Jump to content
Model Cars Magazine Forum

2015 Mustang link


Recommended Posts

I suspect I'm completely alone in this but; I wish Ford would go back to the original 1964 concept and start again from there. It was a simple, light, fun car that appealed to both sexes - not the bloated, steroidal virility statement that it has since become.

You want a tin foil secretary's car that won't steer on anything other than hard, dry pavement?

One of my uncles had ine back in the day, it was garbage the way Dad tells it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You want a tin foil secretary's car that won't steer on anything other than hard, dry pavement?

One of my uncles had ine back in the day, it was garbage the way Dad tells it.

Around 1970 a friend of mine bought a 65 Mustang and, although I never actually drove it, I don't remember him having problems getting around corners and the body seemed to be made of sheet metal.

If anyone has one of these and thinks it's garbage, or is afraid they might be mistaken for a secretary, just dump it in my driveway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As an owner of both a '67 hardtop and an '11 GT who's, y'know, actually familiar with both, I'll take your steroidal, bloated M3-baiting statement as a daily driver any day of the week. There's simply no dynamic comparison between the two.

However, the old girl's been in the family since new and she is an aching beauty. So as sweet and politely stated as your observations are, she's not getting dumped with anybody. B)

The new car is supposed to drop some 150 kg, btw...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Peter, nobody's saying you're not entitled to your opinion. And insofar as your comment applies to the car's mass, your point is undeniable. Ford has wrought some genuine magic in the latest car with its 1650 kg and stick axle to make it the relative F-16 among the American pony car three (far and away the best driver of the four real Mustangs and Camaro I've owned, and I'll just leave the sad-sack Mustang II I was banished to as a teenager out of this), but that job would doubtless have been easier and more effective with less weight thrown about.

Looking at the car in a historical context, however, Road and Track had a reaction fairly typical of the day's motoring press at the Mustang's introduction. And they've gone from saying of the original car back in 1965,"...the present suspension is not suitable for any strenuous driving and the brakes are wholly inadequate for anything more serious than normal street use", to offering the current 300hp, 30mpg V6 car with handling package as a viable alternative to the "Toyota 86 or used Porsche Boxter" question. So the current car is far more capable and really not a whole lot more complex in this era than the original car was in 1965.

Edited by Chuck Kourouklis
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

From what I've heard is that official photos will be released in the Nov/Dec time frame, so the Jan car mags can have them and the car shows will be scooped...it will be interesting to see if the on-sale date is April 17th, 2014 (50th anniversary). Looking forward to seeing it in person eventually.

Edited by Rob Hall
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Well that's what is going to be in Autoweek next week and the car is official as of tomorrow. So, I would say the Autoweek cover is the actual Mustang. Here's more pictures of the car.

http://www.autoblog.com/photos/2015-ford-mustang-autoweek-leak/

I hope the car has the performance and comfort. But, if based on looks alone, I think the new 'Stang is a big FAIL. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suspect I'm completely alone in this but; I wish Ford would go back to the original 1964 concept and start again from there. It was a simple, light, fun car that appealed to both sexes - not the bloated, steroidal virility statement that it has since become.

Not a bad idea Peter...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...