Opinion: New Mustang is next verse, worse than the first
After much ado, the seventh-generation, 2024 Ford Mustang cometh. In the end, the rumors of hybridization, all-wheel drive, and the Explorer’s RWD/AWD platform were premature. The new Mustang, codename S650, remains pretty much business as usual. What it amounts to is more or less a mild, unremarkable evolution of the existing rear-drive architecture. But what does that mean for America’s pony car, and what might end up being this storied nameplate’s internal-combustion swan-song?
Ford is going all in on electrification as it reaps success from sticking batteries into the F-150 and leveraging the Mustang name to sell an electric crossover. For the moment, it appears to be happy to let the traditional Mustang wither on the vine … at least in the big-picture sense. Lest we forget, the Mustang is now the only non-pickup, non-crossover Ford you can buy in the United States. Maybe Ford realized its competition, the Chevrolet Camaro and Dodge Challenger, are not much longer for this world and it wouldn’t take much to keep the Mustang on top in the muscle car game.
The bare minimum appears to have been just enough. There were rumors that Ford would bolt its new Mustang onto the Explorer platform (CD6), which would have allowed for more up-to-date powertrains, including a hybrid setup. Historically, it should be mentioned, both the Mustang and the Camaro have kept up with prevailing technological and aesthetic trends. Both nameplates, for example, added a turbocharged four-cylinder model as a base engine in their most recent generations, but the Challenger and the Mustang in particular have been stressing a more retro vibe since the mid-2000s. Now it appears to be running over the same old ground, albeit in a new wrapper.
Part of the long-term success of the Mustang, even through its lean years, was how it has adapted to the market of its moment. It started in the Sixties when the Mustang was born as a way to give the common man flash for not much cash. Soon, Ford proved its mettle with growly Shelbys and considerable motorsports success. The hangover from the Sixties was the crisis-ridden Seventies, but the Mustang endured the Malaise Era and stayed alive through some questionable baroque styling and not much performance. Still, it was a reinvention that was correct for where the market was at the time.
When the Eighties arrived, the Mustang found itself with a hatchback and more considered Euro-style appearance, but again the pony car held true to making the best of its humdrum undercarriage with up-to-the-minute looks and features. (The Camaro marched in lockstep and did the same.)
Now for the full disclosure: Remember my old ’71 Duster, which I’ve mentioned in previous articles? When I realized that keeping such a highly strung beast on the road was out of my depth, I traded it for a Fox-body. Its motor was a boat-anchor 3.3 and it had a weird manual shift layout with an overdrive. I wired in my Sony CD changer wrongly, which left me to choose between headlights or music—not both at the same time. (This led to a rather interesting night out at the cinema with a girl I’d promised to take out in my Mustang.) But it was a Mustang nonetheless, and I’ve always lusted after one of the last ’93 Cobras after reading about them in a road test with its competitors.
Ford dipped it toes into the retro pool with the SN95 generation in 1994, before awkwardly forcing straight lines onto the 1999 redesign. But when S197 appeared in 2005, chief designer J Mays—who made his name with retrofuturism—set the controls straight for 1964. His work on this design was not influenced (as many believed) by the Mustang Giugiaro concept which would not appear until 2006. I’ve mentioned before how I think the 2005 Mustang is a bit blocky and ungainly, needing a bit more finesse to really sail as a successful throwback in the same way as the Challenger does.
So that’s where we’ve been ever since, Ford like Dodge and Chevrolet deciding that the first versions of these pony cars are the definitive ones. Translation: this is what these cars are and this is how you will remember them. No new Fox-body or pop-up headlight Camaros, no reinvention to keep up with the times; we’re selling you nostalgia rather than a contemporary update of the muscle car formula. Can you imagine a manufacturer green-lighting something as bold as the F-body glass tailgate today? The accountants would be in fits. The Charger has shamelessly kept up its rubber-burning reputation, but as we’ve seen with the new Daytona SRT concept, at least Dodge are trying something new.
S650 is, deep down, a remix of a remix of the 1964 original. It leans heavily on the outgoing S550 Mustang, using essentially the same underpinnings. It’s got a slightly more chiseled appearance, but the reality is one of a very big facelift.
Tooling up for a car is expensive, and among the biggest investments—apart from the lights—is the body in white. It’s the fundamental structure, the actual skeleton on which the car is built. Looking at this new Mustang, you can see the bones are carry-over. Doing it this way allows Ford to update the sheet metal, but I’d argue they’ve merely made it worse. It’s all a bit more of an exaggeration on the existing theme, with bigger hips and a more aggressive down-the-road graphic up front.
The front light to fender is a critical visual relationship, and this is one of those areas where we’re talking about fractions of an inch. Ford lowered the headlights for 2023 and made them a bit messy by trying to replicate the three vertical tail lamps, and by continuing a straight line across the grille managed to give the car a frowning look. The previous Mustang avoided this because its grille shape was more pronounced, so you didn’t notice as much. The S650 feels like a rearranging of existing graphical elements to no great effect.
The Mustang has dropped the black infill panel between the tail lights, reducing some of the visual break-up at the back. Having something to lessen the visual impact of painted sheet metal is important, because too much can bodywork can look bland. Of course, fewer parts means less cost.
It seems strange that car that trades primarily on its driving experience and tactile fulfillment settles for large touchscreens in its interior, especially after the previous model made such a big deal of having a “cockpit” inspired by aircraft design. We’ve seen good and bad TFT implementations over the last few years, but this feels terribly misguided. Ergonomics aside, the whole thing appears incongruous and not really in keeping with the muscle car aesthetic. Mostly the same, but worse, is not what I’d call a recipe for long-term success. Like the Camaro, the Mustang is no longer evolving to keep up with the times but remixing an existing concept to ever decreasing returns.
Now, I can hear you all saying that I’m contradicting myself, and after all, didn’t I praise the Challenger for doing exactly that? Here’s the difference. The Challenger had one look, stuck to it, and was always a unique ownership proposition. It never chased trends. The Mustang, for better or worse, did. It remained current and was even adaptable enough to be a huge hit in Europe, so its failure to do so this time around disappoints me.
I’m glad I didn’t stay up to watch the reveal like I may have done in the past. Because other than that ’93 Cobra, what I really want is a ’71 Mach 1 on dog-dish steelies.
***
Adrian Clarke is a professional car designer, earning a degree in automotive design from Coventry University and a Masters in Vehicle Design from the Royal College of Art in London. He worked for several years at a major European OEM, and in the ’90s his daily driver in London was a 1979 Ford Thunderbird.
those of us “Past” a certain age, of love the look & feel of the Old Mustang/Charger or other mussel cars–but for companies to keep producing them there has to be enough Profit–how many of us are going to put our money where our mouths are? BUY them? enough to keep the companies profits up? the only constant in life is change- Like it or not-
I am extremely happy Ford kept the 6 speed manual alive. when my hellcat wears out, this Mustang will be the only V8 6 speed available, and WILL sell one to me. That said, the dash looks horrible, the body isnt so bad, not as nice looking as the 2020’s. it does appear to have morphed a camaro-butt, however I love the fact , they kept the V8 Manual Trans alive. in the mid 80’s I was impressed that ford kept the V8 manual alive as well….remember when the Probe was going to be the new mustang? Glad they created the fox body……and look what it did for Ford. I am holding my Ford stock, and maybe buying more.
ps i grossly disagree with you…if Ford had built this on an Explorer platform???? it would liken to…. make the 1st mustang on the Colony Park platform……what a ridiculous thought you had there. people dont buy these cars for electronic waste, I, as others want V8 MANUALS….at any cost, for the DRIVING Pleasure.
I agree with this. To me it’s obvious that the next ‘stang coupe will be electric (the SUV Mach E should never have been referenced as a mustang). the grill is very flat, consistent with a lack of a need for a radiator. The two door Mustang was about having an affordable fun car to drive. It is obvious that electric cars are capable of a much higher performance ceiling that current gas cars, not to mention the legislation we are expecting soon.
Electric cars will always be faster than internal combustions engines no doubt. It’s just by construction, they are on/off 100%. However not sure how you feel but I fail to see the emotion in that. Nothing beats the build up and the drama of a naturally aspirated V8. I guess electric cars will be for people who don’t care for or don’t like driving…which I acknowledge is a majority. However we still sell Apple watches and Tisots or vacherons. Some will always love the feeling of the mechanic.
I could not disagree more. One only need look at the most icon sports car in the history of the automobile, the Porsche 911, to see how a great car can and should evolve. While it has slowly improved and modernized over its nearly 60 year history, you can look at a brand new 911 and see how it is the same car as a 1963. The current Mustangs are following that same example, and maintaining the styling ques of the early cars. When a car, like the Mustang, becomes an icon, it is because it has not tried to be something new, but retains the greatness that made it great to begin with.
I agree 100%. The interior is cheesy, inappropriate for a muscle car. Regardless of your taste, that big screen will age badly. Not sure why Ford even bothered doing this. I own a 2019 Mustang Bullit which I love. I am not trading it for this one.
Goodnight. I’m not sure what the author is thinking. The Mustang sill never appeal to the masses. Ford is selling it as a niche car. It’s days of first generation sales of 20 million (maybe a slight exaggeration). It developed a brand new market for an affordable sedan that even made 250 pound housewives want one.
I owned a 68 inline 6 I bought for basic transportation in 1975. I did not buy it because it was ugly or the fact that everyone in my neighborhood owned one. It was new and fresh concept that had models that appealed to the 250 pound matron as well as the weekend track bunch.
The world has moved on to SUV’s. Competition from 27 brands and tastes have moved on. Mustang no longer defines it’s niche, nor can it. But Ford found a diverse base of enthusiasts and it is tapping it well.
If the author feels the need to criticize an auto maker it might start with porch.
The world hasn’t moved to SUV… USA has because of differing emissions rules making it more profitable to chase sales on Subaru Outbacks measured up just enough to sell as trucks (and cheaper emissions).
Most companies have given up on trying to make an affordable car that is a car. Mustang could gain some sales with a cheaper entry point, but with no 4-door platform mate to amortize the costs no one is willing to test the theory (except for the large number of Hondas, etc. that pretty much equate to the grocery spec Mustangs of the 60s).
First honest review. I agree
I think it’s cool everyone has their own views about cars or trucks. My very first car was a 1970 Mach 1 Mustang I bought from my older brother back in 1976 I was 15, for the big price of 500.00, my paper route money. I guess you can say I am a little partial to Fords. I do like all the 60s and 70s muscle cars from all makes. I am glad i grew up in that time frame. Today’s vehicles all look the same to me.
Let me summarize your article by saying it’s not muscle enough and the changes aren’t significant enough. So many words to give us a history lesson and nitpick your way to some sort of vague conclusion.
The front end looks quite a bit better in my opinion. If it ain’t broke…
Ultimately, the auto industry is business. Businesses do not exist without maintaining a profit. With limited competition next year Ford did what was reasonable to maintain sales while still appealing to enthusiasts. They already have the Mach E, which performs very well. To do a complete restructuring of this next generation was probably too much of a stretch after a couple difficult years for the entire industry.
I purchased a new 1965 Mustang . Loved my first car but sadly had to give it up because it would not stay on the road at 70 miles an hour. I felt unsafe because of the light weight. Traded it in for a Galaxy 500 converable red with a black roof. Thought I loved the Mustang, not nearly as much as my
red Galaxy 500. Only wished I had keep that one. Now I drive a 2022 Bentley and still miss my first 2 Fords. The new version is still a great looking car. Not sure how it handles but will go to the nearest dealer for a test drive and maybe purchase the “pony ” car of my past.
A “real” Corvette would have a straight 6, two speed automatic, drum brakes and side curtains. The standard C8 outperforms every previous Corvette with the exception of the latest ZR1. Is that not what a Corvette is all about ?
This will keep demand high for the previous model years.
The only thing “Mustang” about it is the taillights. The visual brand essence has been lost.
Not a fan.
I am in sync with your review. After sadly giving up my 1970 Boss 302 Mustang, I managed to acquire a 1968 and a 1977 (locally built in Mexico) while living abroad. Finally, I have come full circle and purchased a 2022 GT. Having seen several photos of the 2024, and not being a big fan of electronic controls, I am delighted that I opted for the 2022.
Touch screens bad.
Proofreading would be good.