Next Generation Mustang

[Tico]

I say smaller outer dimensions. Lighter. Better MPG. Whatever it takes to keep this car selling under new CAFE. Must still have V8 option no matter what. But that V8 could get better mileage than the 2010 does! Turbo 4 might be OK if it is around 250 HP as an option (high MPG trim level). A little less Retro.

 

Other ideas? Please lay off the IRS thing though! I say offer IRS on something just above the GT like a Mach I or Boss trim level to satisfy those who want it. But for the average John Q Public the current axle is great.

 

Lastly "keep it, RWD, V8 option, fun, cheap and fast". This is what sells Mustang GTs.

 

Ok have it!

[ice-capades]

I say smaller outer dimensions. Lighter. Better MPG. Whatever it takes to keep this car selling under new CAFE. Must still have V8 option no matter what. But that V8 could get better mileage than the 2010 does! Turbo 4 might be OK if it is around 250 HP as an option (high MPG trim level). A little less Retro.

 

Other ideas? Please lay off the IRS thing though! I say offer IRS on something just above the GT like a Mach I or Boss trim level to satisfy those who want it. But for the average John Q Public the current axle is great.

 

Lastly "keep it, RWD, V8 option, fun, cheap and fast". This is what sells Mustang GTs.

 

Ok have it!

 

Agreed.

[Elvis2U]

Agreed about the V8 but if you want smaller dimensions keep the retro style with an rendition of the preproduction 64.5 Mustang two seater. A niche car. Go kartish light with a v6 or turbo 4 cylinder.

A fun to drive high mileage car would be great but the Mustang enthusiast will require a V8.

Don't water down the brand to be politically correct.

[Harley Lover]

Move the design of the car forward so that it is more relevant to today's young people. By contrast, I think GM made a HUGE mistake (long term) witht the Camaro - it will sell short term to boomers, but I don't see young people aspiring to that car at all. It's too big, too heavy, and looks back instead of forward in its design.

 

In some ways, I think the Mustang is a victim of the chassis to which it's married. If Ford could somehow be able to create a more bespoke chassis for the Mustang, I think it would enable Ford to do much more with the car.

 

When I think of how I would like to see Ford evolve the design of the Mustang, I think of how BMW has been able to evolve the design of the 3 series. Any enthusiast can look at a 3 series and know immediately what it is, but it is not slavish about being retro. In fact, as the car has evolved over the years, BMW has done an excellent job of incorporating new ideas in its design (shortening the front overhang, eliminating the forward leaning front end in favor of aero, adding trunk space, etc.) while maintaining its identity as a BMW 3 series.

 

I'm not suggesting that Ford specifically do any of the things that BMW did to the 3 as it evolved, but I am suggesting that Ford needs to evolve the Mustang forward while still maintaining the key aspects that make it a Mustang. DON'T make it a 3 series - that's not what I'm saying.

[ice-capades]

Move the design of the car forward so that it is more relevant to today's young people. By contrast, I think GM made a HUGE mistake (long term) witht the Camaro - it will sell short term to boomers, but I don't see young people aspiring to that car at all. It's too big, too heavy, and looks back instead of forward in its design.

 

In some ways, I think the Mustang is a victim of the chassis to which it's married. If Ford could somehow be able to create a more bespoke chassis for the Mustang, I think it would enable Ford to do much more with the car.

 

When I think of how I would like to see Ford evolve the design of the Mustang, I think of how BMW has been able to evolve the design of the 3 series. Any enthusiast can look at a 3 series and know immediately what it is, but it is not slavish about being retro. In fact, as the car has evolved over the years, BMW has done an excellent job of incorporating new ideas in its design (shortening the front overhang, eliminating the forward leaning front end in favor of aero, adding trunk space, etc.) while maintaining its identity as a BMW 3 series.

 

I'm not suggesting that Ford specifically do any of the things that BMW did to the 3 as it evolved, but I am suggesting that Ford needs to evolve the Mustang forward while still maintaining the key aspects that make it a Mustang. DON'T make it a 3 series - that's not what I'm saying.

 

Maybe I've missed something here but you evidently approve what BMW's done with the evolutionary updates to the BMW 3-Series. Isn't that exactly what Ford's done with the 2010 Mustang compared to the 2005-2009 Model Years?

[ford4v429]

Aside from the normal/size/weight/performance suggestions, gotta add one more that to me was just as important as these others...V8 sound.

 

Ive got this nagging worry that the ecoboost will eventually make the Mustang GT a V6...even if its faster, hope they can figure out a way to get the V8 sound from it...keep thinking there might be a way...seems like there should be a way other than a 120 degree block V6 to give the uneven bank firing harmonics you get from a 90 degree V8...have to think about that one...

 

I just dread the day a basic V8 Mustang GT will either be unavailable due to EPA stuff(wether valid or not- some folks think a mustang V8 is a gas guzzler like a truck). if the V8 ever 'has' to go away, theres got to be a way with firing order/bank angle or something to get that lopsided V8 sound back from a set of duals...maybe even a goofy crisscross exhaust setup? got to be a way...

the sound of the exhaust on the Mustang GT IMO was worth the option price alone

[ice-capades]

Aside from the normal/size/weight/performance suggestions, gotta add one more that to me was just as important as these others...V8 sound.

 

Ive got this nagging worry that the ecoboost will eventually make the Mustang GT a V6...even if its faster, hope they can figure out a way to get the V8 sound from it...keep thinking there might be a way...seems like there should be a way other than a 120 degree block V6 to give the uneven bank firing harmonics you get from a 90 degree V8...have to think about that one...

 

I just dread the day a basic V8 Mustang GT will either be unavailable due to EPA stuff(wether valid or not- some folks think a mustang V8 is a gas guzzler like a truck). if the V8 ever 'has' to go away, theres got to be a way with firing order/bank angle or something to get that lopsided V8 sound back from a set of duals...maybe even a goofy crisscross exhaust setup? got to be a way...

the sound of the exhaust on the Mustang GT IMO was worth the option price alone

 

I'd be very surprised to see Ford ever dropping the V-8 engine from the Mustang line. No doubt that CAFE requirements are going to be an increasing challenge and it will affect the volume of V-8 models offered but we've gone through this same scenario before. Back in the 1980's, the CAFE standards were so tight that Ford knew exactly how many Escorts they had to sell to offset each Mustang GT, Crown Victoria, etc it could sell. At the time, we were lucky to get more than a handful of Mustang GT's for an entire Model Year. For quite a few years, the production and sales mix of Mustangs was 70% V-6 & 30% GT's. Since the introduction of the new 2005 Mustang, that mix almost completely reversed itself and there was a real problem during the 2005 and 2006 Model Years getting enough Mustang GT's to meet demand. This year, the MUstang GT production rate is about 60%.

 

So, as we move forward in dealing with the new CAFE standards and higher gas prices in the long term, I expect that the Market will shift towards more fuel efficient models and the V-8's will sell at a lower rate. As such, I'd expect future V-8 Mustangs to be priced accordingly but still be available!

 

Only time will tell!

[Harley Lover]

Maybe I've missed something here but you evidently approve what BMW's done with the evolutionary updates to the BMW 3-Series. Isn't that exactly what Ford's done with the 2010 Mustang compared to the 2005-2009 Model Years?

Ford made a huge leap back to the future with the 2005; the 2010 is a nice update, but doesn't really move the ball forward. Both cars are hamstrung by the chassis to which they are wed. They are too big on the exterior for what they are, which is a 2+2 pony car. I'm not remotely suggesting that Ford turn them into rice burner wannabe drivers. Rather, imagine if the next Mustang were perhaps a 7/8 scale version of the current car's exterior size, while maintaining the current interior space. The overall reduction in mass would result in improved performance and fuel economy (less weight) while giving up nothing that Mustang owners demand, and losing what they don't need (excess size). Design wise, I'll reiterate what I posted earlier: move the ball forward, maintaining traditional Mustang cues, but evolve the car substantially. This is a young (and young at heart) person's car; it's time to quite making boomer retro machines. Again, that's Chevy's mistake with the Camaro, and Ford needs to move away from that design ethos.

[ice-capades]

Ford made a huge leap back to the future with the 2005; the 2010 is a nice update, but doesn't really move the ball forward. Both cars are hamstrung by the chassis to which they are wed. They are too big on the exterior for what they are, which is a 2+2 pony car. I'm not remotely suggesting that Ford turn them into rice burner wannabe drivers. Rather, imagine if the next Mustang were perhaps a 7/8 scale version of the current car's exterior size, while maintaining the current interior space. The overall reduction in mass would result in improved performance and fuel economy (less weight) while giving up nothing that Mustang owners demand, and losing what they don't need (excess size). Design wise, I'll reiterate what I posted earlier: move the ball forward, maintaining traditional Mustang cues, but evolve the car substantially. This is a young (and young at heart) person's car; it's time to quite making boomer retro machines. Again, that's Chevy's mistake with the Camaro, and Ford needs to move away from that design ethos.

 

OK. Now I better understand what you're saying. I agree with what you're saying about the next generation Mustang being maybe 7/8 scale while preserving the Mustang's classic styling. As for the 2+2 seating, it'll need to maintain the 2+2 seating configuration if only for vehicle insurance considerations. After all, how often does anyone have passengers riding in the rear seats of a Mustang? I agree with your overall view of the new Camaro. The new Camaro is obviously a Camaro when seen but big, and then the viewer sees the interior which is a nightmare. Camoro sales are affecting Mustang sales this year, along with the major economic impact, but Ford's not about to let the Mustang suffer for long. As the economy improves, I expect that the 2011 Mustang series its upgraded powertrains will swing the sales back in favor of the Mustang as we've seen historically.

 

Mustang has always done its best and progressed the most when faced with competition. If that's the best reason for the Camaro to exist then I'm all for the Camaro. The Mustang will thrive long after Camaro has left the Market after sales drop off to previous levels.

 

Ford's biggest asset is Alan Mulally. Should he decide that he's done all that he can for Ford and decides to retire then all bets are off. He's undoubtedly the best CEO that anyone's seen in the automotive business in decades.

[joihan777]

As an owner of a 06' Mustang, I have to admit that at first I thought the exterior dimensions were a bit too big.

 

But after enjoying the good work of Ford employees for nearly two years now, I will tell you the Mustang's current dimensions are fine. The dash could use some loosening up of knee space and the center console could use a softer edge for my knee but that's about the only complaint I have... and I'm a big guy!

 

I also hope Ford co-develops the next generation Mustang platform with a new Thunderbird/ Lincoln 2-seater roadster.

 

That way the Mustang can stay 2+2 but a 2-seater roadster/ "personal luxury car" can be made off a shortened platform.

Of course the sheetmetal and interiors would be unique, but they could share powertrains/ suspensions/ brakes.

 

I even imagine an SVT variant of the Thunderbird to take on Corvette, and be better looking, one day.

Edited October 16, 2009 by joihan777

[akirby]

The current platform was the only choice available for the 2010 update. There was not enough time or resources to build a new one or repurpose an existing one. The next iteration should have the full support and resources to do it the right way - whatever that is.

[ice-capades]

As an owner of a 06' Mustang, I have to admit that at first I thought the exterior dimensions were a bit too big.

 

But after enjoying the good work of Ford employees for nearly two years now, I will tell you the Mustang's current dimensions are fine. The dash could use some loosening up of knee space and the center console could use a softer edge for my knee but that's about the only complaint I have... and I'm a big guy!

 

I also hope Ford co-develops the next generation Mustang platform with a new Thunderbird/ Lincoln 2-seater roadster.

 

That way the Mustang can stay 2+2 but a 2-seater roadster/ "personal luxury car" can be made off a shortened platform.

Of course the sheetmetal and interiors would be unique, but they could share powertrains/ suspensions/ brakes.

 

I even imagine an SVT variant of the Thunderbird to take on Corvette, and be better looking, one day.

 

In my opinion, the last thing that Ford should do is produce a future Thunderbird off the Mustang chassis. My Dealership was one of the top selling Thunderbird Dealerships for years with Don Imus doing live, creative reads of our "Birdland" radio spots. I drove T'Birds for years as my company car but Ford's Thunderbird models have a very inconsistent history as to identity and Market position. Is it a sports car, a personal luxury vehicle, a roadster or something else? Every time Ford introduces a new Thunderbird it's a different type of vehicle.

 

Again, in my opinion, the only car that could or should be built off the Mustang platform is an all-new Mercury Cougar on a stretched wheelbase (long hood, short decklid, tuck-away headlamps) and positioned as a personal luxury vehicle. It would give Lincoln-Mercury Dealers a unique product and allow Ford to spread the development costs of Mustang and Cougar across a larger production base.

[ford4v429]

the 05 up body is freakin huge- I gotta agree

 

(have a pic of 2 S197s sitting next to a 65 fourdoor LTD- guess what- the LTD looks like a kiddie car, and thats no BS...I'll see if I can find the pic.)

 

BUT, the S197 works so darn well, AND has 5 star ratings...I'd kinda hate to see it downsized- and I would love to see a 3~4" stretch in the rear footwells for a cougar variant with enough legroom for bigger kids.

 

Big- yes it is, but its ultra rigid, very very strong/safe, loosing either of those could hurt.

 

74 saw a nice size/weight reduction from 73- but that was a diet that I hope dont catch on again...the 74 was car of the year wasnt it? it was what everyone wanted...then once the novelty wore off they pretty much faded away. The S197 was a huge homerun- doing that right by changing the whole thing might not be the best thing to do IMO.

 

rather than a all new HUGE investment in retooling the whole car, I'd rather see Ford say 'hey...our tooling is depreciated/written off, we can afford to drop the base price by 15-20% and still turn a profit' and watch it do what it did in 65- outsell everything. its a wonderful car as-is, if the tooling can run a few more years, why not share the wealth a little, take a even bigger chunk of marketshare (and make me a fool for saying there will never be a cheaper/better Mustang)...maybe a bit of rethinking how to steal back the marketshare at minimal cost could be worthwhile little exercise- the lower volume new kids on the block wouldnt be happy thats for sure

 

the biggest saving grace for the mustang IMO is that Ford always tried to keep it affordable- with fewer buyers, many just now returning to work at new/lesser rates than before the crash, maybe they could help marketshare if it was just a bit cheaper, maybe they could fall in love with a ford product thats been generally accepted as a great product... I dunno, but I just wish everyone had one- I love these cars...they could push/hype the advertizing something like 'with the overwhelming success of the 2005-up mustang, Ford has decided to extend the current model for another model year without retooling- extending cost savings of already paid for tooling on to ford buyers on one of Fords biggest hits of the last 4 decades' or some bs like that...I think the camaro could be in even bigger trouble(again)

 

revamping the whole car to fit a more modern approach is one thing- but risk of mucking up a 'still a good thing' is still a possibility...

[ice-capades]

the 05 up body is freakin huge- I gotta agree

 

(have a pic of 2 S197s sitting next to a 65 fourdoor LTD- guess what- the LTD looks like a kiddie car, and thats no BS...I'll see if I can find the pic.)

 

BUT, the S197 works so darn well, AND has 5 star ratings...I'd kinda hate to see it downsized- and I would love to see a 3~4" stretch in the rear footwells for a cougar variant with enough legroom for bigger kids.

 

Big- yes it is, but its ultra rigid, very very strong/safe, loosing either of those could hurt.

 

74 saw a nice size/weight reduction from 73- but that was a diet that I hope dont catch on again...the 74 was car of the year wasnt it? it was what everyone wanted...then once the novelty wore off they pretty much faded away. The S197 was a huge homerun- doing that right by changing the whole thing might not be the best thing to do IMO.

 

rather than a all new HUGE investment in retooling the whole car, I'd rather see Ford say 'hey...our tooling is depreciated/written off, we can afford to drop the base price by 15-20% and still turn a profit' and watch it do what it did in 65- outsell everything. its a wonderful car as-is, if the tooling can run a few more years, why not share the wealth a little, take a even bigger chunk of marketshare (and make me a fool for saying there will never be a cheaper/better Mustang)...maybe a bit of rethinking how to steal back the marketshare at minimal cost could be worthwhile little exercise- the lower volume new kids on the block wouldnt be happy thats for sure

 

the biggest saving grace for the mustang IMO is that Ford always tried to keep it affordable- with fewer buyers, many just now returning to work at new/lesser rates than before the crash, maybe they could help marketshare if it was just a bit cheaper, maybe they could fall in love with a ford product thats been generally accepted as a great product... I dunno, but I just wish everyone had one- I love these cars...they could push/hype the advertizing something like 'with the overwhelming success of the 2005-up mustang, Ford has decided to extend the current model for another model year without retooling- extending cost savings of already paid for tooling on to ford buyers on one of Fords biggest hits of the last 4 decades' or some bs like that...I think the camaro could be in even bigger trouble(again)

 

revamping the whole car to fit a more modern approach is one thing- but risk of mucking up a 'still a good thing' is still a possibility...

 

In my opinion, one of the biggest risks to Mustang's future success and continued viability to Ford is pricing. The 2005-2009 Mustang's were some of the best Ford built vehicles in 30 years and the 2010 Mustang raises the bar that much further. Again, the problem is pricing which is having an impact on sales. On average, a new Mustang GT has gone up $4-5,000 over the past 5 years with Mustang GT Premium Coupes listing out at $40,000 MSRP when fully optioned. And as sales drop, Ford often raises prices further with the explanation that the pricing action is to remain competitive!

[Tico]

All good thoughts. I would say it must ALWAYS have a V8. With out the sound it is just not a Mustang GT. Ford should be able to squeeze enought HP and MPG out of a small V8. Also remember the lighter the car the less HP it needs to be quick. See Chrysler 300 for example of how weight renders HP impotent.

 

On the size thing I will continue to insist it must get smaller. Smaller does not have to mean losing 5 star crash rating. See Fusion for a good example of that. I would like to see it shink back down to the 93-98 Mustang size. Rembmer the next platform will have to survive past 2020. The goverment MPG requirments will get pretty stiff. I don't expect Camaro or anything from MOPAR to survive even into the late teens. But Mustang can if it shrinks. A small 2+2 with a high output small v8. Isn't that what mustang has always been about.?

 

Finally I have to say the price thing is relevant. With the Korean guys selling ever more car for less money even Toyota and Honda are feeling the heat. I know some of the 2010s sticker out at 40K but it is a new refresh. I am hoping a loaded GT can be had for a lot less than that in year or two. I know the '09s can be had cheap if you can still find one! Also didn't Ford just put some cash back on the Mustang? Anyway a base GT should still be had for under 30K. I bet if I go drive one a couple of times next spring and then go home and wait for the sales man to call me 3 or 4 times I could get it for that.

[joihan777]

We know the 3.7L V6 will power the base Mustang, with a 5.0L V8 going into the GT. That's for 2011.

 

What about 5-6 years from now?

 

I hope the Mustang doesn't lose too much size, it's quite comfortable as is. Maybe a little trimming around the edges would be OK, but not too much!

 

Let's say the next generation Mustang gets 150-250 lbs lighter. Should Ford keep the 3.7 & 5.0?

 

So long as HP stays around 300 & 400 (And of course 500 for the GT500) and the 0-60 times improve, why shouldn't Ford begin utilizing EcoBoost in the Mustang line?

 

Why not a EB 3.2 V6 Cyclone & EB 4.0L Coyote putting out 300 & 400 hp? I know the hp may not be mindblowingly high but the point here is fun performance while still getting decent mileage? Slightly smaller engines reduce weight and allow aerodynamic improvements too.

 

And if I tell my spouse my next Mustang will get 30mpg, it'll be *THAT* much easier getting one!

[Sherminator98]

I'm not really feeling why people think the current Mustang is "too big"...it looks bigger then older car, but also at the same time, the SN95/Fox platform had the same ergonomics as my 1986 Escort GT, which wasn't anything thing to write home about. The current car is leaps and bounds better then the older cars when it comes to driving confort and seating position (outside of the rear seats which are useless to adults anyways)

 

Look at any car that has been in production for the past 25 years or so...all have become larger in some form or another. I don't see how shrinking down the Mustang to the size of a Focus is going to help anything, besides save weight.

 

As for pricing, I looked at the 2010 GT vs the 2006 GT I have and the 10 GT had all the options I had in my car plus additional ones that I couldn't get, for the same price with my car fully optioned out. As for the 10 GT going for $40K fully loaded, well do you really need a glass roof that costs 2K and a Nav system thats close to 2k?

[akirby]

I'm not really feeling why people think the current Mustang is "too big"...it looks bigger then older car, but also at the same time, the SN95/Fox platform had the same ergonomics as my 1986 Escort GT, which wasn't anything thing to write home about. The current car is leaps and bounds better then the older cars when it comes to driving confort and seating position (outside of the rear seats which are useless to adults anyways)

 

Look at any car that has been in production for the past 25 years or so...all have become larger in some form or another. I don't see how shrinking down the Mustang to the size of a Focus is going to help anything, besides save weight.

 

As for pricing, I looked at the 2010 GT vs the 2006 GT I have and the 10 GT had all the options I had in my car plus additional ones that I couldn't get, for the same price with my car fully optioned out. As for the 10 GT going for $40K fully loaded, well do you really need a glass roof that costs 2K and a Nav system thats close to 2k?

 

It can't get much smaller if it keeps a back seat.

[atvman]

As for pricing, I looked at the 2010 GT vs the 2006 GT I have and the 10 GT had all the options I had in my car plus additional ones that I couldn't get, for the same price with my car fully optioned out. As for the 10 GT going for $40K fully loaded, well do you really need a glass roof that costs 2K and a Nav system thats close to 2k?

 

My only beef with the pricing thing is that you can't get leather and the track pack on the base GT. Otherwise, the option list is three times as long as it was in 2005, which is why prices can get so high. You can get a base GT Premium for $31K, how much would a GT with all those options have cost back in 2005? Probably pretty close to $30K.

 

That said, if prices don't go up when the Coyote is released, then the Mustang will represent a heck of a bargain. 400hp available for under $30K? That is crazy.