2021 MUSTANG (S650) - 7th Generation Mustang Confirmed

[Falc'man]

Based off the D6 platform means it's going to be around the same size. Should be lighter.

Could even lose its long hood short deck proportions, which in turn means more space for the rear occupants, but that is only speculation on my part.

Sponsored

 

[TomcatDriver]

Show me a much smaller, mass produced 2+2 coupe that has an engine sized 5.0L or bigger produced today that has an interior capacity no smaller than the mustang.

The only car that I can find that even comes close is the Lexus RCF. It's has the same wheelbase, but is smaller in every way. The interior is far more cramped. It has less legroom, less shoulder room, 3.5 cubic feet less of cargo space and weighs 150lbs more. Oh yea, it starts at $65k.

You cannot shrink the mustang without negatively impacting interior and cargo space....which would immediately turn off a bulk of the US buyers. These are all packaging constraints.

The current S550 is as big as the Gen 1.5 (71-73) Mustang (I still find it odd that Ford considers 65-73 all Gen1). In any case, most people (sorry if you have one) consider those years as big boats that lost the pony car recipe. The S550 definitely carries the weight better than a '73, but it is a big car. I think there is a lot of room for improvement. Your challenge is a bit of a straw man since limiting to 5.0 or larger V8s you are pretty much saying Camaro, Challenger or super-high end.

 

[millhouse]

You honestly don't believe they could do anything to reduce the size and weight of the mustang and meet their project goals?

Ford won't be decreasing the interior room for the mustang....ever. If they continue to use a DOHC V8, the size won't be getting any smaller. The mustang selling is greatly dependent on being a 2+2 and being able to fit full sized American bodies.

No where did I say the S650 wouldn't be lighter.

 

[millhouse]

The current S550 is as big as the Gen 1.5 (71-73) Mustang (I still find it odd that Ford considers 65-73 all Gen1). In any case, most people (sorry if you have one) consider those years as big boats that lost the pony car recipe. The S550 definitely carries the weight better than a '73, but it is a big car. I think there is a lot of room for improvement. Your challenge is a bit of a straw man since limiting to 5.0 or larger V8s you are pretty much saying Camaro, Challenger or super-high end.

That was my point. Until ford loses a large V8, the chassis isn’t going to significantly decrease in length.

 

[ShelbyGT350]

How about a car the size of a Toyota 86 with an EcoBoost TTV6???

 

[GT Pony]

Good luck with that miata sized V8 2+2 mustang.

That's for the 2520 model year when humans have evolved into tiny black eyed "greys".

 

[TomcatDriver]

That was my point. Until ford loses a large V8, the chassis isn’t going to significantly decrease in length.

Fox bodies had a V8, 65-68s had a V8, and a back seat, and were smaller.

I'll spell it out for you one more time. Ford won't be decreasing the interior room for the mustang....ever. If they continue to use a DOHC V8, the size won't be getting any smaller. The mustang selling is greatly dependent on being a 2+2 and being able to fit full sized American bodies.

Umm....full sized American children maybe. Have you been in the back seat of an S550?

 

[millhouse]

With crash standards getting tougher to meet every year i really dont see the Mustang getting smaller. Lighter? Maybe. If it handles better, is faster, and safer then maybe it loses 100 LBS.

I'm not picking sides but when was the last time a new model year car lost weight? I know the f150 went all aluminum and the Camaro used a smaller platform.

Exactly, it's not about picking sides...there simply is a reason today's cars are larger than they were 20 years ago.

Fox bodies had a V8, 65-68s had a V8, and a back seat, and were smaller.



Umm....full sized American children maybe. Have you been in the back seat of an S550?

Fox-bodies would miserably fail today's crash protection standards. I would still love to own another notch, but they certainly are no where near as safe as todays mustangs.

I've had some co-workers sit in the back. While uncomfortable, they managed for the 10 minutes they had to be in there. My kids fit perfectly. Any smaller however, and they would be completely worthless...which would negate the whole purpose of having rear seats.

 

[TomcatDriver]

Exactly, it's not about picking sides...there simply is a reason today's cars are larger than they were 20 years ago.



Fox-bodies would miserably fail today's crash protection standards. I would still love to own another notch, but they certainly are no where near as safe as todays mustangs.

I've had some co-workers sit in the back. While uncomfortable, they managed for the 10 minutes they had to be in there. My kids fit perfectly. Any smaller however, and they would be completely worthless...which would negate the whole purpose of having rear seats.

OK, it's not going to be a Miata...EVER, but there is no reason the Mustang must stay as big as it is or get bigger. There are examples of similarly appointed vehicles with comparable performance and 4 seats. The fact that Ford or GM don't make them means they are more expensive than a Mustang (maybe). The BMW 2 series, despite being a smaller car, has a more livable back seat and weights a few hundred lbs less and manages just fine in crash tests. Yea, it's a turbo 6 max, but it can be done.

I certainly hope the next gen is not bigger. Keeping it the same or shaving a few lbs and inches (like the 6G Camaro) would be just fine.

 

[millhouse]

I'm not an engineer. I'm also not defending the inability to make the car smaller and lighter, while keeping a v8 and large cabin space.

Do you not realize that your ideal 7/8 mustang would be nearly 15 inches SHORTER and over 3 inches NARROWER than a foxbody mustang? Or that would also make it over 2 inches NARROWER than a MY18 mazda miata?

 

[millhouse]

OK, it's not going to be a Miata...EVER, but there is no reason the Mustang must stay as big as it is or get bigger. There are examples of similarly appointed vehicles with comparable performance and 4 seats. The fact that Ford or GM don't make them means they are more expensive than a Mustang (maybe). The BMW 2 series, despite being a smaller car, has a more livable back seat and weights a few hundred lbs less and manages just fine in crash tests. Yea, it's a turbo 6 max, but it can be done.

I certainly hope the next gen is not bigger. Keeping it the same or shaving a few lbs and inches (like the 6G Camaro) would be just fine.

There are no comparable vehicles have that have small block V8 with similar seating and cargo capacity. That was my point, unless Ford or Chevy eliminates the V8, these cars aren't getting any smaller.

As for the BMW 2 series, you're talking about a car with a 2.0 4cyl car....of course it's going to be smaller and have different packaging constraints. Throw a coyote in there with an adequate crumple zone and you will quickly see that width grown and the back seat shrink down to nothing.

 

[Nagare]

I really wonder just how important the 2+2 aspect of it is, I know I don't personally care for the rear two seats and it is hard to have a proper comparison because the true 2 seaters are completely out of the price range. Based on heritage I don't see them getting rid of the back seats, but I wouldn't mind it at least.

 

[Competition Orange]

With crash standards getting tougher to meet every year i really dont see the Mustang getting smaller. Lighter? Maybe. If it handles better, is faster, and safer then maybe it loses 100 LBS.

I'm not picking sides but when was the last time a new model year car lost weight? I know the f150 went all aluminum and the Camaro used a smaller platform.

Besides the ones you mentioned, these come immediately to mind.

3 series

MK7 golf/GTI/R

Miata

Not to mention the BRZ was designed from the get go to be light weight and have a "packaging issue" causing boxer engine.

OK, it's not going to be a Miata...EVER, but there is no reason the Mustang must stay as big as it is or get bigger. There are examples of similarly appointed vehicles with comparable performance and 4 seats. The fact that Ford or GM don't make them means they are more expensive than a Mustang (maybe). The BMW 2 series, despite being a smaller car, has a more livable back seat and weights a few hundred lbs less and manages just fine in crash tests. Yea, it's a turbo 6 max, but it can be done.

I certainly hope the next gen is not bigger. Keeping it the same or shaving a few lbs and inches (like the 6G Camaro) would be just fine.

Agree.

Do you not realize that your ideal 7/8 mustang would be nearly 15 inches SHORTER and over 3 inches NARROWER than a foxbody mustang? Or that would also make it over 2 inches NARROWER than a MY18 mazda miata?

That's fine, my proportions are wrong.

I find it ludicrous that you are saying it can't be done, LITERALLY before the car is out. Shrink it a bit, have it lose 200lbs, and it'll be a win in my book.

 

[millhouse]

I really wonder just how important the 2+2 aspect of it is, I know I don't personally care for the rear two seats and it is hard to have a proper comparison because the true 2 seaters are completely out of the price range. Based on heritage I don't see them getting rid of the back seats, but I wouldn't mind it at least.

The 2+2 is extremely important. Without it, you alienate anyone who has kids and needs the car for occasional kid duty. You basically start competing with the corvette.

 

[Competition Orange]

The 2+2 is extremely important. Without it, you alienate anyone who has kids and needs the car for occasional kid duty. You basically start competing with the corvette.

I agree with this 100%.

Sponsored