2024 Ford Mustang

My first choice is analog gauges and a 6spd manual. Optionally you can delete the A.C.

This is the best you are going to get. Only other option is to buy a 2,000 mile 2014/15 used Z/28.

 

I know no other options. The mustang though why f it up, just lazy and stupid corporate *****.

 

Too big to make the small changes.

 

.

 

with Pirelli Trofeo RS tires, available optionally as part of the Handling package ($4995) and sized 305/30 up front and 315/30 at the rear.

BIG sticky meats for 'best' driving/track reviews.

https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a44675712/2024-ford-mustang-dark-horse-drive/
.

 

why doesnt anyone ever compare top mustangs to bmw m cars? they look alike, have similar stats, and should be as good a comparison as the typical porsche v vette tests they put together all the time. a loaded mustang might even be as expensive as some of the m cars now.

 

Bloaty and heavy with gimicks,
conclusion its Ok, not necessarily an advance on the mach1.

 

As usual these guys do a great review. Skip to the 20 min mark if you want the driving part. Bottom line, its $70k and 4000lbs with gas.

 

https://www.evo.co.uk/ford/mustang/206043/ford-mustang-dark-horse-2024-review

 

that dash still hurts my eyes

 

I don't mind the screens, but you'd think they could incorporate them with some sort of style... What is actually worse to me is the ridiculous fake carbon fiber looking trim they're using. It looks especially awful around the shifter and on the steering wheel. Just about any other material there would've been preferable. Why couldn't they use the dark metal looking stuff like the GT350 used? That stuff was much better looking.

 

Probably too distracted trying to get the rear bumper to be properly aligned with the rest of the body. The last "good" mustang I owned was a '14 GT500. My '16 GT350 and '21 GT500 were pretty down the scale for fit and finish. Ford really seems to be too distracted from creating an actual sellable product. Mach E anyone?

 

I guess they’re soon to be the only game in town.
Agree with others, why do the screens have to be so cheesy and a carbuncle . In all fairness it’s much better than te horrendous dash of the m2.

it will be interesting to see where those screens achieve their stated purpose, attracting younger buyers.

Probably any muscle car buyer regardless of age is attracted to oter attributes and will tolerate the screens.

 

Ford Quality is a visible issue, not good.
Fundamentally the volume of mustang sales seems to be turbo 4 cars and renatl companies, so its cheap, the Dark Horse is not cheap though.
To paraphrase a ferrari quote from decades ago, A great motor with the rest thrown in for free.

 

During the winter, I would like to buy a 14/15 no-air Queen Z/28 with 2,500 miles.

Some time during the next few years.



Will also keep an eye out for the Dark Horse updates. The D.H. also might be an option.

 

With Ferrari it's "You buy a Ferrari for the engine, and they throw in the rest of the car for free"

With a Ford (at least the Dark Horse) it's more like "You buy the Dark Horse for the engine, and put up with the rest of the car."

 

Good luck on the Z/28. The low mile, non-disturbed bring some pretty good coin. Watch Autotrader as there are always a few there.

 

He led out the 24 stands and dark horse

maybe for low 50s the gt has some thing going.

the dark horse at +-75k is a joke. The build quality is really pretty crappy by modern standards. The interior bits are good in some parts any horrendously cheap in others. At least the decals on the hood can be pulled off.

if anything it reminds me of a late 70s chicken bird.

imo the Mack 1 looks better and is a more honest ca.

for 10k less you can buy a well built well appointed bmw m2 that’s also notionally faster .they both have screen dashes so neither tilts the balance on that.

nit then the mustang is the last muscle car left and you get that charismatic motor. for 50k a gt makes sense for 75k a dark horse seems stupid and frankly a. Regular gt looks more classy.

decade was asking 20k over list for a dark horse. The also add on window etching and 2k worth of crap like wheel locks, on principle I would t do buisness witha. Dealership that predicates sales on the customer being so stupid

 

I like the looks of the Dark Horse handling pack cars--except for the racoon eyes, which look ridiculous to me. I agree that the M2 is likely a better car in every way, but it's missing the V8 soundtrack that the Mustang has. Prices on these cars seem to have exploded in recent years, but that is also the case with a lot of things. Regardless, a 70K Mustang that performs nominally better than a 50K GT seems absurd to me as well. Throw wider wheels and Trofeo RS tires on a regular GT and it's going to feel like the exact same car as the Dark Horse.

Ford talked a lot about the material quality for the interior, but I can't get over that horrid looking fake carbon fiber trim. It has no place in a 50K+ car, IMO. I also think the inerior is let down by the overall design. Throwing a giant screen (or two) on top of the dashboard and calling it a day is not good design. The screens are poorly implemented. I also think it's just missing some overall style, if you will. The S550 had the toggle switches and a nice looking overall design in premium trim cars. The interior of the S650 just looks lazy to me.

 

It is truly awful. Too bad as I like the car otherwise.

I would rather have a "gauge delete" option and have none whatsoever.

Having no idea what my speed, rpm or fuel level is would be like a warm hug compared to having to see those tablets tacked on to the dash.