 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Ford / Ford Mustang / December 2006Gonna Buy Me A New Mustang Sedan, Or Wagon.
http://www.autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061213/FREE/61211029/1065/M ICROSITE Good idea, bad idea? Post your comments. Here are mine. I would love to see the Mustang chassis used to produce some new RWD cars! And while, I love quirky vehicles (I own a Honda element), and vehicles with some amount of utility (reason I love hatchback Mustangs), I think Ford, and the Mustang name, would be better off calling this sedan & wagon idea something other than Mustang, AND using body panels that look nothing like a Mustang. That said, I'd still love to see a limited production run of that GT500K wagon. http://cgi.ebay.com/2007-Mustang-Shelby-GT500K-s-n-Limited-Ed-Art-Print_W0QQitem Z6638712574QQihZ012QQcategoryZ14047QQcmdZViewItem Patrick > http://www.autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061213/FREE/612110 > 29/1065/MICROSITE [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > Patrick Patrick, I totally agree with you. It's something that might actually help Ford save its collective a.s. DC has already done this to an extent with the 300, Magnum, and Charger. Great way to leverage a single chassis design. Joe Calypso Green '93 5.0 LX AOD hatch with a few goodies Black '03 Dakota 5.9 R/T CC >> http://www.autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article? > AID=/20061213/FREE/612110 [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >> said, I'd still love to see a limited production run of that GT500K >> wagon. >> Patrick > > Patrick, I totally agree with you. It's something that might actually > help Ford save its collective a.s. DC has already done this to an > extent with the 300, Magnum, and Charger. Great way to leverage a > single chassis design. Summary: Extend the use of the platform, just as done in every version before.. what am I missing here? What difference does it make that Mustang is the first-use? Let the custom carriage shops convert it to wagons or sedan deliveries, just like before..  SignatureYeh, I'm a Krusty old Geezer, putting up with my 'smartass' is the price you pay..DEAL with it! I agree, build and expand on the platform all you want, but call the sheetmetal something else. Mustang has never been a wagon or sedan, always a two door coupe, and as iconic as the Mustang is, it should stay that way. If you want to add a second set of doors to it, bring back the Fairlane, Maverick or Futura nameplate. > http://www.autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061213/FREE/61211029/1065/M ICROSITE > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Patrick I'm sorry.. did you say "never"? http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c63/richgt05/cdwagon.jpg http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c63/richgt05/FordShelbyGT350StationWagon-RVL.jpg >I agree, build and expand on the platform all you want, but call the >sheetmetal something else. Mustang has never been a wagon or sedan, always [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] >> >> Patrick > I'm sorry.. did you say "never"? > > http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c63/richgt05/cdwagon.jpg > > http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c63/richgt05/FordShelbyGT350StationWagon-RVL.jpg Never. As in, never in production or available to the general public. Prototypes hardly count. That being said, I HATE that "new" Mustang. Looks very much to me like a Magnum wannabe, and I don't care for the Magnum. I know that Ford is desperate, but I have to believe that diluting the Mustang's genes with sedans and wagons is NOT the way to go. They're banking on increased sales that may well not be there. A four-door Mustang in V6 and GT configurations? Call it something else. This redefines what a Mustang is and weakens the brand altogether. Sorry, Ford, but your Mustang is an American ICON, which means that just about everyone has a pretty good idea of what the name connotes. By bringing it out in sedan and wagon models, you reduce the Mustang to the rest of the herd, losing the very appeal that makes it your top nameplate. No, I think that if you want to finally kill the Mustang off, that's the way to go. dwight SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com > A four-door Mustang in V6 and GT configurations? Call it something else. This redefines what a Mustang is and weakens the brand > altogether. Sorry, Ford, but your Mustang is an American ICON, which means that just about everyone has a pretty good idea of what > the name connotes. By bringing it out in sedan and wagon models, you reduce the Mustang to the rest of the herd, losing the very > appeal that makes it your top nameplate. http://www.ford.com.au/servlet/ContentServer?cid=1137385365703&pagename=Page&c=D FYPage Ford of Australia seems to disgree with you. And, you can get all the way from the base 250 hp 4.0L I-6 to the 350 hp 4V 5.4L Boss V8 (and with a six speed manual, cool). Lynn >> A four-door Mustang in V6 and GT configurations? Call it something else. This redefines what a Mustang is and weakens the brand >> altogether. Sorry, Ford, but your Mustang is an American ICON, which means that just about everyone has a pretty good idea of what [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > the way from the base 250 hp 4.0L I-6 to the 350 hp 4V 5.4L Boss > V8 (and with a six speed manual, cool). They don't sell the mustang down under (except for some special imports), they sell falcons. Nobody here will have a problem with sedans, wagons, utes, or anything else on the mustang platform carrying names like falcon, maverick, and ranchero. The key is that it isn't called a mustang. >> A four-door Mustang in V6 and GT configurations? Call it something else. >> This redefines what a Mustang is and weakens the brand altogether. Sorry, [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Lynn Uh, no Ford Australia seems to be in total agreement with Dwight. You are mistaken, those ARE NOT Mustangs, they are Falcons, Fairmonts & Futuras... > > I'm sorry.. did you say "never"? > > http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c63/richgt05/cdwagon.jpg http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c63/richgt05/FordShelbyGT350StationWagon-RVL.jpg > Never. As in, never in production or available to the general public. > Prototypes hardly count. > That being said, I HATE that "new" Mustang. Looks very much to me like a > Magnum wannabe, and I don't care for the Magnum. REALLY? You don't like the Magnum?! I think this may be the first time in 10 or so years we've been sharing this space in USENET that we strongly disagree. Because I absolutely love the Magnum! In fact, I'm going to rent one soon to take on a nice long trip. That long wagon sleek body, chopped roof and a Hemi under the hood, what's not to love? > I know that Ford is desperate, but I have to believe that diluting the > Mustang's genes with sedans and wagons is NOT the way to go. They're banking > on increased sales that may well not be there. I think my biggest problem with these new Mustang sedans and wagons is that the entire Ford line would/could soon be the Mustang line. And with so many Mustang-looking vehicles in their lineup, the Mustang uniqueness would be gone/lost. That said, again, I'd still like to see a few GT500Ks built. > A four-door Mustang in V6 and GT configurations? Call it something else. > This redefines what a Mustang is and weakens the brand altogether. Sorry, > Ford, but your Mustang is an American ICON, which means that just about > everyone has a pretty good idea of what the name connotes. By bringing it > out in sedan and wagon models, you reduce the Mustang to the rest of the > herd, losing the very appeal that makes it your top nameplate. Just to add some more debate what about the new Mini Traveler or the fact the WRX comes in both sedan and wagon versions? > No, I think that if you want to finally kill the Mustang off, that's the way > to go. I think Ford could get away with building a few Mustang wagons or sedans. I'm sure there would be enough collectors willing to snap them up to have something unique, but if Ford were to make a Mustang line of cars and produce 1,000s and 1,000s every year for a number of years the Mustang name would forever be ruined. Patrick > http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c63/richgt05/FordShelbyGT350StationWagon-RVL.jpg Somewhere there is a falcon wagon with a full shelby treatment. It was a racing support vehicle back in the 60s. > I think my biggest problem with these new Mustang sedans and wagons is > that the entire Ford line would/could soon be the Mustang line. Better than the early 80s when they were all fairmonts. oh wait... the mustang was fairmont too.... > I think Ford could get away with building a few Mustang wagons or > sedans. I'm sure there would be enough collectors willing to snap them > up to have something unique, but if Ford were to make a Mustang line of > cars and produce 1,000s and 1,000s every year for a number of years the > Mustang name would forever be ruined. They just should just bite the bullet and bring the falcon and the ute over. They can make a wagon out of it as well. >> http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c63/richgt05/FordShelbyGT350StationWagon-RVL.jpg > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Better than the early 80s when they were all fairmonts. oh wait... the > mustang was fairmont too.... Preach it. I own a couple of those Fairmonts. The 2005, unless I'm mistaken, is the first wholly-Mustang Mustang, built from the ground up to BE a Mustang. In other words, Ford FINALLY got it right, after 40 years of building Mustangs on other platforms. To now build a sedan or wagon and slap the "Mustang" nameplate on it would be insulting. dwight >> > I'm sorry.. did you say "never"? > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > going to rent one soon to take on a nice long trip. That long wagon > sleek body, chopped roof and a Hemi under the hood, what's not to love? Paint it black, it's a hearse. You know I'm no fan of the current Chrysler styling. And I've never liked the chopped hot rod look, especially in production vehicles. One man's sleek is another man's oogly. That 6.1 Hemi sounds interesting, though... >> I know that Ford is desperate, but I have to believe that diluting the >> Mustang's genes with sedans and wagons is NOT the way to go. They're [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > uniqueness would be gone/lost. That said, again, I'd still like to see > a few GT500Ks built. GT500KW. A nice little 4-door station wagon. >> A four-door Mustang in V6 and GT configurations? Call it something else. >> This redefines what a Mustang is and weakens the brand altogether. Sorry, [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Just to add some more debate what about the new Mini Traveler or the > fact the WRX comes in both sedan and wagon versions? If someone tucked a Mini into my Christmas stocking, I'd trade it in the next day. And the WRX...? Ask me again, when it even APPROACHES the iconic stature of the Mustang nameplate. Matter o' fack, that WRX would make a sweet little crossover, if Subaru could figure out the weight ration and handling characteristics to match it up with an expanded cargo area... Maybe they should look into a hatchback design. >> No, I think that if you want to finally kill the Mustang off, that's the >> way [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Patrick We agree there. Mustang = pony car, and a 4-door V6 Mustang might as well be named "Camry." dwight >>> > I'm sorry.. did you say "never"? >> >>> > http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c63/richgt05/cdwagon.jpg http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c63/richgt05/FordShelbyGT350StationW >> agon-RVL.jpg >> [quoted text clipped - 63 lines] > > dwight Following the logic, does that mean the 2-door V6 Mustang is the "Accord"? >>>> > I'm sorry.. did you say "never"? >>> [quoted text clipped - 71 lines] > Following the logic, does that mean the 2-door V6 Mustang is the > "Accord"? No. Solara. :() >>>>> > I'm sorry.. did you say "never"? >>>> >>>>> > http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c63/richgt05/cdwagon.jpg http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c63/richgt05/FordShelbyGT350StationW >>>> agon-RVL.jpg >>>> [quoted text clipped - 70 lines] > >:() But the Solara isn't a Honda... >>>>>> > I'm sorry.. did you say "never"? >>>>> [quoted text clipped - 86 lines] > > But the Solara isn't a Honda... Neither is the Camry. Where did Honda come in? duh-wight >>>>>>> > I'm sorry.. did you say "never"? >>>>>> >>>>>>> > http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c63/richgt05/cdwagon.jpg http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c63/richgt05/FordShelbyGT350StationW >>>>>> agon-RVL.jpg >>>>>> [quoted text clipped - 85 lines] > > duh-wight Major brain fart. Happens once in a while at my age... > >> > I'm sorry.. did you say "never"? > >> > http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c63/richgt05/cdwagon.jpg http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c63/richgt05/FordShelbyGT350StationWagon-RVL.jpg > >> Never. As in, never in production or available to the general public. > >> Prototypes hardly count. > >> That being said, I HATE that "new" Mustang. Looks very much to me like a > >> Magnum wannabe, and I don't care for the Magnum. > > REALLY? You don't like the Magnum?! I think this may be the first > > time in 10 or so years we've been sharing this space in USENET that we > > strongly disagree. Because I absolutely love the Magnum! In fact, I'm > > going to rent one soon to take on a nice long trip. That long wagon > > sleek body, chopped roof and a Hemi under the hood, what's not to love? > Paint it black, it's a hearse. But it's a chopped hearse. > You know I'm no fan of the current Chrysler > styling. And I've never liked the chopped hot rod look, especially in > production vehicles. One man's sleek is another man's oogly. That 6.1 Hemi > sounds interesting, though... The only ground I'll give you is admit the grill could be toned down a bit. > >> I know that Ford is desperate, but I have to believe that diluting the > >> Mustang's genes with sedans and wagons is NOT the way to go. They're > >> banking > >> on increased sales that may well not be there. > > I think my biggest problem with these new Mustang sedans and wagons is > > that the entire Ford line would/could soon be the Mustang line. And > > with so many Mustang-looking vehicles in their lineup, the Mustang > > uniqueness would be gone/lost. That said, again, I'd still like to see > > a few GT500Ks built. > GT500KW. A nice little 4-door station wagon. A 2-door wagon would be better. It would be like the previous generation BMW M coupe I liked so much. > >> A four-door Mustang in V6 and GT configurations? Call it something else. > >> This redefines what a Mustang is and weakens the brand altogether. Sorry, > >> Ford, but your Mustang is an American ICON, which means that just about > >> everyone has a pretty good idea of what the name connotes. By bringing it > >> out in sedan and wagon models, you reduce the Mustang to the rest of the > >> herd, losing the very appeal that makes it your top nameplate. > > Just to add some more debate what about the new Mini Traveler or the > > fact the WRX comes in both sedan and wagon versions? > If someone tucked a Mini into my Christmas stocking, I'd trade it in the > next day. I would too, IF it was an automatic version. The autos suck in those cars. But a Cooper S would be a very fun car. > And the WRX...? Ask me again, when it even APPROACHES the iconic > stature of the Mustang nameplate. There's just something about the WRX wagon that reminds me of the hatchback LX 5.0. While it has an Asian spice to it, the utility mixed with the plain-Jane, but hunkered down hotrod look really appeals to me. > Matter o' fack, that WRX would make a > sweet little crossover, if Subaru could figure out the weight ration and > handling characteristics to match it up with an expanded cargo area... Maybe > they should look into a hatchback design. They probably would, but I hear Americans now associate hatchbacks with cheap econo cars so manufactures have shied away from them. > >> No, I think that if you want to finally kill the Mustang off, that's the > >> way > >> to go. > > I think Ford could get away with building a few Mustang wagons or > > sedans. I'm sure there would be enough collectors willing to snap them > > up to have something unique, but if Ford were to make a Mustang line of > > cars and produce 1,000s and 1,000s every year for a number of years the > > Mustang name would forever be ruined. > We agree there. Mustang = pony car, and a 4-door V6 Mustang might as well be > named "Camry." I think the Asians are starting to wise up. They're realizing the vanilla Camrys and Accords days are numbered. Their future generations are promising much more aggressive looks. Patrick >> >> > I'm sorry.. did you say "never"? > [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > The only ground I'll give you is admit the grill could be toned down a > bit. Grilles were great in the 50's. But once I started washing my own cars, I learned that I could live without them. The '84 Mustang's plastic grille insert was a BITCH to keep clean. The Fusion, the Edge... looks like Ford is trying to copy out of Chrysler's playbook by slapping extraneous metallic pieces on the front of their new line. Compare the 2007 Escape to the upcoming 2008 model - the 2007 looks much cleaner. Maybe Ford is trying to "man up" the Escape, but my wife's not going to be happy about it. (We may end up buying this one at lease end.) >> >> I know that Ford is desperate, but I have to believe that diluting the >> >> Mustang's genes with sedans and wagons is NOT the way to go. They're [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > A 2-door wagon would be better. It would be like the previous > generation BMW M coupe I liked so much. That'd be alright for the upcoming generation. But us baby boomers don't like climbing into and out of a back seat through the front doors. Many of us can't. Come to think of it... my recently departed mother-in-law would have had a much harder time getting into and out of my Mustang than climbing up into the Escape. Maybe if I'd put step bars on the Mustang... (I wonder if the day will come when I can no longer exit a Mustang without help...) >> >> A four-door Mustang in V6 and GT configurations? Call it something >> >> else. [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > with the plain-Jane, but hunkered down hotrod look really appeals to > me. It's...uh..."cute," I suppose. How about a WRK STI wagon, with that big ol' Asian wing plopped on the top? That would sell a few, I reckon. That would combine the performance and utility we're used to. >> Matter o' fack, that WRX would make a >> sweet little crossover, if Subaru could figure out the weight ration and [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > They probably would, but I hear Americans now associate hatchbacks with > cheap econo cars so manufactures have shied away from them. All things come back in time. That Boss Mustang you linked to looks like it would naturally have a lift gate. The new Mustangs have a nice, deep trunk, but a hatchback on that car would make life a whole lot easier. >> >> No, I think that if you want to finally kill the Mustang off, that's >> >> the [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > Patrick God, I hope so. I've been saying for years that I can't tell one from the other. There's a whole herd of four-door family sedans running around that all look the same to me. I used to pride myself on knowing what I was looking at, but I have to squint now at the emblem on the hood to tell a Hyundai from a Honda. Nissan has come around, though; I can spot them pretty quick. Seems that designers have boiled down the small car style to its bare minimum, in search of aerodynamics and front-wheel-drive efficiency. (Not talking about the larger cars, which are vastly different canvases, but the entry level models.) I was looking at two cars in our parking lot - a Chevy Impala and a Honda Accord - and thinking, jeez, that's the same car. It's like the designers purposely keep the cars ultra-bland, for fear of turning off any potential buyers. I guess that works. dwight > I agree, build and expand on the platform all you want, but call the > sheetmetal something else. Mustang has never been a wagon or sedan, always a > two door coupe, and as iconic as the Mustang is, it should stay that way. > > If you want to add a second set of doors to it, bring back the Fairlane, > Maverick or Futura nameplate. Maverick came in two door and later four door versions. I wouldn't mind a new two door maverick. Problem is, ford would intentionally cripple the maverick in the US as it did in the 70s in favor of mustang > http://www.autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061213/FREE/61211029/1065/M ICROSITE > > Good idea, bad idea? Post your comments. Old Idea. Ford first toyed with it about 40 years ago. > > http://www.autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061213/FREE/61211029/1065/M ICROSITE > > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Ford first toyed with it about 40 years ago. I'd buy one of these! http://www.ford.com.au/servlet/ContentServer?cid=1137384216525&pagename=Page&c=D FYPage >>> http://www.autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061213/FREE/61211029/1065/M ICROSITE >>> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > http://www.ford.com.au/servlet/ContentServer?cid=1137384216525&pagename=Page&c=D FYPage Oh, oh my. Okay NOW we have crossed the line... http://www.ford.com.au/servlet/ContentServer?cid=1137384335410&pagename=FOA%2FDF YPage%2FDefault1024&c=DFYPage Signature“I intended that "not stupid" be a requirement.” – Seth Breidbart >> http://www.ford.com.au/servlet/ContentServer?cid=1137384216525&pagename=Page&c=D FYPage > Oh, oh my. Okay NOW we have crossed the line... > http://www.ford.com.au/servlet/ContentServer?cid=1137384335410&pagename=FOA%2FDF YPage%2FDefault1024&c=DFYPage Just go for the whole 9 yards already... Falcon XR8 Ute. http://www.ford.com.au/servlet/ContentServer?cid=1137384335636&pagename=FOA%2FDF YPage%2FDefault1024&c=DFYPage >>> http://www.ford.com.au/servlet/ContentServer?cid=1137384216525&pagename=Page&c=D FYPage > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Falcon XR8 Ute. > http://www.ford.com.au/servlet/ContentServer?cid=1137384335636&pagename=FOA%2FDF YPage%2FDefault1024&c=DFYPage Okay the Ranchero style back I can handle, but the flat bed is just WAY over the line! Signature“I intended that "not stupid" be a requirement.” – Seth Breidbart >>>> http://www.ford.com.au/servlet/ContentServer?cid=1137384216525&pagename=Page&c=D FYPage >> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Okay the Ranchero style back I can handle, but the flat >bed is just WAY over the line! Get out the conversion charts: Max. Power: 220kW@4750 rpm (DIN) Max. Torque: 470Nm@3250 rpm (DIN) -- lab~rat >:-) Do you want polite or do you want sincere? http://www.autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061213/FREE/61211029/1065/M ICROSITE > > > Good idea, bad idea? Post your comments. > > Old Idea. > > Ford first toyed with it about 40 years ago. > I'd buy one of these! http://www.ford.com.au/servlet/ContentServer?cid=1137384216525&pagename=Page&c=D FYPage I wouldn't. While I like the idea of a Ranchero comeback, this Aussie version doesn't, IMO, have a pretty line on it. I'd like to know how many find this car attractive, but think the GTO is ugly. Patrick |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.