Anybody else wish the 2015 were a lot smaller?

[Sardeanie]

Fine with the size, but would just love for it to be lighter. Will be interesting to see if they put the SVT model on a diet...

They should. Gut that thing! No rear seats, Cobra R style. Carbon fiber and aluminum. Less sound deadener and creature comforts. Take it down 300 lbs.

Sponsored

 

[Free Agent]

:barf::barf::barf::barf::barf:

anyway, I like how wide it is. Sexy.

damnnnnn

Baby got back. ;)

For the original question, no I wouldn't want to see it smaller but I wouldn't mind if it were 100 to 200 pounds LIGHTER. But as discussed ad nauseum here on the board that would be cost prohibitive. Any smaller and it would have to become a 2 seater. Needs to stay true to its original roots with a back seat even if it is cramped back there.

 

[scottpe]

They should. Gut that thing! No rear seats, Cobra R style. Carbon fiber and aluminum. Less sound deadener and creature comforts. Take it down 300 lbs.

Well, I wouldn't want one gutted. Hoping the rumors of a 'standard' version and one or more hard core track versions is true. If I got one it would be a daily driver, so I wouldn't want it to be too 'raw.' But I definitely would want there to be a more stripped down, business only version for the serious corner carvers out there.

But in any case I would like to see them put more light weight materials to use. I suspect they will.

 

[Trackaholic]

I am happy with the size. The entire point of considering a Mustang in the first place is to have room in the back for my kids. Get rid of the back seat and you might as well get a real sports car. I wouldn't complain if Ford made one of those too, BTW. But for now, I need the rear seats.

I would be interested in a lighter version. I am planning to see what the SVT versions are like and decide from there. Maybe they can shave off some weight with lighter seats, light weight wheels, CF driveshaft, more aluminum in the suspension, maybe aluminum rear deck.

-T

 

[aspensilver]

It's too big, especially the width. Wider than my fusion which feels like a boat already and the interior width seems really unnecessary. It's not that maneuverable around traffic for DD duties which is disappointing because the track will only be a few days a year. The size is my biggest gripe and why I'm still considering blowing another 10K on an M235I which still seats 4 and is 174.5 in length and 69.8 in in width -- perfect.

75 inches also pretty much guarantees some door dings and scratches parking in standard parking lots. Paranoia time! Obviously not as important as the maneuverability around traffic but still a small concern.

On the baby stuff, people fit baby seats in a 1 series BMW so no it doesn't have to be this big.

 

[Awhiddon81]

All of the rumors I heard about the mustang getting smaller and lighter really got me interested in one for the first time ever. Hard for me to now jump to a new car that is about a foot longer than my wrx and 500 lbs heavier. The more info ford releases the less I'm interested in actually buying one now. I was super excited about buying my first car with a v8, but don't know if I want to give up a lighter nimbler feel for added straight line speed. Maybe I will take a test drive and love it, but I'm doubtful at this point.

 

[SeaStang]

It's too big, especially the width. Wider than my fusion which feels like a boat already and the interior width seems really unnecessary. It's not that maneuverable around traffic for DD duties which is disappointing because the track will only be a few days a year. The size is my biggest gripe and why I'm still considering blowing another 10K on an M235I which still seats 4 and is 174.5 in length and 69.8 in in width -- perfect.

75 inches also pretty much guarantees some door dings and scratches parking in standard parking lots. Paranoia time! Obviously not as important as the maneuverability around traffic but still a small concern.

On the baby stuff, people fit baby seats in a 1 series BMW so no it doesn't have to be this big.

This particularly irks me. The thing was ALREADY wide historically for Mustangs at 73.something and they increased it to 75.x. WHY?! I mean all in the name of what? Lower height? They should have lowered the height anyway, 2000 Mustangs were even lower than their lowered 2015 height. These things just keep getting bigger and wider and heavier and more cartoon looking like all new cars. We don't need 20 inch wheels on a Pony car! Cut the width to 69" and fix the proportions back.

 

[tbonez3858]

It's too big, especially the width. Wider than my fusion which feels like a boat already and the interior width seems really unnecessary. It's not that maneuverable around traffic for DD duties which is disappointing because the track will only be a few days a year. The size is my biggest gripe and why I'm still considering blowing another 10K on an M235I which still seats 4 and is 174.5 in length and 69.8 in in width -- perfect.

75 inches also pretty much guarantees some door dings and scratches parking in standard parking lots. Paranoia time! Obviously not as important as the maneuverability around traffic but still a small concern.

On the baby stuff, people fit baby seats in a 1 series BMW so no it doesn't have to be this big.

The 235 vs Mustang GT choice is really hard for me as well...The 235 is smaller yet has a cavernous back seat compared to the Mustang (go figure). The 235 puts down amazing power as well. Its almost impossible for me to drop 10k more on this car AND know I have a lifetime of dealing with BMWs repairs..If it wasnt for those two things it would be a really tough call. The MPG is really good if you can keep your foot out of it as well.


I think a lot of GT owners are going to be surprised when they line up with a 235 and see tail lights until the speeds get beyond where you should be at on the street.....That car is tracking low 4 second times without a tune or any other mods. It will be easy to get the 235 into the high 3s (0-60) with a tune and a few bolt ons. .BMW, as usual, has massively underrated that car. I've never been a BMW fan but that car is one piece of amazing machinery and the M2 is going to be an all new standard.

 

[SeaStang]

The 235 vs Mustang GT choice is really hard for me as well...The 235 is smaller yet has a cavernous back seat compared to the Mustang (go figure). The 235 is puts down amazing power as well. Its just almost impossible for me to drop 10k more on this car AND know I have a lifetime of dealing with BMWs repairs..If it wasnt for those two things it would be a really tough call. The MPG is really good if you can keep your foot out of it as well.


I think a lot of GT owners are going to be surprised when they line up with a 235 and see tail lights....That car is tracking low 4 second times without a tune or any other mods..BMW, as usual, has massively underrated that car. I've never been a BMW fan but that car is one piece of amazing machinery and the M2 is going to be an all new standard.

I can respect that car but will always need a V8. Just my style. The sound, the hoonery I just wish theyd shrink the damn things a bit more to normal 90% scales.

 

[tbonez3858]

I can respect that car but will always need a V8. Just my style. The sound, the hoonery I just wish theyd shrink the damn things a bit more to normal 90% scales.

Yea there is something about the rumble of a V8...The 10k tack on to the Mustang price makes it a ridiculous option. No way I can find 10k extra in that car..

 

[Hashbrownn]

hmm.. I like big cars... I wouldn't consider purchasing S550 if it had 2 seats or is smaller.
I get claustrophobic in smaller cars. Smallest car I've ever owned is my current Passat.

 

[908ssp]

I am fine with the size it is. I have owned and driven at least a half dozen cars under 2000 lbs. I am too old to live that dangerously anymore.

 

[tbonez3858]

hmm.. I like big cars... I wouldn't consider purchasing S550 if it had 2 seats or is smaller.
I get claustrophobic in smaller cars. Smallest car I've ever owned is my current Passat.

Is it possible that its unnecessarily big? The 235 manages to have a cavernous interior while being a much smaller. Two full sized adults can easily sit in the back of a 235 comfortably. In the Mustang anything over 5'10" is "undo-able" without major discomfort. I know I sound like Im being a fan boy of the 235 but the differences inside the cabin are striking.

 

[SVTFreak]

I'll let you know when I see one in person.

I have a 1800 lb Shelby cobra replica for when I want to drive a small light rocket powered chain saw.

 

[eleanor5oh]

The 235 vs Mustang GT choice is really hard for me as well...The 235 is smaller yet has a cavernous back seat compared to the Mustang (go figure). The 235 puts down amazing power as well. Its almost impossible for me to drop 10k more on this car AND know I have a lifetime of dealing with BMWs repairs..If it wasnt for those two things it would be a really tough call. The MPG is really good if you can keep your foot out of it as well.


I think a lot of GT owners are going to be surprised when they line up with a 235 and see tail lights until the speeds get beyond where you should be at on the street.....That car is tracking low 4 second times without a tune or any other mods. It will be easy to get the 235 into the high 3s (0-60) with a tune and a few bolt ons. .BMW, as usual, has massively underrated that car. I've never been a BMW fan but that car is one piece of amazing machinery and the M2 is going to be an all new standard.

I think you are overestimating the bmw. R&T managed a [email protected]

http://www.roadandtrack.com/car-reviews/first-drives/10-things-you-need-to-know-2014-bmw-m235i

While not slow, its still behind a (5year old) 2010 Audi S4 which traps closer to 109mph.
Still far from the expected 113-114mph trap of the GT.

Sponsored