Mustang to lose 15" length; 6.5" width?

[blazerdude20]

http://m.leftlanenews.com/2015-ford-mustang-to-go-smaller-lighter.html

 

"I know they are trying to remove a minimum of 400 pounds," an inside source told Edmunds. "The big thing is that it will be a ' smarter' size."

 

That 'smarter' size will also include a smaller footprint. The source indicated that the 2015 Mustang will be about 15 inches shorter and 6.5 inches narrower than today's model.

[Anthony]

(If true) that would bring it down to right around below Ford Focus sized.

Edited August 15, 2013 by Intrepidatious

[Tico]

A little quick googling and cut and pasting yields numbers below. I know number may vary by trim level (4 cylinder base vs GT or Cobra). Based on what I found I think this article is exaggerating the length and width reduction A LOT. So the S550 would be the weight of an SN95, the length of a Mustang II and the width of the original 1965. Seems pretty drastic. I thought the S550 was still loosely based on the S197? Maybe they meant centimeters not inches?!

 

 

2015 Mustang ?????

 

weight: 3101
Lenth: 173.5
width: 67.9
Wheelbase: ????

 

2014 Mustang:

Weight (lbs) 3501
Length, (in) 188.5
Width (in) 73.9
Height (in) 55.8
Wheelbase 107.1"

 

2004 Mustang

 

Curbweight (lbs.) Coupe: 3,006
length: 183.2 in.
width Max w/o mirror: 73.1 in.
height: 53.1 in.
Wheelbase: 101.3 in

 

 

1979 Mustang

 

Weight: Coupe 2,550 lbs Hatch 2,790 lbs 5.0 L V8 +320 lbs
Length: 179.1″
Width: 69.1″
Height: 51.5″
Wheelbase 100.5″

 

 

1974 Mustang

 

Weight: Coupe: 2,620 lbs. Fastback: 2,699 lbs. Ghia: 2,866 lbs. Mach 1: 2,778 lbs.
Length: 175"
Width: 70.2"
Height: 50.3"
Wheel Base: 96.2"

 

 

1965 Mustang

Curb-weight range, pounds: 2,445-2,800 (1965); 2,488-2,800 (1966)
Length, inches: 181.6
Width, inches: 68.2
Wheelbase, inches: 108.0

[Deanh]

if so AWESOME!....

[silvrsvt]

I find the size reductions to be a little bit overly optimistic....it would basically mean a totally new platform again.

 

And the interior impact would be huge...I don't want to drive around in a car that feels like my '86 Escort GT interior size wise...like my 98 Mustang GT did.

[bzcat]

(If true) that would bring it down to right around below Ford Focus sized.

 

It will still be larger than Focus.

 

Chopping 15 inches off Mustang will make the new one about the same size as E46 BMW 3 series.

 

Also, the info in that article has already been debunked as completely wrong The new Mustang will be wider than the current one, not narrower, due to IRS. But it will be shorter. See the debunking below

 

http://www.drivingenthusiast.net/sec-blog/?p=16207

Edited August 15, 2013 by bzcat

[ZanatWork]

On behalf of other big, tall guys....I hope that doesn't mean we're screwed over in the first row of seats. I can drive the current car just fine.

[lfeg]

Actually, I fit in a 66 Mustang better than the current one - better leg room for me in the old one

[ZanatWork]

Really? 1st gen Mustangs were awful for me, had my legs splayed around the wheel in an awkward fashion. My '73 Mach 1, however, was excellent.

Actually, I fit in a 66 Mustang better than the current one - better leg room for me in the old one

[Deanh]

It will still be larger than Focus.

 

Chopping 15 inches off Mustang will make the new one about the same size as E46 BMW 3 series.

 

Also, the info in that article has already been debunked as completely wrong The new Mustang will be wider than the current one, not narrower, due to IRS. But it will be shorter. See the debunking below

 

http://www.drivingenthusiast.net/sec-blog/?p=16207

perfect size IMO....and agreed the car is rumoured to be wider.....

[sullynd]

On behalf of other big, tall guys....I hope that doesn't mean we're screwed over in the first row of seats. I can drive the current car just fine.

I don't know, short enough and I can just lose the drivers seat entirely and sit in the rear

[bzcat]

Sounds like the new Mustang will lose the excessive overhangs at both end. That will account for all of the reduction in length. The wheelbase is not changing (see the debunking article I posted a few posts above). This tells me the interior cabin space is staying about the same. Perhaps some cargo room will be lost due to the reduced rear overhang but the added width should make for a more comfortable rear seat.

[Mark B. Morrow]

Actually, I fit in a 66 Mustang better than the current one - better leg room for me in the old one

I can actually put two adults in the back seat of my '64 1/2.

[rkisler]

Sounds like the new Mustang will lose the excessive overhangs at both end. That will account for all of the reduction in length. The wheelbase is not changing (see the debunking article I posted a few posts above). This tells me the interior cabin space is staying about the same. Perhaps some cargo room will be lost due to the reduced rear overhang but the added width should make for a more comfortable rear seat.

 

This is a D2c derivative, so the basics are already pretty much there. There should be some improvement in rear seat package with the IRS, but the rear of the Mustang is the most difficult part of the car to develop. There is so much going on: suspension, rear seat passengers, huge sewer pipe exhausts, convertible package, and all combined with a sloping roof that pushes the rear seat passengers down. It's a nightmare and even with sophisticated design tools, it takes hours and hours to move stuff around to make the best compromise. If the Mustang didn't have the iconic design, but looked more like a sedan (like the 3-series), then it wouldn't be such an issue.

[LSFan00]

If they're really going to sell it globally now then it only follows that the vehicle will not be as long, and will be more tailored to do well with smaller displacement options, compete more with euro 2-doors per above, etc.

 

I have wondered if the euro pedestrian impact standards require more canted hoods (as opposed to horizontal).

[Biker16]

http://m.leftlanenews.com/2015-ford-mustang-to-go-smaller-lighter.html

 

"I know they are trying to remove a minimum of 400 pounds," an inside source told Edmunds. "The big thing is that it will be a ' smarter' size."

 

That 'smarter' size will also include a smaller footprint. The source indicated that the 2015 Mustang will be about 15 inches shorter and 6.5 inches narrower than today's model.

I hope this is true.

[EBFlex]

If that's true, holy crap!

 

But, then there may be room for a more Corvette-like competitor in Ford's lineup.