If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
new mustang
I don't like it ......
|
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
new mustang
On 12/8/2013 11:54 AM, jim stewart wrote:
> I don't like it ...... > > Neither do I. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
new mustang
On 2013-12-08, Debbie > wrote:
> On 12/8/2013 11:54 AM, jim stewart wrote: >> I don't like it ...... >> >> > Neither do I. It's not structurally bad styling. Lose the klingon ridges and a good light refresh would fix it. What bothers me is what I noticed today... the rocker panels... the high panel seam behind the door... ugly. The fender makes a horizontal seam with the rocker. Again ugly. But it's wierd, under the rocker there's a black rocker panel trim piece. I have to see the car in person to figure out what's going on there... but really the seams just are badly arranged. Could be a safety oriented trade off. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
new mustang
"Brent" > wrote in message ... > On 2013-12-08, Debbie > wrote: >> On 12/8/2013 11:54 AM, jim stewart wrote: >>> I don't like it ...... >>> >>> >> Neither do I. > > It's not structurally bad styling. > Lose the klingon ridges and a good light refresh would fix it. > > What bothers me is what I noticed today... the rocker panels... the > high panel seam behind the door... ugly. The fender makes a horizontal > seam with the rocker. Again ugly. But it's wierd, under the rocker > there's a black rocker panel trim piece. I have to see the car in > person to figure out what's going on there... but really the seams just > are badly arranged. Could be a safety oriented trade off. > > > > amazes me how ALL the mustangs '64 to '73 were beautiful .... do designers since then just have no taste ?...I mean my '92 fox vert is ugly...... |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
new mustang
"Brent" > wrote in message ... > On 2013-12-08, Debbie > wrote: >> On 12/8/2013 11:54 AM, jim stewart wrote: >>> I don't like it ...... >>> >>> >> Neither do I. > > It's not structurally bad styling. > Lose the klingon ridges and a good light refresh would fix it. > > What bothers me is what I noticed today... the rocker panels... the > high panel seam behind the door... ugly. The fender makes a horizontal > seam with the rocker. Again ugly. But it's wierd, under the rocker > there's a black rocker panel trim piece. I have to see the car in > person to figure out what's going on there... but really the seams just > are badly arranged. Could be a safety oriented trade off. > > > > amazes me how ALL the mustangs '64 to '73 were beautiful .... do designers since then just have no taste ?...I mean my '92 fox vert is ugly...... |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
new mustang
"jim stewart" > wrote in message ... > > "Brent" > wrote in message > ... >> On 2013-12-08, Debbie > wrote: >>> On 12/8/2013 11:54 AM, jim stewart wrote: >>>> I don't like it ...... >>>> >>>> >>> Neither do I. >> >> It's not structurally bad styling. >> Lose the klingon ridges and a good light refresh would fix it. >> >> What bothers me is what I noticed today... the rocker panels... the >> high panel seam behind the door... ugly. The fender makes a >> horizontal >> seam with the rocker. Again ugly. But it's wierd, under the rocker >> there's a black rocker panel trim piece. I have to see the car in >> person to figure out what's going on there... but really the seams >> just >> are badly arranged. Could be a safety oriented trade off. >> >> >> >> > amazes me how ALL the mustangs '64 to '73 were beautiful .... do > designers since then just have no taste ?...I mean my '92 fox vert is > ugly...... > I'm going to keep my fingers crossed, hoping the folks who can do something about the perceived problems as voiced all across the InterWeb are paying attention and will act. All the physical examples we have seen so far were pretty much hand-made; plenty of time before production actually begins. I also keep reminding myself that the designers and deciders weren't thinking of the Hooked-On-Mustang crowd: they need a much bigger group to become interested. In the meantime I'm not all that offended by a plump BMW with Ford technology and prices. -- Frank ess |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
REPOST: 2004 Mustang Club - 1024s 1965 Mustang fastback - rvl.jpg | Roadsign | Auto Photos | 0 | June 11th 08 11:40 PM |
REPOST: 2004 Mustang Club - 1024s 1965 Mustang conv - fvl.jpg | Roadsign | Auto Photos | 0 | June 11th 08 11:37 PM |
REPOST: 2004 Mustang Club - 1024s 1965 Mustang - int - conv.jpg | Roadsign | Auto Photos | 0 | June 11th 08 11:36 PM |
REPOST: 2004 Mustang Club - 1024s 1965 Mustang 289V8.jpg (1/1) | Roadsign[_2_] | Auto Photos | 0 | June 11th 08 07:10 PM |