New Mustang Pony on Grill

[syrtran]

1) Totally agree about the range compression on 'new' music. "Radio Nowhere" sounds like it was recorded in a phone booth compared to the expanse of "Badlands", "Born to Run", etc.

 

2) And yet there's no mustangs on your SVO.... :P Unless you added them yourself.

Wanna see my floor mats? :D

 

Here's the '65-'73 pony:

 

-image removed to reduce post size

 

Here's the '94+ pony:

 

-image removed

 

It appears that a fair bit of fine detail was removed in '94. Undoubtedly due to the change in budget for finery, as well as the change in material.

Thanks for the pics. I would suggest that any differences are due the change in material (like you said) and in molding refinements over the years. Remember that '68 badge? I'm holding it in my hands comparing it to the '94+ pic. The differences I can see are subtle - in the '94, the front 'knee' (*) joints are smaller and better defined, the face is slightly different below the eye, the clean break between head and neck is different and the lines in the 'tufts' in the mane seems to have disappeared.

 

-image removed

 

I would say more changed from '64 to '94 than '94 to '10, in terms of detail, while in terms of style, there is definitely more of a change from '94 to '10.

I would have to agree.

 

 

(*) To anyone who doesn't know horse anatomy and still cares, what appear to be knees on the front legs are actually more like their wrists. Their upper 'arms' are very short with their elbows up against the rib cage. Horses stand on their finger- and toenails.

[syrtran]

The simple truth is that not everyone wants an IRS. And if you're in to road courses, the solid axle doesn't hinder the Mustang's performance in Grand Am Cup.

I, for one, haven't driven an '05+, so I can't really complain. The problem stems from the idea that Ford announced the possibility of an IRS. This means that at least preliminary work was done on the design. Yet, that design sits on a shelf and isn't even an option for those that are willing to pay.

 

BTW, I'm into road courses, but I don't have an SCCA or IMSA license, so I'm stuck with getting my cornering kicks on salt-induced pockmarked roads - where there (normally) is an actual difference between a panhard-link SRA and a proper IRS. Ask anyone that's driven both a Camaro and a 'Vette (not me).

[White99GT]

I, for one, haven't driven an '05+, so I can't really complain. The problem stems from the idea that Ford announced the possibility of an IRS. This means that at least preliminary work was done on the design. Yet, that design sits on a shelf and isn't even an option for those that are willing to pay.

 

BTW, I'm into road courses, but I don't have an SCCA or IMSA license, so I'm stuck with getting my cornering kicks on salt-induced pockmarked roads - where there (normally) is an actual difference between a panhard-link SRA and a proper IRS. Ask anyone that's driven both a Camaro and a 'Vette (not me).

 

There's no denying that on bumpy pavement an uncompromised IRS will outperform even the best solid rear axle setups. Even Maximum Motorsports will tell you that, it's just that a panhard-link (esp. with torque arm) is really quite excellent if you've ever experienced it. Certainly better than the vast majority of IRS setups you'll see in production cars.

 

I would be all for Ford making the IRS an option on certain Mustangs, but I would prefer that they don't completely abandon the solid axle.

[Mark B. Morrow]

I apologize, I probably saw that and promptly forgot it. It's an age thing (I was born years before anyone had any kind of idea for a 'pony car')

 

 

Like I said, I'd like someone to show me the difference between the '94 and the '65-73. I have an actual '68 badge next to my bed, and none of the pics of the later badge look different.

 

I still have the grille pony from the '68 coupe I junked in 1978 on my bulletin board. I was looking at the grille on my '64 1/2 today. It looks more detailled than the '10. I remember that they changed the horse for the Mustang II back in '74. I'm not sure a change was necessary. It's not a big enough difference to really bother me much.

[Edstock]

I was looking at the grille on my '64 1/2 today. It looks more detailled than the '10.

It is. The 2K10 pony's relief is flatter, with more 'planar' surface definition. However, the 2K10 pony keeps the deep front shoulder relief, which is one of the key 'power-points' in the shape expression. My 2¢. It's a nice variation on the theme.

[SVT_MAN]

Come on....it's been three years! DRIVE ONE!

I knew this thread (4 pages!?) couldn't be about a slightly restyled badge.........so it's about IRS (again) ....sigh.

 

Yet you castigate it's refinement (without driving a "new" Mustang), again, after we've been through this same conversation 3 or 4 times at least. It ain't that bad! It's different than your older Mustang!

 

The Mustang (with or w/o IRS) needs to be affordable! Something the Camaro won't be,

 

Chill out dude. Geesh. You can have an opinion, but you don't need to flame me.

 

You haven't driven a 2010 Camaro, so how can you say that the IRS isn't better? We know the Camaro will cost more, but are you paying more because of added value like an IRS suspension? Neither of us know. We only have reports from 3rd parties - and the 3rd parties say it is better and you are paying for that value. Now, that said, I can tell you right now that the Camaro's interior looks like a clown car. I'm not a fan. But styling is subjective - you are going to find people who love it and also find people who hate it. I personally hate it, but I bet Chevy can find people who like it too.

 

As far as you being upset about this thread, that is ridiculous. No one is holding a gun to your head and forcing you to read it. If you don't like a particular thread, do what everybody else does: Hit the back button. Not that hard ...

 

I, for one, haven't driven an '05+, so I can't really complain. The problem stems from the idea that Ford announced the possibility of an IRS. This means that at least preliminary work was done on the design. Yet, that design sits on a shelf and isn't even an option for those that are willing to pay.

 

BTW, I'm into road courses, but I don't have an SCCA or IMSA license, so I'm stuck with getting my cornering kicks on salt-induced pockmarked roads - where there (normally) is an actual difference between a panhard-link SRA and a proper IRS. Ask anyone that's driven both a Camaro and a 'Vette (not me).

 

Thank you. That is exaclty what I was talking about. It makes no sense that Ford designed the chassis for IRS and then didn't even implement it - AT ALL. You can't tell me that there are not enthusiasts out there who would pay $35,000 for a 320 hp Mustang GT with a properly integrated IRS setup out back. There are guys out there ... people bought the 99 - 04 Cobra - and not everbody whines about the IRS on there. And those who do simply swap it for a GT's rear axle ..

Edited September 1, 2008 by SVT_MAN

[V8 Ford]

Thank you. That is exaclty what I was talking about. It makes no sense that Ford designed the chassis for IRS and then didn't even implement it - AT ALL.

Perhaps the differences in performance were negligible? Handling is not a weakness on the S-197 Mustang (I know, I drive one as often as possible), and Ford has kept the Solid Rear Axle on even the racing mustangs. So has Roush on their line or Mustangs.

[timmm55]

Chill out dude. Geesh. You can have an opinion, but you don't need to flame me.

 

I wasn't flaming you. Sorry if it appeared that way. I was just saying it like I was talking to ya ....really it's been 3 years....try one out. I had a Mark VIII before the Mustang GT and it's not been too rough on me :reading:

 

LOL I was serious about the 4 pages! Nothing on here stays on-topic (again lol!) No malice or 'tude intended!

I'm more amused than anything.

 

As re the Camaro, it's supposed to sticker for more ($5000?) than the Mustang, it's bigger, heavier....perhaps faster ('cept for the KR500). IRS has gotten to be such a sticking point with every review, I say just do it already!!! I won't cost that much more, or add much weight....but the Mustang still has to be affordable.

Edited September 1, 2008 by timmm55

[wildosvt]

I, for one, haven't driven an '05+, so I can't really complain. The problem stems from the idea that Ford announced the possibility of an IRS. This means that at least preliminary work was done on the design. Yet, that design sits on a shelf and isn't even an option for those that are willing to pay.

 

I believe that the IRS they planned to use was installed in the Lincoln LS and T-Bird. Which both are gone, Therefore the IRS is too. Control Blade is still out there.

 

I am one of the guy's who prefer's a solidaxle. Making IRS an option would be great for those who would want it though. But I prefer dragracing, But at the same time I love watching roadracing of all types as long as it is'nt NA_CAR.

 

But back to the topic, I think the updated badge will suit the Stang well for the near future.

[FordBuyer]

I wasn't flaming you. Sorry if it appeared that way. I was just saying it like I was talking to ya ....really it's been 3 years....try one out. I had a Mark VIII before the Mustang GT and it's not been too rough on me :reading:

 

LOL I was serious about the 4 pages! Nothing on here stays on-topic (again lol!) No malice or 'tude intended!

I'm more amused than anything.

 

As re the Camaro, it's supposed to sticker for more ($5000?) than the Mustang, it's bigger, heavier....perhaps faster ('cept for the KR500). IRS has gotten to be such a sticking point with every review, I say just do it already!!! I won't cost that much more, or add much weight....but the Mustang still has to be affordable.

 

Except for the KR? Does everyone on here realize how many specialty Mustangs are out here? There is spot in Downtown Plymouth, MI where specialty Mustangs congregate. A different one everyday. The list goes on and on. Even more than the usuals like Rousch 427 and Saleen Mustangs. If you want a badass Mustang with over 400hp, not very hard to find. Most are done tastefully and look great. Not overdone at all.

 

The secret to Ford selling 150,000+ Mustangs most years is AFFORDABILITY. That has to be the ultimate goal when redesigning it for 2010 MY. Bang for the buck. Camaro has never sold consistently over 100,000 copies/year let alone 150,000. The last Camaro had Corvette engine and could easily beat the Mustang everywhich way, but it didn't sell as Mustang outsold it 4 to 1.

 

Where I disagree with Ford is GT500 having solid rear axle with other premium Mustangs. If you are paying close to $40,000 for Mustang it should have IRS IMO. For under $30,000, I can see Ford's reasoning especially when Ford did good job getting the power to rear wheels with minimum fuss. The next Premium SVT model should have IRS.

[RichardJensen]

Big chunk of rear subframe would need to be reengineered for the CB IRS. As Wildo pointed out, it could probably take the LS/T-Bird IRS with little modification, but the CB has different mounting points, mounting points are stressed and must be braced, and therefore, you either weld in a lot of extra metal, and add even more weight or you do it right, the next time around.

 

I agree that bolt-on IRS would be nice for certain aficionados, but hardly, hardly necessary for the 'off the rack' trade.

Edited September 2, 2008 by RichardJensen

[timmm55]

Except for the KR? Does everyone on here realize how many specialty Mustangs are out here? There is spot in Downtown Plymouth, MI where specialty Mustangs congregate. A different one everyday. The list goes on and on. Even more than the usuals like Rousch 427 and Saleen Mustangs. If you want a badass Mustang with over 400hp, not very hard to find. Most are done tastefully and look great. Not overdone at all.

 

OK. Except, for example the KR500. The rest are tuners, not built by Ford/SVT/Shelby, I'm not about to list every Kenny Bell, Saleen etc.

The point I'm trying to make is the Mustang won't be outclassed at the factory top end cars: Shelby:SS:SRT-8.

 

Yes, for about $5600 I can have a 420 HP Saleen SC installed on my 05 Mustang GT...and it would look totally stock.

Edited September 2, 2008 by timmm55

[atomaro]

OK, time for my 2 cents:

 

1. Weight of GT 500 is blown greatly out of proportion. The bulk of the weight complaints are terminator owners complaining about the weight of the GT500 cause they are butt hurt about there baby being upstaged.

 

2. This whole SRA vs IRS is utterly retarded. Read some info from 2000 Cobra R owners who also own and race the GT500. See how the cars compare.

 

3. Yes, LS1 F-bodys are fast. A Mach I is a drivers race...the S197 GTs will lose with equal drivers. Shelby GTs and Bullits are a drivers race.

 

4. stop reading all the BS out there from fanboys on the internet and knuckleheads from Edmunds. Drive the cars, make up your own minds.

[atomcat68]

Go back to that Car And Driver issue where they "revealed" the next Mustang. The picture everyone said was false. Isn't that the new pony logo in the grille?

[V8 Ford]

Go back to that Car And Driver issue where they "revealed" the next Mustang. The picture everyone said was false. Isn't that the new pony logo in the grille?

The logo they used in that chop came from the 2004 Concept.

[Tico]

Aren't we all tired of the IRS or no IRS debate? Why not offer IRS on all models ABOVE the GT? Bring back the MACH1 or similar, give it a bump in HP and IRS for those who want to pay the $$$. Of course the Cobra should also have IRS. As for the base GT keep it CHEAP and FAST. Yes the Camaro this and the Camaro that. Well then go buy the Camaro. Better hurry, I dobut it will be availabe more that 5 model years before it is canceled again!

 

The success of Mustang boils down to this: RWD V8 two door at a great price. Blow that and we may all be looking at a 2012 version of the Ford Probe!

[F250]

Oh, and I'd love for someone to point out the "refinements" that occurred in '94. Also, they ignored the fact that the '84 GT-350 and the '89-90 25th anniversary cars had the badge. And the '79 pace cars had a horse decal. I think they're hiding something - [insert wild, half-baked conspiracy theory here].

:D

Actually, they probably just lost the original pattern.

 

1979-1982 hood emblem:

1994-1998:

 

The '94 looks like the original first generation horse. The '79 looks like the Mustang II logo which had the horse in more of a canter speed with the head up and the legs at a slower pace than the full run look of the first generation horse.

Edited September 9, 2008 by F250

[goinbroke2]

Give it a break, the irs was tried on a mustang...and BOTH people who wanted it, bought it.

 

Face it, your PERSONAL OPINION does not fit with the MAJORITY of mustang BUYERS.

 

Get over it, nuff said.

[FLLMTR]

Back in the early 90's the problem my buddies had with the Camaro was obtaining insurance. Yeah, their cars were faster than my 89 LX 5.0, but at least I could afford it.