Well said. I cannot relate to these people that fabricate some sort of impossible uber specialized automotive standard that only their own car can meet. Owning a car is not like getting jumped into a gang. You can say nice things about, or even secretly lust, for another car and still have a cool ride. To each his own.

BTW...this should be moved to the "other cars" forum. The thin skinned Evo owners usually don't venture over there. It's more of a general car enthusiast crowd over there.

 

<removed due to redundancy>

 

plokivos -
I don't see how you can say that Design is purely Objective.
In the end it's a personal interpertation of what you are trying to achieve.

Think of the old addage "there's more then one way to skin a cat"

For example: You can design 3 cars that has simlar dimensions, drag coefficent, door handle placement.. etc.. yet have totally different exteriors.

It seems as though it's more of a creative interperation of what you are trying to design. Granted there is some science/objectivness involved, (which there needs to be otherwise you have a totally useless design) but it allows for artistic leeway in the designing process.

It's the artistic interperatation of your objective that leads a design that may or may not visually appeal to others.

I'm not saying that you don't have a right to not to think the design of the new Mustang is not appealing to you, that is your choice. (which i've stated before).

I'm just stating my opinion about the magazine results from the information that I have gathered and from personal experiances with other people's impressions.

If you take that as a personal attack, then i'm sorry that is not my intention. I just happen to disagree with you assesment of the design (of which I am entitled to do so).

 

^ ok, you win. if the design wasn't functional or even objective, all cars would be square to save money or have big ricey wings.

Most critics critic on the ergonomics, functional end use and line aspect before they start talking about the subjective critic on the form and it's "wow" factor.

but you know it's hard to explain unless you were in that environment for a while.

what you're describing is something that car magazine journalists do. That's really not design critic, it's subjective nostalgia.

Subjective or Objective, the new mustang is ugly. Saleen stang looks good. tho, in my subjective opinion, but i'm sure objectively it's got less to do with R&D in aerodynamics then pseudo science.

 

Fair enough, plokivos.

Ugly is a subjective term actually. An objective term would be like non-functional. Bad egronomics, poor visablitly, (something that can be quantified).

Acutally your one of the few people who do NOT like the new design. I was surprised by that, considering alot of people who are die hard riceboys acutually liked the new Stang design.

Personally I like last years SVT cobra the best. Just something about it strikes my fancy (looks wise), except the inteior... what is it with Ford and really ugly (IMHO) interors??? I just don't get it... oh well..

Sorry bout that.. no worries k?

ps - which saleen are you referring to?

 

Either the 05 Mustang did not know how to drive or it is slow as hell. I raced a new Mustang from about 30-90 mph and it was about 2-3 car lengths behind. I want to see from start.

 

If you compare the evolution of mustang design through the cultural events that takes place "from oil crisis to depression", then you could understand why the last gen mustang is the way it is.

It was trying to recapture the idea of muscle car in a package that conveyed the original pony car that was so successful. It incorporated much of the same lines and forms from the original mustang into a completely different car that reminded people of the original mustang.

Just like why 350z reminds you of 300z and datsun Z (240z)

But this new mustang basically takes all the same lines from the original mustang, in a similar shape and almost exact sillouette and try to pass it off as the "new" mustang, which is can't never do. It's almost trying to tell people that the new corvette looks better than the original corvette.

If there is no evolution in design elements, it's a failed design. Ford is just taking that retro bs too far. If you look at the new GT, it's just about the same as the original GT. However they say it's different dimension and modern interior, etc. But if you think about it, GT50 concept was so much more of a progression than the GT could ever be, because it's evolved from original GT40 and became it's own without loosing it's heritage.

In some sense, it's cheating for the company, but if the majority of people like it, that's fine.

I'm sure Pina Ferrina is laughing at the new FORD.

anyway, the new mustang Saleen and GT-R concept looks good. Subjectively, I still don't like how stretchy the new stang looks. Still cheap interior and ghey light change switch. lol

That's why I like evolution, it evolves without compromising it's heritage and evolution stage. STi's that way as well.

 

Hysterical. Mistubishi builds an EVO that looks like a Pontiac Sunbird with a tacky wing on the back and someone thinks the new Mustang has bad styling LOL! The EVO and STI are great cars, but if you think they look better than the new Mustang it's time to take the cheerleading skirt off!

 

Well now wait a minute, you said yourself they had to go an put an extra 50hp in the car after one year - essentially cutting the guts out of the resale value for those unfortunate enough to buy one the first year. How much did your brother lose when he traded up?

Anyway, I have driven one. Other then the rather bland looks of the car, I think it is a nice vehicle - but it hasn't quite found the hearts of whatever demographic it is trying to reach. Hopefully '05 will be a much better year for sales.

 

Not to flame, troll, bash, make fun of, but i can think of 3 things 1 of wich is matter of opinion the mustang has over the EVO .....

1. LOoks thats the opinion of the buyer
2. Interior Evos suck compared to like cars with like MSRP
3. price which makes it hard to compare the 2 almost 5k in base price depending on modle.
Everything else Evo destroys 05 mustang that is all.....

on a side note i think ford is being dumb with the Cobra modle .... they will come out with new body style cobra this year or next not sure but anyway ..... i have heard something like 500hp is thier goal ?!!? i cant begin to stress how retarted this is. in the fact that it will raise the price to 45+ for well equiped modles compeating with new Vett. nice thought ford but the only reason so many own 03 - 04 cobras because you can get one for 30,000 or less depending how good you are at buying a car. 390 hp for 30000 is a good deal. once you make a 500hp cobra and charge 45k + for it ur best seller will be the GT which is slightly behind others in its class in just about everything........ anyone else agree ????

 

He doesn't have the same financial concerns most of us do. This is his 4th new car in the last year. He traded a Toyota Land Cruiser for a new Durango and he traded in his wife's IS300 for one of those SC400's.

I don't believe the LS2 350ci now in the '05 GTO was available in any GM models last year. My understanding is that it's basically a new for '05 motor designed primarily for the SSR and Corvette.

 

I can sort of understand the flames directed towards the new Mustang and all the other redux muscle cars Detroit is coming out with.

We all love our side glass is 10% thinner than the stock Lancer for weight savings, we babble on and on about camber and toe settings for autocross, and get boners when we see dyno sheets over 400 HP out of our little 2 liter engine.

Then some d**chebag has the audacity to roll up next to us at a light and rev his 6 liter engine, when we know full well his suspension is made from stamped steel, and he'll still be on those tires 60,000 miles later. Oh, and he has a fair chance of handing us our *** unless we dumped some cash on mods. B@stard!

I know it pisses me off.

 

The ubiquitous Mustang is a mass production car, and it will have lots of problems. I know. I have a Mustang Cobra - and I have had a few problems that really plagued me. This car also represents the polar opposite of what the Evolution stands for - forward progress and improvement. What? With all the money Ford made with the old Mustang they couldn't think of a new design. They had go back to the 1960's for help. At least the EVO is improving with consistant regularity.

 

Okay. And although he's got the loot, he still lost something though - which the average buyer can't afford. The LS2 may be brand new, but it would probably have been a C6 exclusive product for a while longer had it not been for the fact that both the GTO and SSR have been failures for GM. They need to do something to generate excitement for either of them.

 

Steiner: I see why you're upset about me bashing the GTO...you're an owner. I piddy da' foo!! (or something like that).

Anyway, you were asking what my problems are with the GTO, and I will tell you.

First, let me state that although I find the GTO name ridiculous, and the styling doesn't strike me on a personal level, I will admit that these are subjective opinions and don't have any influence on the performance. So I will leave that part alone.

On to the perfromance factor. I think that any 400hp car should be in the 12s straight from the showroom floor, with plastic still on the seats and the factory tires on. GM was able to do it to the C6, so why not the GTO? The '04 model year GTO had the 350hp LS1, and it barely does 13s. Again, GM was able to get the convertible (i.e. heavy) C5 to almost a 13 flat with that engine, as well as the T/A and Camaro, so I see no reason why the GTO shouldn't be there as well.

When I look at the performance numbers, I expect to see a damned fast car. But this is not the case with the GTO, unfortunately. I think this is because production was rushed to get this thing over from Australia. A few examples of the rushed production: the reverse orientation of the stereo, the "dual" exhaust (which as far as I know is not even a true dual, I think the headers are eventually joined and one pipe leads to the muffler, then two pipes out to make it look like a "dual" coming out of one side), the welded steel and forged iron suspension components.

In the end, I think the GTO is a crappy car for what it was endowed with from GM, it really should be doing more. Also, I think people buy it and like it because they are impressed with the numbers on paper. 350 - 400 hp, 6 speed manual, rwd. It sounds like a good car on paper, but it just doesn't deliver.