Automotive News / Industry / Future Vehicle Discussion Automotive news and discussion about upcoming vehicles

2011 Mustang NOTCH

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Mar 22, 2009 | 08:22 AM
  #16  
WERM's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 1999
Posts: 1,873
From: South Jersey
Originally Posted by blackflag
They thought it sucked, too.

Fox body Mustang was a complete p.o.s.
You'll find far more people who disagree with you than agree with you. It sold reasonably well for about 12 years. Several pop songs in the 80's / 90's made references to it. Hardly the mark of a "P.O.S."
Old Mar 22, 2009 | 08:30 AM
  #17  
z28 justin's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 427
From: Perrysburg, OH
I don't see how fox body Mustangs suck. They're easy to modify and are far lighter than our beloved Camaros. The notches in stock form with a 5.0L were around 3000lbs. The notches had stronger bodies than the hatches of the time. If I wanted to build an all out drag car, I'd join the masses and build a notch Mustang. I like my cars to be able to handle a little bit too though.

Anyway, to the OP, it's a good interpretation, I just got the wrong idea when looking at the thread title.
Old Mar 22, 2009 | 08:44 AM
  #18  
guionM's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 13,713
From: The Golden State
5thGenII, you are a very, very talented artist.

You are 100% correct that ALL Mustangs (at least up till the current one) have either been exclusively or had available notchbacks. Some peoples car knowledge evaporates when you go back more than a few years.

But with that said, the roofline on your drawing does look very Mopar-like. If not the current Challenger, then certainly like the Venom concept of late last decade. Perhaps use the 60s Mustang or even the post 98 Stang for inspiration... just a suggestion.

Originally Posted by blackflag
The fox body Mustangs SUCKED.
Originally Posted by 5thGenII
Except to most of the several million people who owned and drove them.
... and to the bigger aftermarket community than Camaro had.

.... and the media and public that loved the fact that for the price of a V6 RS, you could get a very well equpted, if not nearly loaded Mustang GT V8.
Old Mar 22, 2009 | 01:29 PM
  #19  
96_Camaro_B4C's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 3,650
From: Indianapolis, IN
Originally Posted by blackflag
They thought it sucked, too.

There were millions of Tauruses and K-Cars sold, too. That doesn't mean they didn't suck.

Fox body Mustang was a complete p.o.s.
News flash: The Fox bodies didn't "suck."

And the Taurus most certainly did not (and does not, if you want to count the reborn version).

Have a nice day.
Old Mar 22, 2009 | 04:07 PM
  #20  
bossco's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,977
From: SeVa
Originally Posted by blackflag
The fox body Mustangs SUCKED.
Hotrod material, a foxbody is down right feathery in weight (its not hard to get under 3,000 pounds), easy to wrench on (the car is incredibly basic) plus the monster aftermarket (which can address alot of the short comings in the car).
Old Mar 22, 2009 | 08:20 PM
  #21  
5thGen's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 547
Originally Posted by guionM
5thGenII, you are a very, very talented artist.

But with that said, the roofline on your drawing does look very Mopar-like. If not the current Challenger, then certainly like the Venom concept of late last decade. Perhaps use the 60s Mustang or even the post 98 Stang for inspiration... just a suggestion.
I did not want to change anything on the 2010 that I did not have to. That said other than the roof, the tops of the 1/4s and the trunk were changed, that's it. Also, I did look at a lot of different model years and when I made it more upright like the earlier cars, it really does not flow at all. also if it extended back anymore, it was a shortened fastback.

IMHO, the way I did it flows rather well with the rest of the design, makes a bit classier and an altogether different car. I could make a few more attempts at diferent angles and so forth, but as it gets more upright it interupts the sweeping lines of the rest of the body.

If you'f ever seen a 1970 cuda shell being restored, at first glance you'd have a hard time guessing what it is. The c-pillar the way it's designed just works. fatten it up and it does not look right, make it thinner, it does not look right. More slant and...... hopefully you get the picture.

Thanks for the compliments.

About the fox body comments, I've owned 6 myself. I kinda like them due mainly to large aftermarket and the ability to cheaply turn them into whatever you want. Plus they were the original "tuner" car with a turbo-4 in 1979.

Hopefully my income will pick up soon so I can get a Camaro.
Old Mar 22, 2009 | 09:59 PM
  #22  
blackflag's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 213
To all you haters...

If Ford tried to sell a Fox body today... do you think they'd sell a single one?

I rest my case.

Compared to an '88 Camaro, it was a great car.
Old Mar 22, 2009 | 10:44 PM
  #23  
bossco's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,977
From: SeVa
Originally Posted by blackflag
To all you haters...

If Ford tried to sell a Fox body today... do you think they'd sell a single one?

I rest my case.

Compared to an '88 Camaro, it was a great car.
Well, they did sell the Fox for 25 years (1979 to 2004), so if you consider "today" to mean in the last 5 years, then yeah, they did sell'em "today".

I'm willing to bet they could (however I suspect the Fox car was at the very end of its life due to regulatory compliance), a 3200-3300 pound car with a 315hp V8 in the low 20s would appeal to alot of people - not saying it would be a very good car, but I bet it would sell.
Old Mar 23, 2009 | 12:45 AM
  #24  
blackflag's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 213
Originally Posted by bossco
Well, they did sell the Fox for 25 years (1979 to 2004), so if you consider "today" to mean in the last 5 years, then yeah, they did sell'em "today".
In what universe does "today" mean 5 years ago?

Originally Posted by bossco
not saying it would be a very good car...
Thank you.
Old Mar 23, 2009 | 12:55 AM
  #25  
HAZ-Matt's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 4,000
From: TX Med Ctr
I kind of like it. Might buy it over the real one, even though I like the fastback better on the 60's models.
Old Mar 23, 2009 | 09:20 AM
  #26  
5thGen's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 547
I don't think there needs to be a debate, especialy here.

Some people (usually those who never owned or wanted to own a fox) don't like foxes. The boxy-foxes sold from 1979 until 1993, the sold over 100k units I believe for every year.

The fox offered what no one else was offering, a cheap muscle car. When you were on a budget, the Mustang was cheaper than the Camaro and had a more usuable back seat, insurance was lower and the aftermarket support was second to none.

Some people didn't like chevelles or camaros either.

Other than that, thanks for the compliments on the 2011 Notch.
Old Mar 23, 2009 | 10:23 AM
  #27  
bossco's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,977
From: SeVa
Originally Posted by blackflag
In what universe does "today" mean 5 years ago?
Depends on your reference? I'm guessing for you "today" must mean current model, ergo any previous model must be crap in your eyes



Thank you.
Doesn't mean the cars were crap, the fox cars were reliable and the materials (like alot of cars) held up pretty well depending on how well they were taken car of and what conditions they were exposed too. They served their purpose well and even on the context of "today" can serve as adequate transportation.

Enough dwelling on that, I get a distinct impression your like a gaggle of my Chevy buddies, these guys operate in 2 modes; If its brand x stuff they junk it because it isn't GM (and not worth a crap in thier eyes), if they stumble across a brand-x guy looking to get a deal on the stuff, then its like gold to them, but not worth it in the brand-x guys mind, so they end up junking it because even the brand-x guy didn't want it.
Old Mar 23, 2009 | 11:21 AM
  #28  
guionM's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 13,713
From: The Golden State
Originally Posted by blackflag
In what universe does "today" mean 5 years ago?



Thank you.
In your's obviously......

Originally Posted by blackflag
To all you haters...

If Ford tried to sell a Fox body today... do you think they'd sell a single one?

I rest my case.

Compared to an '88 Camaro, it was a great car.
You might want to get real.... for a change!

The Fox body was last made over 15 years ago!

Everyone would be extremely hard pressed to name ANY cars from the 80s that would sell a single model today. Yet you critisize someone for referencing back 5 years ago...... ah... yea... uh huh... right.

You don't like fox Mustangs (despite even hard core Camaro fans having an appriciation of them) regardless as to the facts, and you apparently are actively hoping General Motors crashes and burns.

It's pretty funny listening to YOU of all people, talking about haters!

Last edited by guionM; Mar 23, 2009 at 11:24 AM.
Old Mar 23, 2009 | 02:16 PM
  #29  
blackflag's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 213
Originally Posted by guionM
Everyone would be extremely hard pressed to name ANY cars from the 80s that would sell a single model today.
That's because there were virtually no good cars made by the Big 3 in the late 70's, early 80's. It was pretty much the low point in automotive history, wasn't it? Are we going to pretend it wasn't?

Probably a few exceptions, like the Dodge Caravan, or something...

Hater.
Old Mar 23, 2009 | 02:20 PM
  #30  
96_Camaro_B4C's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 3,650
From: Indianapolis, IN
Originally Posted by blackflag
That's because there were virtually no good cars made by the Big 3 in the late 70's, early 80's.
Bull crap.



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:42 PM.