Pics? I'd say yes you are crazy. but I dislike the new 05's styling. I'd rather wait for the Cobra and hope it's face lifted nicely or supercharge this 99 that I have.bjayz said:Interesting conversation-I am actually thinking of selling my '86 Porsche 911 Cab and buying the '05 GT for a new driving experience. Am I crazy?
JonJon said:Pics? I'd say yes you are crazy. but I dislike the new 05's styling. I'd rather wait for the Cobra and hope it's face lifted nicely or supercharge this 99 that I have.
doesn't have to have tacked on stuff, but have SOMETHING so it isn't bland like a granny sedanLacuna Coil said:No your not crazy. It's called lean mean and clean styling without all the extra tacked on crapola.
you didn't even mention how the exterior looks my main gripePlatinumDevil said:I agree that I am being overly picky... but once the initial dissapointment hit, i just kind of went down a landslide of dissapointments. So i'll clean up my original post with slightly less opinionated facts, ok well not really, but here they are in point form:
CONS-
1) Engine bay looks terrible (admit it)
2) Exhaust is rusting on the showroom floor
3) Interior is well designed and comfy, it just didn't appeal to me, maybe it was the color that turned me off, or just the way the seats look in comparison to the concept.
4)Trunk is small IMO (my Z34's trunk is at least 3 times the size of the mustangs... the car is also probably an easy 3 feet longer, but now you know where im coming from)
5) Tires are just too damn small, i realise that these tires are the right width for the way this car handles, but im a sucker for the big wide tires.
PROS
1) price, most bang for your buck, in true pony car fashion
2) fastest and best handling mustang to date (i disagree, but we'll let that one slide)'
3) shifter and clutch and tranny done very well
4) stock stereo sounds amazing
5) exterior looks are simply amazing
--Really, the car for me is going to have to be the Cobra i think. The mustang thats, well, less cheap.
Whoever said that when they buy a car they look at just the good things... thats the worst way to look at it, unless you KNOW what your buying before you go shopping. If I was looking at just the good things i might be inclined to buy a korean death machine... err i mean Kia. Theyre worth like a week's worth of work and get decent mileage... SOLD! i'll just ignore the fact that the car belongs in the junkyard once its rolled off the dealership lot.
PS: Once i started listing things wrong i just kept going, like really, Do I care if the mustang has a big trunk? No... only going in there ever would be subs and maybe an icescraper. Interior wise? the last 2 cars i bought i dont even think i looked at the interior, I got the one home and noticed the back seat was missing. So yes, from a mustang driver's perspective... Most of my con's aren't going to play a role in what i buy anyways.
Den said:Heck, I'm pretty picky myself. I bought a 2000 GT and hated it. I would compare it to my 1993 and notice all the things the 2000 was lacking:
1. No underhood light. 1993 has one.
2. I think it didn't have a glove compartment light. 1993 does.
3. Leather seats were not all leather (leather seating surfaces vinal back seat and rear of front seats. (My 1993 has Flofits but I just thought this was cheap on the 2000.
4. Space. I fit my 6' long Procharger box and an 8.8 rear end in the '93. The 2000 was worthless for carrying things. All trunks since 1994 are worthless!
5. Headlight switch. The headlight switch is a hell of a lot cooler on the 1993. I think they used a original 1965 swith on the 2000.
6. Distributor (didn't even put one on in 2000). j/k
7. 1993 has a nice mustang horse on the hood insulation (nice touch). 2000 dosnt have anything.
8. Freaken seats did not recline all the way because they used same seats in convertable. I slept many of nights fully reclined in the 93.
I definately did not get into the 2000 and say WOW they have really improved on the old design. If anything, it rode a little better. I think the 2005 is missing the same stuff as the 2000 plus the 2005 has the added missing feature of a open trunk button in the glovebox.
What happened to that cool plenum cover that said "Powered by Ford" on the 2005. Damn that was cool. It ranked up there with the hood insulation horse on the 1993.
Den said:Heck, I'm pretty picky myself. I bought a 2000 GT and hated it. I would compare it to my 1993 and notice all the things the 2000 was lacking:
1. No underhood light. 1993 has one.
2. I think it didn't have a glove compartment light. 1993 does.
3. Leather seats were not all leather (leather seating surfaces vinal back seat and rear of front seats. (My 1993 has Flofits but I just thought this was cheap on the 2000.
4. Space. I fit my 6' long Procharger box and an 8.8 rear end in the '93. The 2000 was worthless for carrying things. All trunks since 1994 are worthless!
5. Headlight switch. The headlight switch is a hell of a lot cooler on the 1993. I think they used a original 1965 swith on the 2000.
6. Distributor (didn't even put one on in 2000). j/k
7. 1993 has a nice mustang horse on the hood insulation (nice touch). 2000 dosnt have anything.
8. Freaken seats did not recline all the way because they used same seats in convertable. I slept many of nights fully reclined in the 93.
I definately did not get into the 2000 and say WOW they have really improved on the old design. If anything, it rode a little better. I think the 2005 is missing the same stuff as the 2000 plus the 2005 has the added missing feature of a open trunk button in the glovebox.
What happened to that cool plenum cover that said "Powered by Ford" on the 2005. Damn that was cool. It ranked up there with the hood insulation horse on the 1993.
Hmmm that’s odd, it's a stainless steel exhaust system????? Not sure how it would be rusting unless it was submersed in sea water for a week. I'm raising the flag on this one.PlatinumDevil said:2) Exhaust is rusting on the showroom floor.