Mustang Bullitt Forum banner
1 - 20 of 25 Posts

·
Administrator
Joined
·
6,521 Posts
Why do you think they are ugly?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,082 Posts
Those shots really aren't very flattering. Maybe without the vinyl cladding it looks better. Is it me or does it look like the rear panel slopes down some as opposed to being flat?
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
6,521 Posts
BigBullitt said:
Those shots really aren't very flattering. Maybe without the vinyl cladding it looks better.
The camouflage is doing its job well!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,857 Posts
Tony Alonso said:
Why do you think they are ugly?
because in my opinion they simply don t look right.....don't convey what I think would look good on the rear of a mustang

and

I have seen shots of the ''real''/ un camoflaged look and they arent any better un covered up so
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
6,521 Posts
texasbullitt said:
because in my opinion they simply don t look right.....don't convey what I think would look good on the rear of a mustang
And what would look good? Just curious as to what specific shape you are referencing...

To me, that spoiler looks similar to the one on the current GT500.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
18,432 Posts
They could have put a chrome bezel around the entire thing like the 64-66 tail lamps assembly. In my opinion, that would have been retro-ugly. I am still awaiting the actual car. These "spy photos" are not necessarily flatering to any car or it's lines.
 

·
Former Owner of 2001 DHG1557
Joined
·
840 Posts
In my opinion the taillights were ugly on the 05 and up and now that they had a chance to fix them, they go the wrong direction with them and make them even more ugly. Tailights similar to a 69 or 70 is the direction to go. Define the 3 separate sections, but don't do it with back-up lights in-between, yuk.

It seems so simple to me, yet the designers just don't get what Mustang owners want. Just my opinion, I am not trying to offend anybody that owns the newer stang, infact I really like it with a few minor exceptions, kind of like any car you buy, there is usually something that you would like different. For me on the newer stang it is the taillights.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
740 Posts
Agree about the 69-70 tail lights. They had sheet metal separating the lights. The white back up lights seen in the spy pics need to be thinner.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,857 Posts
Tony Alonso said:
And what would look good? Just curious as to what specific shape you are referencing...

To me, that spoiler looks similar to the one on the current GT500.

what looks good to you is good for you ok tony?

I do not like the looks....... its that simple , I hope it is all right with you that I have my own likes and dislikes ( opinion)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,082 Posts
I'd like to see them incorporate the concave tail lights of the 67/68 somehow. I have a feeling that they will still try to mimic the overall design of the 65 through 70 cars for awhile (you have to admit, they are similar to an extent.) I wonder if at some time they will try to progress to the 71-73 style.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
18,432 Posts
BigBullitt said:
I'd like to see them incorporate the concave tail lights of the 67/68 somehow. I have a feeling that they will still try to mimic the overall design of the 65 through 70 cars for awhile (you have to admit, they are similar to an extent.) I wonder if at some time they will try to progress to the 71-73 style.
So long as they don't go down the Mustang II retro-road.:eek: :rolleyes:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
670 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 ·
I just hope the car doesn't look too "euro". Guess we have to wait and see. I am sure it will eventually grow on all of us. I remember it took me a while to get used to the previous body style (94-04).
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
6,521 Posts
texasbullitt said:
what looks good to you is good for you ok tony?

I do not like the looks....... its that simple , I hope it is all right with you that I have my own likes and dislikes ( opinion)
Of course there is no issue about not liking it. I, in fact, don't like the GT500 spoiler because of its depth and angle at which it sets. That, of course, would not preclude me from owning one (just money)!

That's all I was trying to clarify - what about it you didn't like and what you think looks good.

Nothing more...promise!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,012 Posts
Assuming those really are the finalised tail lights, I think they won't look so bad with the camouflage off the car.

With the backup light between the red lenses they kind of remind me of the big chrome bezels around the '65/'66 tail lights

At least they are vertical and not horizontal!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,386 Posts
These tail lights look much better than the Giargio (or whatever) concept had. I think the whole tail end of the "Roman Mustang" looked awful.

I don't like these tail lights over the 2005+ design. I dont like the backup lights breaking up the lens seperation. Looks cheap and AGAIN ... something Ford threw together just so they could say they changed something (i.e. another big waste of money). They should've left the tailights alone, or retro-styled them to exactly copy the 69-70 look.

I also hope they at least either give us the Dark Highland Green color or the 69 Black Jade color. Doing another BULLITT that doesn't have a big block is a waste of time ... just give us the color and be done with it.

No telling what performance (holding breath) we will get (or should I say NOT GET). At first I was excited about the new changes but the more I keep thinking about how Ford short-changed this last BULLITT with no engine options I find myself really caring less what they do from now on.

Just like with the last fiasco ... If whatever they produce DOESNT RUN and what I want isn't available then I aint going to buy one. :lol:

Ford should've saved their money, carried on with the 2005 body without any changes and spent the money better on certifying the 2003-2004 4.6 Cobra engines for this current model, DUMPED Carrol Shelby and offer the 5.4 as an option for all models like they did back in 69 and enhanced the interior color options.

That's my 2 cents anyway.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,101 Posts
DavidMidgley said:
So long as they don't go down the Mustang II retro-road.:eek: :rolleyes:

I totally agree with ya on this.....that woud be a real joke...i think......
 
1 - 20 of 25 Posts
Top