Jump to content

Smaller Mustang


Recommended Posts

Not many chops in awhile!

 

A smaller (if not pint sized) Mustang is starting to sound good!

Still RWD, but 4 cylinder, EB, up to a V8.

 

muttt013.jpg

 

Looks great timmm55, but if the interior has decreased in size then it can't work, the current 2+2 is small enough as it is.

 

Any decreases in size will have to be to the rest of the body. In fact the interior needs to lengthen an inch or two!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not many chops in awhile!

 

A smaller (if not pint sized) Mustang is starting to sound good!

Still RWD, but 4 cylinder, EB, up to a V8.

 

muttt013.jpg

 

Looks great Tim! I haven't had many chops in some time either. Something about the C-pillar-to-body area is throwing me off though, maybe it's just the angle, but it almost looks a bit like a hatchback.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A great idea Tim would open up a lot of doors to increased sales worldwide sales, it would Mustang double over night in the States and four-fold if they sold it to the rest of the world.

 

Europe has not seen a decent coupe sports car for 21 years now from Ford, life in the UK is very very very very very very very dull with just a Focus, Mondeo & Fiesta to choose from.

 

Mustang purists will hate it though - If we had your very cheap fuel prices l would be demanding a V8 only as well.

Edited by Ford Jellymoulds
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A great idea Tim would open up a lot of doors to increased sales worldwide sales, it would Mustang double over night in the States and four-fold if they sold it to the rest of the world.

 

Europe has not seen a decent coupe sports car for 21 years now from Ford, life in the UK is very very very very very very very dull with just a Focus, Mondeo & Fiesta to choose from.

 

Mustang purists will hate it though - If we had your very cheap fuel prices l would be demanding a V8 only as well.

 

I have an 05 Mustang GT and I don't think the Mustang purists would hate a smaller Mustang as long as it was RWD and had a selection of power trians including a V8.

I think the original Euro Capri would be a good model for a new Mustang in terms of size.

 

mooo2o.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have an 05 Mustang GT and I don't think the Mustang purists would hate a smaller Mustang as long as it was RWD and had a selection of power trians including a V8.

I think the original Euro Capri would be a good model for a new Mustang in terms of size.

 

mooo2o.jpg

 

With a power fold hard top, that car could be a hot seller. Your ideas really look great. Keep them coming.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have an 05 Mustang GT and I don't think the Mustang purists would hate a smaller Mustang as long as it was RWD and had a selection of power trians including a V8.

I think the original Euro Capri would be a good model for a new Mustang in terms of size.

The original '65-66 Mustang would be the perfect size.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The original '65-66 Mustang would be the perfect size.

 

Gas was about 30 cents a gallon in 1965. Adjusted for inflation it was $1.68. Here in CA gas is around $4.50 now.

The 71 Capri was a 7/8 scale 2500 lb version of the Mustang. It still seated four comfortably if snugly. Believe it or not (it was news to me) the Capri in 72 was only behind the VW bug in sales.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gas was about 30 cents a gallon in 1965. Adjusted for inflation it was $1.68. Here in CA gas is around $4.50 now.

The 71 Capri was a 7/8 scale 2500 lb version of the Mustang. It still seated four comfortably if snugly. Believe it or not (it was news to me) the Capri in 72 was only behind the VW bug in sales.

1965 Mustang Dimensions:

 

Wheelbase 108"

Overall Length-Hardtop and Convertible 181.6"

Overall Width 68.2"

Overall Height

Hardtop 51.1"

2+2 Fastback 51.2"

 

Curb Weight (lbs.)

Hardtop 2556

2+2 Fastback 2606

 

The original Mustang is about the 2" wider and 2" longer than a 2008 Corolla.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So we're on the same page, the 71-72 Capri was a bit smaller and lighter (2135 lbs with a 1600 CC I4) than the original Mustang, considerably smaller than the 71-72 Mustang.

 

Not that we'll see anything that light again with airbags, 5MPH bumpers and the rest.............

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have an 05 Mustang GT and I don't think the Mustang purists would hate a smaller Mustang as long as it was RWD and had a selection of power trians including a V8.

I think the original Euro Capri would be a good model for a new Mustang in terms of size.

 

mooo2o.jpg

 

I like that one. Also, maybe you could use a taillight setup similar to the 04 Mustang concept on it (the wide, horizontal type setup)? I wonder what it'd look like with that setup?

 

MustangGTCoupConcept02.jpg

Edited by rmc523
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1965 Mustang Dimensions:

 

Wheelbase 108"

Overall Length-Hardtop and Convertible 181.6"

Overall Width 68.2"

Overall Height

Hardtop 51.1"

2+2 Fastback 51.2"

 

Curb Weight (lbs.)

Hardtop 2556

2+2 Fastback 2606

 

The original Mustang is about the 2" wider and 2" longer than a 2008 Corolla.

 

Yeah, I just saw an older Mustang today and my friend also has one, and I find it interesting how small they are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like that one. Also, maybe you could use a taillight setup similar to the 04 Mustang concept on it (the wide, horizontal type setup)? I wonder what it'd look like with that setup?

 

MustangGTCoupConcept02.jpg

 

I thought those taillights would have looked great on a Cougar, but not on a Mustang.....it's gotta be the smaller 3 element lens. And I intentionally left off the faux gas cap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought those taillights would have looked great on a Cougar, but not on a Mustang.....it's gotta be the smaller 3 element lens. And I intentionally left off the faux gas cap.

 

I see. I don't really mind the absence of the faux gas cap, but the trunk lid is a little bare without it.

Edited by rmc523
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A 7/8th down size to original 1964-1/2 size would also shave an easy 500 lbs off.

 

I was against the size they are making now because I feared gas prices would do what they are doing now.

 

Foxes in the hen house.

 

And would be about as safe as a tincan too...guess you never heard of crumple zones

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And would be about as safe as a tincan too...guess you never heard of crumple zones

 

You answered your own question. A new, smaller Mustang, could shave weight AND by using modern materials/designs (including crumple zones) it would be safer. It probably would be heavier than a 65 Mustang, but be considerably lighter than the current one.

 

And why is it every time a "smaller Mustang" is raised some dumb*$#@ mentions the Mustang II? That was 1974......some 34 years ago. Technology has changed: the 75 5.0 was about 120 HP!

Try a Mustang II with 300HP and see how awful it is :hysterical:

 

http://www.popularhotrodding.com/features/...g_ii/index.html

post-19198-1216749101_thumb.jpg

Edited by timmm55
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...