I agree it's a good looking car, but I still think it could use some improvement in aerodynamics. Move the bottom of the A=pillar forward and make the nose rounder, especially those headlights.
Looks great to me.
Yeah. Guess you find a big dealer repair invoice pretty sexy, too. Cuz that's what you'll be looking at a lot when you buy any Ford car.
I still think it could use some improvement in aerodynamics.
It is obvious this was not a design goal.
And yeah, if you're buying a v6 mustang, you probably should just buy something else...
So the fact that the current V6 mustang makes the same amount of horsepower as the pre-2010 V8 doesn't really make a difference?
The mustangs (other than the special editions like the cobra or GT500) weren't really much of a car from the 80's-2010 to be honest. I'm not sure that that comparison is really saying much.
That's not so say people couldn't make them in to much of a car, but stock, they were a bit anemic.
Not quite. The 2010 GT was much improved over previous models. The 2008-2009 Bullitt was much improved as well. The 2010 GT was pretty much a Bullitt.
The mustangs (other than the special editions like the cobra or GT500) weren't really much of a car from the 80's-2010 to be honest. I'm not sure that that comparison is really saying much.
That's not so say people couldn't make them in to much of a car, but stock, they were a bit anemic.
There might be people that it is fine for, but it's more the view people have. I'm more talking about people that want a v8 mustang, see the price, then buy the v6 instead. They are either not going to be happy with it, or pretend that they have a much more capable car than they really have.
In my view, the lower end of that type of car is not that great of a value. You have the looks of a really nice car, then neuter it everywhere else. On the mustang side, it seems everything else suffers, down to the interior.
If you're stripping out what makes a performance car a performance car, usually you can get a bit more car with a more equipped lower end car.
I agree it's a good looking car, but I still think it could use some improvement in aerodynamics. Move the bottom of the A=pillar forward and make the nose rounder, especially those headlights.
Gotcha - that makes perfect sense. Compromies sometimes are OK, other times they come and bite you in the a$$.
If I had 25k to spend (for example) I would choose a 1-2 year old GT over a brand-new V6, if I REALLY wanted the V8 but couldn't afford it brand-new. You either compromise on the age or the engine. In 3-4 years, who cares if the car is 4 or 6 years old, if you have a nice V8!
The V6 will always be a V6....
It is obvious this was not a design goal.
And yeah, if you're buying a v6 mustang, you probably should just buy something else...
Really? For $22k what other car has RWD, ponycar styling, and 300hp?
No, then it would look like a cab forward jellybean, like most other cars. The long hood, relatively steep windshield, and shark nose are what make it look like a musclecar. It gets 31mpg highway with the V6.
If you really want a cab forward jellybean, buy a 90s Mustang.
And if you buy the $22k version you get the (relatively) poor handling, and plastic insides. (back to my comment about pretending the car is better than it is, HP rating isn't everything).
Don't know why people rag on the 300 HP V6 Mustang...
But not a 300 HP 370Z, G37, etc all the other cars with 300 HP V6s that don't even offer a V8 option.
Don't know why people rag on the 300 HP V6 Mustang...
But not a 300 HP 370Z, G37, etc all the other cars with 300 HP V6s that don't even offer a V8 option.
Now if there was a 170hp V6, THEN I would be all over that as a poser car, but the current V6 is a great motor.