Detroit News has one picture from NAIAS that shows 2 Mustangs on stage. The caption reads: "The 2009 Mustang line is unveiled by Ford".

http://multimedia.detnews.com/pix/ph...008/index5.htm

Is there something different about the 2009 Mustang? Why can't I find more info on it? Not that I care, but that pic makes me wonder what's up with the Mustang.

 

We're in the 2009 model year right now.

Ford will have a redesigned Mustang for 2010 model year, currently scheduled for spring next year.

I'm guessing Ford is shortening the 2008 Mustang model year and bringing out the 2009s a little early.

Nothing dramatic or new in all this.

The 2002 Camaro and Firebird began production 2 months early and ran about a month or so later than traditional model year runs. The 1965 Mustang went on sale in April 1964 (there's no such thing as a 1964 1/2 Mustang).

The SN95 Mustang came out a month ahead of schedule (December 03 versus January 04), and was called a 1994 although it was supposed to be a '95.... hence the chassis name SN95.

 

the 09 mustangs have an optional factory glass roof, with a cloth shade, thats the only real difference that I know of. 08 got the HIDS, nav screen, etc.

 

I was talking to a sales guy at work the other day and he said he spec'd a Shelby out with SYNC as well, but I was under the impression that Mustangs couldn't be had with SYNC?????

Somewhat good news on the Challengers they were getting in (as long as somebody doesn't go crazy), they were gonna auction off the Challengers starting at MSRP.

 

No, it was just the new additions for 2008, those being the new bullitt, the glass roof option, and the shelby gt500kr

 

I think I see KITT.

 

SYNC isn't on the mustang yet...unfortunately.

Probably 2010

 

Not an option I would really miss myself, would have rather had something in between the GT and the GT500 power wise, like a 3v 5.4 making something north of 350hp.

Speaking of mod motors, if they have a 5.0 mod I guess its back to a cast iron block to get to 5.0 liters (hopefully in lightweight for iron CGI), FRPP recently introduced a cast iron 5.0 mod block that weighs about 70 pounds more than its aluminum cousin, but offers the relibility needed when going to a 3.70" bore on the cheap.

 

I've never really understood how this term became prevalent over "early build" or similar. I mean, like you said, they're all titled as 1965s. The very early cars have a lot of differences, so I understand the need to make the distinction, but it doesn't change the model year.

Typically anytime after the first of the year you can call a car the next model year and a lot of times manufacturers do that when there's some kind of significant change, vs. just a digit in the VIN and some new paint colors.

 

What kind of power outputs? Can they get the auto cars to get more than 23mpg? Atleast they have been running on 87.

Ford reported a 50% take on models offering Sync. I would get it, free notification of an impact can lower insurance rates, we get a $4.00 per month discount because of onstar. AND its FREE after the initial cost.

 

The refreshed Mustang GT is getting a bump in power to 350 or 360hp to help it compete with the V8 Camaro.

 

It'll be more of a 'based on' the 4.6 or 5.4,
rather than 'made from'

 

Info please?

 

when you consider that the 3v is realistically making like 320hp as is(assuming 15 percent drive line loss), a bump to 350 isn't unrealistic. It would make sense that after 5 years there is a minor increase, especially given the introduction of some, you know, competition.

 

Heh, if they'd just spread the bore centers out a bit. Going from a 3.55 tp 3.70 bore is good for a 20 or 30 cfm increase in cylinderhead flow on the 4v motors by itself, wonder what a nice 4.0 or 4.125" bore would do (although I imagine any really big increase in bore might drive the ring package up higher on the piston???)