deal breakers

[thePill]

It didn't take long for the front to grow on me. It looks like an evolved '14 and is exactly the fascia I was looking for. I threw the Mach 5 chop together, which was heavily fascia based, and people liked it. I agree, the Porsche brand in general is ugly, but a cute ugly that has grown timeless. I wanted the Mustang to look like a Mustang but desperately want a World Class American sports coupe... There just isn't one... There is serious competition coming on top of the existing competitors...

Anyone who looked at the 2011 EVOS and thought "No, thats NOT a Mustang" needs to have their eyes checked. As for the EVOS/Fusion/Mustang hate, Ford didn't even file for new Fusion patents until late 2011... The EVOS was already in Frankfurt and since FOrd has indeed been working the Mustang for 5 years, I believe the EVOS was indeed, the face (and future) of the S550. Now, I know there were some inside FOrd pushing for a unique Mustang look, and they were not pretending. I assume the internal struggle for the "Kinetic 2.0" EVOS look was lost and the look was adopted throughout. I'm not mad at that, I also want a Taurus or Fusion... I can't stop looking at the new Fusion and I loved the Tuxedo Taurus/Niagara Falls road test. Everyone loves the Focus, it's about to be named the "Greatest Car Built in the Last 25 Years" in the UK... http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ars-named-greatest-vehicle-past-25-years.html

Styling would have been a deal breaker but, that is not the case.

Weight... If Ford took the S550's weight down so they could add in all the performance options standard, then yeah. To be honest, the Stingrays Z51 package adds 150lbs and the electronic interior crap took back those 90lbs saved in the chassis and put it right back on.

However, design is one thing... Engineering is another. The design is always limited by the engineering. The Mustang's Chief Engineer said, and I qoute...

We are on a "crusade" to make the next Mustang lighter. How much can we get? I don't know, were still looking at it (2010). Believes 200lbs is within reach.

You can see the interview from 2010 here.

http://www.mustang6g.com/forums/showthread.php?t=653

So stop cryin' about the weight.

Sponsored

 

[Norm Peterson]

Deal breakers . . .

Lack of a conventional manual transmission. It wouldn't matter how good the rest of the car is if it doesn't have a real clutch pedal and a shifter that moves real mechanical bits inside the transmission. We don't even equip our 4-door sedans with automatics.

EPAS with no way to turn the ANC and drift-pull compensations off. Ditto for hill start assist if Ford decides to follow Chevy's lead in making it non-defeatable.

Wheel wells too tight to add wider wheels and tires. Standard wheel diameters bigger than 18" unless the rotors are 15", in which case 19".

MFT, SYNC, and touch screens as standard equipment, and anything that requires me to navigate through a menu. I have zero use for the first two, have at best two nanoseconds worth of patience for the third, and want to get as far away from the last one as possible when I'm in my car.

Weight. It really does need to get at least down to the 3500-ish that my '08 is claimed to weigh. That's entirely heavy enough for a 2+2 car.

Size. Let's not go any longer than the current 107" wheelbase or taller than about 55". Outside those numbers is bigger sedan country than where I want to be shopping when I'm actively looking for 4 doors.


Norm

 

[SStormtrooPer]

Ditto for hill start assist if Ford decides to follow Chevy's lead in making it non-defeatable.

I must be behind the times, Mustang has this now?

I just don't get it. What happened to the days when getting behind the steering wheel of a 1 1/2 to 2 ton machine required a person to be competent in how to operate it?

I guess this goes along with the ones that need their car to park for them...

 

[Norm Peterson]

Many if not most current manual transmission cars now have this, and the mfrs didn't particularly go out of their way to advertise it but kind of snuck it in. As of this moment, this new little nanny can be defaulted to 'off' in the Mustang and in at least some of the Dodges by some clumsy sequence or other (but you only have to do it once).



Yeah . . . and dumbing down the driving results in . . .


wait for it . . .

even dumber drivers.


Norm

 

[Thed]

Many if not most current manual transmission cars now have this, and the mfrs didn't particularly go out of their way to advertise it but kind of snuck it in. As of this moment, this new little nanny can be defaulted to 'off' in the Mustang and in at least some of the Dodges by some clumsy sequence or other (but you only have to do it once).



Yeah . . . and dumbing down the driving results in . . .


wait for it . . .

even dumber drivers.


Norm

And the worst part about it, the people who are generally good at driving manuals often get caught off-guard when they drive a car with this "feature". I've seen some pretty good drivers stall-out because off this.

 

[let me ride]

I dont mind all that tech if it's not too buggy, looks good, and not too distracting, some of it is actually fairly useful.... not talkng bout park assist or anything like that but the center stack stuff.

No conventional manual is definitely a deal breaker. And if it ever becomes a non-standard option that costs extra I would be pissed.

 

[Norm Peterson]

Park assist is one of those things that reminds me of this line from Jurassic Park

. . . so preoccupied with whether or not they could that they didn't stop to think if they should.

Distance to empty and outside temperature displays are useful, a CD changer > CD single player, and there might be a couple more. Past that, I'd rather just enjoy the driving.

No conventional manual is definitely a deal breaker. And if it ever becomes a non-standard option that costs extra I would be pissed.

Interesting thought, and one I've actually had for more than a few years. As of this moment I'd be disappointed rather than pissed, and not particularly surprised. You see, I've been coping with the gradual disappearance of the conventional manual in mid-level family sedans for the last 25 years or so. I haven't yet had to give in and get an automatic, but our car shopping has been heavily influenced.

As long as an optional MT price premium is only the result of extra certification cost exceeding the difference between MT and AT production costs and not just a gouge or a blatant attempt to force me into purchasing an AT vehicle, I'd be just as OK with it as I am with paying extra for whatever optional engine I might also want. Outside that, I'd shop elsewhere without second thought. Wouldn't be the first time I'd jumped ship over a transmission issue, or even the second . . .


Norm

 

[SStormtrooPer]

I dont mind all that tech if it's not too buggy, looks good, and not too distracting, some of it is actually fairly useful.... not talkng bout park assist or anything like that but the center stack stuff.

You may be expecting a bit much out of a infotainment system that is designed/built by Microsoft.

Its funny, back when Ford originally announced Sync(MFT later), and that it would be designed and programmed by Microsoft, the first words out of my mouth were "this is not going to go over well".

 

[Herr_Poopschitz]

I would consider it a deal breaker if I don't fit in the car comfortably. Telescoping wheel and adjustable pedals would be nice. I'm only 6'3", around 260 lb...that's not THAT big.

I hope they don't ruin leg room w/ 'flowing' center consoles that intrude like in the Taurus and Focus...haven't been in a newer Fusion, so not sure if it has the same issue. There's no excuse for why I feel more comfy in a Z4 than a big ol' Taurus other than shit design.

 

[likeaboss]

You may be expecting a bit much out of a infotainment system that is designed/built by Microsoft.

Its funny, back when Ford originally announced Sync(MFT later), and that it would be designed and programmed by Microsoft, the first words out of my mouth were "this is not going to go over well".

Problem is it isn't Microsoft that's the problem. The current NAV system in the Mustang while dated is rock solid. It's that crap Adobe Flash light and outsourced programming that caused all the MyFord Touch issues. Microsoft has spent the last year and a half working with Ford to clean the mess up.

 

[Norm Peterson]

Problem with that is that you can only come to that conclusion after the fact.

Going in, you're looking at a Microsoft as an entity with an image of being the developer of bloated code that takes one or more service packs to get somewhere near right, and a seemingly never-ending succession of updates (think band-aids on top of the patches) after that to fix stuff they still missed.


Norm

 

[nametoshowothers]

Problem is it isn't Microsoft that's the problem. The current NAV system in the Mustang while dated is rock solid. It's that crap Adobe Flash light and outsourced programming that caused all the MyFord Touch issues. Microsoft has spent the last year and a half working with Ford to clean the mess up.

I have had no issues with my sync, navigation is perfect, better than others, voice recog works usually, but the stereo could be better, better speakers in gt500

 

[likeaboss]

Problem with that is that you can only come to that conclusion after the fact.

Going in, you're looking at a Microsoft as an entity with an image of being the developer of bloated code that takes one or more service packs to get somewhere near right, and a seemingly never-ending succession of updates (think band-aids on top of the patches) after that to fix stuff they still missed.


Norm

Please let me know another OS that works with such a wide variety of hardware and different applications that doesn't require patching. While not perfect Microsoft does a pretty good job.

 

[HTownStang]

This just goes back to the fact that cars are becoming increasingly dominated by computers and electronic control and monitoring of everything. Working on BMWs and the like, whether performing fixes or some mods are a pain in the ass for this reason. It totally kills part of the fun and makes it that much more expensive and time consuming when something goes wrong..... If the Mustang heads in this direction it will become a deal breaker.

 

[Overboost]

I'm not sure why so much blame is pointed at Microsoft. IIRC, they handle most of the hardware and the voice recognition, but Ford designs the HMI portion and functionality. It's not perfect, but it's not terrible either. The few vehicles I've been in and driven for extended periods of time have had zero issues with MFT. IMO, Consumer Reports and some rags put a bad taste in everyone's mouth about it, and it stuck.

Sponsored