Couldn't disagree more, but this is always said by some when a new mustang is released so your comment is expected.
I I think the Mustang should be progressive. Sure it s apony car, but now, the Evo's and Scoby's have now replaced the Mustang as fast and affordable "ponycars". The Mustang needs to use heritage design cues, but that is it. The Mustang GT now , by virtue of evolution should be taking out BMW M3's
![Grin ;D](http://www.getbig.com/boards/Smileys/classic/grin.gif)
(not on the race track).
The IS350 has more HP (less torque) than the Mustang, and is quicker and more responsive, and this is a 4 door car with a V6
![Angry >:(](http://www.getbig.com/boards/Smileys/classic/angry.gif)
. The 350Z, which is a direct competitor to the Mustang, gets 300 HP (07 model) and is quicker to 60 than the current Mustang, and it too has 3.5 liter V6, and better build qaulity.
The design, ugh. They needed to evovle the design of the last gens' it was hot. Redoing the 65-69 Mustang, means that they lack innovation and new ideas, so they are playing to nostalgia. The claim that the reason why the car still has a Live rear axle is because the drag racing population wanted it. BS. V6 Mustangs outsell V8's 8 to 1, if not higher. They didn't want to spend, or could not spend the money on designing a new rear axle. These are the same people that said that a manual transmission would not go into the Lincoln LS, because "they don't have a manual tranny that can handle the torque". Yeah, you make a Mustang that has higher torque than the Lincoln LS, but you can't put the same manual in that car. BS.
I can't stand it when our American car companies put out mediocre products that seem half finished