The Complaint Department

#61
pairofnines said:
My trunk is friggin small too, luckily I got a steel reinforcement so I have a better chance incase of a rear end collision. I can only fit like 4 or 5 grocery bags along with my spare tire (hey, I get groceries in it too :nice:). Not much room.
Click to expand...
It's funny how Ralph Nader went after the Corvair but never the Mustang, hmmm, wonder if he worked for Ford! My '72 Mach had one of those "collapsable" spares, useless!
:lol:
 

  • Sponsors (?)


#63
haha yeah, my dad has a '73 mach as a daily driver, he just leaves the back seat folded and puts groceries back there instead of the trunk...so i guess we've never really had enough crap in the trunk to get pissed at the fuel filler neck lol
 
#64
Mach172 said:
It's funny how Ralph Nader went after the Corvair but never the Mustang, hmmm, wonder if he worked for Ford! My '72 Mach had one of those "collapsable" spares, useless!
:lol:
Click to expand...


Don't bad mouth those spares! I have too much audio gear in my '66 trunk to fit a regular spare, but the SpaceSaver fits perfectly... it even works! A couple cans of Fix-A-Flat hidden in the fender wells and I'm all set! :nice: Now I don't lose those 2 points at car shows either...

Too bad about the Corvair. It was even more fun to drive than the Mustang, except for those weekly engine changes.

As far as the location of the filler pipe on the 2005 goes, I'm sure some industrious young guy will do the mod to create a functional rear fill assy. A little side body work and they'll have a good looking car. Having been hit in the rear while driving a '65 coupe, I'll pass on that mod. My tank ruptured, but didn't ignite... I was only hit at about 10 mph and I was simply lucky that day.
 
#65
GaPonyFarm said:
Don't bad mouth those spares! I have too much audio gear in my '66 trunk to fit a regular spare, but the SpaceSaver fits perfectly... it even works! A couple cans of Fix-A-Flat hidden in the fender wells and I'm all set! :nice: Now I don't lose those 2 points at car shows either...

Too bad about the Corvair. It was even more fun to drive than the Mustang, except for those weekly engine changes.

As far as the location of the filler pipe on the 2005 goes, I'm sure some industrious young guy will do the mod to create a functional rear fill assy. A little side body work and they'll have a good looking car. Having been hit in the rear while driving a '65 coupe, I'll pass on that mod. My tank ruptured, but didn't ignite... I was only hit at about 10 mph and I was simply lucky that day.
Click to expand...
The SpaceSaver spares have come a long way since 1972, I am sure, actually, I thought those had been replaced with the mini-spare. Oh, I know, I had a friend who had a '66 Corvair Monza, that little thing was fun to drive!
 
#66
Mach172 said:
The SpaceSaver spares have come a long way since 1972, I am sure, actually, I thought those had been replaced with the mini-spare. Oh, I know, I had a friend who had a '66 Corvair Monza, that little thing was fun to drive!
Click to expand...

Actually... Mine is from a '72. Found one in perfect condition on ebay. I have the the fill canister too, but am saving it for show purposes only. Amazingly its still full! :p
 
#67
GaPonyFarm said:
Actually... Mine is from a '72. Found one in perfect condition on ebay. I have the the fill canister too, but am saving it for show purposes only. Amazingly its still full! :p
Click to expand...

No kidding, is the rubber still good? You know, there was a recall on the canister or the tire of some sort, seems to me it had to do with the way it inflated, guess it popped up and injured some people as they inflated it, I never had to use mine, good thing, that car had the F60-15"s on it, that would have never fit in the trunk!
 
#69
Ron Jeremy said:
Well, I guess that a side fuel door is not going to matter that much.

But I still don't like the environmentalists. They are ruining it for the good people.
Click to expand...

I don't understand how enviromentalists are ruining anything for the "good" people? What does enviromentalists have to do with not having a rear fuel, it's about not catching on fire when you get hit from behind. I mean, sure, there have been many new legislations and stuff for emissions and wildlife, but the only people that really bother me are the extreme liberals. And all the emissions laws do is help keep us and animals around. Yeah, lets pollute the air where we really can't live here any more and we're screwed. That just doesn't make any sense to me. :shrug:
 
#71
Ron Jeremy said:
The liberals ARE the environmentalists. They are communists and socialists. They all want too many controls to be imposed by the federal government. We lose our rights when this occurs. There should be NO laws for this stupid issue of where to place a fuel door. Period!
Click to expand...
I doubt as many would be sold if there is a safety hazard or inconvenience to most drivers by having to pump from the rear. I liked it on my old stangs, but would prefer the new stang to keep it on the driver's side.
 
#73
There is nothing wrong with Ford....in most accidents you Can Not blame just the car or the manufactor...ever think about the idiots driving the cars? Yeah so there are a few innocent people but you Have to admit there are people out there that drive like maniacs because they got a sports car and think they need to race it all the time. Also, why just pick on just the Fords...Dodge, Chevy, etc...they ALL have the same problems. If you don't want a car that doesn't explode then you might as well toss your liscense and jump on a bicycle... There will be NO such thing as a car exploding until all cars are solar powered...or whatever.. Cars shouldn't even exsist in some peoples eyes because they are terrified of the dangers..
I agree with whoever said "if your afraid of getting a mustang because it'll explode than get another car" But you'll be afraid of those other cars too...including those goofy imports... blahhhh...
Now about having a that filler in the rear end..why don't they just make that pretty little design into a covered keyhole for the trunk like others do....maybe that will make some people happy...
the side fill is just fine as long as it doesn't stick out like a sore thumb...
Also...I still think the classics are more safer..only for the fact being they are made of real metal...as for the new models...they are fiberglass...so flimsy.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinions...so why argue?? Everyone makes good points...

--M
 
#74
One more thing...about the 71-73 trunks..I like them being small! Gives us girls more reason to go out again...and again...and again...
But then who actually takes those old classics out to go shopping...please..they are to show off in shows and drive once in a while...treasure those beauties... :)
--M
 
#75
73_77_78_Stangs said:
There is nothing wrong with Ford....in most accidents you Can Not blame just the car or the manufactor...ever think about the idiots driving the cars? Yeah so there are a few innocent people but you Have to admit there are people out there that drive like maniacs because they got a sports car and think they need to race it all the time. Also, why just pick on just the Fords...Dodge, Chevy, etc...they ALL have the same problems. If you don't want a car that doesn't explode then you might as well toss your liscense and jump on a bicycle... There will be NO such thing as a car exploding until all cars are solar powered...or whatever.. Cars shouldn't even exsist in some peoples eyes because they are terrified of the dangers..
I agree with whoever said "if your afraid of getting a mustang because it'll explode than get another car" But you'll be afraid of those other cars too...including those goofy imports... blahhhh...
Now about having a that filler in the rear end..why don't they just make that pretty little design into a covered keyhole for the trunk like others do....maybe that will make some people happy...
the side fill is just fine as long as it doesn't stick out like a sore thumb...
Also...I still think the classics are more safer..only for the fact being they are made of real metal...as for the new models...they are fiberglass...so flimsy.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinions...so why argue?? Everyone makes good points...

--M
Click to expand...



We understand that other cars have problems, but since this is a Mustang website, most of us are really familiar with our cars and their problems. And your metal to fiberglass problem, our Mustangs aren't made out of fiberglass, but a light weight steel, but there is a plastic compound on the bumper cover, thats just to offset cost, but there is a steel reinforcement underneath. It's not really the outer cover, but the proctection under the body, that takes the impact and slows down the force. They use certain areas, some that purposely buckle, and some that stay strong, to keep the floor and engine bay from cutting off your legs and the such. And we understand that all cars have the potential to explode, is that a reason to say "screw it, lets just throw it in the trunk, and it's out of our hands"? "Hey, I don't need a roll bar for my 400 rwhp Mustang, it's out of my hands." But we can make safety measures that help prevent any problems. And yeah, an idiot behind the wheel can cause problems, but we are kind of hard pressed to help him is he slams into the back of you, nothing I can really do. I don't anybody said we were terrified of driving, it is just a safety concern, the more safety, the less lawsuits to Ford, which is a good thing. Wasn't the Pinto made out of metal? Go look up Pinto crashes, and watch it explode into flames when it is hit from behind. Oh, I saw this bad crash, where a Chevy van, made of metal, was hit in the front, and basically the whole front end was in the cabin, it was horrible. I've just seen too many cars explode into flames, that I don't want to even have to think about it. That thought has been implimented in my 69 Mustang, I put a steel reinforcement to section off the cabin from the trunk, to prevent the gas tank being slammed into the cabin. But oh well, the fact still remains that we will not have a rear filler, maybe after the Mustangs are released, the aftermarket or you can fab one up.
 
#80
Is the 2005 really "retro"

I see lots of threads about the 'retro' look of the 2005 Mustang. When I look at it I see some elements that remind me of the 60s Mustangs but I would not call the overall look 'retro'.

Things that would make it look retro to me would be lots of chrome and exposed bumpers. To me the Mustang looks great but the overall layout is not that different from most newer cars.

My thoughts on some of the 'retro' characteristics of the car:
1) Front end: Round headlights are kind of retro but they are all over lots of different new cars. The fog lights are in a similar location to the optional lights on early mustangs so I guess that is kind of retro. There is nothing retro about the turn signals. You could call the horse in the middle of the grill retro but most mustangs have had the same thing.

2) Wheels - Nothing retro about them.

3) Overall shape. It looks similar to the early mustangs but I don't think it is that retro. Long sloping rear window has been on lots of cars over they years. The oversized fender flares only go back to 1999. The sheet metal on the side that creates the appearance of rear side scoops have been on most Mustangs over the years so you can't call it retro. (Thank god Ford has gotten over the fake scoop craze!)

4) Rear end - The new Mustang has three vertical line taillights that you could call retro but it has been on most of the recent Mustangs. I guess the fake gas cap in the center of the rear is retro. (That fake gas cap is also kind of silly looking.) The overall shape of the rear end reminds me of the 60s Mustangs but you can't get less retro than a spoiler.

5) Interior - I would call the gauges retro but not much else inside is retro. The exposed metal does not remind me of any old Mustang. I guess the metal dash look more like something from before the Mustang era to me. The steering wheel does not look like any I have seen before but it does not remind me of any wheel from the past. There is nothing retro at all about the center console.


Let me know what you think of my thought. I love the new Mustang but 'retro' seems like too strong of a word to describe it.

Sorry to making you read my late night ramblings.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

B
Help price this Fox
Replies
0
Views
500
What is it Worth?!?!?
Blueinfan
B
limp
She's a runner
Replies
3
Views
750
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
limp
limp
9
1995 Mustang GT Crank no Start
Replies
6
Views
1K
1994 - 1995 Specific Tech
SRago
S
R
Progress Thread Shelby's Mustang - project revived after 7 years...
Replies
11
Views
2K
1974 - 1978 Mustang II Talk & Tech
Blackhawkxx
Blackhawkxx
G
1983 GLX Convertible 5.0 5-Speed 4BBL 'Barn Find' - 82,000 original miles - Restoration Motivation Needed
Replies
10
Views
1K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
General karthief
General karthief
Top Bottom
Back
New
Hot
Menu