The Complaint Department

RICKS said:
What about the '05 Mustang interior has anything to do with the interiors of anything from the '80's?? The '05 borrows alot of inspiration from 1967, with 69-70-ish seats, but the execution is truly forward-thinking and extremely modern. The interior looks like it belongs in a concept, AND IT'S PRODUCTION! I don't know what you were hoping for, but I can't figure it out. I think Ford did just as nifty a job at taking the look of the past, and making it look futuristic, as Nissan did with the 350Z, which is another really super-cool and futuristic looking interior that used a 70's car as inspiration. Just because you draw in elements from the past, in no way means necessarily that you're moving backwards. If there's another car interior out there that you wish the Mustang would look like (or relate to), then please share...

I did not expect anything : I see it and I don't like it. I don't see what's futuristic in that interior. I do not see any new technology (oups... I'm sorry I forgot the instrument light colors changing...). I do not see any little thing that is a new design. If futuristic is mixing elements of differents previous decades, then it is futuristic. I don't have a problem with the main inspiration being the past, but when you just make a copy of it, it is called decadence.
 
  • Sponsors (?)


This is what I hate about the new Mustang...#1 the hood is plain jane...sort of like the hood on the LS1's. It has to go, hopefully companies such as Cervinis will make the hood more aggressive. That alone will give a better definition to the car. Next I hate the mufflers in the back...I could see from a safty point of view as to why Ford decided to put them there but has that ever been a problem in the past year with the gas tank being exposed? Not really so why change things now? I just hope the mufflers in the back won't affect the way a Mustang will sound. I could see maybe Ford or some other after market company making a new back bumper that only shows the cut out holes in the bumper for the tail pipes only and hides the rest. Finaly, I'm not use to the whole fog lights in the grill...I think the V6 looks better, however, the front bumper needs to be lower a bit...an extension would be a great and cheap solution. Other than that I like the car. I really like the seats and I like the interior.
 
How can you complain about the interior? Obviously I haven't seen on in the flesh yet; but it looks great, IMO; and it also is supposed to be much better in the fit-and-finish area -- i.e. GERMAN-like construction. I am GLAD the americans are taking some hints from the Germans in the fit and finish department (and in the suspension work). I mean come on... The interior we have now leaves a lot to be desired. :nonono: In my car, I can see the lights behind the instrument cluster from the back seat. There's that big a gap in the dash. Also, I don't think the new interior looks "german" or "japanese" at all. Who cares if they use Aluminum? The design is distinctly American; and hopefully with German fit and finish. I think it's a very great combination. :nice:
 
JimF65 said:
A forum is for opinions, both pro and con. I have a right to my opinion, especially since I have been a Mustanger longer that 99.99% of the posters. (My first one was a silver 65 convertible, 289 4bbl (D code) 4-speed, Rally pack, bought on April 18, 1964 - I now have a late-65 that I have worked on for 5 years to update the mechanicals into the 80s). I am just disappointed that Ford can't update the running gear, and the styling is a major disappointment, especially since they regaled us with those beautiful "concept cars".

Agreed, a forum is a place to state an opinion. Unfortunately, you chose to sign up to stangnet to do nothing but tell us all how you hate something most of the members here love. This is where I fail to see the logical reasoning behind you signing up to be a member of the Stangnet forums. It appears to me that you would have a great deal to offer in the classic forum or perhaps the 5.0 forums. If you are indeed such a big Mustang fan, why don't you contribute in a more constructive way in a forum that might suit you better? Instead you did nothing but come here to stir a hornets nest and you succeeded. Congratulations on accomplishing the obvious. You said something negative about a car we love and got a negative response! Good job with that! :rolleyes:
 
drichard said:
I did not expect anything
drichard said:
but I'm just so disappointed...
Explain this to me. To be disappointed means one expected something and was then let down because it dit not meet expectations, but you said you are disappointed but had no expectations. This defies logic and reason.

drichard said:
I don't see what's futuristic in that interior.
The word is RETRO! it is not supposed to look futuristic it is supposed to look like a new version of an old theme.

drichard said:
I do not see any new technology
That is the beauty of technology, it is not supposed to be seen it is supposed to function better than a previous version.

drichard said:
I do not see any little thing that is a new design.
Show us what is old in the design. I cannot see anything that was carried over from an older car.


drichard said:
If futuristic is mixing elements of differents previous decades, then it is futuristic. I don't have a problem with the main inspiration being the past, but when you just make a copy of it, it is called decadence.

No, again it is called RETRO. In no way did Ford claim that the interior of the 2005 was going to be futuristic. They actually came out and said that it would be retro. so I fail to see your surprise when they did what they said they would do.

As far as looking german is concerned. I fail to see it too.

To be quite frank, I am getting fed up with everyone saying they hate this or that about the car. Cry me a river! Hell, cry me an ocean and Ford will still leave it the way it is. When will this country learn that crying about things will not make it all go away?
 
And why are these yo-yo's who don't like the 2005 Mustang such ego-maniacs that everyone of them has to start their own personal thread telling us all about how bad the new Mustang is? :shrug: :notnice:

Why can't you just express your opinion on an existing thread about the 2005 design?

Doesn't the fact that StangNet and virtually every other Mustang web site is on complete overload from people who are chomping at the bit to get a 2005 Mustang tell you something?

Hey Tyler, can you do us a favor an just combine all these anti-mustang guys threads into just one? Thanks!

:lock:
 
351CJ said:
And why are these yo-yo's who don't like the 2005 Mustang such ego-maniacs that everyone of them have to start their own personal thread telling us all about how bad the new Mustang is? :shrug: :notnice:

Why can't you just express your opinion on an existing thread about the 2005 design?

Hey Tyler, can you do us a favor an just combine all these anti-mustang guys threads into just one? Thanks!

:lock:

But if I do that then everyone cries "communist" and tells me they can do a better job moderating than I can.

But if you have noticed, I have been slowly merging all of these threads together into one big thread in a special forum that only staff members get to see. It is called the "Deleted Threads" forum.

Seriously though. I have had to delete nearly every thread pertaining to this subject just because of the unrest they create.
 
tylers65 said:
To be quite frank, I am getting fed up with everyone saying they hate this or that about the car. Cry me a river! Hell, cry me an ocean and Ford will still leave it the way it is. When will this country learn that crying about things will not make it all go away?

Agreed... I am sick of it too. Be glad with all that Ford has done right with the new 'stang. Hell, be glad they're updating it in the first place. It's about time, really. I really see nothing to complain about.

If you want a "perfect" car, then go build one youself and shut the **** up.
 
JimF65 said:
A forum is for opinions, both pro and con. I have a right to my opinion, especially since I have been a Mustanger longer that 99.99% of the posters. (My first one was a silver 65 convertible, 289 4bbl (D code) 4-speed, Rally pack, bought on April 18, 1964 - I now have a late-65 that I have worked on for 5 years to update the mechanicals into the 80s). I am just disappointed that Ford can't update the running gear, and the styling is a major disappointment, especially since they regaled us with those beautiful "concept cars".

A modern transmission and suspension would make a world of difference in the drivability. So to venture into my nearby mountains, I'll just have to drive the Z3, since Ford can't see fit to improve the handling.

I was considering buying a new Mustang (convertible, of course), but not if they can't bring the performance into this century. That means more than just stoplight jumps.
Out of all people you should know what the Mustangs first mistake was.
They designed first 4 generations to "grow up" with the buyer. As anybody could see, they lost sales to the competition and their own Cougar.
The first clean slate design was the Mustang II. It completely modernized the front suspension and other technical attributes.
But the Mustang II was also 'retro', they just didn't label it so. But the styling cues of the eariler Mustangs were more then obvious. And it kicked butt in sales.
Now the 05' has alot technical advances, some new to the Mustang, some new to any car.
No matter what people are going to complain, it's too technical and expensive, or too cheap and dated. They have to find a balance between price and neato parts.
That is the beauty of the Mustang. It has always been a comprimise. It has always been in the affordable ballpark. It may not have the best of anything, but it can play with other cars in all sorts of catagories.
You can look at the competition, and the hard lessons they learned.
Camaro/Firebird: dead, and may not come back in the same formula.
Nissan/Datsun Z: KIA, then brought back by a revived from the dead Nissan.
Cuda/Challenger: Dead, maybe will come back, but only it's name.
The Mustang has managed to stay alive.

You're age doesn't give more rights then younger folks. I don't know why people insist that gives them any more say then the next person.


And try all you want, you're not going to reach the handling dynamics of a 05 in your 65. Not an insult, I have a 67 myself. There is only so much you can do to an old car.
 
Could Someone Tell Them Where a Shifter Goes?

OK OK, ummm is it that hard? Here is the train of though required:

Ford Engineer:well we have a new chassis, lets fix all the problems with the Mustang.(NEVER did this thought cross thier mind, but lets pretend it did) Ok, well lets give it more power, interior room, a better suspension, and a trendy "retro" style. That should do it.

Oh yeah, and since we made the previous chassis for twenty five years, and have had to have heard lots of feedback on the design, lets address some of those issues. Lets move the shifter three inches back where it is in EVERY other car. While we are being nutty, lets even give it seats with support, and (the jury is still out on this one) maybe even a way for the seatbelt to function properly as opposed to getting smashed in the door every careless time you get out. Now we have a really good car. :notnice:

Nope, this is the thouht pattern that they had:

Money, money, money, money, money. I need to make a car that will sell so I can go buy a new Porsche Ceyenne, as I am only a psuedo-car enthusiast and have no real ambition.

OK rant is over
 
HairyCanary said:
And I'd rather not be burned alive if I get rear-ended. :shrug:

Heck, why not 5 or 6"? Then we can really look like riced out civics. Except we'd be better because we have two fart cans. Maybe I can get them in chrome!

Dave

Why do you have to be such an ass? Every aftermarket catback for the GT's come with the 3'' or 3.5'' tips to fill out the space. Im by no means a ricer, it just looks kinda funny having 2.5'' tips that just don't fill in the room thats made for them. That would mean everyone on here with Magnapacks or any aftermarket catback is a ricer. No need to be sarcastic man.
 
1992 2.3LX said:
So what was the last stang to have the muffler can behind the rear axle?

I hate the looks of the can right there. i think it looks so much better with just the pipes after the axle and when you can sometimes catch a glimpse of the cans in the center of the car in front.

To answer the original question, I believe it was the 1974 - 1978 Mustang II.

Having the mufflers back there makes them VERY easy to change without having to put the car on a lift.
 
Pardon me for asking. But instead of assuming everything is positioned wrong and the seats are unsupportive and the seatbelt retractors won't work. Why don't you wait until you can actually sit in one and see?
I'm sorry your seatbelt retractors don't work. But mine work just fine almost everytime. And I'm not going to jump to conclusion on the shifter position based only on pictures.
 
I just cannot believe the negativity from people who have yet to see the car in the flesh let alone sit it it. :bs:

In Car & Driver's article they specifically mentioned how the relationship among the pedals, steering wheel, shifter and driver's seat have been improved. I suggest that you wait until you sit in a rearl production car before you blast it anymore.

As far as the belts go, I had the same problem with my 2000 LS and have the problem with my 2001 GT. However the belt retractors on my 2002 Cougar and 2003 LS work perfectly so it appears that Ford identified a problem and fixed it. But again, how in the world can you assume that the belt retractors in the 2005 Mustang don't work right. :rolleyes:
 
tylers65 said:
Explain this to me. To be disappointed means one expected something and was then let down because it dit not meet expectations, but you said you are disappointed but had no expectations. This defies logic and reason.

ok. I expected a car that would make my heart beat as other models did. Happy ?

tylers65 said:
The word is RETRO! it is not supposed to look futuristic it is supposed to look like a new version of an old theme.

No, again it is called RETRO. In no way did Ford claim that the interior of the 2005 was going to be futuristic. They actually came out and said that it would be retro. so I fail to see your surprise when they did what they said they would do.

see Ricks post, to which mine was a response...

tylers65 said:
That is the beauty of technology, it is not supposed to be seen it is supposed to function better than a previous version.

sure... if true all cars would look like the Ford T...

tylers65 said:
Show us what is old in the design. I cannot see anything that was carried over from an older car.

As far as looking german is concerned. I fail to see it too.

If you knew the german cars from the mid to late 80's you would see it.


tylers65 said:
To be quite frank, I am getting fed up with everyone saying they hate this or that about the car. Cry me a river! Hell, cry me an ocean and Ford will still leave it the way it is. When will this country learn that crying about things will not make it all go away?

:D I'm sorry.... I thought I was on a Mustang forum... I'm not saying I will slay every owner of the 05, or go on shooting all Ford managers, I'm expressing my view. I do not think the design is original, and I do not think either than this is an "heritage" model. That's my humble opinion. I don't like the Fox body either. I think the mustang had a bad period in the 80's, and I'm not found of the new model. No biggy... I'll wait ten more years :rolleyes:

Now, if you want to make the Stang community look more Ricer, it's up to you, but I thought Stangers were the first one to recognize honestly the shortcomings of their Stangs...

BTW, you're pulling a PowerBoss reply style.