Catalepsy Posted December 11, 2006 Share Posted December 11, 2006 Anyone with anything? I guess we pretty much covered everything in the regular forums. Let see how long this forum stays empty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZanatWork Posted December 11, 2006 Share Posted December 11, 2006 Yeah, golly, this thread's been around SO long.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catalepsy Posted December 11, 2006 Author Share Posted December 11, 2006 Yeah, golly, this thread's been around SO long.... LOL I know. I guess I'm used to the Mac rumors forums that is immediately populated as soon as it pops up. It's unrealistic to expect auto companies to have same type of fan base I suppose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZanatWork Posted December 11, 2006 Share Posted December 11, 2006 iFord? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JETSOLVER Posted December 11, 2006 Share Posted December 11, 2006 autobytel/latest Priddy pic Apologies if posted elsewhere, but this is interesting... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted December 11, 2006 Share Posted December 11, 2006 autobytel/latest Priddy pic Apologies if posted elsewhere, but this is interesting... Its pretty pathetic that photoshops are now accepted as spyshots...ugh... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J-150 Posted December 11, 2006 Share Posted December 11, 2006 LOL I know. I guess I'm used to the Mac rumors forums that is immediately populated as soon as it pops up. It's unrealistic to expect auto companies to have same type of fan base I suppose. Mac users have no life... they have nothing better to do than hover around forums just waiting to post Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catalepsy Posted December 11, 2006 Author Share Posted December 11, 2006 Its pretty pathetic that photoshops are now accepted as spyshots...ugh... I agree. Remember when some site posted a photochopped pic of Jag S-type and claimed it to be rendered by someone who saw the vehicle. Well, it wasn't even close. In the internet era, I suppose automotive journalism is really akin to supermarket tabloids that photochop the head of a bat to the body of a baby and proclaims "Vampire Baby Lives!" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh Posted December 11, 2006 Share Posted December 11, 2006 Remember before photoshops there was "Artist Impressions"? Even then, that wasn't much to go on. You go to look where it came from and if they have any credibility. Does this B. Piddy(?) company have any cred at all? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JETSOLVER Posted December 11, 2006 Share Posted December 11, 2006 (edited) First off, the pic is clearly stated as a computer rendering. In the age of 39 Mega pixel Hasselblads and spy camo, why is this a suprise? I can't recall the last time I saw a photo print from a negative, maybe in 2k? Second, Brenda Priddy Co. is perhaps the premier spy photo gang in the country and has a real reputation for getting the pics and scoops. Think of her as a calibrated leak and you get the idea. I have no doubt that this is a heck of a lot closer to the actual product than those bar napkin sketchs that come out with painful regularity in Motor Trend. That rag has not been right on anything in at least twenty years.... But of course, the idea is that you combine all the available info from all the sources and decide what makes sense. Like, a redesign based on the current roof and rear C line, the sales of the GT500 and its frontal and rear cues, the desire and ease of rear fender hips, the need for increased cooling due a potential new powerplant and issues with the hood aero, and the tiein with the recent Giugiaro concept. All in all, I think its a pretty reasonable styling compromise. But, that is just an opinion. Edited December 11, 2006 by JETSOLVER Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Watchdevil Posted December 11, 2006 Share Posted December 11, 2006 (edited) I absolutely like the Priddy picture of the Mustang. It addresses the issue perfectly that I had about the Mustang front end looking too tall and stodgy which made it look old. The current Mustang has a grille that is too tall above the bumper shelf. The hood has this bulge that makes the cowl look to high instead of low and wide. Also, the top of bumper shelf is placed too low and juts out too far so that it looks like a bumper added to comply with 1973 standards. The Priddy picture gets that front end down in a low and wide stance providing just enough height necessary for the lamps and grille. I would do away with the inboard small round lights grouped inside of the regular headlamps. But I do think adding little high tech touches like more interesting projector headlamp detailing and those thinner LED turn signal lamps lends a more technically sophisticated look a modern Mustang needs. While the taillamps are fine, they could use some more detail. Base cars can retain the traditional bulbs but for a more sophisticated look on uplevel models they can do LED's. On the Shelby models they can do wider horizonal lamps like the old ones that were borrowed from he Thunderbird. And here is another idea. Since Ford did the MyColor option for the instrument panel, why not have optional LED taillamps that can be programmed at will to flash sequentially? If the Mustang team is creative, they can think of surpise and delight features and options. A Mustang is special and should be presented that way. No excuse for cost considerations when adding these features. The base Mustang can always be offered without them while some interesting features can be purchased as options that most customers are willing to pay extra for just to have them. I never had any issues with any of the exterior styling from the windshield back. Ford addressed my desire for a complete C-scoop detail with the GT/CS, though I wish the sculpture was recessed instead of added on. I have no issues with whether the quarter panels get a hop-up or not. If it is not done right it will make the car seem dated and unecessarily fussy when simple and clean will do. The biggest complaint is the interior. The dash and door panels looks like what it is. Hard cheap plastic. There is a lack of detailing on the door panels and center console which are all areas the Mustang traditionally was noted for having high style. Just some attention to detail, surfacing and trim can go a long ways. The rubbermaid stackable bin console is a disaster. The automatic shifter lever is the most egonomically unfreindly thing to manage with your hands and looks like it belongs on an old video game console. It juts out of a rectangular opening and trim that looks like it was cut out with an exacto knife. I love the retro flower pot steerng wheel center hub but it is saddled with an thin oversized diameter wheel rim that they seemed to have recycled from the 1970's... The base cloth seat fabric HAS TO GO! It looks and feels like shit. Edited December 11, 2006 by Watchdevil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blueblood Posted December 11, 2006 Share Posted December 11, 2006 (edited) Anyone with anything? I guess we pretty much covered everything in the regular forums. Let see how long this forum stays empty. Give it some time, the forum was just added yesterday.. I absolutely like the Priddy picture of the Mustang. It addresses the issue perfectly that I had about the Mustang front end looking too tall and stodgy which made it look old. The current Mustang has a grille that is too tall above the bumper shelf. The hood has this bulge that makes the cowl look to high instead of low and wide. Also, the top of bumper shelf is placed too low and juts out too far so that it looks like a bumper added to comply with 1973 standards. The Priddy picture gets that front end down in a low and wide stance providing just enough height necessary for the lamps and grille. I would do away with the inboard small round lights grouped inside of the regular headlamps. But I do think adding little high tech touches like more interesting projector headlamp detailing and those thinner LED turn signal lamps lends a more technically sophisticated look a modern Mustang needs. I never had any issues with any of the exterior styling from the windshield back. Ford addressed my desire for a complete C-scoop detail with the GT/CS, though I wish the sculpture was recessed instead of added on. I have no issues with whether the quarter panels get a hop-up or not. If it is not done right it will make the car seem dated and unecessarily fussy when simple and clean will do. The biggest complaint is the interior. The dash and door panels looks like what it is. Hard cheap plastic. There is a lack of detailing on the door panels and center console which are all areas the Mustang traditionally was noted for having high style. Just some attention to detail, surfacing and trim can go a long ways. The rubbermaid stackable bin console is a disaster. The automatic shifter lever is the most egonomically unfreindly thing to manage with your hands and looks like it belongs on an old video game console. It juts out of a rectangular opening and trim that looks like it was cut out with an exacto knife. I love the retro flower pot steerng wheel center hub but it is saddled with an thin oversized diameter wheel rim that they seemed to have recycled from the 1970's... The base cloth seat fabric HAS TO GO! It looks and feels like shit. What I can't for the life of me understand is how it seems every new Ford SUV and truck has bumpers that are flush with the grill, which shortens the front overhang, yet all of Fords cars have these huge, truck-like bumpers.. It doesn't make sense, shouldn't it be the other way around?????????? I like this one better... Edited December 11, 2006 by Blueblood Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Watchdevil Posted December 11, 2006 Share Posted December 11, 2006 Give it some time, the forum was just added yesterday..What I can't for the life of me understand is how it seems every new Ford SUV and truck has bumpers that are flush with the grill, which shortens the front overhang, yet all of Fords cars have these huge, truck-like bumpers.. It doesn't make sense, shouldn't it be the other way around?????????? I like this one better... Thats not bad but I am not crazy about the headlamp and parking lamp arrangement on that one. I am not ready to accept anything but round headlamps on the Mustang. Round doesn't work on every car but it's something that characterizes Mustangs and seems more appropriate. I think it is important for the lamps and grille to have a snarky and meaner look (to convey authority and power) as it it has eyes peering from a mask or something to that effect. One thing I notice on that illustration and the Priddy one is the hop-up detail in the quarter panels. I think a modest hint of hop-up seems to work, but if it is over-applied like the 1967-68 models I am afraid it will look bulbous and old. I did notice in the Priddy picture that the lower bodyside sculture line was raised. I am not sure that is realistic but it does look good and makes the car look more substantial at the bottom instead of having too much of a tucked under look. I also feel that the grille needs to have a deeper inset look than what we have been seeing. I like that the GT500 gives us the leaned-in sides more like the Mustang concept car but still the bulged hood and raised front edge worsens the front end height that I was complaing about. When I see the GT500 in white and blue stripes, I keep wanting to fix it so it does not look like the Mustang II on the front end. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ANTAUS Posted December 11, 2006 Share Posted December 11, 2006 Remember the Ford trucks/SUV have that "Blockerbeam" which allows the truck not to over-ride a passenger car that has a lower bumper level. That is why there's HUGE bumpers on the Ford trucks/SUVs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
156n3rd Posted December 13, 2006 Share Posted December 13, 2006 As far as new and future cars are concerned, when does the U.S. get some small asskicking cars? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timmm55 Posted December 16, 2006 Share Posted December 16, 2006 As far as new and future cars are concerned, when does the U.S. get some small asskicking cars? About 3 or 4 years ago when they made both the SVT Focus and the Neon SRT. 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.