Is This Our 2015 Mustang?
 

On Wed, 9 May 2012 16:55:24 -0700 (PDT), "
> wrote:

>Another rendering. Supposedly this one is close.
>
>I like the back view. The front view, not so much... it's a little
>too busy.
>
>Your thoughts?
>
>http://mustangsdaily.com/blog/2012/0...s-design-cues/
>
>Patrick


ICK. Ick on the Jaguar too.

Is This Our 2015 Mustang?
 

In article >,
Ashton Crusher > wrote:

> On Wed, 9 May 2012 16:55:24 -0700 (PDT), "
> > wrote:
>
> >Another rendering. Supposedly this one is close.
> >
> >I like the back view. The front view, not so much... it's a little
> >too busy.
> >
> >Your thoughts?
> >
> >http://mustangsdaily.com/blog/2012/0...ered-with-evos
> >-design-cues/
> >
> >Patrick
>
>
> ICK. Ick on the Jaguar too.

Like one of the comments on that page, I agree, that is one of the
better looking renderings so far.
It looks like a mustang, not like a camaro.

I didn't check the jag. /grin

--
For all you know this message was...
Sent via an exclusive network, on a snobby portable computing device.

Is This Our 2015 Mustang?
 

On May 14, 11:47*pm, twk > wrote:
> In article >,
> *Ashton Crusher > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Wed, 9 May 2012 16:55:24 -0700 (PDT), "
> > > wrote:
>
> > >Another rendering. *Supposedly this one is close.
>
> > >I like the back view. *The front view, not so much... it's a little
> > >too busy.
>
> > >Your thoughts?
>
> > >http://mustangsdaily.com/blog/2012/0...ang-rendered-w....
> > >-design-cues/
>
> > >Patrick
>
> > ICK. *Ick on the Jaguar too.
>
> Like one of the comments on that page, I agree, that is one of the
> better looking renderings so far.
> It looks like a mustang, not like a camaro.
>
> I didn't check the jag. * /grin
>
> --
> For all you know this message was...
> Sent via an exclusive network, on a snobby portable computing device.

I'm kind of worried that they are heading into Jap territory again,
with everything rounded. The Mustang MUST have some angularity in the
body.

Is This Our 2015 Mustang?
 

On Tue, 15 May 2012 05:38:44 -0700 (PDT), RichA >
wrote:

>On May 14, 11:47*pm, twk > wrote:
>> In article >,
>> *Ashton Crusher > wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Wed, 9 May 2012 16:55:24 -0700 (PDT), "
>> > > wrote:
>>
>> > >Another rendering. *Supposedly this one is close.
>>
>> > >I like the back view. *The front view, not so much... it's a little
>> > >too busy.
>>
>> > >Your thoughts?
>>
>> > >http://mustangsdaily.com/blog/2012/0...ang-rendered-w...
>> > >-design-cues/
>>
>> > >Patrick
>>
>> > ICK. *Ick on the Jaguar too.
>>
>> Like one of the comments on that page, I agree, that is one of the
>> better looking renderings so far.
>> It looks like a mustang, not like a camaro.
>>
>> I didn't check the jag. * /grin
>>
>> --
>> For all you know this message was...
>> Sent via an exclusive network, on a snobby portable computing device.
>
>I'm kind of worried that they are heading into Jap territory again,
>with everything rounded. The Mustang MUST have some angularity in the
>body.


Exactly, It's too ricer.

Is This Our 2015 Mustang?
 

In article >,
Ashton Crusher > wrote:

> On Tue, 15 May 2012 05:38:44 -0700 (PDT), RichA >
> wrote:
>
> >On May 14, 11:47*pm, twk > wrote:
> >> In article >,
> >> *Ashton Crusher > wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> > On Wed, 9 May 2012 16:55:24 -0700 (PDT), "
> >> > > wrote:
> >>
> >> > >Another rendering. *Supposedly this one is close.
> >>
> >> > >I like the back view. *The front view, not so much... it's a little
> >> > >too busy.
> >>
> >> > >Your thoughts?
> >>
> >> > >http://mustangsdaily.com/blog/2012/0...ang-rendered-w...
> >> > >-design-cues/
> >>
> >> > >Patrick
> >>
> >> > ICK. *Ick on the Jaguar too.
> >>
> >> Like one of the comments on that page, I agree, that is one of the
> >> better looking renderings so far.
> >> It looks like a mustang, not like a camaro.
> >>
> >> I didn't check the jag. * /grin
> >>
> >> --
> >> For all you know this message was...
> >> Sent via an exclusive network, on a snobby portable computing device.
> >
> >I'm kind of worried that they are heading into Jap territory again,
> >with everything rounded. The Mustang MUST have some angularity in the
> >body.
>
>
> Exactly, It's too ricer.

You both made me go back for a second look. It's still the best "guess"
the artist has come up with so far, but yeah It does have some ricer
qualities. I'm not liking it as much now. I also noticed the visibility
out the rear might suck on that latest rendering. I wouldn't want to
back into a parking space.

Where do these people that "render" pictures of new cars and such, get
their ideas from? This latest picture is based on what?

--
For all you know this message was...
Sent via an exclusive network, on a snobby portable computing device.

Is This Our 2015 Mustang?
 

"twk" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> Ashton Crusher > wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 15 May 2012 05:38:44 -0700 (PDT), RichA >
>> wrote:
>>
>> >On May 14, 11:47 pm, twk > wrote:
>> >> In article >,
>> >> Ashton Crusher > wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> > On Wed, 9 May 2012 16:55:24 -0700 (PDT), "
>> >> > > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > >Another rendering. Supposedly this one is close.
>> >>
>> >> > >I like the back view. The front view, not so much... it's a little
>> >> > >too busy.
>> >>
>> >> > >Your thoughts?
>> >>
>> >> > >http://mustangsdaily.com/blog/2012/0...ang-rendered-w...
>> >> > >-design-cues/
>> >>
>> >> > >Patrick
>> >>
>> >> > ICK. Ick on the Jaguar too.
>> >>
>> >> Like one of the comments on that page, I agree, that is one of the
>> >> better looking renderings so far.
>> >> It looks like a mustang, not like a camaro.
>> >>
>> >> I didn't check the jag. /grin
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> For all you know this message was...
>> >> Sent via an exclusive network, on a snobby portable computing device.
>> >
>> >I'm kind of worried that they are heading into Jap territory again,
>> >with everything rounded. The Mustang MUST have some angularity in the
>> >body.
>>
>>
>> Exactly, It's too ricer.
>
> You both made me go back for a second look. It's still the best "guess"
> the artist has come up with so far, but yeah It does have some ricer
> qualities. I'm not liking it as much now. I also noticed the visibility
> out the rear might suck on that latest rendering. I wouldn't want to
> back into a parking space.
>
> Where do these people that "render" pictures of new cars and such, get
> their ideas from? This latest picture is based on what?
>
> --
> For all you know this message was...
> Sent via an exclusive network, on a snobby portable computing device.

It's in the name of the link - EVOS.

When I first saw the Jaguar commercial with the three cars "playing," I
thought the blue one looked very Mustang-like. Interesting that some see it
the other way 'round - that the Mustang now looks Jaguarish.

Personally, I like it. You can keep your angularity. Hell, if you like boxy
so much, I have a '93 GT 5.0 convertible that you can buy for cheap.

I know that some want the Mustang to always look like something out of the
late 60s. I keep looking to the future and think about what "could be" the
new Mustang. This rendering (while still a fantasy) is much more like it.

dwight