Seat travel isn't the problem because I can slide the seat back far enough to get my legs comfortable, but then it feels like I'm reaching out for the wheel. When I move the seat up so the steering wheel is where I like it, then my legs are scrunched up. FYI, I am 6'2" with a long limbed, short torso build so I am not your average human, but it's not like I'm 6'8" either. The reason I don't understand it is that I'm pretty sure that the Lincoln LS and Jag S-type have telescoping columns, so why couldn't we get them (at least as an option) on our car? Afterall, our car is a heavily revised/modified version of their platform.srothfuss said:
Osiris said:
Isn't that how it always is?In this configuration you would either need a hatch which adds more weight while taking away rigidity or a sloping trunk which is harder to seal and would likely cause visibility problems. If you have ever sat in one of those 2nd gen 'Stangs ('67 and '68 ) and looked in the rearview mirror even though you had a full acre of glass you couldn't see much, and every bodystyle change after until the 'Stang 2 came out got worse. You have to realize that mass produced cars are always going to be a compromise between economy (how cheap can we build it), safety (are we gonna get sued in this litigation happy society we live inred05bullitgt said:I'd really like to know why Ford didn't extend the roofline or greenhouse into a full fastback profile similar to the 67-70 Stangs and hips would have been nice as well..
In the configuration I was referring to ? my personal preference is with a sloping trunk similar to the 67-68 Mustang Fastback..Not that I have anything against hatches ? but I had 3 fox Stangs in which all 3 had hatches including my last one that was a 93 SVT Cobra and the main reason I purchased my 05 ? was because it reminded me of the original 65-68 Fastback that I admired since childhood and later couldn't afford to buy.. So when the 05's came out ? I got my butt down to my local Ford dealer then placed my order and 3 months later ? traded in my 93 Cobra when my 05 finally arrived at the dealership, so the last thing I'd want ? is wind up with another hatch lol. About your statement concerning possible visibility problems ?? I don't quite follow what you mean ? in the 3 fox Stangs I had that were hatches ? I didn't experience any visibility problems.. So my question is ? what's the difference between a traditional sloping trunk over the hatch based trunk ? they both have slopes to them, do they not..wotfr said:In this configuration you would either need a hatch which adds more weight while taking away rigidity or a sloping trunk which is harder to seal and would likely cause visibility problems. If you have ever sat in one of those 2nd gen 'Stangs ('67 and '68 ) and looked in the rearview mirror even though you had a full acre of glass you couldn't see much, and every bodystyle change after until the 'Stang 2 came out got worse. You have to realize that mass produced cars are always going to be a compromise between economy (how cheap can we build it), safety (are we gonna get sued in this litigation happy society we live in
because someone is an idiot and wants to get paid for it), and styling (are people gonna want to be seen in this). That is the short list and I think they did rather well considering. I mean if we let bean-counters build cars we would be driving the blandest POS's imaginable, and on the same note if the design people tried to balance the books we'd all be riding bicycles.
But I do agree with you concerning the 71-73 Stangs ? I had the chance to drive a 71 Mach 1 and had to mostly depend on the side view mirrors because I couldn't see a damn thing from the rear view mirror thanks to Ford going way overboard with the sportsroof back then..
