SPIED: 2009 Mustang testing

[SVT666]

It looks like the Giugiaro Mustang is the basis for the redesign of the 2009 Mustang.

http://www.leftlanenews.com/2007/01/18/spied-2009-ford-mustang/

[Nethead]

HEMI666:  Unfortunately, from the front fenders rearward, what we have is a current S197 Mustang.  It was the rear half of the Giugiaro that I liked--the front half looked like a cross between the "New Edge" Mustangs of 2004 and the current GT500 and I don't like that part of the Giugiaro much at all.  Put the Giugiaro's rear half on the current S197s front half and you've just about hit perfection! 
Naturally, rotundawonders and production cars often have no more than a passing resemblance to one another once the production version hits the dealerships.  The S197 Mustang does bear a very close resemblance to the 2004 silver fastback and the 2004 red 'vert, Thank God!  Waaayyy back in 1963, the drop dead gorgeous Mustang II showcar got the whole world hot for the Mustang, but the production version lost a great deal of the glamour of the showcar (including the removable hardtop).  Nevertheless, even greatly watered-down the '64 Mustang was phenomenally better looking than its 1964 rivals:  the Falcon, the Comet, the Chevy II, the Valiant, the Dart, the (Rambler) American, the Corvair, and the hideous Barracuda (I was sixteen then, and the only vehicle I can remember ever having seen that was uglier than the '64 Barracuda was some model of Citroen--possibly named the "2CV" or something similar to that)!  If Ford is gonna incorporate some of the Giugiaro Mustang in future Mustangs, let it be those '70-reminiscent rear fenders, the '67-reminiscent full fastback and concave rear-end with the three individual taillights on each side.  And ditch that shitty faux gascap, puh-leeaase!

[GoCougs]

That Giugiaro Mustang was sweet.

How much of a redesign is this? Is this the typical freshening like that seen for the '94 - '04 model?

I hope not, as Ford needs a legit new design every five years.

[SVT666]

HEMI666:? Unfortunately, from the front fenders rearward, what we have is a current S197 Mustang.? It was the rear half of the Giugiaro that I liked--the front half looked like a cross between the "New Edge" Mustangs of 2004 and the current GT500 and I don't like that part of the Giugiaro much at all.? Put the Giugiaro's rear half on the current S197s front half and you've just about hit perfection!?
Naturally, rotundawonders and production cars often have no more than a passing resemblance to one another once the production version hits the dealerships.? The S197 Mustang does bear a very close resemblance to the 2004 silver fastback and the 2004 red 'vert, Thank God!? Waaayyy back in 1963, the drop dead gorgeous Mustang II showcar got the whole world hot for the Mustang, but the production version lost a great deal of the glamour of the showcar (including the removable hardtop).? Nevertheless, even greatly watered-down the '64 Mustang was phenomenally better looking than its 1964 rivals:? the Falcon, the Comet, the Chevy II, the Valiant, the Dart, the (Rambler) American, the Corvair, and the hideous Barracuda (I was sixteen then, and the only vehicle I can remember ever having seen that was uglier than the '64 Barracuda was some model of Citroen--possibly named the "2CV" or something similar to that)!? If Ford is gonna incorporate some of the Giugiaro Mustang in future Mustangs, let it be those '70-reminiscent rear fenders, the '67-reminiscent full fastback and concave rear-end with the three individual taillights on each side.? And ditch that shitty faux gascap, puh-leeaase!

I can't say that I share your feelings toward either the Giugiaro or the faux gas cap.  I like the Giugiaro from the rear wheel forward only.  The back end is pretty hideous as far as I'm concerned.  Hopefully the car in the spy photo is only carrying the front clip and the rest of the car's design is still under development.  The hood to me looks like it's got a bulge to it and the grille opening is bigger then the Giugiaro's because the fog lights are still part of the design.  I don't like how the leading edge of the hood on the Giugiaro is so straight, and this mule appears to have a little more curvature to it.  My only complaints about the current Mustang are that the hood is too flat and the rear overhang "appears" too long.  A hood from Fang called the Mystery 7, or the shaker hood from Fang or CDC would cure that problem.  I'm sure that they will be revising the rest of the car just to match the front at least.

[SVT666]

That Giugiaro Mustang was sweet.

How much of a redesign is this? Is this the typical freshening like that seen for the '94 - '04 model?

I hope not, as Ford needs a legit new design every five years.

The 2009 is a refresh and the all new car is coming out in 20011-12.

[SaltyDog]

It's hard to see much, and there's no gaurantee it'll look like the concept they're comparing it to.

[SVT666]

It's hard to see much, and there's no gaurantee it'll look like the concept they're comparing it to.

There are character lines that indicate it does.  I don't think it will be identical, but I do think it will look about as much like the Giugiaro car as the 2005 did to the concept car.

[nickdrinkwater]

I don't think it should come out any earlier than 2009.  To me the Mustang still looks quite sharp - they don't need to change it just yet.

[Nethead]

nickdrinkwater:  The Nethead here agrees.  Mustangs went awfully far astray from 1971 through 2004--I don't want to go there again!

[SVT666]

I don't think it should come out any earlier than 2009.? To me the Mustang still looks quite sharp - they don't need to change it just yet.

The only thing I would like to see is a new hood and a slightly revised front clip.  Other then that, just leave it as is until the major redo in 2011-12.

[Nethead]

HEMI666:   I would love to see a duplicate of Fang's rear lip spoiler incorporated into the Mustang's sheetmetal as was done on the '69s and '70s.  Fang coulda done better than use a generic under-the-front-bumper spoiler, but then again it's the same one the Vortech Edition uses so Fang ain't the only outfit that coulda done better.  The Nethead here is being a little hypocritical--I loved the 3D Carbon showcar of the 2005 SEMA convention with it's bodywork, 20" wheels, and brilliant-white-with-broad-red-stripes paint--except for the C-pillar louvers and the big rear wing, of course!  Of all the aftermarket hoods I've seen, that one I liked the best--which may be the same one used by the Shelby GT-H.  Ford's FR500GT hood ain't bad, either, and I think it would extract underhood air better than the hood on the GT500.  Fang's hood has extractor vents and they would do a good job, too, so I can see why you like it!  Fang's rear lip spoiler leaves all others in the dust.  Now if someone will make an aftermarket taillight assembly that provides three separate lights on each side, they'll be millionaires--or at least thousandaires--within a month of getting their product on the market (and I ain't talking some kinda crappy plastic cover with three vertical rectangular holes in it that tapes onto the current taillights, but a unit with three bulbs and three red lenses).  God I wish I had Hau Thai Tang's job!!!

[93JC]

nickdrinkwater:? The Nethead here agrees.? Mustangs went awfully far astray from 1971 through 2004--I don't want to go there again!

I like them all, except for '94-'98.

[SVT666]

I saw on another forum that said that Ford is offering incentives on the Mustang.  If this is true I want to know where, because here in Calgary they can't keep them on the lot (even with temperatures below zero).  If you want to lease a Mustang GT, you had better be prepared to pay 10.3% interest, and if you are purchasing, the interest rate is 5.9%.  No incentives and the only way you are paying much below MSRP is if you are close personal friends with the sales manager at the dealership.

[93JC]

I saw on another forum that said that Ford is offering incentives on the Mustang.? If this is true I want to know where, because here in Calgary they can't keep them on the lot (even with temperatures below zero).? If you want to lease a Mustang GT, you had better be prepared to pay 10.3% interest, and if you are purchasing, the interest rate is 5.9%.? No incentives and the only way you are paying much below MSRP is if you are close personal friends with the sales manager at the dealership.

... or if you want a convertible, in which case at the very least Metro Ford has had dozens and has been sitting on them for a couple months, and would probably deal just to get the damned thing out of their basement warehouse. :P

[SVT666]

... or if you want a convertible, in which case at the very least Metro Ford has had dozens and has been sitting on them for a couple months, and would probably deal just to get the damned thing out of their basement warehouse. :P

Yeah, well they should have known better then to order a bunch of verts in the fall.

[MX793]

Doesn't look like they'll be adopting the one aspect of the Giugiaro car that I liked the most:  the fastback roofline.

[Michael Estorol]

(snipped)

the only vehicle I can remember ever having seen that was uglier than the '64 Barracuda was some model of Citroen--possibly named the "2CV" or something similar to that)!?

I trust that the Nethead there is joking. Otherwise, this dreadful error can be explained only as  another self-conscious affectation, along with his pretentious and Runyon-esque prose style.

:P

Actually, I've just looked at pictures of the 'cuda in question. I can see that some might view it as an 'hommage' to the masterpiece Citroen Ami 6 of 1961:




okay -- you can go back you go to your mustang speculations now (but don't let this happen again).

[mazda6er]

Dude, when will you learn that the Nethead here is always right?

[Payman]

Looks like the front fender will get a rounded, downward slope. This is a good thing, because the straight beltline from front to rear on the current car makes it appear too bulky.

[Nethead]

Michael Estorol:? "Pretentious"?? "Runyon-esque"?? Why, thank you, MycholestorolDude!!? Blush.? Aw, shucks, it weren't nuttin'...And thank you, too, Mazda6ER!! Blush Blush  Blush!  Gee, fellas, the Nethead here hardly knows what to say--but I'd like to thank my producer, my director, the esteemed members of the Academy, and most of all my family for supporting me all along the way.

[Nethead]

Looks like the front fender will get a rounded, downward slope. This is a good thing, because the straight beltline from front to rear on the current car makes it appear too bulky.

Payman:  Totally correct, PayDude!  Hau Thai Tang didn't quite go far enough--that famous Mustang rear-fender kick-up needs to be on this born-again Mustang, as does a full C-scoop on the sides instead of a "symbolic" C-scoop that is more of an oblique "L" than it is a true "C". 
However, MycholesterolDude above showed us that the Mustang pirated its trademark side C-scoops from the 1961 Citroen Ami shown above--the Ami has the side C-scoops upside down and backwards, but it IS French after all...

[SVT666]

I want Hau Thai Tang's job.  Hell, I'll even take just the SVT part of his job.  C'mon Ford, at least hire the Nethead and myself, you need more car guys.  Well, except the Nethead thinks a Mustang wagon is a good idea, so maybe you should just hire me. :P

[FoMoJo]

The Giugiaro Mustang is a beautiful design...



...and would appeal to many who would consider a Mustang not refined enough.? When I first saw a picture of one, I thought of it as a great design for a 'Euro' Mustang.? But for what the North American heritage is, and market appeal for a Mustang, I don't think it would work.? A North American Mustang must retain a sense of aggressiveness in its styling.? The one thing I don't like about the Giugiaro is the overall look of the facia.? Although some would view it as sinister and 'snakelike' in design, it reminds me of a Jack'O'Lantern.? It's the same look that the new Camaro has.

There's not too much I'd like to see them change on the Mustang right now...



...until they're ready for a complete makeover.? Getting rid of the bulge in the hood and a sleeker looking front air dam might help but, otherwise, it looks just as it should.? As well, when they do the makeover, they should not try and make it look too modern.

The great Mustangs of the past, the '68 Bullitt Mustang...



...and the Boss 302...



...and even the Mach I...



...had a particular stance and aggressive look that is not quite captured in the latest series.? It would like to see them work towards recapturing that in their next version.

[Nethead]

FoMoJo & HEMI666:  Good postings, Dudes!  Yeah, Ford should hire Hemi first and then the Nethead here--Hemi's got waaayy more sense!
Fo, you've posted some great pics--the Giugiaro, the Boss 302, the Mach 1, and the Bullitt!  Just looking at them is a spiritual experience...
While the spouse bought groceries, I leafed through a Mustang-specific dragmag.  They were doing a limited build of two new fastback GT coupes--a straight drive and an automatic.  They added one-piece driveshafts, 4-point-something rear-end gears, cold-air boxes, reflashes, lighter front K-members, and slicks on the rear with skinnies on the front (and Weld wheels in appropriate sizes for the tires).  I believe that was the limit of the mods.  No interior stripping, no power adders, no HD clutch, although the automatic had a higher speed converter. 
The automatic got trailered early because the aftermarket one-piece driveshaft was out-of-balance so it created vibrations that might have damaged the drivetrain.  On a cool engine, the straight drive turned a best of 12.51 seconds, and pulled the left front wheel a coupla inches off the pavement--that's badass on 281 CID, and would only have been possible in a 281 CID car at this weight with a power adder back in the heyday of the cars FoMoJo displayed in his posting. 
Like Hemi says, it's the second Golden Age of the Mustang, and we love it!

[SVT666]

I read the same article and they threw in 4.10 gears.  I was extremely impressed with the results.  The car started with a 1/4 mile time just under 13.5 seconds and they knocked 9 tenths off without any major mods.  They didn't even get into heads, cams, intake manifolds, throttle bodies, MAF sensors, headers, etc. 

The 3 valve 4.6L is an awesome engine with shitloads of potential.  ProCharger has an otherwise stock Mustang GT with 600hp (although that is well beyond the hp and torque ratings on the block, rotating assembly, and transmission.  Blow-By Racing has a Stage 2 head and Stage 1 camshaft combo that along with a CAI, programmer (not even a dyno tune), and catback has been independently dynoed at 351 rwhp (approx 400 hp at the crank with a 12% loss), and with the stage 2 cams has been independently dynoed by two different mags at 368 rwhp and 371 rwhp (approx. 418 and 422 at the crank respectively).  That's cheap horsepower.  My plan is to get the Blow-By Racing Stage 2 heads, Stage 1 cams (more streetable), X-pipe, Magnaflow catback, WMS CAI, and dyno tune for the power side of things.  The dyno tune will get a few more ponies then the programmer and cost about the same.  I hate this waiting part 

[Nethead]

HEMI666:  Well, they did have Justin Burcham driving, which is the easiest half-second you'll ever knock off your car's ET!  A year ago, Justin Burcham was campaigning an S197 that was regularly turning strings of 12.20s on drag radials--and without boost, boring, stroking, or the bottle!  The interior was not removed--I believe his Mustang weighed in at 3480 lbs ready to crank out a run in the 12.20s.  This dude is magic--or else he cheats well!  A 3480 lb car on a naturally-aspirated 281 ain't got no right to be turning 12.20s.  Sadly, Burcham decided to go for the low tens or even nines so he went boost and bottle on that car soon after those 12.20s runs.  I think he was in the mid-tens when I last read about him.

[SVT666]

Hey Nethead, have you ever heard of a guy named Ken Bjonnes?  Here's a little bit from his website:

First, a little history from my perspective: Let's step back to mid 2002. I had just started getting into modifying my car (the denial stage) while attempting to keep it a street car. I was in search of the bolt-on 12 second pass. At some point during the year I hooked up with Brandon Alsept, who at the time was one of the fastest 2VNA cars. He had a headswapped 98 GT running 12.10@110 with heads that he ported himself and stock cams. From the very beginning, Brandon ?The Butcher? was a very bad influence on me and pushed me where I didn't want to go at the time. It was time to cut the weight. I did all the obvious weight reduction (k member, rear seat, etc) and got the car down to a 12.92@104. I was still short on power at this point, but a respectable time nonetheless.

Over the winter, Brandon once again pushed me to up the ante and I decided to do ported heads and Comp Cams. After being down longer than expected and getting one of the first set of the Comp Cams, I trailered my car up to Cleveland from Cincinnati to get Jerry W. to tune the car. To everyone's surprise, the car made 318 RWHP. Not a common number in those days. The car went 12.33@112.06 first time out. Definitely some promising MPH. It was time to gear up for the Modular Shootout.

Unfortunately, Brandon's car didn't make it to the shootout due to a valve spring failure so it was up to me to represent Cincy. I was running with a hurt tranny and 2 blown struts but I was able to make it to the finals against the fastest 2VNA out there, John Edwards. As expected, the Open Comp master tree'd the hell out of me, but I nearly reeled him in losing by only .007 and running a better ET.

By the end of the year, the car ran an 11.72@116 and 5.0 magazine came calling wanting to do an article. Around the same time, I was contacted by Ron Robart at Fox Lake wanting to test his new P51 prototype intake on my car. Initial testing on my car was very promising and the newly formed MD Motorsports (my company along with Brandon and Gene Fine) decided to build a joint project with Fox Lake. It would be a high reving 2VNA 4.6L (no big bore or stroker) to showcase the P51 intake.

That brings us to June of this year when the car was first fired up. The P51 was still being finished so we bolted on my old Bullitt intake. To everyone's surprise, the car make 368 RWHP and 352 RWTQ! The best part was the car made peak power at 6,200 RPM, well below what the cams were designed for. This was proof that the intake was choking the motor.

On the first trip out, the car ran an 11.38@119. This was with the stock T-45 and at 2875lbs with driver. Density Altitude was 2,700 feet which made the corrected time 11.03@123.58!!! At this point, I decided that with the proper intake, I had a shot to be competitive in NMRA Pure Street. Heads up racing was always more attractive to me than Open Comp, and this was my chance. I decided to get the car Pure Street legal and debut it at the Atco race.

It needed a better tranny with an SFI bellhousing, a full exhaust (running open headers at this time) and a few little odds and ends. I also had to weigh in at 2900lbs. After thrashing on the car for about a week, the car was ready to go and we made a trip to our local track before leaving for Atco. On the first run it ran an 11.17@120. This was at 2925 lbs. Pure Street legal. I'll be the first to admit that there was a lot left in that pass. I was still learning the pro shifted g force I borrowed from Gene and the outlook for the day looked good for a very low 11. Unfortunately on the next launch, the engine torqued so much the oil sending unit slammed into the steering rack an all the oil quickly left the engine.

Back at the shop, we found the problem, got it ready for Atco and we were off. The forecast was bad, but we decided to go anyway. After some electrical problems and some first-race-of-the-year jitters, the car ran a very soft (just wanted a clean pass) 11.38@119. As luck would have it, that's when the rain came and the NMRA cancelled the event. Next up is the Martin MI race at the beginning of September. I'm hoping to have one of the first production P51's on my car by then and be ready to run the first 10 second 2VNA pass. As far as I know, the 11.17@119 is the fastest 2VNA pass ever, even when considering the larger displacement combos out there. Keep an eye out in the MD Forums and right here in the articles section for updates to the project.

[nickdrinkwater]

I like them all, except for '94-'98.

The first one is ok but the other two look like shit IMO.  They don't look like a Mustang should look.

[Nethead]

nickdrinkwater: NickDude, none of them look like Mustangs should look!? The first one's a whale that would have made a decent Torino, but it is the worst Mustang that ever lived!? Utter shit!? The other two are drab enough to have made decent Falcons, or even Chevy Novas...

HEMI666:? No, HemiDude, the Nethead here has never heard of Bjonnes although I should have done!? That's a naturally-aspirated 2-valver he's talkin' 'bout!!? Normally, the Nethead here ain't really into reading about dragracing--although I once was into readin' 'bout it back when I dragraced my Honda CB750 Four. Of course, that was readin' 'bout mo'cycle dragracing.?
Now, I enjoy the current Mustang and its astounding success so much that I read whatever I find about them.? And it gives me something to avoid brain rot while I push the grocery cart up and down the aisles of the supermarket.? The new S197 Mustangs amaze me--Ford seems to have gotten every single detail right for a V8 coupe that started around $25,000 in the Fall of 2004--great looks, great frame/body, great engine, great transmission, great brakes, great suspension, great options (I especially like the 500 and 1000 watt amps available), and a great aftermarket--in the roomiest interior ever offered in a Mustang with fold-down rear seats, one-touch windows, remote mirrors, and air-conditioning standard!? WooHoo!?
Ford's biggest weapon in the upcoming ponywars is that they did not gouge their customers (the same can't be said for some of their dealerships, but by law manufacturers cannot dictate to franchised dealerships what they will charge for the vehicles they sell or the services they provide) with the white-hot S197s--Chevy and Dodge are gonna be in real trouble after the initial halo two years of the Camaro and the Challenger.? DCX (probably quite wisely) refuses to commit to producing Challengers after the first two years, and Chevy is making all the GM mistakes they made with the first Camaro--late intro, a compromised one-size-fits-all frame/body instead of a dedicated frame/body, fear of encroaching on Corvette sales, probably uncompetitive pricing, yada yada yada...The Mustang has no start-up costs to recover because it never went out of production.? The Mustang's one weakness is its V6, and it looks like that weakness will be over by the time the rivals hit the showrooms if the new 3.5 V6 is as great as it's hyped to be.? Most ironic of all, early Mustangs got hand-me-down frames, engines, and running gear from other production Fords--but now it looks like other Fords and maybe Lincolns will get frames, engines, and running gear from production Mustangs!
Now, to change the subject a bit--what have you heard that you believe to be factual about the Hurricane/Boss V8.? Contrary to Motor Trend, I think it was, I don't think there'll be a 302 version of the new engine because the 4.6 is so terrific and easily taken out to 5.0 (about 305 CID).? Ford's got the medium-to-small V8 market well-covered with the 5.4 and 4.6, and the 3.5 should do well in the V6 market.? 6.0 liters seems hardly larger enough to bother, since the 3.70" barrels from the 'Cammer 5.0 would create a 6.1 in the taller deck height 5.4, and improve the bore/stroke ratio to boot.? Realistically, a big block in this day and age is foolish--but if you do it, 7.0 liters is the absolute smallest size that should be offered, and versions up to nine or ten liters should be producible with no changes needed to the block.? That way, if big blocks do catch on, you ain't caught bringing a knife to a gunfight...

[SVT666]

HEMI666:? No, HemiDude, the Nethead here has never heard of Bjonnes although I should have done!? That's a naturally-aspirated 2-valver he's talkin' 'bout!!? Normally, the Nethead here ain't really into reading about dragracing--although I once was into readin' 'bout it back when I dragraced my Honda CB750 Four. Of course, that was readin' 'bout mo'cycle dragracing.?

Yup, it's a naturally aspirated 2V 4.6L.? It's simply amazing.

The Mustang's one weakness is its V6, and it looks like that weakness will be over by the time the rivals hit the showrooms if the new 3.5 V6 is as great as it's hyped to be.?

The 3.5L is going in the Mustang with the facelift in 2009, and in Mustang guise it will be pumping 285 hp (70 hp more then my 96 GT had in stock form).?

Now, to change the subject a bit--what have you heard that you believe to be factual about the Hurricane/Boss V8.? Contrary to Motor Trend, I think it was, I don't think there'll be a 302 version of the new engine because the 4.6 is so terrific and easily taken out to 5.0 (about 305 CID).? Ford's got the medium-to-small V8 market well-covered with the 5.4 and 4.6, and the 3.5 should do well in the V6 market.?

This is what I have heard and read:? The Hurricane (officially the Boss) will be a 4.6L in the GT (350 hp), 5.0L (302) in the Boss version (400-425 hp, but the car will weigh 3100 lbs), and probably a supercharged 5.4L version in the GT500 (550 hp).? There will also be a Bullitt Stang but I haven't heard anything about power for it yet.

6.0 liters seems hardly larger enough to bother, since the 3.70" barrels from the 'Cammer 5.0 would create a 6.1 in the taller deck height 5.4, and improve the bore/stroke ratio to boot.? Realistically, a big block in this day and age is foolish--but if you do it, 7.0 liters is the absolute smallest size that should be offered, and versions up to nine or ten liters should be producible with no changes needed to the block.? That way, if big blocks do catch on, you ain't caught bringing a knife to a gunfight...

You don't need to use a big block to get to 7.0L (Z06), but I still don't see it happening.? Ford has made it very clear since 2003 that they will be supercharging their high performance vehicles such as the Lightning, Harley Davidson pickup, Ford GT, and the GT500.?