2015 engine info by Automobile
04-26-2013, 09:11 AM
#31
2nd Gear Member
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Texas
Posts: 228
Yes, the Fire Chicken and TransAm! forgot about Pontiac..
And that was a good point about the imports!
My point was simple, there weren't any overwhelming choices of cars, thus not a lot of competition and sales were ok. Make the Mustang an international car, and we will see how it attracts buyers. The Camaro is going to go to a smaller higher performance chassis and the Challenger is working on better performing models.
Mustang seems to be opting out of the pony car challenge, not unlike the 70's while the Camaro stayed strong, even with a 350 ci. Just seems like history is repeating.
When I turned 16 in 1988... did I want a new Mustang or Camaro?.. nope, I wanted a 1970 Fastback. In 2029 when my kids turn 18 will they want a turbo 4 banger in an internationalized Mustang.. no, they'll want my 2009 V8.
And that was a good point about the imports!
My point was simple, there weren't any overwhelming choices of cars, thus not a lot of competition and sales were ok. Make the Mustang an international car, and we will see how it attracts buyers. The Camaro is going to go to a smaller higher performance chassis and the Challenger is working on better performing models.
Mustang seems to be opting out of the pony car challenge, not unlike the 70's while the Camaro stayed strong, even with a 350 ci. Just seems like history is repeating.
When I turned 16 in 1988... did I want a new Mustang or Camaro?.. nope, I wanted a 1970 Fastback. In 2029 when my kids turn 18 will they want a turbo 4 banger in an internationalized Mustang.. no, they'll want my 2009 V8.
I think history might be repeating itself here a little bit too. Ford might be quite about the 2015 Mustang because maybe they're still feeling out the mustang crowd? Remember the Ford Phrobe? That was supposed to be the new Mustang until Ford got hounded to death by a massive letter writing campaign from very angry Mustang fans.
And i was 19 in '88. I didnt want a new '88 GT either, I was in love with my neighbors '71 mach 1. It wouldnt surprise me a bit if the 2012 V6 manual 6 spd I drive now would be very desirable 20 yrs from now. Dont nobody laugh at that statement. How many guys back in 1973 would ever think that 40 yrs later people would die to have their "4 yr old" '69 fastback, and that these things would sell for 30, 40, 50,000?
04-26-2013, 11:08 AM
#32
3rd Gear Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: NW AR
Posts: 705
If you look at the progression of the mustang with the 05-09 10-12-and 13-14, all resembling and draw certain design ques from certain eras of past generations, the next logical step, especially with the expectation of a smaller lighter platform with a 4cyl would be a take on the mustangII or foxbody. those cars were dramatically smaller lighter and different back when they debuted and those are the same goals for the s550 platform.
04-26-2013, 02:17 PM
#33
5th Gear Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Clermont, FL
Posts: 2,952
the mustangII wasnt that bad of a car. what made it so crappy was the emissions that got tacked on it. It came with the same 302 that is so very potent in the foxbody cars with just minor bolt ons and remember the mustangII suspension is a popular choice for alot of hotrod builds.
The only reason Ford added the II on it was to show they didnt agree with the emissions and didnt want to tarnish the mustang name but didnt want to drop the car from the lineup, so they badged it as part of the family but not, kindoff like a stepchild.
The only reason Ford added the II on it was to show they didnt agree with the emissions and didnt want to tarnish the mustang name but didnt want to drop the car from the lineup, so they badged it as part of the family but not, kindoff like a stepchild.
Last edited by PNYXPRESS; 04-26-2013 at 02:21 PM.
04-26-2013, 02:57 PM
#34
Gentleman's Relish
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: AZ
Posts: 13,090
I would consider these way more creditable sources....
Different engines for different markets (asia, europe, etc).
http://www.caranddriver.com/features...ed-future-cars
http://www.caranddriver.com/news/201...-bodywork-news
If you look at the site (m u s t a ng G 6g. co m) it's a brand new mustang forum. The link provided is to their own Rumor Mill with loosely cited sources. This thread looks like marketing ploy to become a new Mustang forum and drive people to their site.
Different engines for different markets (asia, europe, etc).
http://www.caranddriver.com/features...ed-future-cars
http://www.caranddriver.com/news/201...-bodywork-news
If you look at the site (m u s t a ng G 6g. co m) it's a brand new mustang forum. The link provided is to their own Rumor Mill with loosely cited sources. This thread looks like marketing ploy to become a new Mustang forum and drive people to their site.
Last edited by Derf00; 04-26-2013 at 03:03 PM.
04-26-2013, 03:42 PM
#35
. It wouldnt surprise me a bit if the 2012 V6 manual 6 spd I drive now would be very desirable 20 yrs from now. Dont nobody laugh at that statement. How many guys back in 1973 would ever think that 40 yrs later people would die to have their "4 yr old" '69 fastback, and that these things would sell for 30, 40, 50,000?
04-26-2013, 09:17 PM
#36
2nd Gear Member
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: CO
Posts: 310
the mustangII wasnt that bad of a car. what made it so crappy was the emissions that got tacked on it. It came with the same 302 that is so very potent in the foxbody cars with just minor bolt ons and remember the mustangII suspension is a popular choice for alot of hotrod builds.
The only reason Ford added the II on it was to show they didnt agree with the emissions and didnt want to tarnish the mustang name but didnt want to drop the car from the lineup, so they badged it as part of the family but not, kindoff like a stepchild.
The only reason Ford added the II on it was to show they didnt agree with the emissions and didnt want to tarnish the mustang name but didnt want to drop the car from the lineup, so they badged it as part of the family but not, kindoff like a stepchild.
And Blue, yeah, you're right, that's why Dynacorn got the Ford license to remake the bodies form 65-70 and why they will not do a Fox or SN-95. An S197, that will really depend on where Ford goes and how different Mustangs are in the future if they don't kill the name.. Saturated, yes because they have been the new car for the past 5 years.... How much does a 70 Fastback (not a Boss, not a Mach 1) go for on the market? A Shelby repro goes for ridicules amounts of money!
I think we can agree just to disagree
Last edited by Hamidar05; 04-26-2013 at 09:26 PM.
04-27-2013, 05:47 PM
#37
2nd Gear Member
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Texas
Posts: 228
You see a 2012 V6 mustang today in the same way people saw a 1969 mustang in 1970, just a car, but in 30-40 years in 2052 the public will see a classic mustang.
04-27-2013, 08:49 PM
#39
5th Gear Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Clermont, FL
Posts: 2,952
No, in 40yrs you 99 will be an antique. But seriously, by age, most fox bodies are classic status, however, within the mustang community the 1964.5-70 cars will be the only ones referred to as classic, as everything after 1987 will be referred to as their chassis code and the 71-73 as big bodies, 74-78 as mustangII, and 79-86 as four eyes.
