Carbon copy?

Front/top
http://www.allfordmustangs.com/forum..._23_wl-med.jpg

Rear
http://www.allfordmustangs.com/forum..._91_wl-med.jpg

Side
http://www.autonews.com/files/2004NA...s/DSCN0441.jpg

This car is unmistakably modern. It may borrow some obvious cues from the past (mostly shape of front), but it also continues on where the Sn95 left off. A good mix of the old and new, and not just the old.

Where do you go from there? Quite simple. You just treat it like any other redesign. Use the current style as a starting point, add new cues, while changing a few others. It really isn't that hard.

 

I hate to agree with the Ford guys, but I do on this one. The Mustang has always had styling cues from previous models. However to say the 2005 is a carbon copy and not an evolutionary homage styling exercise is a bit over doing it. Heck, even the GT is 4-inches taller than the original GT-40.

 

No offense taken! I think I'm being misunderstood though. With improvements in engines and suspension, etc...you get different designs. That's why cars from the 40's don't look like cars from the 20's. However, the BASIC design in still there. Four wheels, motor and someplace to sit! Cars are faster today thus require a different design to make them more aerodynamic. Better suspensions help lower a car to the ground giving it better handling and changing it's looks. Designers take these things into consideration.

What I was trying to get at is that some designs run out of new ideas, ways to keep the same shape looking different AND looking good. The Vette is a great example. They've lowered it, stretched it, shortened it, etc...but it still has the basic design of a Vette from the late 60's or early 70's. They've designed it so much that it now looks like a Viper. The Viper had the same basic design and it's a modern car! Now you have two cars that look like they were made from the same company. Is what I'm saying making any sense? I've never been good at expressing my thoughts in words...lol.

The Intrepid's "cab forward" design is somewhat different. But is it much different from an early 90's Camaro except that it has four doors? The Camaro's engine is halfway under the hood too!

The 300C and CTS both borrow design cues from the past as well. Being edgy isn't new and neither is a Rolls Royce look.

I haven't seen anything really "new" in a long time. I can count really high. I can design something truly new, but I seriously doubt anyone would buy it. Why? Because it would most likely be ugly and crazy looking. Designers have to design cars that look good and that means they have to stick to certain shapes, features, characteristics, blah blah blah.

 

Trying to digest all this, I get confused.

You'll make a point in saying you do not feel Mustang is "retro", yet you do not find CTS, for example, to be "new".

Obviously, the 4 wheels, engine, and place to sit arguement makes a degree of sense, but unless we start driving 6-wheeled vehicles, this will never change.

It is impossible to "run out of ideas" though... like I said, it's liek saying "I ran out of numbers... I can't count any higher."

As for making cars look different, I think it is not as hard as you are inplying... heck, look at Impala and Monte Carlo... not only are they both "4 wheels, and engine and a place to sit", but they actually share the same platform, and they nothing alike...

 

I'm not saying you can run out of designs. But good designs are getting harder to come by. I rarely see a car today that sticks out of the crowd. In the 40's, 50's and 60's that wasn't a problem. The 70's weren't too bad and the 80's got a little worse. But by the 90's most cars really got plain and boring. Like I said, I could come up with a new car design, but I doubt it would sell. Anyone on here want to try and design a car that most people would like and buy? Oh, BTW, it can't have any styling cues from past vehicles or the same basic shape of most cars. Good luck.

 

Sure, the car is modern... but it a modern rendition of a 67 or so mustang... Its not just borrowing some cues, it has em all... with a few modern touches to update the looks and smooth out the lines here and there. And it looks great! I would consider buying one to tell you the truth.

but for the next gen mustang, according to you, should be a more modern version of an already modern version of a 67 or so mustang? Do you see what Im getting at? As for adding cues to it, I dont know what other cues it could add. Me, personally I am excited about this car, and even more excited to see what they do next... but I cant help but be curious as to wiether they are going to carry on this retro design into the next generation, or actually come out with a forward moving original design, instead of a gorgeous modern rendition of a past model. There, Ive said it as nicely as possible.

 

papertarget,
do you consider the pt cruiser or thunderbird to be retro? if so, than i don't see how the new mustang couldn't be considered retro. I personally like it, and think that it looks modern in the same way that the pt cruiser looks modern (i like the pt cruiser as well)...but they are still retro (to me). It doesn't really matter, but i'm having a hard time understanding how the mustang is not seen as a retro design, unless we just have a difference in opinion on the definition of retro.

 

There is a difference from lets say a 2004 mustang having styling cues from the past, and the new 2005 mustang.

The current mustang looks like a new car using old styling cues as to where the 2005 mustang looks like an old car using new styling cues... Im not saying its bad, but I think there is a difference. And I want to know where to from there? Do you move forward with another retro design based off the previous retro design or what? I dont know... Im sure you dont either, but its an interesting question.

 

Viper was modeled after the daytona coupe if i'm not mistaken. You'll see some obvious cues. Long hood, ducktail rear, side exhaust, etc....

http://members.aol.com/coupechuck/PHOTOS/2601-12.jpg

Then there's the 911 which rarely changes from decade to decade.

I don't think its about newness. It's more about nostalgia, and heritage. I look at the new Mustang GT and i don't simply see a retro car or a carbon copy, i see a modern car with some cues from its past. I see a car with a good mix of the old and the new.

Is it breaking the mold? Maybe not. Then again, It doesn't try hard to be too futuristic like the cars of today. Cars today either look like doorstops, jellybeans, or origamis. Cars look too much alike. The 300c is starting to look like RR, Lincoln LS like a BMW, Viper like the s2000, vette like the viper, NSX like the enzo, etc… Only design I would really consider ground breaking would be the Cadillac, and that’ll get old after a while. Retro isn't ground breaking either, but nothing else really is.

 

If using the dictionary definition of retro, then yes, the Mustang is retro. But then so are a lot of other cars (Vette, Viper, Shelby Cobra, GT(40), Bug, PT, T-Bird, all pickup trucks, jeeps, etc...). They all use styling cues from the past which is retro. Evolution, in its truest definition, works both ways. Since the 2005 Mustang has design cues from the 1994-2004 Mustang, why isn't it considered a modern rendition of those cars? I consider more than just the looks though when considering something retro or modern. I consider chassis, engine, etc...all the parts that make up the car.

BTW, I looked up the definition of "modern" and guess what? The 2005 Mustang meets the criteria! LOL

 

To me the big difference in defineing if it's retro is how closely it resembles a previous car. The new 'Stang, Beetle, T-Bird, Cruiser, SSR, and the like are all blantantly retro. They all are a carbon copy, spitting image of a previously existing design/style with a few modern aero tweaks added.

That's a huge difference from just having some heritage cues. The 2005 Stang, as a spitting image of a '68, is retro; the '94-'04 with it's gapping non-functional side scoop was not.

Perhaps if Ford proceedes at the same 'retro-evolution' as in '68, the next car's final design review will be a white model in a January blizzard

Also, the retro discussion never got past styling. I for one am pretty glad (wasn't around for 4 wheel drum brakes and carburators...and I think I'm pretty lucky).

 

I looked it up too...I seriously do not think it comes close.

 

Modern: of the present or recent times; specif., a) of or having to do with the latest styles, methods, or ideas;

I consider the technology of this car and it's design as modern. It is a 2005 Mustang which is "of the present or recent times."

 

1.) Characteristic or expressive of recent times or the present;
2.) contemporary or up-to-date: a modern lifestyle; a modern way of thinking.
3.) Of or relating to a recently developed or advanced style, technique, or technology: modern art; modern medicine.
Avant-garde; experimental.

The tech is modern, the style is not. It's clearly a plagerized '68. It's not experimental, avant-garde, nor advanced.

It is as retro as the Beetle, 'Cruiser, and SSR.

 

I understand, but fail to make the connection. My 94 has the dual pod dash design of the 60's stangs, does that make the dash the same? The first gen Viper was modeled after the daytona coupe, does that make them the same? Something could have the general cues of something and not be the same or as you put it be a “carbon copy”.

You said it is basiclly the old car with a “few modern touches to smooth out the lines here and there”. I disagree. The differences go beyond just lines. The whole shape and size is different. The cars have very difference stances, etc… The similarities are there, but so are the obvious differences.

Again, i'll post pics. I’ll use the 68 Mustang GT as a comparo.

Rear:
Old: http://www.billsclassiccars.com/cars/68redgt_8.jpg
New: http://www.allfordmustangs.com/forum..._91_wl-med.jpg

Front/Top:
Old: http://www.billsclassiccars.com/cars/68redgt_1.jpg
New: http://www.allfordmustangs.com/forum..._23_wl-med.jpg

Side:
Old: http://www.cars-on-line.com/11900/68must11967-A.jpg
New: http://www.autonews.com/files/2004NA...s/DSCN0441.jpg

By saying it is a modern rendition of the 67, you’re implying that it is infact “different”. But I see a lot of Sn95 in this car as well, something that can’t be found on the 60’s stangs. You fail to note that.

I see what you’re getting at, but like I said earlier; it is just like any other redesign. They have to address the same questions and concerns like any other redesigns.

For starters, you could smooth out the front, give it sealed/flush headlights, slightly lower the front bumper, move the fogs down to where they were on the concept, racken the windshield to give it that sleeker look, hood is bulging so I would flatten that as well and have it taper towards the front, bring back the Sn95 scoops on the side and hood or the ram air look of the concepts hood, make the rear a little wider and give it wider tires. One can also explore the option of a hatch, or stay with the trunk style. Change the rear taillights, change the rear bumper so it isn’t sticking out so much, and bring back the “Mustang GT” embossing on the rear bumper as well. Also, the general lines of this car are creased, one could smoothen than out. The 94-98 and 99-04 styles had the same general lines, but the creased look gave the 99+ a different look. That alone can drastically change the looks.

This is just off the top of my head, and is just a refresher. If I was half decent with photochop, and had access to the software, I could have recreated the 05 mustang into what I would have liked. I would keep what I liked, changed what I didn’t, while adding a little creativity by also doing some new additional cues whether borrowing it from the most recent models or something completely new off the top of my head.

Edit: have you seen the new Shelby Cobra. Very much like the old car, but a lot different as well. There's an old design that has a very modern look. How did they design it? they used the old shelby as a basis, while adding a lot of new cues. Same can be done with 05 mustang.

http://www.maximum-cars.com/Cars/Car.php?carnumber=528