What generation...

You could say that it is 5th generation:

1965 - 1973 1st gen, the Falcon-Stang
1974 - 1978 2nd, the Pinto-Stangs
1979 - 1993 3rd, The Fox Stangs AKA Fairmont-Stang
1994 - 2004 4th, SN-95, or the improved Fox-Stang
2005 - ?? 5th gen, S197 platform

Although some may argue that SN-95 is still a Fox at heart and should not be considered it's own generation.

The 2005 Mustang is unique, in that this is the FIRST time that Ford has actually engineered a platform specifically for the Mustang. All other Mustangs were based on hand me downs from family cars.

SN-95 is sufficiently different from the Fox that it is a unique generation. The platform itself didn't change, but there is absolutely no mistaking the difference between the two vehicles.

If it is mustang enthusiast. IMHO It is one of the best mustang magazines out there. Very informative.

351CJ said:

You could say that it is 5th generation:

1965 - 1973 1st gen, the Falcon-Stang
1974 - 1978 2nd, the Pinto-Stangs
1979 - 1993 3rd, The Fox Stangs AKA Fairmont-Stang
1994 - 2004 4th, SN-95, or the improved Fox-Stang
2005 - ?? 5th gen, S197 platform

Although some may argue that SN-95 is still a Fox at heart and should not be considered it's own generation.

The 2005 Mustang is unique, in that this is the FIRST time that Ford has actually engineered a platform specifically for the Mustang. All other Mustangs were based on hand me downs from family cars.

Click to expand...

On that first generation - only the 6-cylinder shared with Falcon. V-8s shared with Fairlane.

351CJ said:

You could say that it is 5th generation:

1965 - 1973 1st gen, the Falcon-Stang

Click to expand...

Would you really put the '71 - '73s in the same generation as the '60s Mustangs? The look completely different.

I believe that the 69-70 were not of the original platform but an updated and larger version of the platform. Simmilar to the relationship between the Fox-4/Sn95 and the original Fox.

manicmustangman said:

Would you really put the '71 - '73s in the same generation as the '60s Mustangs? The look completely different.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I agree, it seems like It was totatly different in like 70 or 71. I wouldnt say those were in the same generation as the 60's mustangs.

65conv50 said:

On that first generation - only the 6-cylinder shared with Falcon. V-8s shared with Fairlane.

Click to expand...

Huh?

If you're talking about things like 5 lug wheels etc., OK, but the platform is the same.

numenor27 said:

Yeah, I agree, it seems like It was totatly different in like 70 or 71. I wouldnt say those were in the same generation as the 60's mustangs.

Click to expand...

65 - 66 are almost identical.

66 - 67 got new sheet metal (body) but underneath they are almost the same as 65 - 66.

68 - 70 got new sheet metal again and some changes underneath, wider track, but they are pretty similar to the very first Stang.

71 - 73, New sheet metal again, slightly stretched, +1" wheel base, track widened again, but the underpinnings are still very similar to the orignal Stang.

The 71-73 stangs are widely known to be in the same generation as the 65-70. Everyone knows this, even me: the non classic guy who is too young to of grown up around them.

351CJ said:

65 - 66 are almost identical.

66 - 67 got new sheet metal (body) but underneath they are almost the same as 65 - 66.

68 - 70 got new sheet metal again and some changes underneath, wider track, but they are pretty similar to the very first Stang.

71 - 73, New sheet metal again, slightly stretched, +1" wheel base, track widened again, but the underpinnings are still very similar to the orignal Stang.

Click to expand...

As an adendum to what 351C was saying...

65 and 66 were nearly identical

67 and 68 were nearly identical but bigger than the 65-66

69 and 70 were very close in shape and size but with several exterior differences but still bigger than 67-68

71 to 73 were nearly identical, but an entirely different car that the previous years.

I view generations of cars by the ability to interchange major parts between the years.

65-66 fenders will not bolt onto a 67-68, 69-70, 71-73. or vice versa.

In my view the generations are as follows...

65-66 = Gen 1
67-68 = Gen 2
69 -70 = Gen 3
71-73 = Gen 4
74-78 = Gen 5
79-93 = Gen 6
94-04 = Gen 7

Now, I know that some will not agree with Gen 7, but when the interiors are identical and the whole front of a 99 can be placed on a 95...

Well, you can argue till your blue in the face over what defines a generation, what seperates generations, and so-on and so-on, etc.etc.etc... But that won't change a damn thing. What has historically been accepted by the media and public at-large, right or wrong, will trump any argument, even if you're 100% correct in making your case. And what IS historically accepted and established and followed by the aftermarket industry, enthusiast clubs, and enthusiast mags, is the breakdown 351CJ listed. Back in the 60's things were very different than today, cars commonly received SIGNIFICANT upgrades and changes and re-engineers practically every other year. In the 50's, this was almost an EVERY YEAR occurrance. For those reasons, the way people defined "a generation" back then was far more loosely defined than we do it today. Today, so much more money is invested in engineering and technology that it is totally impractical to change cars on a yearly basis as drastically and as frequently as we did 30-40 years ago. Instead, today Ford invests GOBS more money into the engineering of a car, and there is a ton more "content" that is expensive to develop compared to the comparitively primitive 1st gen cars. Then they stick with that basic design for much longer, because it takes alot longer to realize a return on that much up-front investment. So the very definition of a "generation" has changed over time, but that doesn't undo what's was already defined and put to bed years ago on the earlier cars. You can't rewrite history, you can't go the revisionist route. Just because technically the 302 motor was closer to 4.9 liters, doesn't mean that the world must discontinue using the term "5.0". So....

1965-1973 ..... 1st gen
1974-1978 ..... 2nd gen
1979-1993 ..... 3rd gen
1994-2004 ..... 4th gen
2005-up ........ 5th gen

The only real odd-duck in here are the 71-73's. The 71-73's were a significant departure from the original Falcon-derived Mustang platforms, moving to a newly engineered platform that shared alot of content with the 70-up Torino. Using today's standard of what defines a generation, the 71-73's would certainly be their own generation of cars. HOWEVER, back then the passing of a generation was based on far more sweeping changes. The 1st generation was really defined more by the first evolutionary cycle of the Mustang, almost like the lifespan of an animal. It was born light, limber and sporty. As the years passed it grew bigger, stronger, faster, more aggressive and mature. Then, in 72-73 the EPA got involved, gas prices were skyrocketing, and it got weaker, fatter, tired, and died. Then in 1974, an ENTIRELY new car was born, an economy car, a compact car, from scratch. That's how the shift in generations was defined back then. Very drastic. Today, we mark generations far more specifically.