I went to the CT autoshow.. her are some highlights Aston Martin DBS Superleggera Aston Martin Vantage Bentley Continental Convertible W12 McLaren GT Superlight McLaren 720s Spider McLaren 600LT Chicane Rolls-Royce Cullinan 1902 Studebaker Electric Jeep Gladiator Toyota GR Supra Toyota Corolla Hybrid Toyota Tacoma 1794 Edition Subaru Outback
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2019/11/17/business/ford-mustang-electric-suv.amp.html I’m going to vomit.
Anyone who still wants to deny that there is a problem after seeing this, is probably hopeless. (inb4 all the EV defenders and climate panickers jump in to justify why an electric SUV Mustang is totally a good thing and perfectly consistent with what a Mustang should be.)
to be fair, in 15 years time, we'll be able to rip the guts out of a junked one, and throw them into a festiva or something, which would be fun. but yes, they shouldn't have called it a mustang, though it's not the only time ford has tarnished the mustang name *cough* mustang ii, probe prototype *cough*
Honestly, I think I'd rather have one of those than an electric Mustang. At least the Probe was a somewhat functional automobile and was NOT electric or an SUV.
How do you "hopelessly deny" a problem that isn't there? With everything I've seen and read, nothing has indicated that the Mach-E is replacing the actual Mustang. The Mustang is still here to stay, the Mach-E is its own thing. If it was set to replace the Mustang, then I would have a problem. Here they're introducing something different but keeping the original car as is, nothing changed. However, if it later turns out that I'm actually wrong, then oof is me.
The problem isn’t that it’s electric, I couldn’t care less. The problem is that it’s soiling a namesake. It’s like me punching your grandmother. It’s not right.
"Soiling a nameplate" is exactly it. You all know what I think of any vehicle not powered by chemical explosives, but seriously, electrification and SUV-ification are exactly what the Mustang is supposed to be against. They might as well make a Mustang bicycle and then ride it around the Nurburgring; it'd be about as sacrilegious! Frankly, I think the fact anyone would even consider combining that nameplate with that vehicle is a pretty good sign that we've hit rock bottom... and are still going downhill somehow.
This s**t is even not an SUV because An SUV is based on a light truck chassis, in other words, body on frame.
Did somebody say Electric Edge Crossover Coupe? Oh wait, it's a electric Mustang crossover that for being "Mustang inspired" looks more like a goddamn Model X than an actual Mustang... Seriously though, the Mustang Mach-E is the Mustang II all over again, but in a even less distinguishable state (the only like easy similarity are the taillamps, and that's really it). Had it not bear the Mustang name, I could've gave less of a shit about the car. Hell, I doubt it would've sold as well if they decided not to use the Mustang as the "basis" for their design.
It is an SUV regardless of whatever definition you find, primarily because people call it an SUV. Language is defined by how people use it, and how people use words changes over time. Maybe calling it a compact crossover may be a better fitting word? Since people will still know what you mean, and it doesn't incite visions of an Escalade, which is also an SUV.
It's interesting that it's you calling others hopeless. --- Post updated --- The Mustang II was actually a huge success for Ford, and highly increased sales. It was the right car for its time, it just wasn't the right car for Internet Car Guys' time. --- Post updated --- Soiling? Why? It's a lifestyle vehicle that can go into performance if specced well, just like most Mustangs throughout the history.
Issues I have: I agree Mustang badge doesn't fit a crossover regardless of drivetrain and it's pretty hideous. That's about it.
If we're going by what the first Mustang was, then the current one should be given another name, and the Mustang should be nothing more than a Focus with a coupe/convertible/fastback (or maybe crossover, because that's what's in fashion now, like coupes were in the 60s). The S550 is far enough from the humble origins for the Mustang name to be used in other vehicles.
What, exactly, is stupid in that? The OG Mustang and other pony cars were the crossovers of the 60s - putting off-the-shelf components in a fancier body to make a more fashionable image and turn a higher profit.
why is it called SUV, which means sport utility vehicle, but in my mind, anything to have "sport" as part of it's vehicle category means good handling, which most SUVs don't have.
