The 7th Gen Mustang S650 Has Officially Landed!!

[spcmafia]

I keep looking at this car, and well, is not bad. But the huge iPad really bothers me and it feels like an afterthought. Like they invested their money on the outside, 96% of the interior and suddenly someone was like "Guys, what about the dash?" and someone else said "Emm, shit, he's right, uhhhhh, quick! Grab one of those large screens laying around, mount it to the dash, and call it a day".

[Dadhawk]

Originally Posted by spcmafia

I keep looking at this car, and well, is not bad. But the huge iPad really bothers me and it feels like an afterthought. Like they invested their money on the outside, 96% of the interior and suddenly someone was like "Guys, what about the dash?" and someone else said "Emm, shit, he's right, uhhhhh, quick! Grab one of those large screens laying around, mount it to the dash, and call it a day".

It likely looks less tacked on when you are sitting in the car facing it. I know that is the way the one in the Escalade and the Lyriq is. I've seen the on in the Escalade in person, and literally hundreds of videos on the Lyriq most from the driving position.

It is certainly better than the craptastic setup in the MachE.

On the flip side, it is a "sporty car" not a luxury car, and I am conflicted as I think it should have real gauges and dials but I suspect that is a thing of the past.

[spcmafia]

Originally Posted by Dadhawk

It likely looks less tacked on when you are sitting in the car facing it. I know that is the way the one in the Escalade and the Lyriq is. I've seen the on in the Escalade in person, and literally hundreds of videos on the Lyriq most from the driving position.

It is certainly better than the craptastic setup in the MachE.

On the flip side, it is a "sporty car" not a luxury car, and I am conflicted as I think it should have real gauges and dials but I suspect that is a thing of the past.

As much as I don't like digital clusters, that seems to be way things will be. To me it just screams a warranty/electronic issue. To others, it screams innovation.

But I guess technology has come so far with LED displays that companies just assume vehicle owners probably would trade the vehicle way before their screens start acting up. Let the next owner sit on that bill.

[Dadhawk]

Originally Posted by spcmafia

As much as I don't like digital clusters, that seems to be way things will be. To me it just screams a warranty/electronic issue. To others, it screams innovation.

But I guess technology has come so far with LED displays that companies just assume vehicle owners probably would trade the vehicle way before their screens start acting up. Let the next owner sit on that bill.

If we end up with one of these in our stable I would be concerned about the display with the top down as it would be a convertible.

MomHawk's 2005 pretty much looks like it just rolled off the showroom floor but it does have about 130,000 miles on it and I made the mistake of showing her this one. Her overly enthusiastic response made me think she may own one of these at some point.

[Sasquachulator]

Originally Posted by spcmafia

I keep looking at this car, and well, is not bad. But the huge iPad really bothers me and it feels like an afterthought. Like they invested their money on the outside, 96% of the interior and suddenly someone was like "Guys, what about the dash?" and someone else said "Emm, shit, he's right, uhhhhh, quick! Grab one of those large screens laying around, mount it to the dash, and call it a day".

Almost every manufacturer is utilizing this ultrawide double screen design now.
Its making the interiors of all these cars look very similar to each other.

No more individuality.

And i hate it alot.
All these tech "innovations" and "improvements/deprovements) will make repairs a bitch. KISS philosphody is going out the window.

If your touch screen stops working you're now chaging the entire double screen instead of the one piece that's broken. Ditto with your gauge cluster.
And its going from a 150-250 gauge cluster swap to a 2000 dollar electronics "upgrade".

[Dake]

Pretty dull. It's not bad, but not especially interesting or exciting either.

[wbradley]

Not every evolution is a step forward. Prime example, transition from Mustang to the Mustang II. As a 9 or 10 yr old, I remember walking around Yorkdale Mall seeing the new Ford cars displayed in 1974 and thinking to myself why does the Mustang look like the Pinto? That was the crappiest era for cars.
Putting a big horizontal touch screen in every car detracts from character and individuality.
And I like the look of analog gauges. Heck, I choose analog music (LPs on an audiophile system) over streaming. I feel the same about gauges.

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by Red-86

Am I the only one who thinks the shape (what we can see through the camo) is basically exactly the same as the current gen? I heard it reuses the same platform (much like the new Z reuses the 370 platform), so I am not expecting much of a departure, styling wise. Nose and tail cosmetic changes most likely.

Unfortunately for me despite liking the Mustang styling I just find them too large a car. I saw a gorgeous 1967 Stang parked next to new one recently and the size difference was shocking. The old car is so much more compact and lower - almost 86/BRZ like - compared to the massive modern Stang. Since the Stang’s back seats are only good for kids anyway, I’d like to see them shrink the modern Stang in size. Smaller, lower, lighter. As a bonus performance would be improved too. Maybe they will when it goes all electric after the next gen?

"...it's a lump of lard...Lose the inline six and that idiotic three speed, shorten the wheelbase and somehow lose half a ton."

The Mustang was never small relative to the crowd. Everything has gotten a lot bigger.

[soundman98]

Originally Posted by Sasquachulator

Almost every manufacturer is utilizing this ultrawide double screen design now.
Its making the interiors of all these cars look very similar to each other.

No more individuality.

And i hate it alot.
All these tech "innovations" and "improvements/deprovements) will make repairs a bitch. KISS philosphody is going out the window.

If your touch screen stops working you're now chaging the entire double screen instead of the one piece that's broken. Ditto with your gauge cluster.
And its going from a 150-250 gauge cluster swap to a 2000 dollar electronics "upgrade".

"they all look the same"




though i agree on the repair costs. it essentially makes a long-term warranty a requirement.

and it's not just the gauges. even the led headlights are the same way-- they're sealed units, so one goes out, and it's $2k...

[Teseo]

Hope Ford sell them without dealerships, MSRP no bullshit or whatsoever.

[ZDan]

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

The Mustang was never small relative to the crowd. Everything has gotten a lot bigger.

Original Mustang was small relative to the 1964/65/66 crowd, and well under 3000 lb. It ballooned on up from there to 3500ish by 1973, then the 1974 Pinto Mustang II came out and it was relatively small and lightweight(ish) relative to the crowd again (unfortunately also ugly and slow).
Then the Fox-body Mustang was not exactly bulky or ridic overweight, 3200 lb. for the V8 version most of its run.

But yeah, the 911 going from small ~2300ish lb. to 3300+ and cartoonishly bloated is perhaps more of a shame...

New Mustang looks great on the outside, looks less bulky which is an improvement. V8 models will probably still be ~3800 lb. though...

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by ZDan

Original Mustang was small relative to the 1964/65/66 crowd, and well under 3000 lb. It ballooned on up from there to 3500ish by 1973, then the 1974 Pinto Mustang II came out and it was relatively small and lightweight(ish) relative to the crowd again (unfortunately also ugly and slow).
Then the Fox-body Mustang was not exactly bulky or ridic overweight, 3200 lb. for the V8 version most of its run.

But yeah, the 911 going from small ~2300ish lb. to 3300+ and cartoonishly bloated is perhaps more of a shame...

New Mustang looks great on the outside, looks less bulky which is an improvement. V8 models will probably still be ~3800 lb. though...

I don't really know if it was small relative to other cars. The design of the original pony cars was taken off of the compact 2/4 door sedans that preceded them like the Ford Falcon and Plymouth Valiant for the Mustang and Barracuda, respectively. The idea was to replicate the much smaller sports cars and coupes with something sporty looking on the most compact chassis they had, kind of like the AE86 from the Corolla or 86 from the modern Corolla. These compacts had V8's already, so this was largely an exercise in reskinning the cars and trying to improve the handling a little. Are you saying the modern Mustang or pony cars are no longer on a compact chassis or dimensions?




https://www.hemmings.com/stories/201...s-1965-mustang

The Mustang isn't too different than other compact American sedans. Most compacts are just a little shorter because of transverse powertrains and no longer are offered with six or eight cylinders because of it, which is why most of these modern pony cars have moved up to larger sedan chassis like the Challenger. I think if Ford put a V8 into a Focus sedan then the hood would be a little longer and the weight wouldn't be too far off from the current Mustang weight, as they have similar wheelbases and dimensions.






Now the Challenger got much bigger to be more of a muscle car than a pony car, as it shares a full-sized car chassis with the other V8 RWD cars in Dodge's lineup like the Chrysler 300 and Charger (original was a mid-sized muscle car), but again, this is because most compact and midsized cars are FWD like the Dodge Dart, necessitating the gain in size of the Challenger to a Muscle car from a pony car.

I think if we compare many cars from the 60's to today then we would see about a thousand pounds of weight and increased dimensions. I don't know how many pictures I would need to prove this is ubiquitous, but the exceptions would be in the large car segment of the past with huge overhangs that are far less common today, as cars have focused on more passenger space, economy and many large cars have been replaced by trucks/suvs.

[ZDan]

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

I don't really know if it was small relative to other cars. The design of the original pony cars was taken off of the compact 2/4 door sedans that preceded them like the Ford Falcon and Plymouth Valiant for the Mustang and Barracuda, respectively.

Yup. They were small cars in the context of the era. The 64-66 V8 Mustang was 2800-2900 lb. when most cars were 3500-4000+ lb.

It ballooned up in size/weight from ~1967 up to 1973 when they weighed as much as 3500 lb., vs. most cars still being in the 3500-4000+ range.

Then the Pinto Mustang came out and was quite a bit lighter, versus 70s American cars that were still mostly a lot bigger and heavier. Fox-body came out in late 70s and was reasonably light at ~2800 lb. for v8 models. Bulked up a bit to early 90s V8s at ~3200 lb. Mid-90s through 2004 mod-motor V8 Mustangs were ~3300 lb (IRS Cobras were heavier, supercharged Cobras heavier still).

Then the big 2005 "retro" came out at 3500 lb. And weight has piled on from there up to 3850 lb. for current-gen V8s.

Are you saying the modern Mustang or pony cars are no longer on a compact chassis or dimensions?

Modern pony cars are definitely no longer on a "compact" chassis... The cars are pretty big and heavy relative to compact cars of today. A modern analog to the 1964 Mustang would be something like the FT86, perhaps with a longer hood and wheels further forward to house a V8, which could weigh ~3000-3200 lb.

The Mustang isn't too different than other compact American sedans.

??? It's a WHOLE LOT different from "other compact American sedans" (which by the way pretty much don't exist any more thanks to asinine CAFE breaks for stupidly oversized/overweight vehicles). I mean, TOTALLY different from the Focus. Also, at 3850 lb., a LOT heavier...

I think if we compare many cars from the 60's to today then we would see about a thousand pounds of weight and increased dimensions.

And I think a modern Mustang in keeping with the 1964 ethos, could easily be a 3000-3200 lb. car. Again, something like a V8 FT86.

Anyway, Mustang weights have fluctuated hugely over the car's history, at times it has been a reasonably lightweight "pony" car weighing *significantly* less than "normal" midsize sedans of the same era, and at others a much bigger/heavier muscle car that weighs more than "normal" midsize sedans.

[Dadhawk]

The problem @ZDan and @IRace.2.0 is that there is not near enough buyers to support these back to basic lightweight cars you pine for in your posts. If they built an exact modern replica of these cars (and I mean down to the weight and austerity of the interior) they would never sell in volume to support their development.