No room under the hood...

[tbonez3858]

You do get that the new design is yet another retro Mustang design, right? Just as much as the S197, if not more so. A shaker hood would fit right in. If they do make a new Mach 1 in a few years, I wouldn't be surprised to see a Shaker on it.

There is no doubt that there a design traits from the past but I don't consider this a retro mustang. There are just as many future traits as there are reflections to the past.

You could make an argument that this model is a complete nod to the aerospace community with the constant reference to the airplane cockpit..I think that is a bridge too far as well...

Sponsored

 

[Chameleon]

I don't consider this a retro mustang.

Agreed.

 

[souprmage]

Agreed.

Just because it's a Fastback, definitely doesn't make it RETRO.

Yes, it's clearly a Mustang, but that too doesn't make it RETRO.

Not entirely sure where the RETRO comment came from really. I'd be curious to hear why he feels this is RETRO.

I see this model as being a Euro-styled Sports Coupe w/ clear Fastback heritage.

As for room, I'd be surprised if they can get a no-compromises SC in there without some extra room, but I've been surprised before.

 

[Tim Hilliard]

You do get that the new design is yet another retro Mustang design, right? Just as much as the S197, if not more so. A shaker hood would fit right in. If they do make a new Mach 1 in a few years, I wouldn't be surprised to see a Shaker on it.

It is honest to the original but not retro, the cues are very subtle. Challenger, yes that's retro. This car is a very modern interpretation with clues to the past.

The shaker if done properly would look ok, I honestly think it looked too small when Ford brought them back, the hood was bulged which drew too much attention to it. A flat hood with a shaker in proportion to the lines of the car would work, just not slapping on an old part. Ford knows what they need to do, if they bring it back it will fit the car this time while giving a nod to the original, it just will not be the original.

 

[Tim Hilliard]

To me the shaker on the modern cars looks like a Mustang is looking in a fun house mirror...follow me? It's the best way to describe how it looks to me.

 

[B-Fox]

I don't think a traditional shaker would work with this car, and I'm sure we can stuff a blower under the hood, we'll just have to wait and find out on the brace
ultimately what will make the car faster, the blower or a brace?

 

[DivineStrike]

The sn95 mach 1 with the shaker looked good imo one of the reasons I like it

 

[Colleton]

OK, I can see that I'm out in the wilderness on this one. That's OK. I do think you're all on crack on the "it's not a retro design" bit though.

 

[SVTFreak]

As for room, I'd be surprised if they can get a no-compromises SC in there without some extra room, but I've been surprised before.

ALL kits have compromises. It's to what extent is the question. None are designed to get as close as possible to theory without any compromises for fit, cost, longevity, tooling, installation, packaging, etc.

 

[908ssp]

It is retro in the same way a Vantage is retro to a DB5. Both have four wheels and rear wheel drive so it's retro.

Hood scoops, window louvers, fake carbon fiber, brake caliper covers etc. For those with no imagination repeating the past because they don't know any better.

 

[MELLOWYELLOW06]

I should have something interesting
that should solve lots of concerns
at the Sema booth.
All we need now is the car to get here in time for the show!

 

[COYO TT]

Do you have pics of yours you could post, were they mounted low or up top/front?

Here you go

 

[Fenderaddict2]

http://wardsauto.com/auto-makers/ford-mustang-boss-302-2012-wards-10-best-engines-ceremony

Perspective....on what was accomplished with our '15 engine. If you don't think we are reaping the benefits gained from the Boss program, I have nothing left to add and will stop wasting my key strokes on you.

I'll add that Ford would likely take more heat if they released this engine at more or the same power as the Boss from all the people who bought/own a Boss that paid a premium for those cars knowing how much better our chassis is.

I believe the HP numbers were below the Boss for several reason, this being one.

 

[scottpe]

I believe the HP numbers were below the Boss for several reason, this being one.

I don't. They are under no obligation to 'protect' the performance or power output of their previous models.

Besides, how much of a consolation is it really going to be to Boss owners that the new GT makes (slightly) less horsepower, given the fact that it is expected to consistently beat the Boss around the track, which it was purpose built for?

Anyone that buys pretty much anything needs to do so with the understanding that something much better and cheaper might be just around the corner. That's just how it goes...

 

[souprmage]

I don't. They are under no obligation to 'protect' the performance or power output of their previous models.

Besides, how much of a consolation is it really going to be to Boss owners that the new GT makes (slightly) less horsepower, given the fact that it is expected to consistently beat the Boss around the track, which it was purpose built for?

Anyone that buys pretty much anything needs to do so with the understanding that something much better and cheaper might be just around the corner. That's just how it goes...

I agree.

There's no way they took the Boss302 HP numbers into account when they built the GT.

They likely scaled back performance for the sole reason of reliability and fuel mileage. Not to say the 302 is unreliable, but it was likely pushed closer to the limit of the engine just because it was purposely built for the track.

But a Track key will push me over the 302 numbers, so then I'll be even happier.

Sponsored