Blueblood Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 Now those are the hips the 2010 Stang should have had... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 Why does everything need "hips"? I like the Mustang's lines just fine without them. Perhaps some slightly more flared fenders, but it don't need "hips". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 I'm just going to sit back and lavish in the comments now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suv_guy_19 Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 Now those are the hips the 2010 Stang should have had... The back end reminds me of a charger...a good thing...the front end reminds me that it is a chevy...a bad thing... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blueblood Posted December 13, 2007 Author Share Posted December 13, 2007 Why does everything need "hips"? I like the Mustang's lines just fine without them. Perhaps some slightly more flared fenders, but it don't need "hips". I think it would be nice change towards the style of the 69-70 Mustangs, whereas the current car is like a retro 65 fastback. It would make it far more aggressive looking, and allow for much wider rear rubber, along with better handling. The current cars sides especially in the rear has always looked bland to me, like something is missing. One thing lots of people seem to get mixed up about what hips really are, some people think they are just a "bump" that rises upwards with no flaring at all. We saw that on the Guigaro concept and I thought it looked like crap, real hips flare out and up, and GM got the hips right on the 09 Camaro, as much as I hate Camaro's I can't deny that fact. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moby Vic Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 Why does everything need "hips"? I like the Mustang's lines just fine without them. Perhaps some slightly more flared fenders, but it don't need "hips". Because everybody knows better than Ford. I'm just thankful the Mustang still exists and has rear drive and a V8. Remember when it was going to be what became the '89 Probe? The Camaro is going for the superaggressive boy-racer look again. Let that market buy it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blueblood Posted December 13, 2007 Author Share Posted December 13, 2007 The back end reminds me of a charger...a good thing...the front end reminds me that it is a chevy...a bad thing... I don't like the front either, but I'd take one of these over that melted chunk of crap aka "Challenger" anyday.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suv_guy_19 Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 I don't like the front either, but I'd take one of these over that melted chunk of crap aka "Challenger" anyday.. I agree with you there, I hate the challenger. I like the Charger though..I know...I'm weird. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blueblood Posted December 13, 2007 Author Share Posted December 13, 2007 I agree with you there, I hate the challenger. I like the Charger though..I know...I'm weird. The problem with the Challenger is they tried to copy the Mustang by going retro, but Ford did the Mustang right by making it look modern, with retro style, The Challenger looks like they copied the old one, and stuck it in an oven for awhile and let it start to melt.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
one2gamble Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 Now those are the hips the 2010 Stang should have had... that profile = 2 door charger but slightly different, I dont know if Like it like that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P71_CrownVic Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 I agree with you there, I hate the challenger. I like the Charger though..I know...I'm weird. Honesty is the first step... :shades: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Traveler Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 (edited) Because those "hips" were common on some of the pony cars and muscle cars of their day. Its a heritage styling cue that works. Ford also has a valuable styling cue they are yet to use on the Mustang. Where's the fastback? The fastback was a signature of the Mustang. Nothing I see wrong with the Camaro in that pic. I'm curious about the front and back and how it will blend with this "toned down" version of the concept. Looks like its taking shape pretty well. Edited December 13, 2007 by Traveler Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 Because those "hips" were common on some of the pony cars and muscle cars of their day. Its a heritage styling cue that works. Ford also has a valuable styling cue they are yet to use on the Mustang. Where's the fastback? The fastback was a signature of the Mustang. Nothing I see wrong with the Camaro in that pic. I'm curious about the front and back and how it will blend with this "toned down" version of the concept. Looks like its taking shape pretty well. The "hips" may be a traditional styling cue, but there comes a point where one needs to break with tradition. It's one thing to mimmick something because it works on the car. It does work on the Camaro. But it's another thing to mimmick something for the sake of mimmicking something. The S197 was a bona fide success without the "hips" and the majority of Mustangs never had them, so it's an element that can easily be lost on its design without losing any Mustang DNA. As for the fastback, it could possibly work on an entirely different design, but being that the Mustang since 1994 hasn't really even had a true "notchback" either, the fastback at this point would be rather redundant and may even look out of place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 Is it just me or do all the new gen Pony cars have this bloated look to them? I know from certain angles, my Mustang has a thick look to it and from what I've seen of the Challenger and now the Camaro, they do the same thing styling wise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 (edited) Is it just me or do all the new gen Pony cars have this bloated look to them? I know from certain angles, my Mustang has a thick look to it and from what I've seen of the Challenger and now the Camaro, they do the same thing styling wise. That they do. Park an S197 next to an SN95. The difference in size is quite amazing. Heck, I parked behind an S197 in a parking lot the other day and realized that it had a higher roofline than my Mazda6!! WTF? Edited December 13, 2007 by NickF1011 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moby Vic Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 The new Camaro's hips come from the '68–'82 Corvette. So someone wants hips because old pony cars supposedly had them. Some say the Mustang is too retro. Some say the Challenger is too retro. Some say the Mustang is not retro enough. Some say the Camaro looks completely contemporary. It's almost as if different people have different likes when it comes to styling, and as if they may make different choices when it comes time to purchase a vehicle. Has the world gone mad? Are manufacturers actually offering choices to buyers and letting them vote with their wallets? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moby Vic Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 That they do. Park an S197 next to an SN95. The difference in size is quite amazing. Heck, I parked behind an S197 in a parking lot the other day and realized that it had a higher roofline than my Mazda6!! WTF? More airbags, more crumple zones, and over a decade of complaints that the Mustang didn't have enough interior room. The Challenger's size also is due to its LX platform origins. I remember reading a review of the '05 Mustang that lamented its small back seat and trunk. I was wondering if the reviewer had ever heard of a Mustang before. I don't recall seeing the MINI getting knocked for its low tow rating or small back seat. Odd. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 The new Camaro's hips come from the '68–'82 Corvette. :huh: I wouldn't even say they are remotely related. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moby Vic Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 Well, I would. And the designer of the concept car said he used some Corvette cues. What do you think he took from the Corvette? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 Well, I would. And the designer of the concept car said he used some Corvette cues. What do you think he took from the Corvette? Mmm...pretty much nothing in my opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blueblood Posted December 13, 2007 Author Share Posted December 13, 2007 That they do. Park an S197 next to an SN95. The difference in size is quite amazing. Heck, I parked behind an S197 in a parking lot the other day and realized that it had a higher roofline than my Mazda6!! WTF? That's due to the factory lift Ford puts on the Mustangs.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fordowner Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 My dealer had put this on my car before I bought it (i did the louvers) but funny the front of the tape says "fastback" and I really liked that. I agree the car is more fastback than notchback. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moby Vic Posted December 14, 2007 Share Posted December 14, 2007 The curvature of the roof on the SN95 and S197 cars is about the same. Where the S197 gained the most mass is in front of the windshield. It no longer has a sloping nose. Where did people expect the increased wheelbase to go? Pony cars have a long hood and a short deck. People complained about the choppy ride quality and cramped interior of Fox body and newer Mustangs, so Ford increased the wheelbase and put more room inside. Now people complain that they're too big. You can't please all of the people any of the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Traveler Posted December 14, 2007 Share Posted December 14, 2007 Having a notchback or a hatchback really would have had nothing to do with adding a fastback. It may have required a smaller trunklid like in the early years. Actually, Team Mustang was poking around several years ago on the Corral asking opinions. They seemed to have seriously considered a hatchback, which I would have liked. My first, a '90 GT, was very versatile with the rear lift. Early Camaros did have the hips and that would most certainly go along with its traditional styling much like Team Mustang borrowed off the vintage Mustangs to come up with the '05. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moby Vic Posted December 14, 2007 Share Posted December 14, 2007 Yeah, I hate that they killed the hatchback. I had a '91 LX 5.0. It was like having a station wagon! The narrow trunk opening on my '95 GTS is awful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.