[beary58]

I have been asking the same question. It doesn't really matter if you like the new mustang or not. The question is will the retro look have long appeal. I read a couple stories last summer in USA Today that said the retro look was going out and all retro cars sales were suffering a lot. And yes, the artical did say Ford felt the T-Bird was a victum of retro as well. Not the engine, price or two seat design. Although, I would have bought one if it where $10000 less.

I've been comparing the new Mustang to the New Corvette and watching the responces. Corvette went the opposite direction and built a car with a more future design. They even dropped the hidden headlights going against the majority of Corvette owners who felt that was part of the Corvette heritage. At least since the 1968 anyway. Personally I think that GM made the safer move.

I like the new Mustang, but mostly because I was ready for a new look. I'm glad the Mustang still looks like a, well a Mustang. But I wonder how hard it would been to take GM's approach and make the Mustang look like a 2010 version of the Mustang instead of a 1968 version.

I do agree that price, not hp, will set the pace of sells. Most Mustang owners do not know how much HP they have under the hood, but do remember how much the paid. Most folks who know the hp also belong on a forum.

2000 White Vert

[63_Fairlane]

This Thunderbird is really bizarre in the way as it mirrors the original. The original car was too heavy and required a supercharger to be competitive. It also didn't last long as a two seater. Ford made it a fourseat luxury/sport to really get sales out of it.

If it were up to me I would build a Thunderbird that was more Cobra like in function if not appearance. In fact, splash Shelby's name on it for good measure and shoe horn the biggest engine possible or supercharge it.