2015 Ford Mustang - General Discussion

  • Thread starter CodeRedR51
  • 6,247 comments
  • 392,196 views
Well, I got a chance to see the new facelift yesterday. Though only in Ecoboost Convertible form, I like the color shown and the headlights are growing on me. Though, the grill isn't; it feels a bit off in comparison to the previous grill design.
32739201691_4105b598c3_z.jpg


32709393002_40c5aa6152_z.jpg
 
Wow, a 7 liter NA V8 in the next GT500 sounds amazing. Though, part of me hopes it doesn't have too much power. I honestly thought 662 hp from the previous GT500 was enough and the Challenger Hellcat is really pushing it with 707 hp. Then again, I guess Ford could get away with a straight-line focused Mustang since they already have the GT350 for the circuit.
 
So what was GM's excuse again?

Cue a protracted ad campaign poking fun at Ford's choice of using "weak" natural aspiration instead of "strong" supercharging, only for GM to quietly adopt Ford's approach next generation.

Maybe they'll drop some tool boxes on the engines too?
 
So what was GM's excuse again?

That they were already at it's limit with the Z06 and that the cylinder walls were too thin for Forced induction, and that the car couldn't run a higher compression due to the strain if bored out further and no Forced induction and so on. To be honest I think Ford has been more on the innovative end of things with trying to solve and figure out a solution for performance, while GM finds a well built yet easy method.
 
Last edited:
I've literally just laughed out loud at the thought of a naturally aspirated 7.0 modern Pony car replacing a Forced Induction predecessor. NA isn't dead, it's merely resting until it can provide the goodness.
 
I bet whoever talked to that guy in Chicago didn't hear right or misinterpreted what the guy at Ford said. I wouldn't be surprised if it just ends up with the same engine that's in the GT350 with a supercharger slapped on top.
 
I bet whoever talked to that guy in Chicago didn't hear right or misinterpreted what the guy at Ford said. I wouldn't be surprised if it just ends up with the same engine that's in the GT350 with a supercharger slapped on top.

Yeah I thought the same with @Dennisch came to crash all our dreams and hopes.
 
Seems the conversation has moved on, but as I've never really been a fan of ANY recent generation Mustang.... I gotta say, the newest refresh actually doesn't look that bad. And I prefer the new headlights to the old ones.
 
Mustang factory options
Available tweaks comprise a performance exhaust system for the V8-powered GT, suspension modifications developed by Ford Performance for all coupe variants and a quick-shift kit for manual cars.

These customisations can be applied to new Mustangs without affecting the standard three-year, 100,000km warranty, provided they are ordered and fitted before delivery.
 
True, but the Mustang hasn't had that record in the recent generations. Both the 4th and 5th gen Mustangs didn't receive a facelift until 5-6 years into their production cycle.
True, however it also didn't have much in the way of competition during those years. Now that the Camaro and Challenger are back and selling well, Ford has to keep it from getting too stale. They may have decided to go with a normal refresh timeline to do that.
 
It wouldn't be so bad if they removed the turn signals (or are they fog lights?) underneath the headlights. But no, of course Ford has to go and screw up someting that worked just fine.
 
Dan
It wouldn't be so bad if they removed the turn signals (or are they fog lights?) underneath the headlights. But no, of course Ford has to go and screw up someting that worked just fine.
I agree, the most offensive thing to my eyes are those fog lights. They just look wrong, counter-intuitive even.
 
True, however it also didn't have much in the way of competition during those years. Now that the Camaro and Challenger are back and selling well, Ford has to keep it from getting too stale. They may have decided to go with a normal refresh timeline to do that.
Ah, that would explain it then I suppose.
 
Back