Why no 05 LX 4.6 mustang? think about it

BrutalStang · Nov 4, 2004

Why no 05 LX 4.6 mustang? would you buy one?

who loved the LX 5.0's of the day? i know i did. i think it would be neat if they did a real base line mustang(like a fox LX or a GTS) and stuck the V8 and GT suspension in there. wouldnt that boost sales? and i know i would definatly get one then. i like how the new one has no hood scoop or side scoops(could have done without those indents, but i guess thats heritage) but if the sn95's had a model like that im sure they would have sold alot better. real base looks and options with big power is what a muscle car(or pony car is you wanna call it that) is all about in my opinion.

so who would buy something like an LX 4.6? i think it would be really cool, also bringing back the feeling of the late 80's and early 90's to the mustang world.

oilypushrod · Nov 4, 2004

great idea. I would buy one

Irv · Nov 4, 2004

there is an LX Mustang, they just call it a GT Deluxe now

LurchNC · Nov 4, 2004

The LX's of the late 80's looked a lot more like the '85-'86 GTs. When they went to the more aggressive looking '87 GT a more understated LX without all the spoilers ect. made sense. The '05 GT is pretty understated as it sits, so unless they make a wilder looking GT, not sure it would work. I personally love the cleaner looks of the Fox LX 5.0 vs. the Fox GT.

My $.02

PerformanceRed · Nov 4, 2004

The LX's were all ugly looking boxy cars. They never appealed to me like the 99-04 Mustangs did.

I also like the 2005 Mustangs.

Dms05 · Nov 5, 2004

I think the GT Dirvetrain in a V-6 body would be the ultimate sleeper, with no GT badges and all. I would'nt even want the cut outs for the exhaust.

98V6 · Nov 5, 2004

I would buy a basic model. GT suspension, V8, Manual seats, power windows and locks. Thats all I really need.

Svtpilot · Nov 5, 2004

PerformanceRed said:
The LX's were all ugly looking boxy cars. They never appealed to me like the 99-04 Mustangs did.

I also like the 2005 Mustangs.

Well all Mustangs of that vintage were boxy compared to the 99-04s. The appeal of the 5.0LXs is that it gave you everything the GT had as far as performance but did away with the extras, like ground effects, & tail light covers. It looked cleaner (in my opinion) was a little lighter and about 6k cheaper the the GT. Plus if you were really hard core you get get a 5.0LX Coupe, with no A/C and with crank windows which would be a lot lighter the the GT.

I would like to see to something like that today.

cobradream · Nov 5, 2004

I totally like the idea of at least ditching the spoiler. That orange stang from Street Scene with 20's and minus the spoiler has a real nice look to it. My only dissapointment , besides the lack of those pimp daddy sequential taillights, is the weak spoiler and foglights. I think that if cerivini can really pull off their eleanor kit, a standard LX model would be the ideal base to work from.

PS. Why didn't ford want to fork out the old eleanor style wheels in 17's on the GT?

SAYNOTORICE · Nov 5, 2004

the no spoiler is the best option....really makes it vintage looking...i thhink the only place for a spoiler on a mustang is if its on a special package like a boss, or saleen, not the base GT, thats how it used to be.....i priced a GT with no options except stereo, no spolier and bullit wheels for $25,000

66Satellite · Nov 5, 2004

Yeah, this got kicked around a lot with the sub 20K V-8 threads a while back. I'd love to see it, but it probably won't happen. What would be truly cool is too see Ford come out with a stripped notchback V-8 package. Limit the number of colors, no options other than tranny and maybe wheels, keeping the price as low as possible.

svtguy · Nov 5, 2004

66Satellite said:
Yeah, this got kicked around a lot with the sub 20K V-8 threads a while back. I'd love to see it, but it probably won't happen. What would be truly cool is too see Ford come out with a stripped notchback V-8 package. Limit the number of colors, no options other than tranny and maybe wheels, keeping the price as low as possible.

Maybe gears as a option, 3.73's, 4.10 & 4.30's

BrutalStang · Nov 7, 2004

98V6 said:
I would buy a basic model. GT suspension, V8, Manual seats, power windows and locks. Thats all I really need.

this is pretty much what i was thinking about, just as basic as possible with the GT performance. it would also make it more affordable to those who wanted something like a GT but didnt need all the extras. the idea of a sleeper, that looks like a V6 but isnt is great. i would love to surprise those ricers even more, like i do with my LX 5.0.

Mustang5L5 · Nov 7, 2004

I like that idea....offer a V6 with the 4.6L option. No fog lights, no spoiler, maybe a different set of wheels.

Maybe ford could have used a different hood on the GT model.

It's just the LX trim model has too much history (like the GT) to let it die off.

I like messing with ricers in my LX 5.0. The reputation gets around as i have come across several who would not try an LX, but would be willing to run a Fox GT. Us Mustangers know there difference isn't much, but those LX's do have a rep.

DaTT(1sK) · Nov 7, 2004

If I'm not mistaken, was the LX not a faster car than the GT in the 1/4 mile due to less weight?

65conv50 · Nov 7, 2004

One of the major reasons for the huge sales of the first-year Mustangs was the wide variety of equipment offered. That way they could appeal to a wider group of buyers, and therefore increase sales. It worked like a charm, and set sales records.

Today, with the advance of computers, it is far easier to do that. I don't understand why they don't. Ford seems to have forgotten some of the keys to their earlier success. (Another forgotten key was the very competitive price.)

First year Mustang buyers of the base car had a choice of 4 engines, 3 transmissions, 2 interiors.. even 3 wheel sizes, for Pete's sake!! You could get an inline 6 (cheapest.. so much for the argument on here that inline 6s are expensive) of either 170 or 200 inches, depending on when you bought it. Likewise there were 3 different V-8s offered. A 260 2v (which later became 289 2v), a 289 4v or a 289 High Performance. Any engine except the HiPo came with 3-speed manual, 4-speed manual, or 3-speed automatic. (The HiPo came only with 4-speed manual)

If you opted for the GT package, you could still get your choice of the 3 different V-8s, and 3 different transmissions. Then you could go with manual or disc brakes, manual or power steering, and a long list of other items. The variety was so much that today, you can go through hundreds of early Mustangs, and not find any two exactly alike. I know in 40 years I have never seen another exactly like my first one.

Point being: give the buyers a choice of making the car more to each individual's liking, and you will get more buyers. Why can't they see that? I know it would make me more likely to buy the car - and I'll bet so would many more on here.

Personally, I would like a convertible without GT, but with V-8 and 5 (or 6 if they offered) speed manual and IRS.

Mustang buyers are NOT clueless sheep. Give us a CHOICE!!

Carlos · Nov 7, 2004

They tried that in 94-95 with the GT-S and it didn't sell well at all. I don't think they'd bother again, evethough I'd like a stripped GT.

Carlos

Mustang5L5 · Nov 7, 2004

DaTT(1sK) said:
If I'm not mistaken, was the LX not a faster car than the GT in the 1/4 mile due to less weight?

Yes, LX's were lighter than GT's on average.

351CJ · Nov 7, 2004

65conv50 said:
One of the major reasons for the huge sales of the first-year Mustangs was the wide variety of equipment offered. That way they could appeal to a wider group of buyers, and therefore increase sales. It worked like a charm, and set sales records.

Today, with the advance of computers, it is far easier to do that. I don't understand why they don't. Ford seems to have forgotten some of the keys to their earlier success. (Another forgotten key was the very competitive price.)

First year Mustang buyers of the base car had a choice of 4 engines, 3 transmissions, 2 interiors.. even 3 wheel sizes, for Pete's sake!! You could get an inline 6 (cheapest.. so much for the argument on here that inline 6s are expensive) of either 170 or 200 inches, depending on when you bought it. Likewise there were 3 different V-8s offered. A 260 2v (which later became 289 2v), a 289 4v or a 289 High Performance. Any engine except the HiPo came with 3-speed manual, 4-speed manual, or 3-speed automatic. (The HiPo came only with 4-speed manual)

Mustang buyers are NOT clueless sheep. Give us a CHOICE!!

Different time and era. Back in 1965 there wasn't stringent emissions requirements, EPA mileage requirements (which go in 50lb class increments), crash testing etc. etc. Every engine + transmission combination needs to be tested & certified.

Eventually you will have 4 engine choices in the '05 Mustang, but they 2 more engine choices will be in SEs.

Mustang5L5 · Nov 7, 2004

351CJ said:
Eventually you will have 4 engine choices in the '05 Mustang, but they 2 more engine choices will be in SEs.

Hopefully, with 30K GT's out on the lots, the SE's won't be too bad.

I really wanted an '04 Mach 1, but couldn't swing it at this time. I'm hoping they bring out a '06 or '07 Mach or Boss model...then i'll be all over it

Why no 05 LX 4.6 mustang? think about it

Would you buy something like an LX 4.6?

that would be really cool, like going back in time

they died for a reason, no way

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

Banned

New Member

That is…until I whipped out my Bissell

New Member

New Member

That is…until I whipped out my Bissell

New Member

That is…until I whipped out my Bissell

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency