ZanatWork

I'm hoping that powertrain improvements are coming soon, and maybe something to bring its chassis manners up to the levels of the Accord and the 6, which remain the benchmarks in terms of "driver's cars" in the segment. I'll never apologize for wanting Ford to make the best-in-class...in more categories than sales.

I'll just get the usual comments out of the way for those involved: "Nobody cares about midsize sedan performance""...yet, the top competitors, often outselling the Fusion, keep offering V6s. As they're moving more metal, it should be a consideration. "Just because you want it doesn't mean it should happen"...I didn't write this article, and it's one of MANY that point out how the Ecoboost promise promises tend to fall a bit short. In this case, it doesn't perform like a V6 or get mileage like a 4-banger. Neither aspect is impressive. "You know there'll be an ST version"...yeah, that was said years ago, before this generation was even in production. "Car and Driver hates Fords"...yet, keeps putting them on the 10-Best List, has basically been fawning over the Fiesta ST since it came out, loved the Boss 302, and is genuinely impressed with most aspects of the Fustion...except its powertrain. Those bases covered... http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/ford-fusion-titanium-20l-ecoboost-awd-test-review "More disappointingly, the turbo four is just as thirsty as a V-6. We averaged 20 mpg, below even the Fusion’s EPA city rating of 22 and nowhere near the 31-mpg highway rating. For those who’ve been paying attention to Ford’s EcoBoost strategy, this comes as no surprise." I'm very happy this generation of Fusion is doing as well as it is. I just hope Ford builds one for the "rest of us" soon.

Hmmm. Whatever the case, the Mustang with the performance pack just lost a comparo with a Camaro SS 1LE at Motor Trend.

I have to point out the unlikely/impossible: a Ranchero based on the new Mustang would be almost TOO good-looking. I'm fully aware that it would be a huge undertaking to give it the required AWD to compete with the mid-sized trucks, likely wouldn't offer much of a mileage bump, and many other issues... ...but, as a fan of the early 70's Rancheros, I can't deny the though has big appeal to me. I'm well aware that "just because I want it doesn't mean it should happen", don't bother going there. I just think it'd be a gorgeous, if obviously niche, vehicle.

I thought the biggest problem the GTO/G8 had was...looking like a Cavalier inflated to 5000 psi.

Actually, one way that is answered, for me anyway, is the "Lightning Lap" Car and Driver has done for a few years, now. They micro-analyze the various straight and corner entry/exit speeds along with the overall times...and it allows one to get a look at how the cars stack up in their own price tiers, plus others above and below. The outgoing GT500, despite being something of a (joyous) brute, made good showing for itself vs. plenty of much pricier competition. The new Mustang wasn't in this year's test (the only Fords were our hot-hatch ST models), but I'm looking very forward to next year's test...which may have the GT-350 involved as well. As to the interior materials, as referenced by the Europeans...I don't expect most of their testers to "get it". Pony cars, even today's versions, are generally the products of borrowed platforms and bits from other models in the inventory. They're historically forced to over-achieve just to have relevance, and a certain degree of "rawness" is not only allowable, but expected and even celebrated by people that understand the segment at all. The boon/curse of the modern Mustang is that it's been getting billed as a "poor man's M3/M4" since the '96 Cobra brought its DOHC mod motor to the party. The Mustang has since been tested against the BMW repeatedly, with the inevitable caveats regarding price differences and performance vs. refinement. While the Mustang's lack of cornering prowess has been shamelessly exaggerated by Top Gear and others over the years, our favorite pony car is now headed for an area that has had some of the most amazingly flickable cars in history. For everything it does well, it'll be criticized for not having the road manners of a Cayman or a 4C, the feel of an M4, etc etc etc. I'm curious to see if Europe gets it or not, but I am actually fairly optimistic.

I just did a comparison: according to Car and Driver, the previous Mustang GT did 0-60 in 4.6 seconds, and the quarter mile in 13.2... ...whereas C/D tested the 2015 Mustang GT at 4.5 seconds and 13.0, respectively... ...so yes, despite the added heft, it actually got a bit quicker, as proven by tests done by the same publication.

If the Mustang sold for A5 money, they could afford exotic materials to cut more weight. As it is, I wouldn't be surprised to see more aluminium and what-not involved as this 'Stang generation continues. The GT-350R might "add lightness' to the horsepower equation, and terrify a Z28 or three in the process.

There was actually a big deal about SVO when that Mustang came out, and the rumors/spy pics sections of various publications listed SVO as the engineers behind various performance Fords, even if they didn't end up wearing the label. With the interest in SVO Mustangs getting piqued with the new Ecoboost variant, I'd think there'd be plenty of equity worth mining.

Beat me to it, I just read their review. Yeah, they're completely chuffed by it, especially the GT versions they tested. I'm just dying to read the upcoming comparisons, and tests of the various specialty models to follow. I may have my next new vehicle purchase figured out.

I loved SVO, still do...I don't see why it needed replacing.

Ummm...not just the SRT Challenger, but the Hellcat. The normal SRT Challenger is unlikely to get under 4 seconds. So, yeah...the "failed" 2015 Mustang GT is slower to 60 than a 707 hp supercharged Dodge that costs twice as much. Shocker!!

Wow. "Stupidness"?!? That's kinda all anyone needs to see in this exchange.

I KNEW I'd gone a little big on the words....

There's always...wait for it...the idea to wait for an actual comparison test, instead of fixating one one ESTIMATED statistic in preview tests. Y'know, actual comparison rather than whining about theoreticals?

I think "ridiculous" is fixating on that tenth when every other ingredient in the driving experience is reportedly vastly improved.

Top Gear's quick review is practically gushing. http://www.topgear.com/uk/car-news/new-ford-mustang-first-drive-car-review-top-gear-2014-09-17

Yeah, I've been reading about those kinds of "features" on cars for years, particularly Euro-stuff. Apparently, people that like high-dollar performance cars want a knob for their powertrain experience. That makes me pretty sad.

Yep, Penske has the best chance of carrying the Ford hopes forward in this Chase. I kinda hate it, as I've been a Roush fan forever and thought Keselowski was a punk (albeit a maturing one)...but I'm liking all the times "...leading in his Ford Fusion" has been said this season.

I'm afraid the tester at Autoblog wasn't enamored with Lincoln's 3-ton SUV. He likes the power and the interior volume...but not the engine noise, not the ride/handling, not the "cheap plastics in the interior". http://www.autoblog.com/2014/09/15/2015-lincoln-navigator-first-drive-review/ Happily, we know it's just a two-model-year band-aid.

Ab-so-damned-lutely, this is the first time in over a decade that I've been excited about our coaching as much as the potential of the players.

Welcome to a moment when we're in utter and complete agreement!

If the Focus RS gets AWD (which I dearly hope), Ford could legitimately kick in the door of the market that likes WRX STi/EVO wannabe rally cars...and it looks to be a very sustainable performance car market with the smaller motors and AWD, both of which are continuing trends in the market.

Having owned both a Tempo and a Contour, I can say this: The Tempo was decent at a time when the domestics were nearly as dumb about small family cars as they were about compacts. I actually liked it fine, but it was obviously an "on the cheap" car when I drove essentially anything from a contemporary Japanese maker. The Accord, which hadn't grown into a true midsizer at that point, was a better car in every single way. I really liked the Contour, but its transmission ate itself right after I paid the car off (yes, it had gotten fluids and filters at the correct times). It handled and drove light years better than the Tempo, and I actually got it into triple-digit speeds on one long road trip...and only had the 2.0...but it also had interior trim that seemed determined to fall apart very easily. To me, the Contour was out of the oven slightly too soon. A bit more rear legroom, some more "focus" on quality, and it could have been much better remembered. Sadly, that was an era where Ford was losing interest in quality. Trotman and Nasser...so much more interested in the "toy brands" than the core....

Well, technically they had MKS' to sell...but very few takers.