BluFlash5x8
Well-Known Member
And all the terrible colors. That Crimson is an aweful redish-brown.... How about a plumb or purple.
Sponsored
I personally love the contrast of a black painted roof.If I wanted a black roof I would have bought a black car.
I gladly take the 10hp hit by being able to run 87 octane fuel. Running 91 octane is likely only a 2-3 hp degradation. You have to remember that the camaro demands premium fuel while the mustang allows it's owners a choice. I love having the option.I'm not happy that there's no power ratings, even though Ford tends to overstate them, and be the ONLY manufacturer to rate its performance vehicles on 93 fuel,hence the over-rated power, when everyone else is rated at 91 fuel. So tobe realistic to the competition, deduct 10-12 hp & tq from the release numbers for real world comparison. Plus, with the added 45-60 lbs with new standard features, normally found on premium models, is Ford going for a heavy weight record? We want a lighter, more nimble car not a barge for boulevard cruising. And are the Dull, Dim DRL LED's going to be addressed at some point? The front of the car is so, lifeless. Nobody to date has made an effort to "brighten" this car's weakness, its dim Almost to skinny, tri-bar DRL's. I suspect Ford will be playing catch up with Camaro yet again, with 440 hp on 91 fuel. It is currently 425 hp. And 300 hp in ecostang. The weight increase will finally push a base mustang gt to 2009 GT500 weight, at 3825 lbs. My 2013 GT stick was 3622 lbs full fluids on the scale. Add me in and it was 3802 lbs. I wish Ford would focus on their customers and not waste billions of $$ on autonomous vehicles and Artificial Intelligence. This is the new world order coming to fruition.
Yeah, I'll take same alcantara door inserts!i can totally see people ordering the carbon package panels individually from ford parts
Yep, same here, just adds a nice overall look to it in my opinion. Everybody has their likes, dislikes and preferences, and that just adds variety to the world.I personally love the contrast of a black painted roof.
To each his own.
Your spot on. Albeit it's unfortunate the black painted roof costs so much. The contrast with most of the colors looks awesome. When you see one in the real it's a real head turner. The ruby red with black roof is a stunner. To bad they're making it part of the package as I don't want a lot of them running around as there will be too many which will take away from the uniquness :(I personally love the contrast of a black painted roof.
To each his own.
I have not seen it in person, but the pictures look like the color of a Dr. Pepper can, which is a color I like, but doesn't seem right on a Mustang. Except the convertible for some reason. That looks pretty good.And all the terrible colors. That Crimson is an aweful redish-brown.... How about a plumb or purple.
15-17 Mustang GT is 435hp, Ecoboost is 310hp. 20hp bump for the 18+ is not impossible, but yeah they should use a lighter weight frame like the new f-150.I'm not happy that there's no power ratings, even though Ford tends to overstate them, and be the ONLY manufacturer to rate its performance vehicles on 93 fuel,hence the over-rated power, when everyone else is rated at 91 fuel. So tobe realistic to the competition, deduct 10-12 hp & tq from the release numbers for real world comparison. Plus, with the added 45-60 lbs with new standard features, normally found on premium models, is Ford going for a heavy weight record? We want a lighter, more nimble car not a barge for boulevard cruising. And are the Dull, Dim DRL LED's going to be addressed at some point? The front of the car is so, lifeless. Nobody to date has made an effort to "brighten" this car's weakness, its dim Almost to skinny, tri-bar DRL's. I suspect Ford will be playing catch up with Camaro yet again, with 440 hp on 91 fuel. It is currently 425 hp. And 300 hp in ecostang. The weight increase will finally push a base mustang gt to 2009 GT500 weight, at 3825 lbs. My 2013 GT stick was 3622 lbs full fluids on the scale. Add me in and it was 3802 lbs. I wish Ford would focus on their customers and not waste billions of $$ on autonomous vehicles and Artificial Intelligence. This is the new world order coming to fruition.
The alacantra does it for me, its a throwup between the engine turned and carbon.Can I just say I love you for posting this?? That Carbon Sport package is sweet.
My planned order so far:
2018 GT Premium Manual
Orange Fury
401A
GT Performance Package
Carbon Sport Interior Package
Magneride
Dual Mode Exhaust
Reverse Sensors
Can't wait to see pricing.
If you can't afford 93 octane maybe you should buy a Focus SE.I gladly take the 10hp hit by being able to run 87 octane fuel. Running 91 octane is likely only a 2-3 hp degradation. You have to remember that the camaro demands premium fuel while the mustang allows it's owners a choice. I love having the option.
Keep in mind too, the S550 mustang has been killing it in sales since day one. Judging by sales, Ford gave it's customers exactly what they wanted. Without the S550, I would still be looking at used foxbodys or late 60's mustangs.
I tell you what I don't want. I don't want a cramped interior, tiny trunk opening and shit visibility to save 100lbs of weight...nor would I want a significant price increase to offset said weight.
Some states don't sell 93. Best we can find in Utah is 91 unless you go to an airport or racetrack.If you can't afford 93 octane maybe you should buy a Focus SE.
I'm pretty sure that 91 will work a whole lot better than 87.Some states don't sell 93. Best we can find in Utah is 91 unless you go to an airport or racetrack.
Those numbers are with 93 octane. States like Cali don't have 93 octane unfortunately. We have to settle for 91 octane at best. Because of that the HP numbers for those of us in those states are not what you quoted. :frusty:15-17 Mustang GT is 435hp, Ecoboost is 310hp. 20hp bump for the 18+ is not impossible, but yeah they should use a lighter weight frame like the new f-150.