Saw the 2003 Cobra at the auto show, and it looked amazing. yet, it did not get much attention, considering it was next to the 05 GT concept Stang.

 

You do realize that there's a difference? My 94 mustang has the "Vibrant red" paint which is orange under certain lights and angles and red in others. I don't think the Teal f-bodies are any different.

Red:http://mustanggt.homestead.com/files...MasMustang.jpg

Red and Orange: http://mustanggt.homestead.com/files...asMustang2.jpg

Orange: http://mustanggt.homestead.com/files...eforefront.jpg

Does the Mystic Teal f-body do anything different?

If it makes you sleep better at night, think what you want to think
.

 

Ok, I was not aware that color existed. So does it make you sleep better at night knowing Ford spawned Chromallusion(sp?) on a million bad-taste pimpmobiles?

 

A number of people jumped on me for suggesting GM mix things up with offering decal packages, stripe packages, or two-tone packages, etc. on low-production submodels or limited editions, a la Mach, Boss, etc. Anyone ever seen the 83 Daytona T/A or 82 Z28 Pace car or the black/gold red/gold white/blue etc. Firebirds of the 70s? That's what I was getting at. People said it was too retro, too lame, too tacky .. talk about LAME and TACKY! color-shifting paint has got to be the most useless painting idea I've ever heard of when it comes to cars.. jeez, do something better with those research dollars.... That red/orange effect is so vague and slight, it's something 99% of us wouldn't even notice going down the road, unless we knew to look for it. Is that really worth paying for? Might as well put neon lights and independently-spinning hubcaps on there and call it a K-mart special.. Companies like Phoenix Graphix would not be flourishing if decals and color variations were lame and tacky, when they are in fact an integral part of history in distinguishing submodels from each other and adding visual appeal.

gt

 

While I agree the color-shifting paint can look 'tacky', I'm betting that it is the paint manufacturers who R&D this stuff and then present it to the auto manufacturer's to see if they get a bite.... so the money spent developing it probably doesn't come so much from the car people... but I could be wrong, I have no proof.

 

Dude, i don't care whether GM or Ford was first. It's just that you jumped on me for quoting the damn article. The article said the Cobra was the first car with color shifting tech. I personaly don't care, but i thought it was interesting enough to note it. If you want to refute that, argue with the writers, not me. And i'm assuming Mystic Teal Metallic f-bodies would fall under what you'd classify as "bad-taste pimpmobiles"?

 

Ford/SVT is only making 1000 Mystichrome Cobra's and they will sell everyone, probably over sticker too! Don't get mad at Ford for this they atlest kept the car going and even in the face of huge corporate losses, and no direct competiton, they still decided to do the 03 CObra project. If GM had half these guts we'd already have a 5th Gen Camaro and probably a Chevelle too!

 

No, paint that only shifts two colors doesn't look bad.

 

As I child of the 1980s I feel differently about factory stripes and decals. I'd go so far as to say they don't belong on any car, especially mine. The decal is an automotive anethema. I had stick-on pinstripes, I hate two tones, and definately hate decals.

However, I'm a big fan of well executed custom paintwork. I've seen recent examples of hand painted pinstripes, especially on trucks, that are as a beautifully executed as work from the 50s. I also remember flames, fades and airbrushed scenes that were pure art.

On the other hand, I'm sick of adhesive badges that fall off with age and stripes that strip off. "Color shift" paints are a welcome distraction from cheapo visual cues. My only objection is on the grounds of repairability. If "white pearl coat" is impossible to repair without a complete (and expensive!) full repaint job, "Mystic" Mustangs be even greater accident damage headaches.

To a collector who'll covet, and garage, a 2004 Mustang Cobra for many years, Ford is providing a nice custom look. Kudos.

 

I guess different people pick up different cues from the past, etc.

just look at the 2004 Z16 photo.. little variations like that are all I'm talking about. Obviously someone there agrees with me, since they're making it the way they are.

I mean, honestly, do you enjoy the fact that a 4th gen Formula is indistinguishable from a base Firebird other than a badge or two? Ridiculous. Oh yeah, let me guess.. the exhaust pipe is different..? How do you tell a Z28 from a base camaro from a distance, you gotta look at the wheel width? I mean come on, seriously, the cookie-cutter mentality where everything must look the same is just flawed.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand that variety will lead to wider appeal. That's what I'm encouraging. Joe Blow may like a dull bland monochrome F-body with plastic hubcaps, Jow Schmoe might also like F-bodys but with an unusual look with bright colors and two tone and who knows what else. Why is the 97 30th anniv Camaro so sought after? Is it really *vastly* different from the rest of the LS1's that year? No, it's probably the fact that it doesn't look like all the rest of 'em, due to exclusive white/orange scheme. There's nothing special about it except the look, and the serial number. That's it. The look. Same with the 99 30th T/A. There are people I know who would never consider owning a 4th gen, but they'd love one of those 2 cars, for example. Not because it's a special edition, but because it looks unique, like something you don't see every day. If GM had suceeded in doing little things like that to regular edition cars and not just ltd editions, they'd sell more of 'em.

If you're saying visual variety is bad, then you're just on the wrong side of logic on this one.

 

Mine changes color from Dark Grey to Metallic Purple ... factory option in 94. All depends when/how/what time of day you look at it. Gotta love it!