Size and Weight - still deal breakers?

[Melino]

Let me first say I love the way the car looks, but what happened here? Where did all those multiple sources come up with those crazy decreases in length and weight. While its lost some of its bulk it's the same wheelbase and everything. Weight is probably put on too with IRS and all that new tech.

Is this still a deal breaker for you guys?
(a while back a lot of people said it was)

Sponsored

 

[MadMoose]

Not at all. I don't want it to get smaller and turn into a brz. I like being able to use it as a daily driver. Weight loss is still possible, they haven't announced figures yet. but even if it doesn't lose weight, it's still going to be similar or less weight than its competitors. It's current weight doesn't bother me one bit.

 

[Mriley]

I'm too in love with the exterior to care much right now and if it performs as good as we are hearing then really no biggy. if it put on a few pounds due to stiffer chassis and IRS then its not the end of the world. I'd be curious just how much the new tech contributed to it tho if someone at ford wants to strip the car for us before it gets into the hands of some adventurous enthusiasts

 

[xlover]

size seems just right for me and most, plus based on what is popping up in the blogs and mags who went to the preview and events engineers have been saying they are happy with the results from weight loss targets tho non specific i think we can expect the car to have gone on a relatively significant diet

 

[HanShadow]

Nope. I would have liked to see 400lbs come off, but even with only 1-200lbs off, you still have a car that should be more agile/balanced than the current models, and it will still do a 0-60 in the 4s...

 

[aardvark]

Yeah, I'll admit that I am disappointed that it isn't shorter. (Well, at 188.3" it is 0.2 inches (5mm) shorter, but that's essentially nothing).

I'd have loved it if the 2015 had been reset to the 181.6" of the 1965 car, but it was not to be.

Deal breaker? No, but it does dampen my enthusiasm a bit. I love the design, though.

 

[Patio208]

I'm perfectly fine with the size. It makes the car more practical and useable for those of us with kids at least. I wouldn't mind some weight loss but in a car packed with so much content at this price point it was never going to be a dramatic difference.

 

[eurospeed]

Yeah, I'll admit that I am disappointed that it isn't shorter. (Well, at 188.3" it is 0.2 inches (5mm) shorter, but that's essentially nothing).

I'd have loved it if the 2015 had been reset to the 181.6" of the 1965 car...

Weight is my number one concern, but since that is unknown, I'll complain about the length. Disappointing. I'm not sure the international community will appreciate it either -- this was a golden opportunity for Ford and I feel they blew it here. For me, the decision to purchase is greatly dependent on weight so the jury is still out.

 

[HGFireHazard]

Weight is a concern to me. Size, not so much.

I don't want the car to get heavier. I don't want to continue the arms race of more horsepower and more weight. In fact I'd rather see it do the opposite. As long as the car doesn't gain weight I'm okay. Weight loss is even better. With the upcoming Camaro speaking volumes about weight loss this car can't afford to put weight on, so I'm hoping with Ford alluding to meeting their goals that's the truth.

 

[Trackaholic]

Don't miind the size. Glad to see it's a little lower, as the one thing I notice on the current mustang is how tall it looks. Legnth seems fine to me, and one of the reasons I'm strongly considering a Mustang as my next car is due to the back seats.

I would like the weight to go down from the current model, but it sounds like that might not happen. Initial rumors were a very significant weight loss that was IMO not quite believable (I read 400 lbs in some articles). That seems to have change more recently to 200 lbs. And now I'm reading that "the weight target was achieved" but no mention of what exactly that means.

Reminds me of the C7 launch, where mags were initially reporting substantial weight loss. GM went to great lengths to show off the reduction in the weight of the frame, but rumors started going around that the car was not actually going to be any lighter. Turns out it ended up a bit heavier, especially in Z51 trim.

So, I wouldn't be surprosed to see something similar happen with the Mustang, although if it gets any heavier than 3600 lbs it would be disappointing.

Wouldn't be a show stopper if the car drives well, but there's always the expectation that if it was 200 lbs lighter it would be that much better.

Keeping my fingers crossed for a reduction, but trying not to get my hopes up.

-T

 

[SStormtrooPer]

All things considered, there are other deal breakers -- size and weight just add to the list.

Seeing that the car got longer(3mm) and wider(13mm), even if by a tiny margin, I can't imagine that weight went down GT vs. GT. Maybe the EB dropped 100 - 200lbs. off the lightest 2014. And if there was weight loss across the whole line-up, you can be damn sure Ford would have been vocal about that -- but we really know nothing, other than "the weight target has been achieved". Well what was the target?

I think Ford REALLY had a huge opportunity to set the bar in the segment they created/defined, but chose to "fit-in" instead.

I am really disappointed with this car.

 

[JonnyMustang]

I was disappointed that it basically stayed the same. I get that features add options and I suppose the Mustang is still too much of a daily driver to shrink it any. I would like to see it get closer to BRZ territory though. The EB motor option will help in this department though.

Wasn't there a scrapped design last year? I wonder if that's what caused the rumor?

 

[Fenderaddict2]

Yeah, I'll admit that I am disappointed that it isn't shorter. (Well, at 188.3" it is 0.2 inches (5mm) shorter, but that's essentially nothing).

I'd have loved it if the 2015 had been reset to the 181.6" of the 1965 car, but it was not to be.

Deal breaker? No, but it does dampen my enthusiasm a bit. I love the design, though.

My thoughts exactly.

 

[Ghostface]

Guess 3300 was too hopeful.... Would've put it near C7 territory in GT form. But edmunds has the GT estimated at 3700. Ouch.... That might be a deal breaker if true. Still going to be researching other options: next sti, BMW x35i (new and used), brz sti if it happens, etc

 

[aspensilver]

How is it so big overall?
I have an E39 BMW, has a V8 4.4L engine in it and seats 5, 4 very comfortably and is only .6 inches longer. Then the trunk has plenty of room. Where is all this space going? Huge trunk? Giant engine bay doesn't make sense, E39 M5 has 4.9L engine. I don't get how this car is so long but doesn't have much rear passenger space.

I'm also confused why the car is so wide? Over 74 inches wide?? Maybe good for track but it makes parking anywhere annoying and you get more door dings. Also not as easy to fit tight spaces. Can't believe this car is wider than my '13 Fusion? This thing is like a boat width to me. Then they seem to put the gas pedal near the center console so your leg rubs the console but your left leg has like 6 inches from the door.

Car looks awesome, just confused why this car is so big. I was expecting something sleeker, but I guess the only Mustang I've spent time in was a 1970.

Sponsored