By on November 17, 2008

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

44 Comments on “New Ford Mustang...”


  • avatar
    mikeolan

    It’s amazing how Ford can keep a retro-heavy design fresh instead of butcher it (Chrysler PT Cruiser) or let it rot on the vine so long it becomes Passé (VW New Beetle). Kudos to them, this looks better than the shameless rip-off Camaro and Challengers.

  • avatar
    romanjetfighter

    Looks pretty much the same. Dunno what the hype is all about… seems to be a facelift is all. Those seats look mighty comfortable, though. :D

  • avatar
    hughie522

    Well, that’s a bit anticlimatic after all the teaser photographs they released.

    It’s a bit, “You got Camaro in my Mustang!” if you ask me.

  • avatar
    mistrernee

    HP or GTFO

    They doing anything with the wimpy 4.6L engine? Didn’t see any mention of it on there.

    A minor refresh is exactly what the exterior needed. I wouldn’t mind seeing a rear quarter shot though, the little picture of the tail lights doesn’t look promising.

    Edit: Feel like adding that the awful steering wheel is still there.

  • avatar
    ajla

    Looks good, but nothing Earth-chattering. I still like the look of the Challenger more.

  • avatar
    Stu Sidoti

    Quote: ” mikeolan :
    November 17th, 2008 at 9:39 pm

    “It’s amazing how Ford can keep a retro-heavy design fresh….Kudos to them, this looks better than the shameless rip-off Camaro and Challengers. “

    Mikeolan my good man….have you driven a new Camaro? I have and I feel that it has dead-sexy styling-quite a bit better than both Mustang and Challenger. The Camaro and the Mustang are about the same size but the Camaro just drives so much better than the Mustang and even with the ‘little’ 300HP V-6 Camaro I drove, it had plenty of power and just has so much better road feel and handling over the Mustang…As for the Challenger, it’s so darned BIG that it just doesn’t feel like a pony car.

    One more thing…how does a company ‘shamelessly rip-off’ their own designs? That’s not ripping off of a design, that’s using your own heritage.

  • avatar
    dwford

    This is the mid-cycle makeover. Ford has said they are moving to a 6 year cycle with a major refresh after 3 years. Yes this is late for that, but I guess it starts with the 2010 Fusion triplets. Besides, muscle cars typically have had longer shelf lives than regular cars. Hopefully an all new Mustang is in the plans for 2013.

    Besides, at the rate GM and Chrysler are going, who’s to say how long the Camaro (if ever) or Challenger will last?? The Mustang may be the only muscle car around (again!) before long..

  • avatar
    toxicroach

    At the rate GM is going, who knows if the Camaro will actually hit the streets?

    Though if it is as advertised it’d be pretty hard to chose a Mustang at this point. You can either save 10g and get about the same horses or for the same price get an extra hundred HP.

  • avatar
    Detroit Todd

    It’s ugly. Fugly, even.

    The front end looks like a back-to-the-future-back-to-the-future kind of development, a/k/a, a 2000 Mustang, with rounds instead of sweeps out front. Plus (or minus), it has a Mazda-3ish canopy. Bleh!

    Well, I guess the wheels are nice….

    Why no rear shot? Is that just as ugly? Uglier?

    Is Mulally playing it too safe? Certainly, I’m not inspired by this Frankenstein of Mustangs past-future-past. Though, to be fair, I suppose, this isn’t a volume car.

  • avatar

    I like it. Boy, I’m going to have a hard time choosing between this, the 370Z, and whatever’s good in Euroland…

  • avatar
    mikey

    Very nice,not as nice as the Camaro but still
    a sweet ride.

  • avatar

    It is a facelift, underneath the tweaked wrapper it’s the same vehicle we’ve had for a few years now. It’s the same with the “new” F150, “new” Fusion and so fourth. I certainly wouldn’t call it better than the Camaro or Challenger but in this class it’s more down to what to personal preference and brand loyalty than anything else.

    The interior is far and away the biggest improvement. The rest I’m not so sure about, it certainly echoes that early to mid 1970s Mustang look instead of the more desirable 1960s original IMO. I really would have liked to see the circular indicators in the front bumper.

    It’s also disappointing it won’t be sporting Ford’s new 6.2L V8 (yet) or 5.0L V8. The 4.6L is plenty capable though, defying it’s power ratings on paper and it responds very well to cheap tweaking.

    If only all of Ford’s vehicles had this much attention to detail and classic, distinctive styling then perhaps they wouldn’t be in such trouble.

  • avatar

    Very nice. I think they did a better job than Chevy on the Camaro. And way better than the Challenger. That car sucks. But I would have liked to see the back.

  • avatar
    Steven Lang

    Who knows? Maybe the ideal comparo would be the Challenger, Camaro and this Mustang.

    By the way, I saw a Challenger today getting prepped up while I visited a nearby Chrysler dealerhsip. It’s an absolutely drop dead gorgeous vehicle in what can only be described as a gun-inspired grey. Oh and just an FYI, I’m not the type of person who typically appreciates anything retro.

    If I weren’t in the industry and constantly changing cars, I’d seriously look at one of these three as a permanent addition in my garage.

  • avatar
    P71_CrownVic

    Hmmm…let’s see:

    4.0 V6 from a truck – FAIL!!!!!

    5-Speed A/T – FAIL!!!!!!

    Solid rear axle – FAIL!!!!!!!!!

    315HP, 4.6 V8 – FAIL!!!!!!!!!!!

    Hyundai, people…,HYUNDAI is able to get 375HP out of their 4.6 V8…60 more HP.

    2010 Mustang – FAIL!!!!!!!!!!!

    But at least Ford spent the money where it counted…making it possible to change the color of your gauges and being able to talk to your radio…

    This car should be the inspiration for another Ford “Deathwatch”.

  • avatar

    Dave,

    Go to the official website. You’ll see the back in a virtual 360-degree view. You can even change the color on the 360. I like it in black, IMHO…

  • avatar
    red stick

    I’ve thought the retro Mustang has looked good from Day One, and like the update too. Someone at work has a Challenger and it just looks wrong to me–too long, too narrow, and too heavy. I like the proportions on the Mustang much better.

  • avatar
    guyincognito

    I like it. I think the conservative approach will play well. Ford should have most of the tooling paid off and might actually be making money on the Mustang besides.

    @TriShield:

    The F-150 is actually significanly changed. Everything, save the engine, is entirely new from the firewall forward.

  • avatar
    Droid800

    @P71_CrownVic

    The engines are holdovers until the new 5.0 liter and EcoBoost engines are ready to go. It’ll be class-leading once they do that. This is a victim of Ford’s racheted-up refreshing cycle; because the facelift got moved up, it was ready for production before the engines were.

  • avatar
    Samir

    The exterior is great if you ask me. I wish Ford’s executives were as diligent in protecting their other franchises (Ranger, Crown Vic)

    I really wish Ford would offer a $4,000 IRS option for this car. It’s not like it can’t be done. I feel like until they do, you will always have to make apologies for the tail hop under hard cornering.

    (/Mustang Driver)

  • avatar
    psarhjinian

    Well, it’s cleaner than the big-hips-and-deep-brows Camaro and Challenger, which is nice. I don’t generally like rear hips on a car, but at least the Mustangs aren’t particularly obvious.

    Any clue as to the weight and price? That was always the Mustang’s likely advantages next to the Camaro and Challenger, and it would be interesting to know if they’ve kept both down.

  • avatar
    SunnyvaleCA

    @P71_CrownVic

    The HYUNDAI with 375HP has no stick shift. The “failed” 315 HP stick Mustang is going to be faster in a straight line at double-digit speeds and a lot more fun too. The purpose of horsepower is entertainment… the Mustang with stick will give better driver entertainment.

  • avatar
    toxicroach

    Yeah, I’ve driven the GT… certainly you won’t ever be lacking in acceleration for any daily driving purpose.

    I want one real bad but I just know I’d end up getting killed or with my driver’s license revoked. You can’t not speed in it.

  • avatar
    Droid800

    @psarhjinian

    Autoblog is saying that the new Mustang is 400-500 pounds less than the Camaro and Challenger. The V6 version only gained 15 pounds over this year’s, and the V8 only gained 35.

    Once the new engines are introduced, though, weight will go up. (EcoBoost is going to weight more than the 4.0 liter for sure)

  • avatar
    Jonny Lieberman

    The big news is that the GT is essentially the Bullitt.

    if you’ve driven the Bullitt you know what great news this is.

    As Karesh might do, click here for reliability data and stuff. Er, for more pics, some design “analysis” by moi and Ford’s very own press release.

    http://tinyurl.com/6or936

  • avatar
    dkulmacz

    Mmmmmm . . . Grabber Blue . . . .

  • avatar
    Scorched Earth

    At first I was disappointed, but then I read it was a mid-cycle refresh. I think it looks great, but I also LOVE the current Mustang design. There’s a little evolution in the retro design, just enough to keep fresh and hold us over til the REAL next Stang.

  • avatar
    maniceightball

    I like it better than the old one — I’m glad they’re taking styling cues from Giugiaro. They seem to miss that proportion is where it’s at, but they’re making progress. In fact, that’s what’s bothered me most about the retro Mustangs — they’re awful about balancing the designs and maintaining even a minimal amount of aesthetic coherence.

  • avatar
    maniceightball

    This car should be the inspiration for another Ford “Deathwatch”. – P71_CrownVic

    Uh, I think Ford’s actually going to be fine in the long term.. It’s the other 1.8 that you should be concerned about.

  • avatar
    Nicodemus

    @ P71 Crown Vic

    Hmmm…let’s see:

    4.0 V6 from a truck – FAIL!!!!!

    5-Speed A/T – FAIL!!!!!!

    Solid rear axle – FAIL!!!!!!!!!

    315HP, 4.6 V8 – FAIL!!!!!!!!!!!

    If only the Falcon was engineered for LHD all of those would be passes!

    http://www.ford.com.au/servlet/ContentServer?cid=1178852824823&pagename=Page&site=FOA&c=DFYPage

  • avatar
    P71_CrownVic

    You got that right, Nicodemus! Then Ford would sell a car worth buying.

  • avatar
    murphysamber

    Outside of being something more interesting than a Malibu to rent at the Enterprise counter, I think it’s a little bit of the same pig with different lipstick. Good thing it’s not being passed off as a new model. Weird, but you would be suprised how many mustang drivers (women) I actually see end up in Beetles.

  • avatar
    jar527

    I think it looks great. It’s a nice surprise that they spent anytime at all updating the interior. From 1994 to 2004 they only changed the Radio size. I don’t think the HP deficit will cost it any sales, it hasn’t in the past. Sync, Navigation, back-up camera, glass roof unbelievable number of options. I’ll take mine in Torch Red please.

  • avatar

    Bring back the Mach II! :D

  • avatar
    KnightRT

    It’s hot. It immediately makes the previous version look old, and the form factor is fair bit less ostentatious than the Camaro. I’m disappointed with the solid rear axle and the lackluster V6, but they’re good enough for the target audience.

  • avatar
    Richard Chen

    How about the LX 2.3?

  • avatar
    jerseydevil

    absolutely stunning, again. the sexiest car made in america.

    i also like the challenger, and the camaro. I wish that ford had put a better 6 in the car, or offered a turbo 4. oh well.

    If it is the bullit, i will have to buy a GT anyway.

    grin.

  • avatar
    psarhjinian

    Once the new engines are introduced, though, weight will go up. (EcoBoost is going to weight more than the 4.0 liter for sure)

    Will it? Ecoboost is essentially, well, forced induction and smarter fuel injection; can that really weigh very much? Generally, boosted engines weigh less than a naturally-aspirated powerplant of the same output.

  • avatar
    Mark MacInnis

    For those who want to get an idea what the rear and rear quarter look like…..the Detroit Freep has a couple of pix that TTAC chose not to show….here’s the link.

    http://www.freep.com/article/20081118/BUSINESS01/811180375

    Nice to see that ONE of the D3 (call it that while you can…according to the article above it will be “General Motors, owned by China” pretty soon. (if Wagoner were head of a Chinese company that lost as much money and prestige, guess what his fate would be?)) has future product plans.

    As a former Mustang owner (’73 Mach I and ’70 Boss 302) this design seems mighty tasty….

  • avatar

    315 from 4.6 is not impressive, stick shift or not. My Infiniti Q makes “around” 300 hp (rated at 278, supposedly low-balled for Japanese gentleman’s agreement) from 4.5L and will sling two tons to 60 with a slushy auto in about 7 seconds. It has oodles of torque and a nice punch at high revs, topping out around 6900 rpm. Oh, I forgot to mention, my Q is 17 years old. Fail indeed. Imagine a Q next to a fox body 5.0 which was struggling to top 200 hp out of the box. I won’t be really impressed until we see the magic 100 hp per litre (or even 80-90? This thing is only at the middling 68/L mark) number from the big American V8s, particularly the overhead cam items.

  • avatar
    rockit

    An old Q still is slower 0-60, even you admit so I’m not sure why you bring it up here, and doesn’t it use premium?

  • avatar
    sean362880

    It looks like the 05-06 GTO.

    It’s a half step backwards for Ford, halfway between the current Mustang’s cool-looking fastback shape and the previous generation’s rounded front nose/hood.

    Not good. I’d much rather have the current version, preferably a Bullitt.

  • avatar
    dolo54

    I think it’s great, but I can’t imagine buying this knowing an updated drivetrain is in the pipe for next year.

  • avatar
    pman

    Initially, I liked the idea of new cars with retro-styling because I’m old enough to remember seeing the originals as a kid. But it has gotten to become so ubiquitous, cliched and hackneyed that it now just smells like a lack of design creativity. And now we get new-and-improved refreshed retro-styling for the original retro-styled cars that were copies the original originals. For me, it’s become a snoozefest.

    And 315 hp from a 4.6 liter V8? Now THAT’S retro!!
    But, hey, last year’s Hemi belched out 335 hp from 5.7 liters, or just under 60hp/liter, and that had people gooing in their pants.

    Some people are easily impressed, I guess.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • DenverMike: Is that how trolls get off? It makes no sense to the rest of us, but clearly it’s a major malfunction....
  • SaulTigh: Frankly, the internet raised them and that’s the problem.
  • SCE to AUX: “information asymmetry and legal monopoly status” Disagree. The internet has wiped out...
  • Lou_BC: @jkross22 – basically true. Go in preparing and be ready to walk away. The reason why dealerships want...
  • Lou_BC: @EBFLEX – you want a link? https://gmauthority.com/blog/2 022/01/general-motors-hit-w...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Corey Lewis
  • Jo Borras
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber