It was/is being announced today. Horsepower numbers not yet reported but the power plants will be a 2.3L Turbocharged 4 cylinder (Fox body all over again!), 3.7L V6 (boost in power over last year) and 5.0L V8 (boost in power over last year).
There is some speculation that the 'ecoboost' 4 will actually put out more horsepower than the V6, which makes sense- since the V6 will still remain the 'base' car, the ecoboost engine optional. And I'm sure better fuel economy if you keep your foot out of it. Though, of course, the forums will be ripe with complaints about poor ecoboost fuel economy- folks don't realize that the idea behind a turbocharged small engine is that it's power on demand, efficiency the rest of the time. If you run it hard, rev it high, shift like you're on a track, run at high speeds, use a lot of throttle, etc., then those turbos are going to be spooled up and the engine is going to use more fuel! (More air = more fuel!).
What do you guys think? Here's a couple pics;
I like it, overall. If you took the badges off and told me it wasn't a Mustang, that it was a new fusion sport coupe or some rebirth of the Falcon; I'd LOVE the car. Mustang badges aside- it is a downright way cool car. Mustang badges aside, they could've also gotten away with all wheel drive and a sportier interior. But, it does have the Mustang badges. Why is that bad? Well, because I love the Mustang. When I was a little kid this guy drove a red Mustang convertible with white paint stripes down my street and I fell in love. Never outgrew it either! So, it is tough to see such a radical change to the car. It's radical because it has a big european sport influence in the car. BUT- people forget that so did the ORIGINAL Mustang! The ORIGINAL Mustang, Cougar, and Thunderbird were designed to compete with european sports cars, and their build and design was to suit that.
Here's a 1967 Ferrari 275;
And here's a '67 Mustang fastback;
And even a 1967 Toyota 2000GT;
Are they the same cars? No, of course not- but there's a distinct similarity in styling, they really pulled from European sports car styling cues. So did the corvette and many other cars. In the 1960's, American Muscle was king, but there was nothing sexier than a sleek European sports car. So the geniuses at the Big 3 said "Why not both?". There are TONS of examples of how the European, Japanese and American markets leading sports cars borrowed from one another heavily. So it's no surprise that the same is happening now. There's a lot of Mazda/BMW/Aston/etc. influence in this car.
So honestly, a restyling to make it a curvaceous european sports car is, more than anything, a way to 'get back to it's roots'. BUT- I still fell in love with those old body styles- so it's gonna be hard for me to adjust! I kind of wish they had just kept the Mustang the same and introduced this car, with a few more tweaks, as a 'Fusion Coupe'. But then, in business it's not worth moving anywhere if you aren't moving forward.
My only REAL gripe is the 2.3L Turbo 4 cylinder. The idea is great; I would LOVE one of those Ford Taurus' with the 4 cylinder turbo. Gas mileage when you need it, performance when you need it. Like two engines in one. BUT; part of a muscle car, or any sports car really, is the sound and the torque. I know others disagree; but I just think inline 4 cylinder engines sound awful- especially in a car like a mustang. The V6 sounds okay and the Coyote 5-0 V8 should be the US national anthem. But the 4 cylinder? Not so much. They'll probably do all kinds of stuff with sound tubes and stuff like that like they did with the Focus ST to give it a more aggressive 'tone' without sounding too whiney, but it's still not the sound that I think a Mustang should make. Others, of course, would disagree and that's fine! But that's the way I feel.
What are your thoughts? You guys like the new 'stang or no?
Jury is still out on the interior for me. At first glance it's almost early-2000's Chrysler-ish. I haven't decided if I liked it or not. Mainly because I was looking forward to that a lot. I have a 2014 Focus and that interior is lightyears ahead of any Ford just 4 or 5 years ago (or any domestic sedan for that matter). A lot of tech, a lot of great styling, intuitive, full color LCD screens even for the odometer/trip odometer. The Mustang was kind of a simpler, plainer interior; which was okay- but I had hoped for a 'tech upgrade' while preserving that basic muscle car feel. Not sure if they really did that so much as slap a touch screen in there, and put a bunch of really funky knobs and switches.
Thoughts?
There is some speculation that the 'ecoboost' 4 will actually put out more horsepower than the V6, which makes sense- since the V6 will still remain the 'base' car, the ecoboost engine optional. And I'm sure better fuel economy if you keep your foot out of it. Though, of course, the forums will be ripe with complaints about poor ecoboost fuel economy- folks don't realize that the idea behind a turbocharged small engine is that it's power on demand, efficiency the rest of the time. If you run it hard, rev it high, shift like you're on a track, run at high speeds, use a lot of throttle, etc., then those turbos are going to be spooled up and the engine is going to use more fuel! (More air = more fuel!).
What do you guys think? Here's a couple pics;
I like it, overall. If you took the badges off and told me it wasn't a Mustang, that it was a new fusion sport coupe or some rebirth of the Falcon; I'd LOVE the car. Mustang badges aside- it is a downright way cool car. Mustang badges aside, they could've also gotten away with all wheel drive and a sportier interior. But, it does have the Mustang badges. Why is that bad? Well, because I love the Mustang. When I was a little kid this guy drove a red Mustang convertible with white paint stripes down my street and I fell in love. Never outgrew it either! So, it is tough to see such a radical change to the car. It's radical because it has a big european sport influence in the car. BUT- people forget that so did the ORIGINAL Mustang! The ORIGINAL Mustang, Cougar, and Thunderbird were designed to compete with european sports cars, and their build and design was to suit that.
Here's a 1967 Ferrari 275;
And here's a '67 Mustang fastback;
And even a 1967 Toyota 2000GT;
Are they the same cars? No, of course not- but there's a distinct similarity in styling, they really pulled from European sports car styling cues. So did the corvette and many other cars. In the 1960's, American Muscle was king, but there was nothing sexier than a sleek European sports car. So the geniuses at the Big 3 said "Why not both?". There are TONS of examples of how the European, Japanese and American markets leading sports cars borrowed from one another heavily. So it's no surprise that the same is happening now. There's a lot of Mazda/BMW/Aston/etc. influence in this car.
So honestly, a restyling to make it a curvaceous european sports car is, more than anything, a way to 'get back to it's roots'. BUT- I still fell in love with those old body styles- so it's gonna be hard for me to adjust! I kind of wish they had just kept the Mustang the same and introduced this car, with a few more tweaks, as a 'Fusion Coupe'. But then, in business it's not worth moving anywhere if you aren't moving forward.
My only REAL gripe is the 2.3L Turbo 4 cylinder. The idea is great; I would LOVE one of those Ford Taurus' with the 4 cylinder turbo. Gas mileage when you need it, performance when you need it. Like two engines in one. BUT; part of a muscle car, or any sports car really, is the sound and the torque. I know others disagree; but I just think inline 4 cylinder engines sound awful- especially in a car like a mustang. The V6 sounds okay and the Coyote 5-0 V8 should be the US national anthem. But the 4 cylinder? Not so much. They'll probably do all kinds of stuff with sound tubes and stuff like that like they did with the Focus ST to give it a more aggressive 'tone' without sounding too whiney, but it's still not the sound that I think a Mustang should make. Others, of course, would disagree and that's fine! But that's the way I feel.
What are your thoughts? You guys like the new 'stang or no?
Jury is still out on the interior for me. At first glance it's almost early-2000's Chrysler-ish. I haven't decided if I liked it or not. Mainly because I was looking forward to that a lot. I have a 2014 Focus and that interior is lightyears ahead of any Ford just 4 or 5 years ago (or any domestic sedan for that matter). A lot of tech, a lot of great styling, intuitive, full color LCD screens even for the odometer/trip odometer. The Mustang was kind of a simpler, plainer interior; which was okay- but I had hoped for a 'tech upgrade' while preserving that basic muscle car feel. Not sure if they really did that so much as slap a touch screen in there, and put a bunch of really funky knobs and switches.
Thoughts?
