it a lot. I am in love with the new GT500s though. They did an excellent job on that car. Just wish it had Independent Rear Suspension. Yes, they are cutting costs, but when you are selling a car for that price; what's another $3/4k?
I owned an 88 GT convrt right out of HS.... fun/fast/mass produced/etc car. Overall (IMO) Ford has always missed the mark with the mustang. First years were too feminine...Shelby rocked it in late 60's w/ the GT 350/500/etc, but he was and aftermarket tuner (which meant Ford Motor Co left a lot on the company design table). The Boss years from 69-72 (ish) were pretty cool, and those cars stand the test of time. But overall (from 1964-1/2'-present) the Mustang desgin dept rates a C- IMO.
Here's my 05' Mustang GT rear/ tail lights below. Nothing was ever wrong with them... why make them so out of proportion with the model and add massive amounts of unpainted plastic around the body of the car? Why?
I have to disagree. Ford has generally always hit the mark with the Mustang. The first gen cars are continually spotted on great design/most significant lists and were a huge success. The more aggresive Shelby versions are, of course, legendary. The Boss. Mach, Shelby, second gen designs do stand the test of time(agree there)-with guys like Shinoda involved, how could they not? The Mustang 2(mid-late 70s), were a performance and image disaster, although they sold pretty well. The '82 GT(with the famous ad campaign-The Boss is Back!), led the way out of the darkness and a return to real performance. They also intro'd the 5.0 and in their various versions spawned an assault on race tracks across the country. Their square shouldered, no BS design, provided a nearly unmatched platform with which to build monstrous performance. The softened later years and the initially unloved 4.6 were a step back, but still a sales success. Sprinkled in amongst the garden variety models, were a number of special editions like the Cobra, The R, the Bullitt-these garnered positive press and expanded the brand. Some were quite attractive. The first "retro" redesign was a smash hit-visually and economically, again with special editions and the re-emergence of the Shelby brand. Lets not forget, in addition to the many Shelbys, the multitude of factory "unofficially blessed" specials like Saleens, Rouche's, Steeda's, Parnelli's, Gurney's, more Bullitts, etc,etc,etc. The new design has been welcomed by the automotive press with its greatly improved handling and upgraded interior. I, too, am not a huge fan of the back view(probably the least satisfying angle of the car), but, overall, its very nice and returns pretty decent numbers at its usual great pricing. The Mustang is, and continues to be, an American legend and I, for one, wish it continued success.
I had on 07 GT500 Conv. You are so right on that the lack of Independent Rear Suspension diminishes the car. I put a lot of money into mine to beef up the suspension. Galpin Ford did the works to that beast, but it just never could keep that rear planted at the wrong times. I got sick of wrestling it and sold it.
What suspension did you go with? The reason these cars don't have IRS is because a live axle rear end is geared towards drag racing. This is why 03/04 Cobra owners *****ed about the IRS and and often replaced it with the live axle... I'm curious what suspension you used? I know some real garbage out there and I know some that will make it handle like a Porsche - www.griggsracing.com - I wouldn't put anything else on my Shelby.
The best performing modern muscle car on the road today is the GT500. and 2010 is looking sweet..... Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login
I guess you haven't seen new Camaro road tests? The Camaro handles better, rides better, gets better mpg's and has IRS.
Yes but it will get destroyed in a drag race by the Shelby and that's where the competition is for these cars. Actually on second thought i've read numerous Camaro road tests ( I get about 13 different car magazines a month) and I don't ever remember a detailed GT500/SS comparison. And how could I when it's taken GM way too long to get this car out and here Ford is already on their second edition of the S197. Would love to see a good shootout between the SS and the GT500...
Check out the 2010 Shelby GT500 (Convertible), it's really nice! Because they wanted to put stripes on the shifter you'll notice they had to use a billiard ball, they actually are having the shifters made by a billiard company. -Ray Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login
The upcoming Z28 or the dealer installed blower kit would be the GT500 comparo though, the SS is in the GT segment. Remember the GT500 costs like 8-10K more then a similar optioned SS.
From Inside Line: "Quarter-mile performance is totally awesome as well, as the GT500 makes its best pass in 12.4 seconds at 114.7 mph. That's not only a useful margin over the '07 car with its 500-hp powertrain, which did the deed in 12.8 seconds at 112.6 mph, but it also makes the Chevrolet Camaro and Dodge Challenger look like weak-ass sissies. The Camaro turned the quarter in 13.0 seconds at 110.9 mph and the Challenger did 13.9 seconds at 103.2 mph. The Challenger SRT8 does it in 13.2 seconds at 107.5 mph. We might have gone even quicker and faster in the Shelby GT, except for the 14-mph headwind we faced at this track close to San Francisco Bay." Read the rest here: http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/Followup/articleId=145566
What's nice also about the GT500 is if you spend another 900 bucks on an intake and lower pulley, you bring it up to 600hp. (The 2010 GT500 achieved a 40hp upgrade with just the addition of an intake). The car is untapped off the factory line and with the forged bottom end you're safe up over 800 hp. Agreed that the Z28 would be some good competition, this will get nasty.
