New 2005 Mustang GT Commercials - a must see

[COPO427]

Ya, I know guys it's a Ford but these are worth watching, especially the one with Steve McQueen. Some movements from Bullitt were computerized into the farm field commercial. I think it's great. I get goose bumps when I watch it and saw it on TV once.
The other one with the Armed Forces is a long commercial and is worth every minute. It was on last Sun after I watched American Dreams. I salute all the guys over there even though it's a war I can't see us winning. Just like Vietnam. Alot of guys are not coming home. What a shame to the families.

Check out the one played on American Dreams
http://www.nbc.com/nbc/American_Dreams/ford.shtml

Check out the McQueen commercial!! http://ford.ca/english/showroom/FordCars/mustang/default.asp

I sat in a 2005 GT and it's tempting to get one, but I want a 70 SS396 Chevelle http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/burnout.gif . If I get a stang then I can't afford a Chevelle. http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif

[MikeA]

The Steve McQueen commercial is cool. http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif

[Don_Lightfoot]

Another new one I saw for the first time is the new Tang in front of an old Drive-In Movie Screen. The '05 is sationery, but the screen has flashes and movie clips from all the old 60's and 70's Mustangs.

A local dealer is going the extra mile on some of these. He has two at present, one is all Black which he plans to keep for demo drives. He's approached my paint and resto guy to have some retro stripes put on the cars as they come in. He's thinking of late 60's Mach 1 stripes for some and 1970 Boss stripes for others. Should be a money maker for him and look sharp as well.

I hate to say it, but these cars are cool.

[Allen]

[ QUOTE ]

I hate to say it, but these cars are cool.

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL! I feel the same way. Yesterday, I was at the assembly plant in Michigan and got to watch some of the production.

In general, I have never paid much attention to the Fords, but brand name aside, it is a cool looking ride.

[Schonyenko2]

Ford is gonna make a lot of money on these cars. They really are pretty cool. And there's no camaro in site. Chevy has dropped the ball. http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif

[hvychev]

Very cool commercials. I sold an 05 Mustang tonight and the guy kept asking me if I had seen the Steve McQueen one. I have now! http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif

[CamarosRus]

My cousin owns a 2004 Mustang MACH 1. After driving two 2005's (auto & 5spd) his opinion was that his 32 valve DOHC modular engine 04' was faster and the 04' sitting position was more comfortable.....He reports that the 32 Valve engine is not in the 05'lineup....and that the 06' SVT engine will be a 400HP supercharged affair?????......I understand that my comments have NOTHING to do with the new popular styling..
Chuck S

[J_D]

EVEN THOUGH I AM A DIE-HARD BOW-TIE FAN, I had the opportunity to ride in a new 2005 Mustang at SEMA (earlier this month) through the course and on the skid pad at the Ford/Pioneer/Yokohama event. I was impressed. Never thought I would ever hear myself say this, but I could almost see myself owning one.

One of the gentlemen I spoke with from the GM Speciality Vehicle/Performance Division told me "Ford is going to kick our butt on this one. They have the three things that we just can't seem to do. Performance, Styling and Cost".

[J_D]

The Ford rep that took me through the course told me that the only modifications they made to this car for the event was a free flowing exhaust and changing out the rear gears from 3.55 to 4.10's.

[J_D]

My son, a "tuner" addict, going through the skid pad.

[J_D]

Another one, also on the skid pad.

[J_D]

LAST ONE, I promise............. http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/naughty.gif

Another photo............a rear-wheel drive Ford Focus with a 5.0 liter V-8.

[camarojoe]

That color kicks as$... any idea what its called? Looks very 1960's.

[hvychev]

Joey that color is called Legend Lime. Very cool and retro.

[Chevy454]

[ QUOTE ]
"They have the three things that we just can't seem to do. Performance, Styling and Cost".

[/ QUOTE ]
Hey, maybe dropping the f-body line WAS a bad idea! Everyone tried to tell GM that the GTO would never be the Mustang fighter they'd hoped for...reckon the GTO's poor sales opened up their eyes?

[Denis]

[ QUOTE ]
Ford is gonna make a lot of money on these cars. They really are pretty cool. And there's no camaro in site. Chevy has dropped the ball. http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

It's 1964 all over again. History repeats itself. I guess that means we can expect a new Camaro in 1967...

[Seattle Sam]

[ QUOTE ]
It's 1964 all over again. History repeats itself. I guess that means we can expect a new Camaro in 1967...

[/ QUOTE ]
One can only hope...from GMInsideNews:

[ QUOTE ]
Camaro/Chevelle- Chevy has an all new sporty coupe set to debut in 2007 on the Zeta platform. This car is very similar to the 2007 GTO, with the exception of tighter styling. At this point the assumption is that this car will be the all new Camaro. There is however an outside rumor that this car may be hastily redesigned and given a more appropriate name such as Chevelle. Then GM would design a Camaro on an all new midsized RWD platform loosely based on a lengthened Kappa platform. This platform (rumored to be called "Beta") was first previewed in the Holden Torana TT36 concept shown at the 04 Sydney International Auto Show. This would slightly delay a Camaro to possibly 2008. Either way, we will keep you updated!

[/ QUOTE ]
http://popularhotrodding.com/features/0309phr-5camaro05_z.jpg
(from Popular HotRodding's web page (http://www.popularhotrodding.com/features/0309phr_5camaro/))
-Sam

[Mr70]

As much as I would love to see the Chevelle name revitalized,I see that car design reflecting the 1st Gen Camaro more than a Chevelle.
It is http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif

[camarojoe]

Cool rendering, but it looks like someone punched it in the mouth.

[CopoCrunkus]

Young man has done alot of different renderings, some are really cool Check out his Site (http://www.carsbykris.com) http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/biggthumpup.gif

[Jeff H]

I don't mean to be negative, but the new Mustang looks very similar to the Volvo and it really doesn't do anything for me. Don't get me wrong, I like a lot of Mustangs, but this newest styling doesn't work for me. And remember how well the retro T-Bird did? Retro isn't necessarily a good thing. It's really the fact that the Mustang is the only rwd V8 game in town.

[COPO427]

[ QUOTE ]
My cousin owns a 2004 Mustang MACH 1. After driving two 2005's (auto & 5spd) his opinion was that his 32 valve DOHC modular engine 04' was faster and the 04' sitting position was more comfortable.....He reports that the 32 Valve engine

[/ QUOTE ]

It's a 24 valve engine 300hp/320ft lb t.

[mmcporter]

I gotta tell you, I've sat in the 2005 Mustang and found it superior to the 2004 (and prior models) in every way. It's longer, better finished and just overall more comfortable. I think they will sell as many of these GTs as they can screw together. Already Roush has come out with his upgrade of the car....gotta give Ford credit for hanging in there with the pony car.

[hvychev]

[ QUOTE ]
It's really the fact that the Mustang is the only rwd V8 game in town.


[/ QUOTE ]

Jeff take this into consideration. Even when the Mustang was NOT the only RWD game in town it SPANKED the Camaro. Check out these staggering statistics.

Production figures 2002
Mustang-142,404 Camaro-42,098

Production figures 2001
Mustang-155,162 Camaro-29,009

Production figures 2000
Mustang-202,990 Camaro-45,417

I bet that Ford sells more Mustangs than it has in years with the new design. I said in a different thread that never in my career have I seen so much excitement over a new car. This car is bringing people out of the woodwork to get a look at and maybe even purchase this car. This car is not like the T-bird. That was a niche vehicle that catered to a few. This is a car that everybody can identify with and most of all afford. You can get a loaded GT with leather and all for like $25,900 sticker. Where are you going to find a brand new, good looking, 300hp, full warranty car for that price??? Chevy needs to get on the ball, I think Ford has hit a home run here.

[sYc]

Hey Frank, I agree. http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beers.gif Now empty your "received private message" box so we can send you PMs. http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/biggthumpup.gif

[Chevy454]

[Frank: excellent research! But you should also throw the Firebird #s in their. Kinda like the F150 versus the Chevy & GMC, Ford has all their eggs in 1 basket while Chevy & GM split their market. Although, adding in the Firebird #s isn't gonna make much of a difference.]

Now, "why" does the Mustang outsell the F-body? It wasn't performance, the styling of both were on par with each other, and pricing was comparable...so where's the beef? Frank, you guys see these people everyday...what did they say when the F-bodys were still being made??

[hvychev]

I cleared up some Tom! http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/blush.gif

Rob here is what Ford themselves and customers have told us. First most did not like the body style of the F-body, said it was stale. (I personally do not agree with that. My father even owns one and I think that they look sinister!) The F-body was without a doubt more superior in power to the Mustang until 2005 so that could not have been the problem. Second and most importantly the Mustang has a HUGE base of woman buyers. In fact some at Ford have said that they are worried about what impact that the "aggressive" new styling will have on woman's opinions of the re designed Mustang. I personally have not seen this on the showroom floor. I have not heard a woman say that they do not like the car yet.

[Mr70]

Sherry from Sherrys wigs drives the New Mustang. http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[Jeff H]

Frank, I agree that Ford has always outsold Chevy when it comes to Mustang vs Camaro but I think the biggest reason for that is because of the 3 year head start Ford had and people will stay loyal to a certain brand. But you can't look at the Camaro and Firebird sales in the last 5 years of its existance because GM didn't even advertise the cars knowing that they were being cancelled. You have to look at the 93-95 Camaro sales to see the increase due to the new(LT1) engine and body style. GM definitely dropped the ball with the Camaro and Firebird but we know that was really due to where it was made. A comment I always heard people say that they didn't like the 4th gen Camaro because it was much harder to get in and out of and almost impossible for people to get into the back seat. I don't really understand what that has to do with a 300hp sports car. It's kind of funny because Ford is 10 years late with the 300hp $26,000 sports car, the Camaro was exactly that 10 years ago. It really comes down to brand loyalty in the end though.

[hvychev]

Jeff I don't know about the 3 year head start thing between the Mustang and Camaro. MAJORITY of the people buying Mustangs today did not buy them new 41 model years ago. So the difference in the first three years would have no bearing on the brand loyalty issue. Where brand loyalty might come into play is it might be safe to say that more people buy Mustangs just because there WERE more sold new compared to Camaro so there is that thing of being able to identify with the car more because most people could say that they knew someone very close to them that had a Mustang new.

The thing about the Mustang being way under powered compared to the Camaro may precisely be the reason that people bought more Mustangs new. There car was not some uncontrollable powerhouse for it's majority buyer which is woman. Just food for thought.

[camarojoe]

I agree alot had to do with the fact that a Mustang was always more "user friendly" than a camaro in its last generation... I always joked that an 80s mustang GT was like a "bigger" Escort GT with RWD, and in alot of ways thats why it sold so well with women, and people who planned to use the car as a sole vehicle on a daily basis. I have a 1997 Camaro, and must admit, it would suck as an "only car", and is much more of a "sports car" in layout than a Mustang is or was. If you didnt care about HP, and were buying a daily commuter with a 6 cylinder engine, and had no brand loyalty, most would choose the upright, easy to get in and out of, easy to SEE out of, Mustang over the low slung Camaro... and most of those production stats for BOTH cars were likely 6 cylinder cars that were just bought for daily commutes to work by folks who were not "car people". Another BIG thing in addition to the lack of advertising was the fact that you could drive into a chevy dealership and not even SEE a camaro on the lot for about the last 7 years of production. Most people go to a dealer and drive home a car on the lot... if you wanted a camaro, youd have had to order it, or specifically know thats what you wanted going into the dealer... with Ford, you'd go to the dealership and see a row of 10-20 Mustangs ont he lot at any time, which would make them much more likely to sell IMO. With all that said, I still won't be trading my 30th Anniversary SS on a new 'Stang any time soon!

[camarojoe]

Plus... Chevy also has the vette for true performance guru's... and face it, if youre gonna spend 30K+ for a top of the line performance camaro, odds are good you could afford to spring for the extra monthly payment to drive a Vette.

[mmcporter]

I think Joe kinda hit the nail on the head here. The Camaro and Firebird were always cramped, "form over function" designs that had some acknowledged quality control problems and, if anything were maybe a little "too edgy". The Stang has always worked better as a "real car".

[Jeff H]

Good point about no Camaros on the lot Joe. I don't think there was any real difference between a 200hp 289 Mustang and a 210hp 327 Camaro though. Both companies made very limited quantities of high performance versions(I wouldn't call an SS350 high performance). But I still believe a lot goes to brand loyalty. Ford sold almost a million Mustangs before the Camaro even hit the road. I know a lot of people that owned a 60's or 70's Mustang and upgraded to an 80's or 90's Mustang. But anyone buying a rwd car as a daily driver nowadays isn't a very conscious consumer so the 6 cyl Mustang thing is very difficult to understand. I think those people want it to look like they own a sports car. A rwd car in today's driving and weather just doesn't make much sense. I know I had fun when it snowed and I tried to get home in my 93 Z28 Indy 500 Pace Car or my 91 SS454 pickup. But I accept the fact that I won't make it to work in bad weather and so does my company so it's not a problem for me. I just hope Ford can keep the price down under $30K for the GT so the affordable V8 rwd market will stay alive.

[camarojoe]

I really don't think the fact that the mustang was intoduced in 65 vs 67 for the camaro had a whole lot to do with Mustangs outselling camaros in the late 90s. I do know what its like to try to drive a RWD car in the snow... and even spun a 1990 454SS around once to prove its not a good idea to drive one between November and April around here... http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[Seattle Sam]

Joe and Jeff, I respectfully disagree with you both about RWD vs FWD.

First I agree that driving a big block pickup truck with no weight over the rear wheels in the snow is a bad idea. It's not even a very good idea in the rain.

BUT, my best car ever in the snow was a 1975 Caprice - I owned it when I lived in New Hampshire in the mid-80's, and I went through an entire winter without snow tires.

I used to drive my '78 Z/28 four speed in the snow, too. Although WITH snow tires.

You actually have more control of your car with RWD than with FWD. After all, when the drive wheels start slipping on your Jetta or Civic you can no longer turn - you are just going to continue sliding in the same direction. With RWD, you can steer with the front, and use your throttle to steer with the rear. http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif You noly lose your steering if you lock the brakes.

With a good set of siped (not studded) snow tires, and taking care not to overpower the available traction, I would much rather have a rear drive car in any snow or ice conditions. Just add today's anti-lock and traction control technology, and that goes double!

Check out this article for more info on FWD vs RWD... http://slate.msn.com/id/2081194/

-Sam