|
MarsellusWallace posted:I'm eyeballing a Mustang as my first car to be a daily driver in small town Iowa, where snow is a certainty, while snow removal is not. I've got a lot of experience driving a torquey 2wd Cummins pickup in questionable conditions - is it reasonable to expect a Mustang with snow tires to be better in snow and sleet? Get the nicest 2005+, gt if possible. They handle quite well, have decent power, are reliable and much more fun to drive than previous versions. You probably won't need snow tires.
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2013 01:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 03:25 |
|
|
I know this is one of my two repeated contributions to this thread, but... I drive a '98 GT all year 'round in Minnesota with all-seasons and it's been no trouble at all. I drove up from small town Iowa last May during that snowstorm that dropped a foot without issue, but I would be worried about trying to take an unplowed hill with more than 6" on the ground. If I lived where there weren't plows, and were hills, I would probably not drive the Mustang in 6" or more. Not sure how the newest generation fares. It's probably better, but either way; I wouldn't settle for anything less than a 5.0. Risk the failure rate. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2013 02:23
|
|
|
vote_no posted:I know this is one of my two repeated contributions to this thread, but... I drive a '98 GT all year 'round in Minnesota with all-seasons and it's been no trouble at all. I drove up from small town Iowa last May during that snowstorm that dropped a foot without issue, but I would be worried about trying to take an unplowed hill with more than 6" on the ground. If I lived where there weren't plows, and were hills, I would probably not drive the Mustang in 6" or more. I drive an 01 GT through Minneapols and echo this. In 4 winters I've only slid off the road once and it was in conditions so lovely it would have happened in almost any car.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2013 02:40
|
|
|
MarsellusWallace posted:I'm eyeballing a Mustang as my first car to be a daily driver in small town Iowa, where snow is a certainty, while snow removal is not. I've got a lot of experience driving a torquey 2wd Cummins pickup in questionable conditions - is it reasonable to expect a Mustang with snow tires to be better in snow and sleet? I've DD'd a 1999 v6 MT in southeast Michigan since February 2012. I've always had all seasons on it and haven't gotten stuck/slid off the road. Fresh snow is amazing to drive on. Sleet is as awful as ice. As cars polish the snow into slush/ice even a 5% grade at a stop sign/light can give you some trouble, if you have speed built up hills and grades are not a problem at all unless they are very long. So if you live near slopes with stops at the top of them you will need some snow tires. Iowa is flat, right? I don't think you will have a problem. Your experience will not be any worse than the truck and it can only be better if you slap some snow tires on the mustang. As for getting the first model year of a next gen (SN-95 to New Edge) the main problem I run into is the cup holders were clearly not designed with stick shifts in mind. I had a brake caliper seize which took the rotor with it. Aside from the the only thing I have put into it is gas and oil since Ive gotten it. There are some used car basics I should have done: new dampers all around, new motor mounts, the parking brake mount is broken but mostly functional, ect. I almost got stuck where I needed to dig my car out. It sat on the street for few days after a big snow before the plows finally came down our road. I was able to rock the car out of it thanks to it being a stick shift. Once I needed to turn around a a snowy slope because I couldn't make it all the way up. It was 100 meters long and there was a 90 degree turn right before it that limited my momentum. vvv What up, engineering buddy!? Mechanical? Thats what im in. I drive by the Ford HQ on the way to school every day but the bastards only have EE internships as far as I have been able to find out. Ford is doing the 2015 Mustang official unveiling on the 5th. SanitysEdge fucked around with this message at 08:46 on Dec 3, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2013 02:52
|
|
|
Thanks for the input, guys. I'd like to point out that this thread drove an excellent financial decision (decided to do engineering school after reading about the 5.0 and 3.7), and a terrible one (buying a performance car as a young male immediately out of school). I'm going to wait and see how the next generation turns out (It'll be out in the spring, right?) If it's great, I'm out 30 grand, and will report back how great it is If it's not, I'll get a current gen, and I'm out 28 grand anyway, because apparently these things don't depreciate
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2013 07:10
|
|
|
MarsellusWallace posted:Thanks for the input, guys. I'd like to point out that this thread drove an excellent financial decision (decided to do engineering school after reading about the 5.0 and 3.7), and a terrible one (buying a performance car as a young male immediately out of school). 13s are still on the lot heavily discounted, 14s are still out there as well. The 5.0 carries over unchanged (mechanically) with MT82 for MY15 (which probably won't be found at invoice) until summer 2014. It's never not a good time to buy a Mustang.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2013 19:08
|
|
|
2015 has been leaked: http://www.autoblog.com/2013/12/03/2015-ford-mustang-photos-leaked/    
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2013 19:37
|
|
|
I am really liking that rear fascia.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2013 19:40
|
|
|
Looks like a v6 with pony (appearance) package? Holding onto my jimmies until they can be properly rustled.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2013 19:58
|
|
|
At first glance I'm so so. The roofline is a bit too drastic for me, but the rear fascia is nice.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2013 20:01
|
|
|
Whats the article say about things like curb weight, engine choices, and IRS?
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2013 20:11
|
|
|
I'm not sure I'm sold on the new look. Granted it took me a little while to warm up to the face-lifted 2010 but now I like it better than the 2005, so who knows. It's an interesting look at least, but I agree with 1791apparel: that roofline means the backseats are even more useless than before.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2013 20:30
|
|
|
It's pretty hard to read, but there's mention of IRS, a 200-pound weight drop, bigger brakes for the GT. Interestingly, there's only mention of 2.3 and 5.0, nothing about the V6. But that section is also talking about Performance Package options, so I guess it's possible there is a V6, but it won't be offered with a performance pack.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2013 20:39
|
|
|
Fucknag posted:I am really liking that rear fascia. If there's one thing I'm positive about, it's that they nailed the look from the rear view.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2013 20:44
|
|
|
And thats all the other cars are gonna be seein FELLAS YEHAWW
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2013 20:45
|
|
|
coolskillrex remix posted:And thats all the other cars are gonna be seein FELLAS YEHAWW Awwww yeaaaaaa But yea, rear end looks great. I like the front headlight style as well, but the overall lines of the front don't quite add up nicely to me yet. Maybe it'll be better with some of the different grill/front fascia packs. The current cars have plenty of those at least, so hopefully that's something that will still be a thing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2013 20:51
|
|
|
Looks excellent. Only issue I have is the body-colored rear splitter. I'd rather keep it black or make it an option to be body colored. I love the late 60's vibe I'm getting from the rear end. Also, I think what's throwing off the front end is the smallish headlights and the big spots where the fog lights are.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2013 20:58
|
|
|
Yea, I think it'd be just about perfect if the whole front top/bottom grill area was just a little bit shorter/compressed height wise. It would fit with the headlight size better, and give the car a more aggressive rakish angle from the side, too, if the front had a slight downward slope. I don't think it would take very much to achieve that effect, either. (Which probably means I'll come to just like it well enough as is over time).
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2013 21:14
|
|
|
I don't know if it's just the photo or what, but the front seems altogether too round - like they took a picture of a Mustang, printed it on vinyl, and wrapped that around a Sebring front clip. The back half looks drat nice, though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2013 21:21
|
|
|
I guess there's no surprise that it suffers from the same high belt-line that plagues that Camaro and Challenger as well.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2013 23:06
|
|
|
I just can't dig those headlights, man.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2013 23:09
|
|
|
oRenj9 posted:I guess there's no surprise that it suffers from the same high belt-line that plagues that Camaro and Challenger as well. Yea, I think if I had to pick my least favorite thing, this would be it. It's just so loving bad for visibility out of the car.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2013 23:15
|
|
|
High beltlines are here to stay--it's a side impact safety thing. Get over it. The headlights are definitely the part that bug me the most. I'm hoping they look better in person.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2013 23:52
|
|
|
Dick Burglar posted:High beltlines are here to stay--it's a side impact safety thing. Get over it. Note: I have not yet been hit by a car.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2013 23:57
|
|
|
That front three-quarter view has an unfortunate reflection that makes the passenger side look like it has a Nissan GT-R headlight, which bugs me. But that sloping roofline and rear end makes me think of a 350Z which I think is awesome as it's one of the nicest looking RWD coupes made since the turn of the century. I still think it will look really nice in person. These early press photos sometimes aren't the greatest. Edit: Maybe this will end up being more Ford Z-car than muscle car? It will still go like gently caress with the V8. Mental Hospitality fucked around with this message at 00:22 on Dec 4, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 00:19
|
|
|
I really dig it. The rear end looks amazing. That said, a single inch off the beltline would do wonders. E: are those actual photos or renderings?
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 00:53
|
|
|
Does it come stock with -3 degrees rear camber or is that a track pack add on? ^^^ I'm guessing from this alone that is a rendering
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 00:55
|
|
|
It's hard for me to tell. I am looking at it thru a first gen iPad that generally lives in my garage and the protective cover looks like someone to sandpaper to it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 01:04
|
|
|
Looking at it at home now its 100% a render
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 02:07
|
|
|
Bumming Your Scene posted:Looking at it at home now its 100% a render They're officially unveiling it Thursday morning right?
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 04:26
|
|
|
From the side profile it looks really tall and stubby. Nthing the hate for high beltlines.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 07:51
|
|
|
Oh, drat.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 15:33
|
|
|
That looks much, much better. It may be the lighting, but it looks like they were able to disguise some of the high beltline with curvature in the doors. Daddy likey Tide fucked around with this message at 17:09 on Dec 4, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 17:04
|
|
|
It looks different in every set of leaked pics that come out
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 21:43
|
|
|
More pictures http://www.mustang6g.com/forums/showthread.php?t=971 
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 21:46
|
|
|
OK that's a way better picture. e: Get some new springs and lower the fronts by an inch or so, then we're even getting in to "OK I think I can overlook the silly high beltline stuff" territory. Gwaihir fucked around with this message at 22:12 on Dec 4, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 21:55
|
|
|
I want to see it next to a curent-gen Mustang to see the size difference.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 23:58
|
|
|
I haven't driven a Ford in 15 years, what exactly is SYNC? I'm a heavy bluetooth user in the car (phone calls and playing music), is SYNC required for that?
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 00:14
|
|
|
Sync is just their name for phone bluetooth integration. I don't have it in my car, but I've driven rentals with it, and it does all the usual stuff. Phone phonebook integration, voice control, music etc. (This is with an HTC One, fwiw).
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 00:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 03:25 |
|
|
Yikes, so I would need the $1,200 tech package just to get bluetooth.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 02:06
|
|