2009 Ford Mustang Changes: What Would You Like To See?

[Cobra Jay]

Lighter chassis, optional 6 speed, optional IRS on v-6 and GT's, gear choices, a motor that can make WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY more than 300hp in N/A form and cost less than 30k!

Definately would like to see a Bullitt, BOSS or MACH1 package!

Oh and if you're listening Ford Design Engineers, Get the damn windshield washer squiters off the hood!

 

[Mustang5L5]

Actually Rumor has it Ford is planning some modern touches in the upcoming refresh of the car

 

[myponyrocks]

Actually Rumor has it Ford is planning some modern touches in the upcoming refresh of the car

Hopefully by modern, we're talking something more futuristic, and not just progressing up the old mod path... IE Mustang II style...

 

[four six]

a pushrod motor

Yeah come on a pushrod 5.0. may be a cammer 5.0

 

[helty]

Yeah come on a pushrod 5.0. may be a cammer 5.0

You're right, I mean the Generals only making 400 N/A hp with them, 500 in the Z06, STOCK I might add. Whats the most power you've seen out of a N/A 4.6, 2,3 or 4V? Not to mention our tiny little 281 takes up more engine bay than a pushrod would, which makes working on the engine a pain in the dick. I mean 8hrs to install Longtubes? Then you gotta take em off to change the clutch? $600 for cams?

I dont know why so many around here have the idea that pushrod motors are inferior to OHC's. GMs been kicking Fords as with them for quote a while now.

 

[jasonh_86]

You're right, I mean the Generals only making 400 N/A hp with them, 500 in the Z06, STOCK I might add. Whats the most power you've seen out of a N/A 4.6, 2,3 or 4V? Not to mention our tiny little 281 takes up more engine bay than a pushrod would, which makes working on the engine a pain in the dick. I mean 8hrs to install Longtubes? Then you gotta take em off to change the clutch? $600 for cams?

I dont know why so many around here have the idea that pushrod motors are inferior to OHC's. GMs been kicking Fords as with them for quote a while now.

QFMFT

Only thing I think is better about the 2V OHC than the LS1 is changing the spark plugs haha

 

[Mustang5L5]

You guys realize a lot of the changes that you want are unrealistic right?

You guys are thinking about this from a performance aspect, but Ford is thinking about it from a business aspect...in other words MONEY!!

Do you honestly think that putting an IRS into a GT is a cost effective move for Ford? It brings the price of the GT up with little gain in the eye of the buyer because the vast majority of Mustang GT buyers will not care if it has one or not.

Also, unless Ford can mass produce a new engine for use in other vehicles, count on seeing the 3V 4.6L in the Mustang for a long time to come. If anything Ford will squeeze a few more ponies out of it, maybe bring back the 4.6L DOHC as the GT engine, but i doubt we will be seeing any major powertrain changes anytime soon. Making the 6-spd (now the TR-6060) standard or optional on the GT would also drive up cost...and we already have $30K GT's.

 

[helty]

Well from what I understand the F-bodies had a pretty tight engine bay to begin with

Dont get me wrong, if I'd plan a high horsepower FI car, I'd probably go with a built 4V with a big ass single turbo. But sometimes the thought of a N/A 500hp 347 stroker just gets me all warm and fuzzy inside.

And from what I understand Ford resurrected the Hurricane engine program (6.2L OHC). Its main purpose is to counter Mopar and GMs truck powerplants, but I wouldnt be surprised if it ended up in a special edition Mustang in the future, ie Boss, Mach, etc. Thats still a bit IF, the program doesnt get scrapped again.

 

[MyEarsHurt]

Someone needs to change the taillights/rear bumper. I mean, its just ugly as sin from the rear.

 

[stangGT97]

You're right, I mean the Generals only making 400 N/A hp with them, 500 in the Z06, STOCK I might add. Whats the most power you've seen out of a N/A 4.6, 2,3 or 4V? Not to mention our tiny little 281 takes up more engine bay than a pushrod would, which makes working on the engine a pain in the dick. I mean 8hrs to install Longtubes? Then you gotta take em off to change the clutch? $600 for cams?

I dont know why so many around here have the idea that pushrod motors are inferior to OHC's. GMs been kicking Fords as with them for quote a while now.

agreed 100%. I've been kicking myself for so long for not buying a 94-95 GT because I want a fast N/A stang and its just easier to do it with the older pushrod motors. Everyone thinks my 4.6 is a big V6

 

[myponyrocks]

I think the camaro coming out definately gives an acceptable reason for Ford to jack prices up and add minimal horses or other "goodies". They seem to be in idiot mode at FoMoCo lately any how.

 

[tontot77]

one that weighs less... 5.4 turbo ...

 

[BLK_ROUSH]

Do you honestly think that putting an IRS into a GT is a cost effective move for Ford? It brings the price of the GT up with little gain in the eye of the buyer because the vast majority of Mustang GT buyers will not care if it has one or not.

That's why it would be nice to 'really' option out a GT.
Having a chassis built to accept an IRS that was planned/integrated would have made that more feasible. But you're absolutely correct, it's always about the bottomline. $$$

Shrink it down to the size and weight of a fox body and it'd be awesome. With the way things have gone the '09 will be 20 feet long and weight 4300lbs.

 

[MEandmyKB]

You guys realize a lot of the changes that you want are unrealistic right?

You guys are thinking about this from a performance aspect, but Ford is thinking about it from a business aspect...in other words MONEY!!

Do you honestly think that putting an IRS into a GT is a cost effective move for Ford?

Don't know - seems like my brother paid exactly $28,355.00 for his brand new loaded '05 GTO [stickered for just a bit over 32k] and when I priced a loaded '05 Mustang GT...it's sticker price was over 31k and the dealer wouldn't budge on the price.

 

[40oz]

get the damn weight down. A pushrod motor is smaller and lighter than OHC even with more displacement. If they are going to stick with OHC, they need to get the power up over 300hp, and the weight down around 3000lbs., or why bother? If you have to add hundreds of pounds just to add 10 hp, you aren't gaining anything.

 

[MineralMan]

Don't know - seems like my brother paid exactly $28,355.00 for his brand new loaded '05 GTO [stickered for just a bit over 32k] and when I priced a loaded '05 Mustang GT...it's sticker price was over 31k and the dealer wouldn't budge on the price.

That's because no one really wanted the GTO. The car looked great on paper, bench racers rejoiced that the General had something that beat the Mustang. But supplies of the GTO were greater than the demans, and therefore dealers were discounting the "halo" car just to move them off the lots. Hence the reason the GTO is being killed off after only 3 years, sales were way off of expecations.

The Mustang was the exact opposite. Demand for the Mustang, especially GT models that were fully loaded, was far greater than supply. Dealers were able to charge sticker (or above) for the first year of GT Mustangs because they were widly popular, no matter what the stats were on paper. Most 06 GTs are still going for at or near sticker, and dealers don't really have to budge on price because someone will pay it.

As far as the weight goes, i agree it'd be nice to have something that weighed less than the 05/06 does now.. but that's likely not going to happen. Cars just weigh more now-days, and it's not just a Ford phenomenon or an American car phenomenon. With all that gets packed into cars that weren't in there before, such as airbags front and side, traction control, ABS, stability control, leather seating, climate control, 1000W stereo systems, more NVH dampening, etc... of course cars are going to weigh more. Some of this is regulated by the Feds, others are regulated by the consumer... gotta have the new gadgets.

Someone quoted the Fox body weight as something being ideal. Quick check on Edmunds.com shows the 1993 Mustang GT had a curb weight of 2834lbs. Compare that to the 2006 Honda Civic Si coupe, which has a curb weight of 2877lbs (increase of 43 lbs).

I agree, the 05/06 could be slimmed down a little bit... this generation is the 2nd largest Mustang ever (only to be topped by the 71-73 Mustangs). Maybe after this generation has run it's course over the next 10 years (you know Ford will ride this one as long as they did the Fox and possible the Fox4 cars)... we'll then have the downsized Mustang III

 

[Back in Black]

how about an ass end that isnt flat. . .something to make the hood less boring. . .5.4L with 400HP. . . 6-speed and no more red interior

 

[thomas91169]

its very simple. if ford wants to compete with the better cars out there that will be around in 09(camaro, challenger, charger, etc), theyre gonna have to step it up, and realize what it is thats making those cars look like a better buy than the current retro/homo stang.

1) 5.4L/4V - 370+hp stock - if chevy and dodge can make 400-500hp naturally aspirated with motors that are bigger in cubes but take up less engine bay, i dont see what the **** fords dilemma is. maybe design a engine that isnt 281cid that has the same footprint as a 460cid.

2) lighter and smaller - nobody likes driving a fricking land barge. thus the reason for the death of the MN12 platform.

3)looks - you guys ****ed up the t-bird. then you came back and ****ed up the mustang. ford, you suck @ teh retro. it looked decent, as a concept, but somewhere between that and the mass produced version, someone dropped the ball and got all half-assey. the challenger is retro perfected. if they make the exact version as it is now, i WILL buy one, no matter the cost. and thats what the 2009 mustang should make me feel like, make people say "i want his car, no matter the price or how my insurance will look"

4)No IRS on GT - 'nuff said. i love my solid rear, and as far as DD and Dragstrips, im going to keep it, i feel i have much more control over it, compared to my old MN12. if i want a corner carver/autox, ill get a Evo.

5)model lineup consists of
Base - 3.5l V6, 250hp, 5spd or 5spd auto/slapshift
LX - 5.4L 3v - 320hp, 5spd / 5spd auto slapshift
GT - 5.4L 4v - 350hp, 5spd
GT2 - 5.4L 4v - 400Hp, 6spd, IRS Optional
Cobra/GT500 - 5.4L 4v SC - 500+Hp, 6spd

6) Diversification - want more sales, make better cars/lineups. currently, ford has no AWD performance vehicle to slap around the evo/sti. as a slap in the face to ricers galore, id like to see ford bring back the Pinto name, AWD 2.3L powertrain from the Mazdaspeed6, slap that into a small chassis(or just use the mazda6 as a base) and make it 300ish HP. then if you want to piss off more, make a RWD version of it, grab some sales from nissan and infinity.

then piss of chevy by making a corvette eater for half the price. im talking about a 2 seater Tbird, 5.4L 4v with 400ishHp, but suspension and lightness to make it one to be contended with. price it 30k and watch corvettes cower. nobody said the Mustang had to be top dog forever, i mean, it wasnt when it first came out.

 

[RedDaemon]

Ford will squeeze a few more ponies out of it, maybe bring back the 4.6L DOHC as the GT engine

i can definitely see that happening with ford's history for doin that kind of thing (putting "last years model" cobra crap into the "new model" GT)

 

[kid rock]

i was gonna say that i want ford to sell the mustang over here in the uk................ BUT i dont, cos it will be RHD not LHD and everybody will own one not for the love of an american muscle car but because they can! not because its a mustang but because they can spend there company car allowance on it!!

Si