CodeRedR51
Premium
- 55,904
- United States
Not even close. Actually, I'd argue that the 2005 is a more cohesive design than the 2010. It's plain and boring, yes, but as a whole the design language of that car makes more sense. Remember, at the time it was the sexiest thing on the road until the Camaro came out and we realized retro muscle cars look amazing with actual muscles. The 2010 car added muscles but they still don't look like they're supposed to be there. The greenhouse...and those 3/4 windows...they clearly belong to the design scheme of the previous car.
I'm not a massive fan of the '05 but it was around 2005 when I really started getting into Mustangs and American muscle cars. Out of the ones I like it is the worst. I, for some reason, don't like the look of the 2015. Don't know what it is. Maybe it's those taillightsWhich one?
Also:
I just had to comment. I like the 2015. I don't know if I like it as much as a 65 or 67, but I like it more than the 2005, the 1993 and maybe even the 2010. Maybe.
The 2005 which was fantastically retro and thus sold like flapjacks. That car had numerous design flaws, but I think the best way to illustrate them is in side view:
Of particular note, the front and rear chops are severe, giving the rear end a rather flat and tall expanse of bumper at the back. The front end is riotously square. Not a bad thing... I like the grille and lights in isolation, but the relationship of the the headlight to the front wheelarch has always bothered me... and I'm sure the guys at Ford spent hours massaging the clay at that exact spot to minimize the interference... but it's still there.
The sides are flat. Too little curve to give good definition and shadow.
The swage line leading to the vestigial side vent is a nice touch, but the big flat rear fender looks fat and dumpy. I chose an outdoor shot because artful studio lighting that highlights the fender flares covers up how dull it looks with sharp shadows... but on the road, there's no denying there's something missing there.
The 2010 facelift was bettter. Fixed the relation of the front clusters to the wheel arch. Blended the wheelarches into the fenders to give the fenders themselves more definition. Pulled the vestigial side vent back into a swash to give more structure to the rear fender, put in hips(!!!), and canted the tail-lights to give more shape to the (still too tall) rear.
They also started using black paint on the rockers to disguise the car's bulk. Obviously not on this car, but on most models, this was the case.
Here, you still have a lot of rear bumper, and yes, in side view, it's not particularly inspiring (more like a Tiburon), but from the rear, it's much nicer, with the surfaces on multiple planes, this time.
The rear haunch is more noticeably muscular, standing out from the side of the car better.
The swage lines effectively break the side up into three distinct sections, giving a distinct center cutaway portion that makes the car look much sleeker. Nice touch: Upper shoulder line continues after rear arch, further exaggerating the muscular proportion of the hips.
The front light clusters and the front wheelarch blend better. They've given it a sharper nose without losing the upright square element (thus, no, it really doesn't look anything like an Aston) necessary for a "Muscle Car". It's very reminiscent of the 1969 Boss... whose high-mounted sidescoop and integrated rear window are echoed in the styling of the rear fender.
I can understand if people don't like the 2015... taste is subjective... but inferior to the 2005? Hell no. It's superior to the 05 in most every way. Maybe against the 2010 facelift, it's debatable, but this model represents the clean break needed to take the Mustang's design (and yes, many Mustang-specific design cues are still intact!) into the 21st Century.
-
EDITED: Forgot to finish the last line before I left the house for work.
The 2005 which was fantastically retro and thus sold like flapjacks. That car had numerous design flaws, but I think the best way to illustrate them is in side view:
The swage line leading to the vestigial side vent is a nice touch, but the big flat rear fender looks fat and dumpy. I chose an outdoor shot because artful studio lighting that highlights the fender flares covers up how dull it looks with sharp shadows... but on the road, there's no denying there's something missing there.
I'm not a massive fan of the '05 but it was around 2005 when I really started getting into Mustangs and American muscle cars. Out of the ones I like it is the worst. I, for some reason, don't like the look of the 2015. Don't know what it is. Maybe it's those taillights
I don't see it that way.The tail of the '05 is short in comparison to the original. The '15 is pretty much a reset to make it look more like the first fastback.
I like the tailight treatment. Brings back the french fry look.
The 656 horsepower 427 SOHC, possibly the 750hp Can Am Boss 494 if you count that. As far as I know those are the most powerful they ever built that are N/A anyways.
Did you actually read the article?
I agree. And what's more they don't even need to make these sorts of shouty claims to make the gt350 seem good, it's already looking amazing
That's cool, it is different. I would expect the standard Coyote 5.0 manifolds to be a popular swap, sound wise, assuming they bolt up.
