Pondering 2015 Lineup Options

Discussion in '2015+ (S550) Mustang -General/Talk' started by ximportdriver, Nov 23, 2012.


Do you want the Shelby or the SVO/SVT labels in the new generation?

  1. Shelby (GT350, GT500).

    1 vote(s)
  2. SVO/SVT, Cobra.

    13 vote(s)
  3. Neither--Ford needs to come up with something completely fresh.

    1 vote(s)
  4. Both--I want the SVO/SVT, Cobra, GT350, and GT500 options or any derivative combination.

    12 vote(s)
  1. Re-read what I wrote numb-nuts. I said what the introduced to replace the II was worse ('79-81 foxes were beyond awful), and that it took them ten years to get it right (circa 1989 and the MAF going nationwide, without which, there would've been NO big aftermarket, it'd be like the GM TPI 305/350 aftermarket). The '79-81 foxes were absolutely pathetic. The '82-84 cars were almost as bad, though marketing hype and misguided nostalgia peg the '82 as the "return to performance" when it was all of 0.1 seconds faster in the 1/4 than the fastest II stock-for-stock. (Put matching tires on the II and it'd probably win considering the contact patch on the stock tires of a II was about the size of a business card!) Both 1985 and 1986 brought huge steps forward in all departments, with the 7.5 rear axle being ditched for the 8.8 behind the V8s, the CPI, then MPFI systems coming along in those two years, and then the improvements to the bottom-end of the engine for '87, MAF cars for Cali in '88, and then finally, in '89, the true birth of fox-body performance, nationwide MAF.

    Like I said, what replaced the II was worse (255ci V8s and 200ci I6s that can both be outrun by a 2.3 car with a good driver anyone? A draw-through turbo 2.3 that detonates, catches fire, etc? The SROD transmission? Really?) and then Ford spent ten years correcting it to get it right.

    Learn to read homie.

    Oh, and Chevy did stop making the Vette, there was no 1983 model.

    While I'm at it, you're right, the gas crisis had nothing to do with the Mustang continuing past 1973. The II was on the drawing boards in 1970, was approved by '72, and in production during '73. The fact that the gas crisis happened saved the II and the Mustang in general because of it, but it was a happy accident, it wasn't any genius planning, hell, that's why I didn't bring that little bit of bull:poo: up.

    It's okay Bill, let the gayness out, we won't judge you.
  2. I think there maybe the possibility that a special edition, high performance model may not show up immediately. The current GT500 didn't come out until the third model year of the S197, and to go with non-Ford or Mustang examples the C6 Z06 was not available upon that generation's launch much like the SRT4 Dart is not available until next year.

    As for the Fox Mustang's reputation, It's hard to gauge what people as a whole really think of it, IMO. While many media outlets and publications will agree the II was horrible, there seems to be no mention of the Fox in either positive or negative light despite the fact it is currently the longest produced Mustang generation (15 model years, yay!). I noticed with regards to models and toys, there seemed to be a fair bit produced when the Fox was more relevant (i.e. was in production) but after that, it all seemed to fizzle out. Yeah, I know Hot Wheels introduced an all new '92 LX casting a few years ago but that was really out of the normal. Video games seem to not pay as much attention to the Fox, I've seen plenty of titles with the classic Falcon based cars, SN-95s, and S-197 but I can only name of three to four games that have had Foxes in them officially (as in not by a third party mod, etc.). So in conclusion, while everyone seems to rag on the II for being utterly bad, Foxes seem to have been all but forgotten.
    74stang2togo likes this.
  3. Well numb nuts, that's your opinion. The '79-82 cars out handled, out braked, and out styled the II by disgusting margins. The fact is that if the '79-82 cars were so terrible, why did they sell so well and why did they eventually grow into what they did? If they were as terrible as you make them out then they wouldn't have sold.

    The answer is POTENTIAL. Do you see guys racing IIs in American Iron still to this day? No. Do you see guys building drag cars out of II's? No. The II was "the right car at the right time", i'll give you that, but the only car that the II was better than was the Pinto it was designed from.
    FordRacing302 likes this.
  4. I am entertained. This ****ing place is full of ego filled peckerfaces these days.

    Free post.
  5. Out handle and out-braked? Are you on crack? The early foxes used the same sized rotors and similar pads (on the exact same wheel bearings) and had the same design drums and brake hardware in the back. Throw in the bump-steer that IIs don't have and foxes do, and your argument is invalid. Honestly, early foxes handled like the p.o.s. four-door sedan they were based on. It did get better (as I do believe I mentioned), but those roots were pretty damn humble.

    Terrible cars sell well all the time. Chrysler's whole lineup from the 1980s onward is proof of that. (K-cars, Neons, PT Cruisers, etc.)

    Are IIs raced in American Iron? No. You know why? The cars don't fit the rulebook due to wheelbase. (I was going to build one, found out that it wouldn't be within the rules, and I built an '87 fox instead.)

    Drag cars? Yes, I've got one and have a friendly rivalry with three other II owners that I know of that have one. Mine is in the high 12s even though it spins the tires off the line because it has no weight in the ass-end and I'm too cheap to go with a four-link just yet. Hell, JACK ****ING ROUSH built Mustang II drag cars.

    Styling... well, you noticed I didn't touch on that one. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder or the beer-holder. To me, the only good-looking foxes were the '85-86 cars, I love them. The 79-84 cars just looked horrendous, and the 87-93 cars looked absolutely generic. I got asked all the time if my '87 and '88 foxes that I daily drove for years were Tempos, Cavaliers, Taurus, etc. They're that generic looking, they look like every other mid80s-mid90s car and that's part of what makes them so hideous to me. The '85 and '86 cars though, man, those had style.
  6. You raise a valid point, outside of Mustang circles, it is VERY hard to judge the fox's reputation. Within a Mustang crowd it's got it's hardcore, fanatical fanbase, it's detractors, etc. To the outside world though, what does anyone really think? I know that if you simply broaden the circle from Mustang guys to car guys in general, there's a slant towards dislike of IIs, but once you get outside that circle, that slant mostly disappears. I've had girls want to pose with my harvest gold Ghia and get their picture taken because it's a "pretty Mustang", I've had invites to car clubs in spite of it being a II because the clubs think it's cool that a guy as young as me is building something old, and different.

    With video games, I've only seen ONE that had either foxes or IIs in it, and it was the SAME game, "Mustang" for PS2 (awesomely arcade-ish racer with neat cars, I recommend it if you're not a stickler for realistic driving games, because there is NO way my little blue Cobra II should be beating a '68 GT with a 390 in highland green and a yellow and black '73 Mach 1 around the track). "Ford Racing 3" had so many SN95s, classics, and even, I kid you not, a Capri in it. (My old man's a Capri nut, he nearly cried when he saw it!) But no foxes or IIs.

    I collect diecast cars, I've got a whole section of Mustangs, and in all of them, I've got one fox. ONE. Not that I don't want more, I want a '79 Pace Car (only good looking early fox), an '84 GT350 (still ugly, but had some awesome cues and a distinct history), any and all SVOs, the '85 and '86s in every guise, and an '87 GT convertible for nostalgia's sake. The only one I've been able to find is a '93 Cobra.

    I have six diecast IIs and didn't look hard for but one of them. One was an impulse buy at a grocery store checkout, a '78 Monroe Handler II by Hot Wheels I bought earlier this year. One was a Johnny Lightning Monopoly edition Kemp Cobra II racer I bought at Advance Auto Parts. Three are the "Fresh Cherries" series released at Wal-Mart a couple years ago, one in each of the available colors. The last was the only challenge. I wanted an original run Johnny Lightning Kemp Cobra II racer in silver, and had to check Ebay for years before I found one that wasn't beat up and/or overpriced and won the bid on it.

    Granted, there's still more IIs I want for my collection (I'd kill for a notchback, just one, I'm not a big fan of most II hatchbacks, they're ugly!), but where the hell are the foxes?

    All of that aside, wasn't this thread supposed to be about 2015s anyway? I crack one damned joke...
  7. Face it dude the only thing the II ever gave the world was a better looking Pinto and a decent front suspension to use on old hotrods.


    Oh look they made it longer and gave it a retro front end and dolled it up with Mach 1 stickers. You're right, that's soooo much better looking than this


    Attached Files:

  8. There is a 1983 Corvette. There were a few but one still exists. :stick:
  9. '79 Pace car, eh, I'd put them on equal footing in the looks department with a II Mach, they're both hatchbacks, which I don't like anyway, but other than that, I like 'em both.

    Now that '80? It looks like a slant-nosed 2-door Fairmont. Fugly. I've seen vacuum cleaners with more character.

    As to the comment of IIs only being good for their front suspensions, well, that's like saying foxes are only good for their EFI systems, like the one in my '76, and the one I installed in a Fairlane, and all the others that have been taken out of the foxes to put into something else.

    As far as Laser's comment on the '83 Corvette, there were 44 prototypes, all but one of which was destroyed, zero production cars. The remaining prototype is in a museum.

    Attached Files:

  10. Man i hope you know by now i'm mostly just effin with ya. I still wouldn't say the II is a better car than the Fox, but they can be made to look good too. I must say though, i have no love for the coupe II's, which is ironic since they gave birth to the coupe Fox which is my preferred Fox body style.


    THAT is absolutely sick looking.

    This was the best looking pic of a II coupe I could find :lol:

    Attached Files:

    Ross12 likes this.
  11. I sooner drive a Stang II over a Prius so I guess thats something. :shrug:
  12. derailed :doh:
    74stang2togo likes this.
  13. Would you expect anything less? That's how we roll in these parts.
    88LX5.Oh likes this.
  14. Your avatar has really large bewbz.
  15. It's how the Internet goes. C'est la vie.

    And that black II you posted above is absolutely sick.
  16. Sorry to get back on thread, but here's my take on what I'd like to see. First 2 are the standard base w/ V-6 and GT w/ Coyote. No need to tinker with that basics lineup that has served well since '94. After that, we need 2-3 specialty models. The obvious choice is an evolution of the current GT500. Then I really want to see a turbo car ala the SVO, with a hot 2.0 Ecoboost 4 banger where the emphasis is on light weight and high grip, make it stripped down w/o an infotainment system, automatic dual zone HVAC, etc... As far as a 3.5 Ecoboost car, that seems to be an expensive way to get the same power numbers you're already getting from the Coyote. If you go for big numbers with that, then you're gonna be looking at $$$ that gets into GT500 territory. Not that I'll be mad if they do go that route, but it seems a little redundant whereas channeling the ghost of SVO past would be different and hopefully at a price point less than a loaded up GT.

    PS, since I did bring the thread back on track, I leave you with this as my penance:
    View attachment 138929
    Svtpilot likes this.
  17. there are words in your post?
    Svtpilot and 88LX5.Oh like this.
  18. The problem with so many specialty models is that they form competition within the Mustang lineup, and Ford wants to avoid that. This is why we haven't seen an "LX" since the GTS's of the early '90s. You can't make a hot turbo 4 banger that makes anywhere near GT power unless you make it way more expensive than the GT in order to keep it from competing with sales. Then people are going to ask why they should pay more for a car with half the engine just like they did back in '85 when the SVO came out. We cultists loved the SVO's but the public just didn't get it. If they built a stripped down Mustang with an Ecoboost engine, they'd probably sell it as some kind of stupid race package without a VIN like they do the Cobra Jet.

    The only reason there's still a Shelby in the lineup is because Ford themselves don't have a hot V8 car of their own that's competing with sales like they did back in the '60s. Ford started making the Boss cars and that created competition with the Shelby cars and then they dropped Shelby. The Cobra Jet is made without a VIN to prevent this from happening. They just build a balls out car that's faster than a Shelby, but won't sell it for street use because then who would buy a Shelby? They could easily drop a GT500 engine into a V6 body without all the interior crap and make a stupid fast car and give it some random name and it would sell like crazy but at what cost? If they strip it down people are going to expect to pay less than a premium GT, which would then screw out GT sales except for the few who just want the niceties. If back in the '80s/90s there wasn't an LX, imagine how much higher GT sales would have been. Ford learned that lesson and that's why there hasn't been a low cost high performance model since then and probably never will be.

    And i hope i someday eat my words but that's how i see it.