What would you like to see or are disappointed about in the 2015?
07-06-2014, 01:44 PM
#101
Yes take a good look at it... Convergence factors aside. they are similar, but they are distinctly different. You can't fault two different camps for coming to the same conclusions on what works. But, clearly the hood, the ram scoop, the lower fascia and the air ducts ar not the same. The similarities are in the upper fascia and cleaarly even there...these are distinctly different. You can see for youself one is not like the other....different lights different dimensions and a different line. The horizontal on the lip of the hood and the upper bumper is more aggressive on the SALEEN. The lower Fascia is obviously more open and functional. The tuck of the front wheels under the fender is more purposeful and functional and the roofline has more of an arch to it.
To say they are the same only says you don't see the difference because you never liked the new look to begin with. Convergence only means they came to the same conclusions from very different paths leading to it. And for that you can give them a pat on the back. Because when there is only one right answer the hard part becomes how to make it different no matter how subtle that may be.
So....no.... I don't see a Camaro when I look at the SALEEN. I see A MUSTANG that has addressed aerodynamics and styling in a manner that is unique to SALEEN and along the same trajectory as the Camaro camp.
Just Saying
---
To say they are the same only says you don't see the difference because you never liked the new look to begin with. Convergence only means they came to the same conclusions from very different paths leading to it. And for that you can give them a pat on the back. Because when there is only one right answer the hard part becomes how to make it different no matter how subtle that may be.
So....no.... I don't see a Camaro when I look at the SALEEN. I see A MUSTANG that has addressed aerodynamics and styling in a manner that is unique to SALEEN and along the same trajectory as the Camaro camp.
Just Saying
---
FoMoCo was not idle when they saw what Chevy did with the 5th Gen SS-1LE, ZL1, and Z/28 handling.
Ford took note and studied what made such a heavy beast handle so well.
The result is the S550 becoming lower and wider; so much more wider that many Mustang fans now accuse the S550 rear quarter panels of having "Camaro shoulders." The S550 also mounts IRS, which the 5th Gen Camaro also has.
But all of these are a direct result of performance convergence: if it works so well for one set of cars, the other makers will also do it to remain in competition.
I see this as a positive: The S550 GT Performance Package now outperforms the S197 Bosses.
For the Saleen front end, I for one will definitely buy that it and replace that ugly Aston Martin grille. For me, Evos should have never ever been put into the Mustang. I know Ford is scrapping the S197 and other retro looks, but their body designers could have done so much more better than trying to merge Evos in Mustang.
I can live with the Camaro look from the Saleen kit. Many think Camaros are ugly, but to me, the Evos grille is 10X uglier.
07-06-2014, 01:56 PM
#102
Yes take a good look at it... Convergence factors aside. they are similar, but they are distinctly different. You can't fault two different camps for coming to the same conclusions on what works. But, clearly the hood, the ram scoop, the lower fascia and the air ducts ar not the same. The similarities are in the upper fascia and cleaarly even there...these are distinctly different. You can see for youself one is not like the other....different lights different dimensions and a different line. The horizontal on the lip of the hood and the upper bumper is more aggressive on the SALEEN. The lower Fascia is obviously more open and functional. The tuck of the front wheels under the fender is more purposeful and functional and the roofline has more of an arch to it.
To say they are the same only says you don't see the difference because you never liked the new look to begin with. Convergence only means they came to the same conclusions from very different paths leading to it. And for that you can give them a pat on the back. Because when there is only one right answer the hard part becomes how to make it different no matter how subtle that may be.
So....no.... I don't see a Camaro when I look at the SALEEN. I see A MUSTANG that has addressed aerodynamics and styling in a manner that is unique to SALEEN and along the same trajectory as the Camaro camp.
Just Saying
---
To say they are the same only says you don't see the difference because you never liked the new look to begin with. Convergence only means they came to the same conclusions from very different paths leading to it. And for that you can give them a pat on the back. Because when there is only one right answer the hard part becomes how to make it different no matter how subtle that may be.
So....no.... I don't see a Camaro when I look at the SALEEN. I see A MUSTANG that has addressed aerodynamics and styling in a manner that is unique to SALEEN and along the same trajectory as the Camaro camp.
Just Saying
---
07-06-2014, 05:36 PM
#103
S197 Section Modder-ator
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Orlando FL
Posts: 13,373
07-06-2014, 08:02 PM
#104
http://wot.motortrend.com/vanquished...eft-side-blue/
The only problem from the side profile of both the Vanquish and the S550 is how much more "bulk" both cars have put on the nose because of the mandated EU pedestrian crash "void" between the top of the engine and the hood.
But as you start to see any glimpse of the front end of either car, both of their silly big grinning grilles turn me off really quick.
I'm glad Saleen made an attempt to offer a different look for the S550 front end; nice try on their part but too bad it does look too similar to 5th Gen Camaros. But at least it's now an aftermarket option to the stock Ford Evos front end.
I won't buy the 2015 S550; I'll sit back and wait for the bugs to be squashed and for the aftermarket industry design and develop upgrades and good mods. Hopefully by 2016, the S550 will have a good choice of aftermarket mods; including more front end mod kits from others like Steeda, Cervinni, etc.
Or in the spirit of this thread, I hope Ford will offer as a factory stock option of a different S550 front end look that has a whole lot less Evos in it.
Sure the S550 Cobra (or GT350, or GT500 or whatever the top trim will be called) will have a restyled front end, but they will still retain too much Evos for my taste.
Last edited by JIM5.0; 07-06-2014 at 08:08 PM.
07-07-2014, 09:32 AM
#105
Jim 5.0..... if that's how you see it you're entitled to that opinion. But don't speak as if you know what the majority perspective is. In fact if what you say is true for you to distinguish them apart then you're seriously cross eyed or legally blind. Take the following...
You see convergence taking place in the design of the side aerodynamics and how it integrates into the door and rear quarters.... Obviously form following function applies Therefore convergence in engineering comes to the same conclusion and therefore the design execution is similar...
As for the front fascia. The way the teardrop headlights on the Astin flow up into the fenders along side the hood lines...is definitely not how Ford addressed their execution of the front headlight. The front upper Grill treatment is similar in location which can be attributed to convergence, but the treatment itself is not the same, unless you're seeing a honeycomb pattern and find it the same as a horizontal pattern or you're suffering from astigmatism. Not to mention the dimension of the opening curvature is not the same. Also the lower fascia has a similar way of directing airflow on the outer edges below the headlights...but the way things are treated in between are different. An open inlet as opposed to a grilled inlet and the side splitters have a lighting treatment on the Mustang. As well as the front splitter on the Astin is a separate application that is blacked out as oppsed to the one on the Mustang which looks more like an extension of the upper bumper.
Then there's the hood itself.... The curvature and the heat extractors are definitely similar and also due to convergence in practical design and engineering. Its just makes sense for aerodynamic reasons and functional purpose that the hoods should be this way. But the location of the extractors are not the same, possibly due to the fact that they are more efficient in each application where they are placed and the hood lines are similar in form but the pronounced ridge line on the Mustang sets it apart. Then again these attributes are similar across many different models and makes of sport coupes and sedans.
It can be seen that the current crop of complainers are simply experiencing the same thing the Fox Body fans did when the body style changed. They didn't like it since they were already too familiar with what they already fell in love with. Unfortunately if we all drove the decision for Ford to remain on the Fox body imagine how much our cars would suck today trying to engineer components and technology to fit that constraining form rather than designing the form of a car to fit the function of all the unconstrained components.
The s550 is a brilliant step forward. It's form is functional. Its design is forward thinking and its looks are sleek and modern with a definite hat tip to its Pony Car roots and plenty of power to remind us that its also a Muscle Car that can also zig and zag unlike any Mustang ever before it.
Boom
---
You see convergence taking place in the design of the side aerodynamics and how it integrates into the door and rear quarters.... Obviously form following function applies Therefore convergence in engineering comes to the same conclusion and therefore the design execution is similar...
As for the front fascia. The way the teardrop headlights on the Astin flow up into the fenders along side the hood lines...is definitely not how Ford addressed their execution of the front headlight. The front upper Grill treatment is similar in location which can be attributed to convergence, but the treatment itself is not the same, unless you're seeing a honeycomb pattern and find it the same as a horizontal pattern or you're suffering from astigmatism. Not to mention the dimension of the opening curvature is not the same. Also the lower fascia has a similar way of directing airflow on the outer edges below the headlights...but the way things are treated in between are different. An open inlet as opposed to a grilled inlet and the side splitters have a lighting treatment on the Mustang. As well as the front splitter on the Astin is a separate application that is blacked out as oppsed to the one on the Mustang which looks more like an extension of the upper bumper.
Then there's the hood itself.... The curvature and the heat extractors are definitely similar and also due to convergence in practical design and engineering. Its just makes sense for aerodynamic reasons and functional purpose that the hoods should be this way. But the location of the extractors are not the same, possibly due to the fact that they are more efficient in each application where they are placed and the hood lines are similar in form but the pronounced ridge line on the Mustang sets it apart. Then again these attributes are similar across many different models and makes of sport coupes and sedans.
It can be seen that the current crop of complainers are simply experiencing the same thing the Fox Body fans did when the body style changed. They didn't like it since they were already too familiar with what they already fell in love with. Unfortunately if we all drove the decision for Ford to remain on the Fox body imagine how much our cars would suck today trying to engineer components and technology to fit that constraining form rather than designing the form of a car to fit the function of all the unconstrained components.
The s550 is a brilliant step forward. It's form is functional. Its design is forward thinking and its looks are sleek and modern with a definite hat tip to its Pony Car roots and plenty of power to remind us that its also a Muscle Car that can also zig and zag unlike any Mustang ever before it.
Boom
---
07-07-2014, 10:40 AM
#106
lol, I said they look similar and that it looks a lot like a Camaro, not that they are the same, kind of like how the s550 looks a lot like the Fusion but still not the same. If you just want to chalk it up to me being 'butthurt' by stating I never liked the new look to begin with (which isn't accurate) then so be it but its a pretty crappy way to carry a discussion with someone.
;-)
---
07-07-2014, 06:25 PM
#107
S197 Section Modder-ator
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Orlando FL
Posts: 13,373
........Or in the spirit of this thread, I hope Ford will offer as a factory stock option of a different S550 front end look that has a whole lot less Evos in it.
Sure the S550 Cobra (or GT350, or GT500 or whatever the top trim will be called) will have a restyled front end, but they will still retain too much Evos for my taste.
Then again, one combo (maybe Saleen) is all you need...
07-07-2014, 09:55 PM
#108
Jim....
I preferred the s197 prior to 2013-14. At least there was an actual attempt to distinguish the different models from each other with the front fascia.
From 2013 up it became more of an effort to make all the model options look like a GT500. With nothing really significant to identify each trim level. The shark bite hog nose became the norm and people loved it only because it looked similar to a GT 500 no matter what model you bought. Making a tribute GT500 look alike was now very little effort ... Where as before it was a major cosmetic overhaul to accomplish that. It made the dream of owning something like the renowned Shelby...more attainable. Where ford should have continued to make each model more pronounced in their differences.
Just saying.
---
I preferred the s197 prior to 2013-14. At least there was an actual attempt to distinguish the different models from each other with the front fascia.
From 2013 up it became more of an effort to make all the model options look like a GT500. With nothing really significant to identify each trim level. The shark bite hog nose became the norm and people loved it only because it looked similar to a GT 500 no matter what model you bought. Making a tribute GT500 look alike was now very little effort ... Where as before it was a major cosmetic overhaul to accomplish that. It made the dream of owning something like the renowned Shelby...more attainable. Where ford should have continued to make each model more pronounced in their differences.
Just saying.
---
07-08-2014, 02:05 PM
#109
Jim 5.0..... if that's how you see it you're entitled to that opinion. But don't speak as if you know what the majority perspective is. In fact if what you say is true for you to distinguish them apart then you're seriously cross eyed or legally blind. Take the following...
You see convergence taking place in the design of the side aerodynamics and how it integrates into the door and rear quarters.... Obviously form following function applies Therefore convergence in engineering comes to the same conclusion and therefore the design execution is similar...
As for the front fascia. The way the teardrop headlights on the Astin flow up into the fenders along side the hood lines...is definitely not how Ford addressed their execution of the front headlight. The front upper Grill treatment is similar in location which can be attributed to convergence, but the treatment itself is not the same, unless you're seeing a honeycomb pattern and find it the same as a horizontal pattern or you're suffering from astigmatism. Not to mention the dimension of the opening curvature is not the same. Also the lower fascia has a similar way of directing airflow on the outer edges below the headlights...but the way things are treated in between are different. An open inlet as opposed to a grilled inlet and the side splitters have a lighting treatment on the Mustang. As well as the front splitter on the Astin is a separate application that is blacked out as oppsed to the one on the Mustang which looks more like an extension of the upper bumper.
Then there's the hood itself.... The curvature and the heat extractors are definitely similar and also due to convergence in practical design and engineering. Its just makes sense for aerodynamic reasons and functional purpose that the hoods should be this way. But the location of the extractors are not the same, possibly due to the fact that they are more efficient in each application where they are placed and the hood lines are similar in form but the pronounced ridge line on the Mustang sets it apart. Then again these attributes are similar across many different models and makes of sport coupes and sedans.
It can be seen that the current crop of complainers are simply experiencing the same thing the Fox Body fans did when the body style changed. They didn't like it since they were already too familiar with what they already fell in love with. Unfortunately if we all drove the decision for Ford to remain on the Fox body imagine how much our cars would suck today trying to engineer components and technology to fit that constraining form rather than designing the form of a car to fit the function of all the unconstrained components.
The s550 is a brilliant step forward. It's form is functional. Its design is forward thinking and its looks are sleek and modern with a definite hat tip to its Pony Car roots and plenty of power to remind us that its also a Muscle Car that can also zig and zag unlike any Mustang ever before it.
Boom
---
You see convergence taking place in the design of the side aerodynamics and how it integrates into the door and rear quarters.... Obviously form following function applies Therefore convergence in engineering comes to the same conclusion and therefore the design execution is similar...
As for the front fascia. The way the teardrop headlights on the Astin flow up into the fenders along side the hood lines...is definitely not how Ford addressed their execution of the front headlight. The front upper Grill treatment is similar in location which can be attributed to convergence, but the treatment itself is not the same, unless you're seeing a honeycomb pattern and find it the same as a horizontal pattern or you're suffering from astigmatism. Not to mention the dimension of the opening curvature is not the same. Also the lower fascia has a similar way of directing airflow on the outer edges below the headlights...but the way things are treated in between are different. An open inlet as opposed to a grilled inlet and the side splitters have a lighting treatment on the Mustang. As well as the front splitter on the Astin is a separate application that is blacked out as oppsed to the one on the Mustang which looks more like an extension of the upper bumper.
Then there's the hood itself.... The curvature and the heat extractors are definitely similar and also due to convergence in practical design and engineering. Its just makes sense for aerodynamic reasons and functional purpose that the hoods should be this way. But the location of the extractors are not the same, possibly due to the fact that they are more efficient in each application where they are placed and the hood lines are similar in form but the pronounced ridge line on the Mustang sets it apart. Then again these attributes are similar across many different models and makes of sport coupes and sedans.
It can be seen that the current crop of complainers are simply experiencing the same thing the Fox Body fans did when the body style changed. They didn't like it since they were already too familiar with what they already fell in love with. Unfortunately if we all drove the decision for Ford to remain on the Fox body imagine how much our cars would suck today trying to engineer components and technology to fit that constraining form rather than designing the form of a car to fit the function of all the unconstrained components.
The s550 is a brilliant step forward. It's form is functional. Its design is forward thinking and its looks are sleek and modern with a definite hat tip to its Pony Car roots and plenty of power to remind us that its also a Muscle Car that can also zig and zag unlike any Mustang ever before it.
Boom
---
What I mean is you are completely disregarding how much more massively similar the two cars look to each other and only focusing on the fine details the most people would not even notice (save for the few who actually know anything about cars).
To me, I just think you are focusing way too much on the specific details that you became completely blind to just how similar each car is to each other.
Sure, the Vanquish grille is not exactly the same shape as the S550, but they are still wide and somewhat tall. You're right the dimensions of each opening are different, but you cannot know that until you are really close enough to see the difference and the exact shape differences of each.
Sure, the lower fascia of each functions differently because they are different cars, but unless you are paying attention, you will not even notice that the two lower fascias even look different.
And sure the Vanquish has teardrop headlamps that are more rotated up and towards the hood, but they are still long and thin like the S550 headlamps.
To me, the difference in the hood extractors of both cars are completely irrelevant as to the overall appearance and shape of the total car. Again, you would not even notice the two have completely different extractors because the hood shapes and front quarter panel shapes are so similar.
My point is look at both the S550 and Vanquish pictures again and now focus on the similarities and not on all the details.
Look at them with only a glance without time to pick out specifics such as headlamp shapes, hood extractors, the exact different shapes of the grilles, etc.
The overall total cars look more alike than unlike. Only upon picking out details will you be able to realize that they are not the same car.
The same goes for the Saleen S550 front end kit and the 5th Gen Camaro ZL1. There are way more similarities than differences. As a matter of fact, you really have to be looking very close to even see the differences of the Saleen kit and ZL1 front end.
Sure, this might be attributed to convergence, but you cannot deny that the S550 and Vanquish look more similar to each other than not, even with all the details you mentioned.
The S550 is targeted for Europe so the EU pedestrian protection features are in both Vanquish and S550 - Convergence of both technologies which also greatly affect front end shape. Convergence due to legislation and regulation.
The S550 is going IRS, just like Camaros and Challengers have already done - Convergence due to performance goals.
The S550 is 70mm wider, and thus has "Camaro shoulders" on the rear quarter panels to house the wider track width - Convergence again due to performance goals.
The Mustangs have a long time ago gone to OHC, and now DOHC TiVCT due to a combination of performance and emphasis on better fuel economy and emissions - Convergence due to performance, regulatory, and legislative constraints.
I am not saying the S550 is a heavy sloth that handles like a pig, drinks gas like an inefficient hog, and is a traitor for eliminating live axle. I love what Ford has done and all these features they packed into it; especially the performance goal of the S550 GT Performance Package beating S197 Bosses on the track.
I just dislike the cosmetic package: the looks of the front end.
On the note of being accused as a complainer just because FoMoCo is changing the Mustang style again, I'm not. Please don't associate me with someone who dislikes change. I love change, only if it is for the better.
I am a complainer this time around because to me, in my opinion, and because it is my dislike, I just don't like the Evos at all. If the Mustang were restyled differently without any Evos influence in it, I would really love the S550 a whole lot more.
I said it before, I know Ford has awesome body designers and I know they could have done so much better even though retro is out of the question. I just wanted to see a much better looking brand new Mustang style than Mustang that decided to converge too much with a Vanquish and other Aston Martins.
Moreover, don't attribute me as a fair weather fan nor as someone who would ditch Mustang when times are low; I still love Mustangs, even when the Fox bodies were around.
To me, Foxes were unpleasant to look at, only the Mustang II being uglier in my eye.
Very ironically, it was Foxes that made me fall in love with Mustangs and research everything I could about Mustangs. Even the Mustang II became endearing to me even though I considered it a stab in the back of the 64-72 classic 'Stangs.
And sooner or later, I will purchase a S550, even though I hate the Evos. The Evos in the S550 might not be as ugly to me in the future, but unfortunately, I know I will never accept the Evos looks.
Last edited by JIM5.0; 07-08-2014 at 02:40 PM.
07-08-2014, 04:02 PM
#110
Hard to sell me on a hood that goes all the way to the Grill Vs a Hood that stops before a clearly define front fascia as being the same. The subtle curves Vs the hard lines swapped between each visually. If the pinnacle of aerodynamic design clearly led to the same conclusion in the shape then its the subtle execution of all the parts that need to be looked at. To say they are similar is correct, But, then when you minimize all cars to the basics they suddenly all have much that is similar.
The side aero details are also found on the M4, and the Corvette and many many other modern sports oriented sedans and coupes. The snorkel styled front gaping grill is also common across many other manufacturers. The similarities are endless, which still only point to convergence in design and thinking. If all the right answers eventually lead everyone to the same conclusions then its the minor details that will eventually be the definition of what is different between them or how they execute the underpinnings and everything else under the visual cladding.
Its just as easy to say the Vanquish looks like an FRS. Or the Mustang looks like a Jaguar. Or an AMG looks like a Mustang. Or a BMW looks like all of them. Convergence does that.
You could do a side by side comparison between the current 2014's and the incoming 2015's and find similarities. ...
And
Then understand that the EVOlutions taken under consideration between the two actually makes sense for the named EVOS look. Much like Cab Forward was the factor for Dodge at one point....then everyone else caught on.
If you look for just the similarities the only thing that is blarring at anyone with an untrained or trained eye is they are similar in the streamlining which provides a similar silhouette. That does not define what each form is following beneath it. And more often that is where the main difference will be in current modern and future cars.
Just saying
---
The side aero details are also found on the M4, and the Corvette and many many other modern sports oriented sedans and coupes. The snorkel styled front gaping grill is also common across many other manufacturers. The similarities are endless, which still only point to convergence in design and thinking. If all the right answers eventually lead everyone to the same conclusions then its the minor details that will eventually be the definition of what is different between them or how they execute the underpinnings and everything else under the visual cladding.
Its just as easy to say the Vanquish looks like an FRS. Or the Mustang looks like a Jaguar. Or an AMG looks like a Mustang. Or a BMW looks like all of them. Convergence does that.
You could do a side by side comparison between the current 2014's and the incoming 2015's and find similarities. ...
And
Then understand that the EVOlutions taken under consideration between the two actually makes sense for the named EVOS look. Much like Cab Forward was the factor for Dodge at one point....then everyone else caught on.
If you look for just the similarities the only thing that is blarring at anyone with an untrained or trained eye is they are similar in the streamlining which provides a similar silhouette. That does not define what each form is following beneath it. And more often that is where the main difference will be in current modern and future cars.
Just saying
---