Right now, I feel my car is one of the hottest vehicles on the road!!! People love it, and most think it cost more than it did. My question is do you all think the new Mustang will end the RX-8's reign at the top! I'm sure the Mustang wont have a better interior, american cars always suck! Heres, some links, the real thing will be much cheaper lookin im sure, but its still a nice vehicle.

05 mustang (http://autos.msn.com/research/vip/futuremodel.aspx?familyid=91&pictureid=0&usage=image&src=vip)



05 Mustang 2 (http://www.mustangforums.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=3362&PN=1&TPN=2)

That car does absolutely nothing for me...

looks nice
but I dont like american cars in general
not enough rice

The profile is OK. But I'd never buy anything with rear lights like that. It's ridiculous.

Oh, wait... the steering wheel is ridiculous too.

Lets wait to see the production car not the concept (everybody remember the RX-Evolve interior, etc.). I saw that concept car at the Detroit Auto show last Jan -- it looked pretty good in person but I am very doubtful that the actual production car will look much like it (details) once Ford's cost cutters get hold of determining the actual production materials.

Besides that it only has two seats -- so it must get the thumbs down from me.

it's OK but i'd never choose it over the 8...I bet there will a heck of alot more of them on the street than there are Rx-8's since i'm sure it will be priced cheaper...So I think the 8 will still be one of the more unique cars on the road. Also it is kinda weird to see a modern exterior design but with a 1960's interrior..

I don't like it one bit. I hope the production model goes through some serious changes....

I'm sure the Mustang will sell more, unless it's truly awful. Right or wrong, the Mustang has a huge following among the 'buy American' enthusiast crowd.

But I doubt it will take any glory from the RX8.
1. There's at least a 95% chance that the Mustang will have poorer handling characteristics because Ford will cut costs on production and it's much harder to give a front engine V6 or V8 vehicle a 50/50 weight distribution.
2. The current Mustangs cost in the teens for the V6, low to mid 20s for the V8, and low 30s for the Cobra. Ford may increase the price for the new model, too. So if you want a Mustang that can beat the RX8 in a straight line, you probably won't be able to get it for cheaper than an RX8. If it is cheaper, it won't be much cheaper.
3. The RX8 will get more attention because it will be less common on the road than the new Mustang. Rarity increases value. (Of course, if it is too rare Mazda will stop making them and we don't want that.)
3. The RX8 is the best looking car on the road you can buy for under $100,000. The new Mustang looks decent, but it is still way out of the RX8's league. My boss has a G35, and his boss has an RX8. The 8 gets attention all of the time, and people always ask about it. Nobody cares about the G35.

You know, a car looks a lot worse with 16 inch rims, rather then 20s like that concept has.

All concepts look good. But the production version won't look nearly as good.


G35 > RX8

The G35 has style to spare. + 280hp

Forgive me for asking, but how do you get 400bhp out of a supercharged 5.4ltr engine and call that sporty?

Originally posted by RobDickinson
Forgive me for asking, but how do you get 400bhp out of a supercharged 5.4ltr engine and call that sporty?

Which engine are you talking about? The 4.6 liter DOHC supercharged V8 in the Mustang Cobra is 390 horsepower.

The 4.6 liter Northstar V8 in the Cadillac XLR is 320 horsepower, I believe. The 4.5 liter V8 in the BMW 545 and Nissan M45 are around 330 horsepower. Compared to those numbers, the Cobra's engine looks reasonable to me.

Originally posted by Captain_Ron
G35 > RX8

The G35 has style to spare. + 280hp

The G35 is fast, no question. Put into gear, push gas pedal, and take off faster than 98% of the vehicles on the road.

But more style than the RX8? Of course that is a subjective measurement, but I disagree. The G35 interior is classy and comfortable. The car looks great. The RX8 interior is flashy and unusual. The car looks awesome.

Thanks guys, yeah I hope mazda makes only enough to keep them in production, I've had mine for weak and havent seen any others on the road, and plus the Chicks Dig IT!!!!!!!!!!1

Originally posted by FamilyGuy
I'm sure the Mustang will sell more, unless it's truly awful. Right or wrong, the Mustang has a huge following among the 'buy American' enthusiast crowd.

But I doubt it will take any glory from the RX8.
1. There's at least a 95% chance that the Mustang will have poorer handling characteristics because Ford will cut costs on production and it's much harder to give a front engine V6 or V8 vehicle a 50/50 weight distribution.

Agreed. However, 50/50 weight distribution does not ensure that in itself.
Originally posted by FamilyGuy
2. The current Mustangs cost in the teens for the V6, low to mid 20s for the V8, and low 30s for the Cobra. Ford may increase the price for the new model, too. So if you want a Mustang that can beat the RX8 in a straight line, you probably won't be able to get it for cheaper than an RX8. If it is cheaper, it won't be much cheaper..

The current Mustang GT will beat the RX8 in a drag race and its cheaper.

Originally posted by FamilyGuy
3. The RX8 will get more attention because it will be less common on the road than the new Mustang. Rarity increases value. (Of course, if it is too rare Mazda will stop making them and we don't want that.).

How many Mustangs are going to be produced? 30,000 RX8s produced a year in the US is going to make the car far from rare.

Originally posted by FamilyGuy
3. The RX8 is the best looking car on the road you can buy for under $100,000.

Please stop the delusion!!! S2000, Lotus Elise, Z06, Viper, 911 Turbo, Z4, Boxer, NSX are all in that price range my friend.

Please stop the delusion!!! S2000, Lotus Elise, Z06, Viper, 911 Turbo, Z4, Boxer, NSX are all in that price range my friend.

S2000 never turned my head, that car is like a boxy lookin Miata, It sucks! Lotus Elise would turn heads just because its a lotus, the lines aren't better than the 8 and the interior definately isn't. The viper's interior sucks as well, but it will turn heads. And I hate the way the Z4 looks too, long @$$ hood. So that leaves the 911, Boxter, and NSX, I give you those.

I hate that S2000 though!!!

get a 8 then talk!!

No offense my friend, but a car with suicide doors and a "bulbous profile" are not going to win int he looks department over these more expensive dedicated sports car.

Originally posted by revhappy
No offense my friend, but a car with suicide doors and a "bulbous profile" are not going to win int he looks department over these more expensive dedicated sports car.

IMHO, the 8 is halfway to being a much more radical looking design. It seems as if they backed-off and scrapped the last draft, and they went for a hybrid between radical (not Radical!) & conservative.

No matter what the 'looks,' Enzo's, Z4's, Elise's - those are radical designs following function. On the other hand, your Evo is an example of dedication to the performance department. Our 8's are an example of an all-around tourer -it might not shine on any particular dpt., but its above average on all of them (looks left aside...)

Eventhough, I think the Elise looks beautiful.:D

I like Mustangs to some degree, and I like the exterior of this new one pretty well. But IMHO, they went way too far with the retro thing with the interior. Might pick one up in a few years and play with it. But you'll notice that even though I knew these were coming out, I still bought the RX-8. :D

Originally posted by RX8-TX
IMHO, the 8 is halfway to being a much more radical looking design. It seems as if they backed-off and scrapped the last draft, and they went for a hybrid between radical (not Radical!) & conservative.

No matter what the 'looks,' Enzo's, Z4's, Elise's - those are radical designs following function. On the other hand, your Evo is an example of dedication to the performance department. Our 8's are an example of an all-around tourer -it might not shine on any particular dpt., but its above average on all of them (looks left aside...)

Eventhough, I think the Elise looks beautiful.:D

I agree, RX8-TX. The RX8 looks amzing from the front, but some of the other angles area bit off with the suicide doors, elongated wheelbase and roofline. That being said, I think a 2X2 version with 2 doors would have been a car that perhaps would have eclipsed the others mentioned here. Who knows, it may still come out in a couple of years?

Seen it up-front and in-person. It's pretty ugly, and the interior components are so badly combined (combination of 50's diner and 80's BMW - seriously) there's no was I could stand it for a full test drive, let alone years of ownership.

Originally posted by revhappy
Agreed. However, 50/50 weight distribution does not ensure that in itself.


True. Handling is more than weight distribution.


The current Mustang GT will beat the RX8 in a drag race and its cheaper.


I did say in my post that a faster Mustang will cost more, and if it is cheaper it won't be that much cheaper. Currently the base MSRP for a Mustang GT is $24,000 - not too much cheaper than the RX8's base MSRP of $26,000.


How many Mustangs are going to be produced? 30,000 RX8s produced a year in the US is going to make the car far from rare.


The only link I could find was http://www.mustangworks.com/articles/features/2003Mach1/
but basically Ford sells over 120,000 Mustangs a year --> 4x as many as the RX8. Plus, of course, there are already millions of Mustangs on the road while the oldest RX8s in the US are not even six months old.



Please stop the delusion!!! S2000, Lotus Elise, Z06, Viper, 911 Turbo, Z4, Boxer, NSX are all in that price range my friend.

Some of those cars look sweet, and a lot of them are tremendously fast and would blow the RX8 away, but I think it looks better than all of them.

Originally posted by FamilyGuy
True. Handling is more than weight distribution.

Cool..we agree to agree!
[B]

I did say in my post that a faster Mustang will cost more, and if it is cheaper it won't be that much cheaper. Currently the base MSRP for a Mustang GT is $24,000 - not too much cheaper than the RX8's base MSRP of $26,000.

Its still cheaper. The Sport Package of the RX8 (basically the cheapest high performance package) adds a bit to that, right?



Originally posted by FamilyGuy
[B]The only link I could find was http://www.mustangworks.com/articles/features/2003Mach1/
but basically Ford sells over 120,000 Mustangs a year --> 4x as many as the RX8. Plus, of course, there are already millions of Mustangs on the road while the oldest RX8s in the US are not even six months old..

True, Mustangs are all over the place, but perhaps this one will be a bit different looking. Still, both cars will be common on the road.

Originally posted by FamilyGuy
Some of those cars look sweet, and a lot of them are tremendously fast and would blow the RX8 away, but I think it looks better than all of them.

Its tough to argue looks, but I like them all! :D

I love Mustangs! Mostly 60's stangs. I'm pretty excited to see a new platform. I think it will be manufactured at a Mazda-Ford plant... so I wonder if it's 100% Ford! Wouldn't that be a kick in the pants!

The Mustang is one of the best selling cars in american history (icon). I don't think it would be fair comparing the two cars.

I'd imagine the V8 will be faster than the 8 in most categories but as usual, less refined... that's why it's a Muscle Car and not a Sports Car. A Mustang will always be a Muscle Car. They tried to make a Mustang into a sports car with the 2005 concept and people hated the fact it might have an independat rear suspension... so back to the live axle... like the one in my '81 RX-7... see Muscle car.

I make fun of my friend's Mustangs all the time. They make fun of my rotary, but we both appreciate their differences. That's why there's choice.

I'd love to read somewhere that a Mazda engineer designed the chasis of the Mustang (though I think it's off the Tbird/luxuray lines).

First Mazda had a hand in the Ford Fucus and Futura (?) ... imagine if they made the Mustang! That would be such a slap to american "ingenuity". I love it.

:) T

Originally posted by revhappy
Its still cheaper. The Sport Package of the RX8 (basically the cheapest high performance package) adds a bit to that, right?

[B]


Just a quibble. Sports package adds nothing to performance. Non of the options for the 6 speed MT are performance enhancing in any way. They are all cosmetic packages.

Originally posted by tbonerx7
They tried to make a Mustang into a sports car with the 2005 concept and people hated the fact it might have an independat rear suspension... so back to the live axle... like the one in my '81 RX-7... see Muscle car.
I don't believe that is the reason they ditched the Idependant rear suspension. It was a cost cutting measure.

If IRS is so bad then whey did Ford put it on their top of the line SVT Cobra? Better handling, thats why.
When the new Mustang comes out, once again only the SVT Cobra will have IRS.

Don't get me wrong, I think the Mustang is a great car for what is designed to do. Cheap, fast, strait line fun and the new model will be no different.

In San Antonio, I couldn't swing my dick in a parking lot without hitting a Mustang. I'm glad to have a car that turns heads (even mine, after 4 moths of ownership).

Originally posted by Genom
Just a quibble. Sports package adds nothing to performance. Non of the options for the 6 speed MT are performance enhancing in any way. They are all cosmetic packages.

Isn't the Sports Package the lightest of the high power packages? I know technically you can get a base high power model, but are they really on the lots? Also, doesn't that model have smaller wheels and brakes?

The base 6 MT already has the 18 wheels and larger front rotors. The sport package adds xenon headlights and DSC.

Touring adds upgraded stereo, moonroof, Homelink Mirror and leather. GT finishes it with seat warmers, electric driver seat and heated mirrors I beleive (this is all from memory but can be found on the mazda site). Navigation is an option for any package. The base and sport are the same weight. The others add about 50 pounds total I think from the options. Some people weighed their cars when it first came out so a quick search I am sure would find the posts.

Originally posted by Genom
The base 6 MT already has the 18 wheels and larger front rotors. The sport package adds xenon headlights and DSC.

Touring adds upgraded stereo, moonroof, Homelink Mirror and leather. GT finishes it with seat warmers, electric driver seat and heated mirrors I beleive (this is all from memory but can be found on the mazda site). Navigation is an option for any package. The base and sport are the same weight. The others add about 50 pounds total I think from the options. Some people weighed their cars when it first came out so a quick search I am sure would find the posts.
Close, but the touring doesn't include the leather. That is the main draw of the GT.:)

i am a mustang fan, and i do like the new mustang, but however successful and popular it turns out to be, it won't really be on the same par as the 8. it'll be a much more mass-produced coupe, cheaper, less exotic, and low-tech. it caters to a much larger crowd, whereas the 8 is more of a cult car, a lot sweeter, compared to it. i'm pretty sure you'll see more people lining up for the new 'stang, and you'll see a mad rush of it on the road initially, just 'cuz it's a mustang. don't really think it's right to compare the two, mustang's a big muscle pony car that's traditionally not high in the handling department but more of an american standard-issue sports car. in any case, the 8 will hold its own

Originally posted by revhappy
a car with suicide doors and a "bulbous profile" are not going to win int he looks department over these more expensive dedicated sports car.

you really stand by your magazine, those're words taken straight from car and driver. well, looks are very subjective. sam mitani of r&t thought the 8 is the best-looking car ever to come out of japan. i whole-heartedly agree; the 8's maserati-ish front grill is so well-penned, as are its front fenders and canted headlights, the rear end, the greenhouse, to me it is a very beautiful, very sporty yet distinctive design with a good dose of traditional sports car cues. on the contrary, i find the G35 coupe and 350z ugly, though i do like the 350z. but i love the elise

Originally posted by chinx
i am a mustang fan, and i do like the new mustang, but however successful and popular it turns out to be, it won't really be on the same par as the 8. it'll be a much more mass-produced coupe, cheaper, less exotic, and low-tech. it caters to a much larger crowd, whereas the 8 is more of a cult car, a lot sweeter, compared to it. i'm pretty sure you'll see more people lining up for the new 'stang, and you'll see a mad rush of it on the road initially, just 'cuz it's a mustang. don't really think it's right to compare the two, mustang's a big muscle pony car that's traditionally not high in the handling department but more of an american standard-issue sports car. in any case, the 8 will hold its own



you really stand by your magazine, those're words taken straight from car and driver. well, looks are very subjective. sam mitani of r&t thought the 8 is the best-looking car ever to come out of japan. i whole-heartedly agree; the 8's maserati-ish front grill is so well-penned, as are its front fenders and canted headlights, the rear end, the greenhouse, to me it is a very beautiful, very sporty yet distinctive design with a good dose of traditional sports car cues. on the contrary, i find the G35 coupe and 350z ugly, though i do like the 350z. but i love the elise



I tend to agree with the criticism of the RX-8s looks, and C&D is not the only car mag to point out that it's kind of a mish mosh of designing ideas. I think it looks great but 10 years from now the FD will still look better, as will the G35, and early Z models, maybe even Supra to some degree. They are clean classic and elegant designs. Understated (the Supra less so) yet still eye catching. The RX-8 looks great now, but I would liken it to a woman with plastic surgery and a boob job. Looks great now, but 10 years from now it will look overly done up and like it's trying too hard. <awaits the flames>

Ike

Ike

Originally posted by Genom
The base 6 MT already has the 18 wheels and larger front rotors. The sport package adds xenon headlights and DSC.

Touring adds upgraded stereo, moonroof, Homelink Mirror and leather. GT finishes it with seat warmers, electric driver seat and heated mirrors I beleive (this is all from memory but can be found on the mazda site). Navigation is an option for any package. The base and sport are the same weight. The others add about 50 pounds total I think from the options. Some people weighed their cars when it first came out so a quick search I am sure would find the posts.

Is the Base Model actually avaialble on the lots? When I went for a test-drive they only had Sport, Touring and Grand Touring.

Originally posted by chinx
you really stand by your magazine, those're words taken straight from car and driver. well, looks are very subjective. sam mitani of r&t thought the 8 is the best-looking car ever to come out of japan. i whole-heartedly agree; the 8's maserati-ish front grill is so well-penned, as are its front fenders and canted headlights, the rear end, the greenhouse, to me it is a very beautiful, very sporty yet distinctive design with a good dose of traditional sports car cues. on the contrary, i find the G35 coupe and 350z ugly, though i do like the 350z. but i love the elise

Yup, that's why I used quotation marks. :p Seriously, looks are hard to argue, but come on, you have to admit the design compromises hurt the looks to some degree. I still will stand by my remark that a 2X2, 2 door design would have been an amazing looking car.

Originally posted by revhappy
Is the Base Model actually avaialble on the lots? When I went for a test-drive they only had Sport, Touring and Grand Touring.

They will obviously push the ONE with the goodies. I believe those looking for a base model, are probably gonna have to wait. Let's see what Mazda's Inventory says:

Mazda Inventory Search (http://www.mazdausa.com/MusaWeb/vlResults.action?exterior=ALL&exteriorCode=ALL&state=&tranCode=T9&sort=price&msrp=25%2C700&engine=ALL&vehicleCode=RX8&interiorCode=ALL&modelTrimName=RX-8&isCPOSearch=false&dealerName=&imageLocation=rx8%2Fimages%2Fphotographs%2Fpho_bui _rx8_ext_red_your.gif&trim=RX8&trans=ALL&isFromDealer=false&incentives=&zip=75080&distance=50&vtype=NEW&city=&isComplete=true&dealerId=&engineCode=ER&year=2004&name=RX8&interior=ALL)

For those who might say the Search is not accurate: I found mine through this thing. I wrote down the VIN and called the dealer. 5 minutes later, they confirmed it was in stock. So, from my perspective, it should be pretty accurate. Oh, BTW, there is at least 1 page of 6sp base models (nearby me)

ok, I am a die-hard Mustang fan. The new 2005 Mustang going to be a 4 seater, it'll have a 125 color selection for backlighting for the dash,

Here are some photos:
Production version of 2005 Mustang (http://bradbarnett.net/mustangs/timeline/05/05/DealershipRelease3.jpg)
Production version interior (http://www.svtperformance.com/forums/attachment.php?postid=795764)
4.6L 3V V8 GT engine photo (http://www.themustangsource.com/timeline/05/BON3v-2.jpg)
Guage Cluster lit green (http://www.themustangsource.com/timeline/05/ClusterGreen.jpg)
Production version rear end (http://www.svtperformance.com/forums/attachment.php?postid=795772)
Gauge Cluster - blue (http://www.themustangsource.com/timeline/05/ClusterBlue.jpg)

Production version interior view of driver's seat:
http://www.svtperformance.com/forums/attachment.php?postid=795757

Test mule version of 2005 Mustang:
http://www.svtperformance.com/forums/attachment.php?postid=795797

The 2003/04 SVT Cobra has independent rear suspension (IRS) as most of you know, which is good and bad. Good for handling of turns and twisties. Bad because with 390 bhp and 390 lb ft torque - it produces a tremoundous amount of wheel hop, which you wouldn't get from a solid live axle. IRS is not the greatest confirguation if you plan on going to the track. Another good with the Cobra is it is highly mod-able and could give 450+ hp with not much trouble or money. I read an article that said "$1199 in mod will yield lows 11's in 1/4 mile on stock tires" and said what you need and how to do it for $1199 without having to remove anything from the interior.


oh btw... I think the Audi TT is one of the best looking cars on the road, but that is my own personal subjective opinion.

Remember, it's a RUSTANG every Mullet head will have one, they sell a shitload of those cars but they are a dime a dozen, the 8 is in a class all by itself

the dash reminds me of the 99 cougar dash the vents look the same. Its probably a similar interior with shiny silver plastic

Originally posted by IkeWRX
I tend to agree with the criticism of the RX-8s looks, and C&D is not the only car mag to point out that it's kind of a mish mosh of designing ideas. I think it looks great but 10 years from now the FD will still look better, as will the G35, and early Z models, maybe even Supra to some degree. They are clean classic and elegant designs. Understated (the Supra less so) yet still eye catching. The RX-8 looks great now, but I would liken it to a woman with plastic surgery and a boob job. Looks great now, but 10 years from now it will look overly done up and like it's trying too hard. <awaits the flames>

Ike

Ike


I completely agree...and this is coming someone with a car desiging background. The Rx-8 looks great now, and I'd love to have one. Its just that the looks scream "LOOK AT ME!! I'm a top performance machine!!" Very flashy, yet it doesn't quite have the power to back it up yet. Amongst the automotive designers, its a great design, but not a classic. It will die earlier than the classier styled cars: g35 (not the 350Z though), FD etc....although the Supra is considered pig ugly to us designers except for the tailights. Our main complaint is: It needs more power to back up it's looks.

Personally, I love the way it looks. I don't care whether it will remain good looking after 6 years or not, I want one now. I sold my FD and bought an S2K which I kind of regret...I'm thinking of selling the S2K and pickin up an 8. The S is good looking, but not Great looking....kind of conservative, but thats just the way Honda is. Always playing it safe. The Element was their most valiant and risk taking effort in the design department (unfortunetly to most of the untrained eye its a disaster) thats sold in the U.S....

Originally posted by Saint_Spinner
The S is good looking, but not Great looking....kind of conservative, but thats just the way Honda is. Always playing it safe. The Element was their most valiant and risk taking effort in the design department (unfortunetly to most of the untrained eye its a disaster) thats sold in the U.S....

I still consider the Acura NSX to be a Honda! :D

yup. Love the NSX (my other choice apart from the 8), but even thats considered conservative. They could have easily made it even lower....smaller green house, more "swoops" etc....had one behind me yesterday...I really want one now.

I must say this is the best EXTERIOR looks a Mustang has ever had! But that interior has GOT TO GO! They better make some major changes to the interior for sure.

Originally posted by Werth_lots
I must say this is the best EXTERIOR looks a Mustang has ever had! But that interior has GOT TO GO! They better make some major changes to the interior for sure.

I think the '67s and '68s looked better... I know many people disagree, but personally I would have preferred if they had copied the exterior styling of one of the late 1960s models exactly. Those were sweet looking cars.

Same way the new Pontiac GTO is getting rave reviews for performance and supposedly has a surprisingly good interior for a GM car. Still, if it had looked like a 1960something GTO, I think they would sell out in an eyeblink. Instead, the exterior is bland.

Originally posted by FamilyGuy
I think the '67s and '68s looked better... I know many people disagree, but personally I would have preferred if they had copied the exterior styling of one of the late 1960s models exactly. Those were sweet looking cars.


maybe not EXACTLY, but yes, a closer emulation (without sad-sack eyes, and gaping Japanesque front ducting) with aggressive, sharp, geometrically pleasing lines would be far more attractive than this POS. i really hate the new Mustang design... the ugly one from the early-to-mid nineties was better, IMO.

Originally posted by DeNile'
[B] My question is do you all think the new Mustang will end the RX-8's reign at the top!

Out of curiosity what are you basing your statment above on? Specifically 'reign at the top'

Don't get me wrong - I think the 8 is a great looking car if a bit under powered but the top of what? The sports car class?

Originally posted by DeNile'
Please stop the delusion!!! S2000, Lotus Elise, Z06, Viper, 911 Turbo, Z4, Boxer, NSX are all in that price range my friend.

S2000 never turned my head, that car is like a boxy lookin Miata, It sucks! Lotus Elise would turn heads just because its a lotus, the lines aren't better than the 8 and the interior definately isn't. The viper's interior sucks as well, but it will turn heads. And I hate the way the Z4 looks too, long @$$ hood. So that leaves the 911, Boxter, and NSX, I give you those.

I hate that S2000 though!!!

get a 8 then talk!!

Funny you say that about the S2000 since the 8s front end looks strikingly similar to the S2K.

It may not turn your head but everywhere my Berlina and I go we get heads to turn and interest raised...and the cars been on the market for 4 MYs now...

Appreciate your opinion just disagree with it and your hatred of the S2K is misplaced I believe

And here's a pic with my friend's Z roadster
http://home.austin.rr.com/thes/SZ2.jpg

Originally posted by khoney
In San Antonio, I couldn't swing my dick in a parking lot without hitting a Mustang. I'm glad to have a car that turns heads (even mine, after 4 moths of ownership).

Same in Austin they are freakin everywhere - there are so many even I can't believe it sometimes...talk about a cookie cutter :)

I used to live in Corpus Christi, TX and still go there often to visit family... and Mustangs are absolutely everywhere!!!

Since I've moved out to CO, I don't see near as many... but when I do i still get really pissed off just cause of how many I've seen in Texas!

So, I'm pretty sure the point I was trying to make is that there's just alotta Mustangs in Texas... but I'm still not sure.

*Post ended for sake of further embarrasment*

Brit

Mustang will never be a two seater.

The car wont look anything close to the design study.

It will smoke the RX-8 in GT trim and cost less to boot.

Handling has never been a Mustang strong point but the Cobra does have IRS but its built around the same mouting points as the GT so your kind of limited. Word is the new GT wont get IRS.

Your correct the GT won't get the IRS which I'm kinda disappointed in a way. But anways here are some new pics of the 2005 in GT trim and the interior.
or at least the link


http://forums.bradbarnett.net/index.php?showtopic=1787&st=0

Well, now that I have seen pictures of the production version of the new Mustang's interior, I've just gotta say...

BLLLLEEEEAAACH!!!! YUCK!!!

What a crappy looking, plasticky, CHEAP looking interior! WHAT was Ford thinking?!? I am so glad I didn't wait for this car.

Still love the exterior tho, at least from the front and side. The back leaves a lot to be desired.

I agree, great looking retro style, horrid inside.

Will appeal to diffrent people then the 8

To Each their own. Heck, it could be worse it could be a Civic. I do like the RX-8 but only the interior not the exterior. As for the 05 Mustang I'm holding out to see a model that I can touch and see. Only 1 wish I would like to see that car have, but it's not happening at least right now. Have the IRS as a option for the GT. To a earlier reply, this new chassis, was specifically designed to handle both the live axle and the IRS. Not like the old Fox Chassis. Which they just shoehorned the IRS into. Mustang, RX-8, 350z, could they be considered the same class, I guess, but to me each car is a totally different beast. Since the Jac Nasser era ended in Ford did anyone notice Ford is trying to upgrade the cars with better materials and workmanship. Mazda was itself affected a little by the Jac Nasser era (yuck). I give Bill Ford credit he's trying his hardest to get Ford up there again. Just for the plasticky statement, Nissan Maxima uses the same plasticky feeling material:D. Anyways I'm looking at a Mazda3 what do you guys think about that little car.

I loved, loved, loved the Cobra convertible, it is so much fun to drive with that super-powerful engine that sounds sooo good. I almost bought it instead of my 8.

But the inside reminded me of a rental car, and the stick felt like I was doing arm exercises. The 8 fits like a glove. I miss the open air of my Miata though.

Originally posted by Brian302505
To Each their own. Heck, it could be worse it could be a Civic. I do like the RX-8 but only the interior not the exterior. As for the 05 Mustang I'm holding out to see a model that I can touch and see. Only 1 wish I would like to see that car have, but it's not happening at least right now. Have the IRS as a option for the GT. To a earlier reply, this new chassis, was specifically designed to handle both the live axle and the IRS. Not like the old Fox Chassis. Which they just shoehorned the IRS into. Mustang, RX-8, 350z, could they be considered the same class, I guess, but to me each car is a totally different beast. Since the Jac Nasser era ended in Ford did anyone notice Ford is trying to upgrade the cars with better materials and workmanship. Mazda was itself affected a little by the Jac Nasser era (yuck). I give Bill Ford credit he's trying his hardest to get Ford up there again. Just for the plasticky statement, Nissan Maxima uses the same plasticky feeling material:D. Anyways I'm looking at a Mazda3 what do you guys think about that little car.

I have noticed the change. My neighbor just got a ford truck, and I have to say that the interior is first rate, it looks like a luxery car!

But they have a lonnnnng way to go before I forgive them for the SVO....I still wake up screaming thinking about it.

I really like the new three, outside is racy, and interior is very nice...A 6 is not that much more, have you taken a look at it?

I like Mustangs to some degree, and I like the exterior of this new one pretty well. But IMHO, they went way too far with the retro thing with the interior. Might pick one up in a few years and play with it. But you'll notice that even though I knew these were coming out, I still bought the RX-8. quote by Omicron

Before seeing the RX8 back in May 2003. I have planned to wait for the 2005 Mustang.

I'm so happy I got the RX8.

Just look at the interior:confused:

Saw the 2005 Mustang at the LA Auto show, and that car looks terrible in person. Interior was very "plastic" looking, and it was just cheap overrall. It's supposed to be priced similar to RX-8 pricing... but when it's all said and done, RX-8 will still catch people's attention.

trying to go retro on the inside...and it is a new design, but still has a live rear axel..big mistake there.

I saw it at the San Jose Auto Show. Man the rims on that car were huge. 19"? The car was on a pedestal so the rims were at eye level. Maybe that made them look bigger. Overall I didn't like the look of the car. I think the pictures of it look better than seeing it in person. Thumbs down for me.

Profile and interior is okay. Back is great b/c is has retro cues but blends in nice modern lines. The front is ugly as hell - very cheap looking and bland.

Originally posted by DeNile'
Please stop the delusion!!! S2000, Lotus Elise, Z06, Viper, 911 Turbo, Z4, Boxer, NSX are all in that price range my friend.

S2000 never turned my head, that car is like a boxy lookin Miata, It sucks! Lotus Elise would turn heads just because its a lotus, the lines aren't better than the 8 and the interior definately isn't. The viper's interior sucks as well, but it will turn heads. And I hate the way the Z4 looks too, long @$$ hood. So that leaves the 911, Boxter, and NSX, I give you those.

I hate that S2000 though!!!

get a 8 then talk!!

Id get rid of my car in a second if i could get the Lotus. Looks better best handeling hands down. As true a sports car as anyone could ever make. Its light you can kick peoples arse stock if you chose to do so. There is just no comparison IMHO. If you can show me one area where the 8 bests the Lotus please do (besides 4 seats lol).

Take a look at these pics they may change your mind lol (at least im drooling lol)

http://www.puresportscar.com/gallery/showgallery.php?cat=519

Dont get me wrong I love my 8 to death but if I could get any car in the world it would be the lotus and id do it in a heartbeat. Its al little out of my price range however so ill have to pass at this point.

I would love the Lotus as well, I saw it on a trip to the UK last year and flipped otu after seeing it in person.

I also really liked the Mustang conceprt car I saw at the NY auto show almost a year ago, when I went there to specifically see the RX8. I loved the Mustang, but was in the market for a car sooner than the 15 months Ford was mentioning, and got the * (which I then did the buyback for a few weeks ago) I saw pics of the Mustang that is acually going to be released- and to me they look nothing like the concept- so I'm getting another 8- hopfully with better gas milage.

Bleh, the concept looked great I thought, but the production cars fall short with the interior and exterior.

Ike

For those who already are hating on the car before it is even released... even though BOTH the RX-8 and Mustand are Ford group cars... wait until you read the end of my post before commenting.

Originally posted by FamilyGuy
True. Handling is more than weight distribution.

Yep and the 2005 Mustang weighs around what the auto RX-8 does...3300 if I remember correctly (and I may not be!). In addition this IS an entirely new platform. Not the 1979 Fox plaform that has been the base of all Mustangs 1979-2004. Articles on the subject say that Ford knows the Stang needs better handling... particularly with the demise of the Camaro/TransAm... compeition comes down between the Stang and the imports... for those with a mind open to buying whatever drives the best for them...



I did say in my post that a faster Mustang will cost more, and if it is cheaper it won't be that much cheaper. Currently the base MSRP for a Mustang GT is $24,000 - not too much cheaper than the RX8's base MSRP of $26,000.

Um... check out the Janurary 2004 Motor Trend. est. base price is $27,000 and the SOHC 4.6 V8 has found more power with the change to 3 valves from 2 valves... this has bumped hp to 300. The Stang is going to cook the RX-8 0-60 and in the 1/4 mile. Ford is going to make another higher performance Stang (Boss, Bullet, Mach 1) again... meaning likely 320-350 hp. The Cobra... it will be in excess of 400hp and still under $40k I'd imagine.

Ford has also been playing with an all aluminum DOHC V10 in a Stang body... hmm...



The only link I could find was http://www.mustangworks.com/articles/features/2003Mach1/
but basically Ford sells over 120,000 Mustangs a year --> 4x as many as the RX8. Plus, of course, there are already millions of Mustangs on the road while the oldest RX8s in the US are not even six months old.

Yep... and guess why Ford does? Because even if you hate it, think it's crap... apparantly your opinion is in the minority as Ford sold so many Mustangs, they pushed the Camaro/TransAm out of production.

In Japan, Mazda is just a minor an auto maker as they are in the US. I wouldn't expect their sales to be phenomenal

Suprise for all of you... Honda is just another Mazda... minor in Japan. But for some odd reason they sell like crazy in the US. JDM is mostly Toyota and Nissan. Then Mitsubishi , Honda and Mazda. Then Kei-car market is a bit different... we'll leave that out for now.




Some of those cars look sweet, and a lot of them are tremendously fast and would blow the RX8 away, but I think it looks better than all of them.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder...

Now all of that being said...

I had been waiting and waiting for years for this Stang to come out... a return to what is really the Mustang. The oil crisis lead to the ugly POS in 74-78. 1979 saw Ford make a half-ass attempt at coming back with a real sports car, but based it off the Ford Fairmont's fox platform?! So that bodystyle with no relation to the car's soul was produce from 79- 04. And now for '05 on a new plaform, Ford returns the car back to the evolutionary lines it should have been on. On paper... great power, and better handling than the previous generation.

And then I saw the RX-8.

I have loved the RX-7/rotary engine since the first RX-7 in 1979 (I think it was). So this return was a great thing for me... Taking it out for a test drive just confirmed... I_WANT_THIS_CAR! The clencher... well with kids coming up in the 2-3 year range... I need backdoors on my car and a useable backseat. Frankly... the 2005 Stang's backseat looks like the Camaro's... useless (I sat in it before and would rather not again) and she's only got 2 doors. So it'll be an RX-8 for me... although I'll be certain to run the hell out of Stang or two on test drives at the dealer...

Interesting post...I was under the impression that mazda was ranked number 4 in japan ever since the mitsu fiasco (hiding compliants, not doing needed recalls, ect..) but you would know better then me, since you live there..

The strong point of all the 'pony' cars has always been thier low price v. their 0-60 performance..they have never been know for their refinement.

The trouble is, taste has changed. People expect both now..

and the new stang has a live rear. and really can not set the world on fire with handeling. It also is over priced.

Oh, I also think most of us here like to forget there is any relation between mazda and ford..

Originally posted by klegg
price v. their 0-60 performance..they have never been know for their refinement.

The trouble is, taste has changed. People expect both now..

and the new stang has a live rear. and really can not set the world on fire with handeling. It also is over priced.



If Ford makes most of the reasonable options (AC, LSD, CD, decent sound system, ABS, etc...) part of the standard package and not expensive add-ons, they got the pricing just right. The price I read was $17,000 for the 202 horsepower V6 model and $24,000 for the 300 horsepower GT.

I don't think there are any other cars you can buy new with that much power at that kind of price.

Plus, the platform for the new Mustang is the same one for the Lincoln LS. The handling won't set the world on fire, but it should be an improvement over the previous generations.



Japan8,
To answer some of your comments:
- I haven's seen any weight listings for the new Mustang. If it's 3300 pounds or less, that's great. The previous Mustang and Mustang Cobra weren't quite as quick as their nice horsepower numbers would indicate because the car was so heavy (Cobra was more than 3800 pounds, if I recall correctly).
- I wouldn't get my hopes up for a return of the Mach 1 trim or an affordable Cobra trim. Previously the Mustang GT used a 2 valve SOHC V8, the Mach 1 used a 4 valve DOHC V8, and the Cobra used a supercharged version of the engine in the Mach 1. The new Mustang has the 3 valve SOHC, and it is my understanding that the DOHC V8 is going to be dropped. A supercharged version of that 3 valve SOHC is going to need to run some serious boost and have a few other tricks to match the present generation's 390 horsepower. The V10 would be awesome beyond belief, but Ford would never offer it for a sub $40,000 price.
- I wasn't saying that the Mustang was bad because it's more common than the RX8. I just meant that an RX8 is automatically more unique because it is a less common car. "Unique" does not mean "better", just less common. If you want a really unique car, drive a Ford Pinto. Everyone will notice because you will have one of the only Pintos on the road - but nobody will claim that it is a great car.

Originally posted by FamilyGuy

- I haven's seen any weight listings for the new Mustang. If it's 3300 pounds or less, that's great. The previous Mustang and Mustang Cobra weren't quite as quick as their nice horsepower numbers would indicate because the car was so heavy (Cobra was more than 3800 pounds, if I recall correctly).
- I wouldn't get my hopes up for a return of the Mach 1 trim or an affordable Cobra trim. Previously the Mustang GT used a 2 valve SOHC V8, the Mach 1 used a 4 valve DOHC V8, and the Cobra used a supercharged version of the engine in the Mach 1. The new Mustang has the 3 valve SOHC, and it is my understanding that the DOHC V8 is going to be dropped. A supercharged version of that 3 valve SOHC is going to need to run some serious boost and have a few other tricks to match the present generation's 390 horsepower. The V10 would be awesome beyond belief, but Ford would never offer it for a sub $40,000 price.

...when i first got into cars, like way way long time ago, i'm afraid to admit that i was a "mustang guy".

fascinated with the power, and just the popularity, i slowly came to realize that mustangs actually aren't all that special as sports cars, at least not since the 1960's.

now that i look at the architecture, i see that their engines are really quite, umm... not good.
being ignorant, i related displacement to engine size, and figured that V8's, especially those of the American flavour, were junk. but it's slowly become evident to me that the Chev small block, while it could still use a whole lot more development and still isn't my favourite, is vastly superior to Ford's 4.6L DOHC (which is a real lump of an engine, pushing 400hp or not).

if they made a V10 engine, ha... i dunno, i just don't know if a car big enough to hold that enormous SOB would be slick enough to be called a sports car, unless they got smart and stopped trying to play the stupid displacement war with the other two big boys.

Interesting post...I was under the impression that mazda was ranked number 4 in japan ever since the mitsu fiasco (hiding compliants, not doing needed recalls, ect..) but you would know better then me, since you live there..

Well new cars sales has likely dropped... what Mitsu did is just SOP (Standard Operating Procedure) for the average large Japanese company. Bookkeeping by banks, the government and large business is REAL dirty here.

Back to topic... I suspect that Mazda has moved up. The Atenza (M 6) has been selling pretty well and hell... there are two RX-8's in my apartment building and a guy at work had one too. I suspect the Axcela (M3) will sell decently as well... as the S-Wagon (P 5) seemed to have started a new trend of small sporty wagons... HOWEVER... Mitsubishi also has Mitsu Heavy Industries which makes contrsuction, etc. machinery and Mitsu's work truck is probably the leading one on farms. Mazda's I've seen once maybe. I think Toyota makes one.... but I don't think Honda does. Outside of Mitsu this LARGE market is run by Daihatsu... but then we are getting into the kei-car market... and Suzuki and Daihatsu are king here.


The strong point of all the 'pony' cars has always been thier low price v. their 0-60 performance..they have never been know for their refinement.

No, but outside of the GT, it's all Ford's got, and with the sales it pulls they are hardly afford to half-ass it this time around. As someone else mentioned... the price v performance is almost impossible to beat.


The trouble is, taste has changed. People expect both now..

Which is why I suspect it'll handle decently... no Porsche, but it'll kick the ass of old Stangs.


and the new stang has a live rear. and really can not set the world on fire with handeling. It also is over priced.

And the top model will have IRS... thus better handling. Yeah it'll cost more, but it will be even faster yet. You do know the current Cobra can take a Viper with an exhaust change and a pulley change on the supercharger, right? It was an article in a past issue of a Mustang magazine...

[QUOTE]
Oh, I also think most of us here like to forget there is any relation between mazda and ford.. [QUOTE]

That'll never change, so I'd suggest for people to get used to the idea. As a matter of fact, where do you think that intergrated stereo/climate control console came from? Smells of Ford Tarus...

If Ford makes most of the reasonable options (AC, LSD, CD, decent sound system, ABS, etc...) part of the standard package and not expensive add-ons, they got the pricing just right. The price I read was $17,000 for the 202 horsepower V6 model and $24,000 for the 300 horsepower GT.

I agree completely. We'll have to wait until summer/fall to find out, but if Ford does that up right... they'll probably have another winner on their hands.


I don't think there are any other cars you can buy new with that much power at that kind of price.

Nope... and that has been part of its appeal since '64.


Plus, the platform for the new Mustang is the same one for the Lincoln LS. The handling won't set the world on fire, but it should be an improvement over the previous generations.

Exactly. My old '90, which has become my father's project car, actually handled better than I expected. Hearing talk like I do on this board I expected a dog, but... it felt much better than I thought it would. This was coming from a Sentra SE and a Prelude Si...



Japan8,
To answer some of your comments:
- I haven's seen any weight listings for the new Mustang. If it's 3300 pounds or less, that's great. The previous Mustang and Mustang Cobra weren't quite as quick as their nice horsepower numbers would indicate because the car was so heavy (Cobra was more than 3800 pounds, if I recall correctly).

The weight is 3425 according to the magazine scan I found...

http://bradbarnett.net/mustangs/timeline/05/05/index.htm

So we are looking a decently quick car.


- I wouldn't get my hopes up for a return of the Mach 1 trim or an affordable Cobra trim. Previously the Mustang GT used a 2 valve SOHC V8, the Mach 1 used a 4 valve DOHC V8, and the Cobra used a supercharged version of the engine in the Mach 1. The new Mustang has the 3 valve SOHC, and it is my understanding that the DOHC V8 is going to be dropped. A supercharged version of that 3 valve SOHC is going to need to run some serious boost and have a few other tricks to match the present generation's 390 horsepower. The V10 would be awesome beyond belief, but Ford would never offer it for a sub $40,000 price.

Maybe I'm mistaken, but I could have sworn that the inbetween performance model was going to return again...

Dropping the DOHC V8 would be dumb... I doubt they have that in mind, as the Cobra will need to top 390hp. If the demand is there for the V10 in the Cobra... I think Ford will do it. But I dunno about having enough demand for it.


- I wasn't saying that the Mustang was bad because it's more common than the RX8. I just meant that an RX8 is automatically more unique because it is a less common car. "Unique" does not mean "better", just less common. If you want a really unique car, drive a Ford Pinto. Everyone will notice because you will have one of the only Pintos on the road - but nobody will claim that it is a great car.

As someone whom always likes to have a unique car, I understand and agree completely. Even if similiarly priced, the Mustang may be faster, but the RX-8 is more unique.

Originally posted by wakeech
unless they got smart and stopped trying to play the stupid displacement war with the other two big boys.

Up until less than 10 years ago, there weren't internet discussion forums. If you wanted to learn about cars, you caught the shows on TV or what was in the races - which banned forced induction. You talked to the guy down the block. Maybe you subscribed to a few magazines, like Hot Rod or Mustang and Fords. For that kind of guy - most American guys out for a relatively inexpensive sporty car, big displacement and big numbers for horsepower and torque are what brought him to the lot for a test drive.

When I started at this forum, I was really disappointed in the 159 ft*lb rating for the RX8. I had no idea about open differential vs. limited slip differential. I didn't know about the final drive ratio, weight distribution, torque curves, gearing, and the all important horsepower to weight ratio. There are still people here that think the upcoming Lotus is a joke because it only has 180 horsepower - they just haven't been taught to consider that 180 horsepower in an 1800 pound car equals hell on wheels.

Ford knows that the big displacement, big numbers car buyer still exists, and they're capitalizing on it. More power to them. Me? I've been corrupted. I probably never will be able to afford anything more sporty than a station wagon.... but if I can, I will definitely test drive a Mustang but almost certainly instead pick a Miata, or RX8, or S2000.

big displacement wars? that's funny, ford's engine has actually gotten smaller since 94. The big ass 7.5l v8 is now a 6.8l v10. the 7.3l diesel is now a 6.0l diesel. their 5.8l v8 went down to 5.4l. their 5.0l v8 is now a 4.6l. the only engine that has gone up is the old i6 which was a 3.9 now a 4.3 or 4.2. dodge and chevy have all gone up, though they do offer smaller block engines.

Originally posted by visitor
big displacement wars? that's funny, ford's engine has actually gotten smaller since 94.

Well, part of the changes are because Ford went from using pushrods and regular diesels to SOHC and DOHC engines, changes to valve timing and other optimizations, and turbodiesels.

I just meant to point out that the Mustang is the only sub $30,000 performance car you can buy with more than 6 cylinders or 3.8 liters of displacement. I imagine Ford could get the same performance from a turbocharged smaller engine and it probably would have been lighter too. Ford probably never even considered that option because the name Mustang is synonymous with V8 and a deep rumble from the exhaust, regardless of the performance advantages of a different engine configuration.

Originally posted by wakeech
[Bnow that i look at the architecture, i see that their engines are really quite, umm... not good.
being ignorant, i related displacement to engine size, and figured that V8's, especially those of the American flavour, were junk. but it's slowly become evident to me that the Chev small block, while it could still use a whole lot more development and still isn't my favourite, is vastly superior to Ford's 4.6L DOHC (which is a real lump of an engine, pushing 400hp or not).
[/B]

Care to elaborate on this? Why are the engines not good? What's wrong with the Ford 4.6L DOHC, why is the Chevy small block better?

I'm not picking a fight, just asking. This stuff is fun to learn :)

Originally posted by FamilyGuy
Ford probably never even considered that option because the name Mustang is synonymous with V8 and a deep rumble from the exhaust, regardless of the performance advantages of a different engine configuration.

88 Mustang SVO. 2.3 turbocharged engine. Ford even released a very limited run of it's special DOHC 2.3T engine that was supposedly put in the Merkur's. That engine stock was rated at 250 at the flywheel. The SV0's 2.3T was somewhere around 200-250. Tuners can put 300 to the wheels without many mods.

the cobra's 4.6l is not vastly inferior to the chevy small block. granted it's supercharged, but the internals alone are good up to 800hp. it's basically the american skyline engine. you could drop 3g's on the ls6, get header and cams and you ve got a mid 10 second car. you could spend half the amount and be in the same area with the cobra. now the cars that the 4.6 sits in may not be quite as good as what chevy has to offer, but if you're comapring engine to engine, the modular is pretty damn nice.

Originally posted by visitor
88 Mustang SVO. 2.3 turbocharged engine. Ford even released a very limited run of it's special DOHC 2.3T engine that was supposedly put in the Merkur's. That engine stock was rated at 250 at the flywheel. The SV0's 2.3T was somewhere around 200-250. Tuners can put 300 to the wheels without many mods.

I would bet the '88 SVO with the 2.3T was a damned good car. I would also bet that Ford went back to using V8s because lots of Mustang enthusiasts would not buy it, no matter how good it was. For better or worse, most American muscle car enthusiasts like big engines in their vehicles.

Originally posted by FamilyGuy
I would bet the '88 SVO with the 2.3T was a damned good car. I would also bet that Ford went back to using V8s because lots of Mustang enthusiasts would not buy it, no matter how good it was. For better or worse, most American muscle car enthusiasts like big engines in their vehicles.

I owned a SVO. WHen it worked it was a fine car. Problem was, it never worked! The GT was always faster, cheaper and more reliable..For a while the SVO had a better suspension, with the quad shock rear, but they moved that over to the GT...The SVO did have better seats, and a better shifter.

All in all, I look back at my SVO as a huge mistake by ford, and a real nightmare for me!!

Basically the same problems Ford had with the 1979 Mustang Pacecar with the 2.3T engine. My father had one... POS. The 1983 5.0 was a much better car.

You know, you may be on to something..the pace car was all dolled up, had a lot of "gingerbread", but was a P.O.S.!!

The svo was easy on the eyes, but was a P.O.S.!!

Ford clearly has a plan to throw window dressing on crap and sell it at gold prices!!