Spilled White-Out on Mustang
 

The truck like grille/hood, the flat boxy sides, on and on, so the 2005 is not perfect, but it sure is a Mustang.

Sooner or later, I was going to try a touch-up with white-out; today was the day (software updates gave me time on the board) after over a year knowing what it was going to look like.

So what's the point?

I had to get this out of my system, had to show someone what minor changes could of, would of done. That the headlights look like an elderly asian person or a sad angry person squinting.

I could not even figure out how to paste the two side together in a program, I am forever a "cut & paste" guy with markers and white out - sorry.

PS: If some one wants to edit the j-pegs and re-post it as one image, knock yourself out - cheers.http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1102973892.jpg http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1102973921.jpg

From two years ago, when I bother to actually draw.......................these were trace-overs from the cover of Motor Trend.
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1102974148.jpg http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1102974198.jpg
Note: Don't think I could ever settle for a Mustang after driving a Porsche.SmileWavy

So "spilled white out" is your euphemism for huffing the stuff, which would explain the compulsion to draw Fords.

I gotta remember that one. "Damn, looks like I spilled some Jack Daniels right into a glass..."

Hey wideboy.....I mean widebody, I did not like the 996/Boxster headlights when they first came out, but they eventualy fix that problem to.

The reason I posted here, is that a Mustang site (http://forums.bradbarnett.net/index.php?showforum=7) I used to go to, does not allow direct posting of J-pegs..........so I copied the web location here.

I expect this thread to die in a single day, don't sweat it bro.:)

I just felt obligated to give you grief for posting FORD stuff on a Porsche site.

I restored my wifes '64 1/2 Mustang. I knew every inch of that car and was never inspired. Boring. Slab-sided. New one is just as bad. Looks like it was designed by a brick maker. Oh well, it's probably just me.

No problem, I expect a little locker room humor from both sides. Here is what one guy posted when I said my 28 year old Porsche still will handle better:

We'll be sure to wave to you as we pass your 30 yr old Porsche broken down on the side of the road. I'm sure your g/f will appreciate the lift in a car that actually has a functioning stereo, and heat.

Of the top 15 problems found on early 911, the following might be applicable to a '77 911S.
Throttle linkage damper failures
Pulse type electric fuel pumps
Electrical grounds and connectors (early '77)
Chain Tensioners
Clutch designs and actuation systems (all years)
CIS air box breakage from backfires
CIS fuel pump relay failures
CIS warm-up regulators
Fuel system check valve failures

The non-galvanized bodies often had grounding problems in their electrical system as well as general connectors due to corrosion. More and more relays were added during the '70s to help compensate for the large distances between the battery, switches and various components.

NOTE: Except for the galvanization babble, this is my car.
:D
Oh yea, and they pasted the two halves together too.SmileWavy

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1102976239.jpg

It's not just you, I've been calling it a "Brick from the Past" for almost three years now.:)

Change the title of this thread to something like: Rebirth of American Muscle.

Howsabout the Dodge Charger?
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1102987932.jpg

Just a thought...

Randy

kach22i,

I like your "scheme 1" drawing. Maybe you should get a job on the Ford design team?!

I agree on the headlight issue, to me that's the biggest problem of the new one. Not my cup of tea, but cheap HP.

but at the end of the day it's still a Ford - too bad, they could have really done something - too bad they don't design like Chrysler, least they have a before concept of lines.

Dang, just spilled some Boodles onto a forgiving lime wedge - best take care of that right quick, CHEERS TO HONOR...

I gotta remind myself that the consumer is a attention-deficit, self-concious, little b^tch to be told what's good for them.

A REAL Mustang...aka a REAL MANS CAR....all 428 cubic inchs of it...http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1103011552.jpg

I became interested in the Mustang again about the time of September 11, 2001.......................needed an escape, a distraction to help me heal. Once we knew what it was going to look like the fun was over, and I lost interest.

It's still a Ford?

Do you mean like the Ford GT (GT-40 remake)? That car will beat the pants of off Porsche/Ferrari (or at least kept pace) if you buy into what all the magizines are saying, not bad for a years worth of effort.

They missed the boat with the Mustang, but that's my two cents, bet they still sell a gazillion of them. Don't know if the product will have legs, could be the first retro product that does.

recale, Interesting Charger...........have not seen that before.

After 9/11/2001 I traced over a Mustang, shortened the overhangs and looked to the Jag X-Type and Audi TT for influence, as well as the 1965/1966 + 1969/1970 Mustangs. Nothing like the texture of a good line drawing.:)
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1103016844.jpg

I am still hoping Ford has the sense to do something with the Mercury Messenger concept car.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1103016968.jpg

I took one of those Mustangs for a test drive on Friday. It was 6 cylender and an Automatic. Ug! But I wanted to see what it was like.

I haven't driven a Mustang in a while, but it was kinda fun. The automatic sucks. After driving the 911 5-speed, it's hard to lope along at 2200 rpm at 60 mph. A stomp of the loud pedal gets a short delay followed by a loud growl. I'm sure the GT would have been waaay more fun.

If it was my DD, I could see getting tired of it quickly. The automatic couldn't even supply a tiptronic of sorts. It was all so retro, I don't think they wanted to mess with the look.

The interior was retro cool and boring at the same time. Again I could see the appeal now, but get tired of it quickly. Oddly enough, the 12v plug was at the top of the dash..great for a radar detector, but terrible to plug in a cell phone...

Don't delude yourseves guys. While short on sophistication, a Mustang Cobra will ruin your day. They are a chip & a pully away from 500 hp at the wheels, have irs & decent brakes. Proceed with caution.

I might drive one just so that I have an opinion...........perhaps a V-8.

Last year Grassroots MotorSports Magazine put a 356 speedster up against a mini van on a closed course with cones. The mini van had better times because of the drivetrain they said. The van looked like a handful lurching all over, but ABS and all new stuff that kept it under control.

If a mini van from 2003/2004 beats a Porsche from 1955, will a 2005 Mustang beat a 25-30 year old Porsche?

No mater what the numbers say, the "Porsche Dynamic" is a different experience than the Mustangs "kick in the pants" style. It will be interesting to see if a magazine does a face off of this sort in the future.

"If a mini van from 2003/2004 beats a Porsche from 1955, will a 2005 Mustang beat a 25-30 year old Porsche?"

-Heck yeah! My 89 Civic hatch was better than the 70T in many regards. Modern fuel/spark systems will do that.
The new 'stang doesn't look bad, and your drawings definitly have merit and stay in the lines of the concept. You can buy 3-4 for the price of a new Carrera.

All I want to know is: what are those rear grill vents for:D?

Kach22i,
dude - heck with the buildings, you should be throwing ink in auto. Brothers got some chops!