04 vert vs 05 vert
- Thread starter exhausted
- Start date
-
Sponsors (?)
The 2005+ vert will look like the 69-70 verts. I never liked the 69-70 verts at all. The 2005+ vert will look shorter in length in the rear because of the deletion of the fastback look of the roofline. The 69-70 verts had this same problem. They were too long in the front and too short in the rear without the fastback roofline. This did not look as bad on the 64 1/2-68 Mustang verts because the front and rear of the car was proportionate in length or at least close to being proportionate.
On the other hand, the 69-70 fastbacks were nicer looking cars than the grande coupes and verts. I guess it's just a matter of preference here. I personally don't care about the 2005+ verts. But if I had to I would rather own a 1999-2004 vert than own a 2005+ vert. This is because the 99-04's bodystyle looks more proportionate from front to rear in the convertibles. The 2005+ Mustangs don't. The 2005+ looks longer in the front end than the 99-04 and its body style makes it look unproportionate for a convertible top if you compare it to its rear end length.
On the other hand, the 69-70 fastbacks were nicer looking cars than the grande coupes and verts. I guess it's just a matter of preference here. I personally don't care about the 2005+ verts. But if I had to I would rather own a 1999-2004 vert than own a 2005+ vert. This is because the 99-04's bodystyle looks more proportionate from front to rear in the convertibles. The 2005+ Mustangs don't. The 2005+ looks longer in the front end than the 99-04 and its body style makes it look unproportionate for a convertible top if you compare it to its rear end length.
66Satellite
Banned
- Feb 6, 2003
- 649
- 0
- 0
exhausted said:
Have you seen pics of of the 05 production vert? If so, please post them. I've only seen the concept vert, which looked odd with the rollbar. I suspect the 05 production vert will look pretty decent.
66Satellite
Banned
- Feb 6, 2003
- 649
- 0
- 0
I think my 01 vert will be a keeper.
I am afraid Ron has a valid point. I owned a 71 Mach 1 (original owner) and the reason I didn't get the Grande vert that year was it just didn't look right. It looks like the same rationale. The car is too bulky w/o the
top to look "right".
I will wait to see, but, I may just keep the 01 for a lot longer than I anticipated. The fastback looks great, but I want a ragtop.
I am afraid Ron has a valid point. I owned a 71 Mach 1 (original owner) and the reason I didn't get the Grande vert that year was it just didn't look right. It looks like the same rationale. The car is too bulky w/o the
top to look "right".
I will wait to see, but, I may just keep the 01 for a lot longer than I anticipated. The fastback looks great, but I want a ragtop.
tylers65
I've got your tool right here!
Ron Jeremy said:
WOW! You were actually there when J. Mays said "Team, we are going to build the new Mustang from the ground up. We are going to start from a clean slate, but this time, we are going to make it so the Mustang only looks good as a fastback. Now, get to it team".
That has to be one of the coolest stories ever. Next time you talk to Mr. Mays, ask him for IRS as an option.
tylers65 said:WOW! You were actually there when J. Mays said "Team, we are going to build the new Mustang from the ground up. We are going to start from a clean slate, but this time, we are going to make it so the Mustang only looks good as a fastback. Now, get to it team".
That has to be one of the coolest stories ever. Next time you talk to Mr. Mays, ask him for IRS as an option.
Tyler,
I think that many people in here DO agree with me about the new 2005+ Mustang. It only looks good ONLY as a fastback. Most in here also agree that the 2005+ Mustang convertible looks disporportionate when you look at the very long front nose and the very short rear end on the convertible model. Let's face the truth here. The convertible does not look as nice as the fastback does in this body style.
I think that many people in here DO agree with me about the new 2005+ Mustang. It only looks good ONLY as a fastback. Most in here also agree that the 2005+ Mustang convertible looks disporportionate when you look at the very long front nose and the very short rear end on the convertible model. Let's face the truth here. The convertible does not look as nice as the fastback does in this body style.
tylers65
I've got your tool right here!
Ron Jeremy said:
I think you need to back up an wait to see the new 'vert before you run your mouth. You sound like a fool spoputing off things you obviously know little about. All you have done is shown that you are quick to judge something you have yet to see. You are basing your opinion on a concept car that really looks little like the actual production car. I never saud that I do not agree that the Concept GT "fastback" looks better than the vert (which I personally did not like at all). I am saying that you need to reserve judgement until we see the actual car. You sound like a fool rambling on and on about a car you have yet to see.....Oops, I forgot, you are friends with J mays and he showed it to you and told you that he planned on the new Hard top being the only Mustang that would look any good.
Seriously, slow down kid. The Vert will come and then you can tell the world from on high that it is not as nice as the Coupe.
66Satellite
Banned
- Feb 6, 2003
- 649
- 0
- 0
I think looking at this photo it's pretty easy to imagine the vert. I'm guessing the windshield will be raked up a tad more? Maybe someone could photochop it? I think it'll look great. Anyone know if they'll be showing a production vert in Detroit next week?
Similar threads
