I am looking at some pics of the new Mustang last night, and thinking about the other retro looks that started that way, like say the PT or the Prowler. The T-bird which was re-born and will likely go away just as quickly again. So I can't help but wonder, where do we go from Retro? Musatng has a continued heritage to deal with, not a here today gone tomorrow. When you line up all the model years, it's fairly easy to see the evolution of the car, well except for that awkward leap from 73' to 74, but even in the new retro model you can see the blend of the 04 and the original so that while it's a call back, it's still looks like a next generation too. So where do you end up going from there when the retro craze comes to it's end? Do you simply nip it in the bud like in 73' and start from scratch again, throwing a curve ball into the evolutionary chain? I'm curious where anyone else see's things headed?
With 40 years of heritage to draw from, there will always be cues that can be applied to give a classic flavor to the cutting edge dish. Think of it this way: boiled down to its base form, it could be considered "retro" to stick with the same basic formula of long-hood-short-deck, RWD, V8 powered two door coupe simply because that's what it was originally. Surely that isn't a rut that Mustang is in that it should "evolve" away from? Personally, I think the term "retro" itself is a disservice to the car. It simply remembers what it is, and doesn't become something it is not.
I think the next generation will be something like the C5 corvettes. It will be a new design with very little similarity (looks wise) to the generation before.
you begin to modernize the retro, in my opinion the mustang now has a really good base to build on again.
dunno about you gp but i always thought the C5s looked like mereley curvier versions of the C4... they are probably the most similar looking of any of two generations of corvette (well outside C5 and C6, perhaps).
The new 2005 Mustang looks just like any other modern car to me. Big plastic bumpers, etc., nothing really different, except for some vague similarities to the older Stangs. To me, the 2000 to 2004 look the best in new styling. As for the Corvette, it looks like a larger version of the Miata .
When I spoke of evolve I meant more the styling and asthetics than the roots of the car, and normally I'd agree with you Blake on that portion, but I am not completely sold on the idea that Ford learned their lesson with the Probe incident stangers almost faced not so long ago. Not to mention that even though gas prices can be blamed for it, the mustang has in fact become things that it certainly is not several times before like the 74' evolved into and also the fact that you had to choose between a 4 banger or an 8 in the 80's. Fine to offer sixes, but c'mon, some stangs have been big econo boxes in the past, and sure perhaps becasue of them we have stangs to still enjoy today, but life saving or not it was a diservice to the brand no less, no?
Ugh, I don't know. We're throwing around so many different issues at this point, I'm getting tired head just trying to figure out where to start. IMO, it is folly to already start second guessing where Mustang will go from here, when the newest (and arguably best in decades) generation hasn't even arrived at the dealer yet.
Aw, man. Now I feel bad. I was at least expecting a little in retort. I think my knee-jerk reply/opinion is fueled by being beaten down by other people who hear the term "retro" and immediately start throwing a fit about how stupid a PT Cruiser is and what a failure the new T-bird is, and how it is unimaginative and a cop out. I've just had the fight beaten out of me when I try to assert that retro does not equal bad/ugly/lame/whatever. To address something you took issue with earlier, I think I should have worded my thought differently. "It simply remembers what it is, and doesn't become something it is not." should read: It simply remembers what it is, and shouldn't become something it is not.
We (or at least the automakers) are never going to go "back to the future" with a '60's Mustang - The EPA and the NHTSA won't allow one to be built like they were back then. Cat's, airbags and diving-board-type bumpers are cast in granite while even more safety measures are brought forth in an effort to prevent the continuance of Darwinism. That having ben said, thereare those designers who will continue to bring back styling cues from the musclecar days. And why would anybody consider that a bad thing ? I've mentioned the '05 Stang in talking with lots of people of all ages, from my Boy Scouts to my 58-year-old brother (worked nights in a band/days selling '67-68's new off the lot). Everybody likes it; everybody sees "the old Mustang within". The only negative I heard from anybody was almost unanimous dislike for the pseudo-Shelby-esque tail panel on the concept car - especially from the brother who sold the two GT-500's in Yuma during that era. He also had opinions about the concept's dash panel and stainless steel headlight buckets; and is happier with what the production model looks like in those areas as well. By the way, I believe that brother is on some sort of a waiting list at (I think it's Earnhardt's in Mesa) to get one of the first shipments. Should be hearing from him soon Still Dreamin'
Yeah but you know I'm not allowed to around here anymore Blake, my shenanigans aren't tolerated, they just cause wars and trouble, so a mild guilt trip was my only option. I am not picking on the car at all, I think it's great and I love the call back styling cues, I just couldn't help but be curious how it affects future evolution if at all when the (forgive the expression) Retro fad dies out. I guess when I look at it from what you are saying (or I think your saying), which is basically that the Mustang has, since 94', begun to remember it's design roots and has been implementing them again, so the new one is not really a retro, just stepped up a notch or two. From that angle it makes sense, though I still question how much they would have chose to remember them had there not at least been some retro influence in the market. Past descisions like slowly abandoning side scoops from 69' to 73' (simply because the market was going to cleaner bodies) then to bring back some of the cues out of nowhere but in a far lesser car, and then once more taking off in a whole new direction then back again one more time simply can't help but rattle my brain as to what happens next. When the retro craze does end, I can't help but feel that the selective memmory will once again forget before it's time to remember, as opposed to always remaining faithful to what it is and should be. I don't know honestly, I just thought it was a thought provoking topic for friendly discussions. The folks who have beaten you down with those comparisons should get a red hot poker in the you know whatta. As I stated originally, the Cruiser will go away when the retro fad ends, and the T-bird will likely retire once more, but since the Mustang IS here to stay, it begged me to ask the question.
I can understand your worries pak, but the mustang will probably always look like a mustang unless something drastic happens like the 70's. The problem in my opinion is that there was no longer anywhere to go with the 94 remodel and still have it look like a mustang. In my opinion Ford should have a completely modern rwd coupe in the merc cougar but the mustang is going to need to be a mustang and the new body will lend its self well to modernization as it ages. The yellow GT-R concept car doesnt really look retro to me, it feels like a modern BOSS. Im not sure if the 05 would even be considered retro if the mustang had stayed to its original styling cues over the course of its development. The mustang should evolve like Jaguars, they evolve they shouldnt get remade and redone.
Nice topic... I enjoyed reading. I hope more people comment. I'll try to post some when I get more time.
