Biker16 Posted May 3, 2012 Share Posted May 3, 2012 how about the mustang as a fastback only, and eliminating the notchback completely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edstock Posted May 3, 2012 Share Posted May 3, 2012 how about the mustang as a fastback only, and eliminating the notchback completely. Works for me; whether the world markets might have an effect on that, only Ford knows. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Versa-Tech Posted May 3, 2012 Share Posted May 3, 2012 (edited) how about the mustang as a fastback only, and eliminating the notchback completely. That would depend on a few variables. A rear hatch would certainly be far more attractive to european buyers. However, their would be an inherent loss in lateral (and potentially vertical) rigidity which would need to be compensated for. Furthermore, the hatch itself would require it's own structure along with the roof on which it hinges. That said, a hatchback would provide more asthetic design freedom and potentially better aero. Either way, a hatch would cost substantially more. The designer side of my brain says they'll go hatch, the engineer side says notch. Unfortunately the accountant node is still awaiting the approval of bong resin cleanup funds, which are unlikely to pass either side of the aformentioned halves, rendering it useless until the end of the erection year. Edited May 3, 2012 by Versa-Tech Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StangBang Posted May 3, 2012 Share Posted May 3, 2012 how about the mustang as a fastback only, and eliminating the notchback completely. What if Ford pulled a suprise and made Mustangs as fastback coupes only with no convertibles??... Then brought out a new Thunderbird as a converitble only model?? Well it would be a great reason to bring back the Thunderbird but the Mustang Convertible-ists would have a freakin fit! Anyway I see the full fastback bodystyle coming back to the Mustang. It's one way to make the rear overhang shorter thus descreasing the massive look of the current car. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted May 3, 2012 Share Posted May 3, 2012 Eh, I don't see Ford abandoning the Mustang convertible, ergo I don't see a fastback returning either. The current cars already have a "fastback coupe" look to them anyway. Probably as close as we're going to get. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
30 OTT 6 Posted May 3, 2012 Share Posted May 3, 2012 I consider the SN95 and S197 Mustangs to be fastbacks, not notchbacks. If the rear window opens along with the deck it is a hatchback, not a fastback. The last Mustang "notchback" and "hatchback" was built in 1993 on the old Fox chassis. The old 5.0L Fox notchbacks were bitchin' sleepers, especially when the "5.0" badges were taken off. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moosetang Posted May 3, 2012 Share Posted May 3, 2012 I consider the SN95 and S197 Mustangs to be fastbacks, not notchbacks. If the rear window opens along with the deck it is a hatchback, not a fastback. You are correct, sir. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biker16 Posted May 3, 2012 Share Posted May 3, 2012 Anyway I see the full fastback bodystyle coming back to the Mustang. It's one way to make the rear overhang shorter thus decreasing the massive look of the current car. I agree 100% Eh, I don't see Ford abandoning the Mustang convertible, ergo I don't see a fastback returning either. The current cars already have a "fastback coupe" look to them anyway. Probably as close as we're going to get. I think they should make the mustang a "fastback "hatchback. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PJ111 Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 I agree 100% I think they should make the mustang a "fastback "hatchback. Makes it more practical...At the expense of structural regidity . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomServo92 Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 Makes it more practical...At the expense of structural regidity . And that's why there shouldn't be any more Mustang hatchbacks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBirdStangSkyliner Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 (edited) And that's why there shouldn't be any more Mustang hatchbacks. When you are going for high horsepower, and hopefully great handling in the next generation, structural rigidity has to trump practicality in a car like a Mustang. Just imagine if Ford could accomplish adding world class handling to the Mustang while retaining all of the great pony-car attributes. I think the boys across the pond, the bigger pond, and down under would be interested. Edited May 4, 2012 by TBirdStangSkyliner Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mettech Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 (edited) When you are going for high horsepower, and hopefully great handling in the next generation, structural rigidity has to trump practicality in a car like a Mustang. Just imagine if Ford could accomplish adding world class handling to the Mustang while retaining all of the great pony-car attributes. I think the boys across the pond, the bigger pond, and down under would be interested. And don't forget: China's Women Buy Maseratis and Ferraris Like Italian Pastries UPDATE (7/6/11): China’s Red Cross, the country’s largest charity, has come under attack after a young woman who claimed to work at the charity posted pictures of herself online posing with her white Maserati. She also owns an orange Lamborghini. Sheesh. Meanwhile, the former Ferrari operations chief for China (who now oversees North American ops) says that the country “is now the second-largest market for Ferrari, and the average age of customers there is 32. In the U.S., it’s 47.” A third of China’s millionaires are women, and they buy a disproportionately large share of high-performance sports cars in the world’s fastest-growing major economy. Fiat SpA said the percentage of women buying its Maseratis in China is triple that of Europe, while the percentage buying its Ferraris is double the global average, according to Bloomberg. The rise of women entrepreneurs—more than half the world’s richest women are Chinese according to Hurun Report—is propelling their share of luxury spending, said FT. ”In China, women are ambitious…so they will buy more ‘high powered’ products than women in the US or Europe,” says Tom Doctoroff, greater China head of JWT, the advertising agency. “A woman here needs to project her power in ways that a western woman simply does not need to.” http://www.forbes.co...alian-pastries/ Edited May 4, 2012 by mettech Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2b2 Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 totally off-topic (probably) wonder if a glass-area-only hatch could provide even better rigidity than a trunklid? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Versa-Tech Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 totally off-topic (probably) wonder if a glass-area-only hatch could provide even better rigidity than a trunklid? It's the crossmember between the front edge of the trunk lid and the back seat that braces the rear end. The problem with a hatch is that it only serves a purpose if the cross member is moved under the trunk floor or removed entirely. Furthermore, the rear seats would need to fold forward. All of this adds weight, cost, and reduces efficiency. Considering the design objective, the cons outweigh the pros 3:1. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Versa-Tech Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 I consider the SN95 and S197 Mustangs to be fastbacks, not notchbacks. If the rear window opens along with the deck it is a hatchback, not a fastback. The last Mustang "notchback" and "hatchback" was built in 1993 on the old Fox chassis. The old 5.0L Fox notchbacks were bitchin' sleepers, especially when the "5.0" badges were taken off. I just realized that it's the louvers that are hinged on my '69, not the glass. Quite honestly, I think I just opened the decklid for the first time since... Well, ever. :D So, my next question is... What the hell is the difference between a fastback and a coupe?! Marketing? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 I just realized that it's the louvers that are hinged on my '69, not the glass. Quite honestly, I think I just opened the decklid for the first time since... Well, ever. :D So, my next question is... What the hell is the difference between a fastback and a coupe?! Marketing? Coupe typically means a 2 door vehicle. Fastback means a vehicle having a roofline that slopes all the way from front to rear. A Fastback could also be a Hatchback or a Coupe. A Coupe could be a Fastback but not a Hatchback. A Hatchback could be a Fastback but not a Coupe. A sedan can also be a Fastback (MB CLS). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biker16 Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 It's the crossmember between the front edge of the trunk lid and the back seat that braces the rear end. The problem with a hatch is that it only serves a purpose if the cross member is moved under the trunk floor or removed entirely. Furthermore, the rear seats would need to fold forward. All of this adds weight, cost, and reduces efficiency. Considering the design objective, the cons outweigh the pros 3:1. the cross member connect the C-pillar together, it is usually in the roof not in the package tray on most cars. on the focus fiesta and next fusion the tray is not structural because they were designed to be hatchbacks and or wagons. the C-pillars floor and Roof Form a structural ring. the mustangs seats already fold forward. If moving to a hatch allows the size of the car to be reduced it can save weight. The Corvette has survived decades with a hatch body style, with little complaints about its structure. even with it's package tray the must torsional rigidity is less than a Focus Hatch. BTW this is a fastback. the current car is a notchback, not a fast back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 the mustangs seats already fold forward. They haven't since the 2005 MY The Corvette has survived decades with a hatch body style, with little complaints about its structure. even with it's package tray the must torsional rigidity is less than a Focus Hatch. The Corvette doesn't carry people in a rear seat either. Look at the Side impact testing on the 2000-2007 Focus hatchback...it scored marginal for the rear seat passengers. Thus why the 2008 went to a Coupe design to improve that rating. I'll assume the 2012 hatchback has been stiffened up in that area... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoonerLS Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 this is a fastback. the current car is a notchback, not a fast back. This is the original fastback: Which sure looks a lot like this: Now this is a notchback: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biker16 Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 They haven't since the 2005 MY thats strange. even though it does have a hole in the BIW for a passthrough. The Corvette doesn't carry people in a rear seat either. Look at the Side impact testing on the 2000-2007 Focus hatchback...it scored marginal for the rear seat passengers. Thus why the 2008 went to a Coupe design to improve that rating. I'll assume the 2012 hatchback has been stiffened up in that area... the 2005 focus sedan and 3dr hatch received 4 stars in side impact tests compared to 3 stars for the 2005 Taurus with it's package tray. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Versa-Tech Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 (edited) the cross member connect the C-pillar together, it is usually in the roof not in the package tray on most cars. on the focus fiesta and next fusion the tray is not structural because they were designed to be hatchbacks and or wagons. the C-pillars floor and Roof Form a structural ring. the mustangs seats already fold forward. If moving to a hatch allows the size of the car to be reduced it can save weight. The Corvette has survived decades with a hatch body style, with little complaints about its structure. even with it's package tray the must torsional rigidity is less than a Focus Hatch. BTW this is a fastback. the current car is a notchback, not a fast back. Body style designations generally only concern the functional elements. I consider this marketing. As far as the placement of that cross member goes, most do put it under the floor, but we're quickly approaching the day when such compromises are no longer acceptable. If Ford really plans to shed as much weight as they say, they're going to need to change the standard of what they consider acceptable. Comvention is dead. Edited May 4, 2012 by Versa-Tech Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 (edited) They haven't since the 2005 MY Says who? Edited May 4, 2012 by NickF1011 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 Ford says otherwise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biker16 Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 Says who? i thought so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 the 2005 focus sedan and 3dr hatch received 4 stars in side impact tests compared to 3 stars for the 2005 Taurus with it's package tray. Based on a platform that dated from the 1980s...lets try again 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.