New Mustang means new GTO for me

"C. Olofsson" wrote in news:NRwbb.1153$La.382@fed1read02:

Ooh, low blow. ;)

I suppose they're ok, but they still look weird compared to Fox cars. Perhaps we can compromise on the '05? I think it's awesome from what I've seen so far.

Joe Calypso Green '93 5.0 LX AOD hatch with a few goodies Black '03 Dakota 5.9 R/T CC

at 22 Sep 2003, C. Olofsson [ snipped-for-privacy@cox.net] wrote in news:NRwbb.1153$La.382@fed1read02:

I know. I looked at mine last year when she was up the lift without her wheels (She was geting her 17" wheels installed) and I could not help but admire her angles which showed even better without the wheels 'interfering' so to speak.

What I would not give for Star Wars landspeeder technology. Install that, close off the wheelwells and they could keep the 05. :-)

All it needs is one of those raw coloured stamped aluminum wings.

-Rich

should have let it be..

1978 Pontiac Firebird 78 was a good year 2002 Pontiac Firebird just looks pretty 1998 Ford Mustang Cobra its black 2000 Dodge Avenger should have been Mopar powered 1998 Honda Civic sold to rice boy wonder 1999 Ford Mustang GT sold - think the Cobra was a nice replacement..

Don't get me wrong, I love the looks of a '93 GT! I think they're awesome, and would buy one in a heartbeat, if I had the money. :-(

I agree. I'm hoping, however, that it doesn't look as fat in reality as it does in the pictures I've seen. Not that it's grotesque or anything, but it's a little too bulky on the sides and rear bumper. The front end and roof line are nearly perfect, though!

Cindy '96 laser red auto GTS

Never had that pleasure, but I don't need it after I had the 18's installed recently. There's nothing more beautiful than a lowered SN95 with 18x10's in the rear. ;-) Only drawback is the tires sometimes rub the wheel well going in and out of driveways, if I'm not careful. But I can live with that. :-p

I dunno... the '05 might look great up close and personal. And who knows about the performance? I'm going to reserve final judgment until the real thing comes out next year.

Cindy '96 laser red auto GTS

Paul wrote

This is not the first time I've seen this in this NG, that someone likes the '69 Stang and dislikes or even hates the '70. Why is this? Here's a '69

and here's a'70 . What's the bigdifference? I actually like the '70 better. The dual headlights arecleaner than the quads. But I wouldn't say I dislike the '69 justbecause it has the quads. Could it be that some folks confuse the model years, and think that the oversized '71 to '73 era (here's a '71 ) -- which I don'tlike but don't hate either -- began in '70?

180 Out TS 28

Personally I like all of those.

I really don't care for the Mustang II era at all though. they just looked too bland for me..

at 23 Sep 2003, 180 Out [ snipped-for-privacy@hotmail.com] wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@posting.google.com:

Amongst others '70 did away with the front lights outside the grill. Replacing them with those ugly slats. I do not like that, one of the design feautures which appeal to me are those lights and the way they were inset. Like the 05 has. And yeah, then 71 came with the 'bigger is better' attitude which I really hate.

After all, that design was picked by a guy they hired from GM :)

"C. Olofsson" wrote in news:UjPbb.1370$La.1220@fed1read02:

Interesting observation on the rear end. IMO, the current cars have "fat" rear ends; the '05's rear certainly looks smaller to me. I think with the proper wheel/tire combo, it'll look just right.

Joe Calypso Green '93 5.0 LX AOD hatch with a few goodies Black '03 Dakota 5.9 R/T CC

You've got that backwards. Once again, most Japanese sports cars barrow heavily from the 65 to 69 fastback.

One need only look at the mid 80's Celica for proof of that. It looks like a miniature version of a Boss 302!!

Scott Williams '66 HCS