Looking at the roofline of the new mustangs, I'm convinced that there is an attractive looking car just INSIDE the front and rear body panels... Trim 3 to 8 inches off of the car, and there's probably a kickass sports car in there.
It just looks overweight to me.
Rip, if you want a car that KILLS that saleen for 1/2 the price, find a used 2000-2003 camaro z28 ($7000), slap a new custom coat of paint on it ($3000-$5000), put a little work into the suspension with new springs, adjustable shocks, new wheels, brakes, etc ($4000), and then put a supercharger and exhaust on the motor ($6000-$8000). Since you're starting from around 340hp at the crank bone stock (most z28s dyno over 290 at the rear wheels stock), you ought to get 400-450 hp with only bolt-on engine work.
That hopped up z-28 would outrun any stock mustang ever built on the street, dragstrip, and on a road course, for well under $25,000.
There's a reason why the stock z-28 and firebirds had a speed limiter at 159... Because they'd ALL exceed that straight from the showroom floor if the limiter wasn't in place. Every single serious magazine review of the z-28 from 1998 to when it was discontinued found that their review cars all had a measured top speed of 159 mph. And they'd all beat the current year's mustang around a road course.
Better handling, faster, cheaper... Yea you get mullet jokes but they're just jealous. I was a mustang fan until the 1998 F-body hit the streets, and now there's no way I'll trade my firebird for anything less than a corvette or BMW M3. Because almost everything else on the market except for those ultra-hopped up ricers would be a step backwards in performance or a massive step up in price.
That said, those stangs are fairly popular and they're "cooler" than the f-bodies ever were. They're just slower, and most people don't really care about that.
