[Xaxas]

You people complain about good competition having more variety, neither of which are never bad, guess what, the Mach-E and this hypothetical 4 door Mustang are the money makers that fund the developments of cars of forum posters like you.

As long as they don't make anything objectively BAD, all is fair, I don't like that the Mustang brand-name means multiple things now but the Mach-E is a legit good vehicle and it's what will fund the last 700+ HP V8 Mustang that everyone will talk about but very few people will buy, because that's the enthusiast car reality and we must enjoy that because it will go away very soon.

[SirJangle]

Originally Posted by UnknownJinX

Yeah, when the cars were humongous and were as safe as tin cans in a crash, of course they had a lot of room. Even an old Mini Cooper had lots of room inside because there is no thickness to it.

Nowadays, any RWD coupé that's reasonably sized and can pass safety standards won't have much room in the back.

Even for FWD coupés that have room in the back, accessing it is another issue. You can have all the room in the world, but if I can't fit a box through the space between the folded front seat and the door opening, it's useless.

That's why I actually wish more coupés tried the quad-coupé/suicide door approach like my RX-8. You maintain the coupé look but the access to the rear seats are better than standard coupés. You don't even have the pesky B-pillar in the way - that's attached to the rear door.

I loved my RX-8. I've always wondered why no one else copied that design. My son was 8 when I had that car and we had no problem whatsoever getting him and his friends in and out.

[DorsoDuroJohn]

Because looks are subjective, and that RX-8, well, just NO, no no no no not in a million years. A car that cannot decide if it's a coupe or a sedan, I'm out.

[FarmerFran]

Originally Posted by SirJangle

I loved my RX-8. I've always wondered why no one else copied that design. My son was 8 when I had that car and we had no problem whatsoever getting him and his friends in and out.

Saturn did, not sure who was first though.

[UnknownJinX]

Originally Posted by SirJangle

I loved my RX-8. I've always wondered why no one else copied that design. My son was 8 when I had that car and we had no problem whatsoever getting him and his friends in and out.

It's still a little more tricky than a sedan but again, it's an improvement over the Accord Coupé I had before. I could stuff tires and wheels in the back without any issues.

Originally Posted by DorsoDuroJohn

Because looks are subjective, and that RX-8, well, just NO, no no no no not in a million years. A car that cannot decide if it's a coupe or a sedan, I'm out.

That was Jeremy Clarkson's impression in his Top Gear review of the car.

Another trouble with the design is that it's very difficult to turn into a convertible - it would either be not rigid or be too heavy by the time it gets rigid enough.

Originally Posted by FarmerFran

Saturn did, not sure who was first though.

Saturn Ion Coupe was another example. Nowadays, there is the BMW i3, Mazda's own MX-30 and some trucks also have it.

Mazda basically had to do it as Ford was their major stockholder at the time and they wouldn't let them sell a second sports car without it having 4 doors, so that's Mazda's answer to it.

[seethruya]

Originally Posted by Xaxas

You people complain about good competition having more variety, neither of which are never bad, guess what, the Mach-E and this hypothetical 4 door Mustang are the money makers that fund the developments of cars of forum posters like you.

As long as they don't make anything objectively BAD, all is fair, I don't like that the Mustang brand-name means multiple things now but the Mach-E is a legit good vehicle and it's what will fund the last 700+ HP V8 Mustang that everyone will talk about but very few people will buy, because that's the enthusiast car reality and we must enjoy that because it will go away very soon.

I think it was not only a brilliant idea but a stroke of genius with Ford calling this electric vehicle the Mustang Mach-E for this simple reason. Because they named it Mustang, everyone has to give their 2 cents. Which means people will talk about the vehicle. Press will look into the Mustang Mach-E and compare it to the Mustang. With articles like, does this vehicle deserve the Mustang name, does it honor the heritage, would a Mach-E GT beat the real Mustang GT?? All this free publicity simply because they called an electric vehicle Mustang. Controversy creates cash.

The Mustang Mach-E GT, 480 HP and 634 FT/LB is nothing to scoff at. I think it would make a great family vehicle when that time comes for me.

[MR's 2SS]

Originally Posted by UnknownJinX

Yeah, when the cars were humongous and were as safe as tin cans in a crash, of course they had a lot of room. Even an old Mini Cooper had lots of room inside because there is no thickness to it.

Nowadays, any RWD coupé that's reasonably sized and can pass safety standards won't have much room in the back.

Even for FWD coupés that have room in the back, accessing it is another issue. You can have all the room in the world, but if I can't fit a box through the space between the folded front seat and the door opening, it's useless.

That's why I actually wish more coupés tried the quad-coupé/suicide door approach like my RX-8. You maintain the coupé look but the access to the rear seats are better than standard coupés. You don't even have the pesky B-pillar in the way - that's attached to the rear door.

Theres a lot more to crash stats.
Yes the new cars have crumple zones and they test things like cock pit intrusion in the foot wells.
60s and 70s tires and brakes were garbage by comparison. The interiors were steel so... not only no air bags but slamming into a steel dash is always going to be a drag.
But I didnt suggest they build those cars again. No more so than the Camaro is like a 67 or Mustangs are 65s...
The toaster oven fleets of same same are the reason so many people buy pick up trucks and never use them as a truck. Why pay 46 grand for an egg shaped mini SUV when 50 grand gets you an F-250 Lariat. Or even the same 46 gets you an XLT and you can haul whatever you need.
People drove drunk in the 60s and 70s...brakes sucked. No seat belts... flying through windshields face first and leaving your fingers behind in the defrost vent sucks.
But Im sure they could make a nice safe two door with a usable back seat.

[MR's 2SS]

Originally Posted by FarmerFran

Saturn did, not sure who was first though.

How about those early 60s Lincoln convertibles. But we called them suicide doors. I think for a while they outlawed them because they could scoop somone and run them down where the front hinged doors would just close.

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by FarmerFran

Saturn did, not sure who was first though.

Or the RAP door on the pick up trucks.

[UnknownJinX]

Originally Posted by seethruya

I think it was not only a brilliant idea but a stroke of genius with Ford calling this electric vehicle the Mustang Mach-E for this simple reason. Because they named it Mustang, everyone has to give their 2 cents. Which means people will talk about the vehicle. Press will look into the Mustang Mach-E and compare it to the Mustang. With articles like, does this vehicle deserve the Mustang name, does it honor the heritage, would a Mach-E GT beat the real Mustang GT?? All this free publicity simply because they called an electric vehicle Mustang. Controversy creates cash.



The Mustang Mach-E GT, 480 HP and 634 FT/LB is nothing to scoff at. I think it would make a great family vehicle when that time comes for me.

Any publicity is good publicity, as the saying goes. There was a survey saying that a lot of SUV buyers don't agree with Ford naming an SUV Mustang. I really need to find that article.

Originally Posted by MR's 2SS

The toaster oven fleets of same same are the reason so many people buy pick up trucks and never use them as a truck. Why pay 46 grand for an egg shaped mini SUV when 50 grand gets you an F-250 Lariat. Or even the same 46 gets you an XLT and you can haul whatever you need.

People drove drunk in the 60s and 70s...brakes sucked. No seat belts... flying through windshields face first and leaving your fingers behind in the defrost vent sucks.

But Im sure they could make a nice safe two door with a usable back seat.

Again, it doesn't matter how useable the rear seats are. If they aren't accessible then they aren't good.

It's kind of like the trunk on our Camaro's. The volume isn't the main issue, it's the small opening that restricts what can go through. Even if our cars have the same trunk volume as a hatchback, a small opening will render that useless.

Realistically, even if you have a 4/5-seat coupé, you are really just expected to not use them 90% of the time. Of course there are people here who use them regularly for their kids, but those are more the exceptions than expectations.

I had a conversation with a friend a long time ago. He has an older Civic Sedan that his parents bought for cheap and I asked him why not go for a coupé. He said that he has two younger siblings that he often had to drive to school and they all went to different schools, so a sedan makes it a lot easier to drop them off, versus a coupé where they had to shuffle around so the sibling in the rear can get in and get out. It doesn't sound like a big issue, but I can imagine that getting pretty old and annoying quickly on a daily basis.

[crysalis_01]

Originally Posted by Xaxas

You people complain about good competition having more variety, neither of which are never bad, guess what, the Mach-E and this hypothetical 4 door Mustang are the money makers that fund the developments of cars of forum posters like you.

As long as they don't make anything objectively BAD, all is fair, I don't like that the Mustang brand-name means multiple things now but the Mach-E is a legit good vehicle and it's what will fund the last 700+ HP V8 Mustang that everyone will talk about but very few people will buy, because that's the enthusiast car reality and we must enjoy that because it will go away very soon.

What do you mean "you people"?

Just kidding. I actually agree with a lotnof your post. I mostly see a lot to postering aka fake outrage about things like this. A company naming a product whatever they want is what they're going to do. They spend the money for the kind of marketing research that we, enthusiast buyers, will never invest. We view it through a very specific set of filters and don't take into any company'd real goal...making money. If we enjoy the decision, great, they make money from us. If not, oh well, were niche and they'll make it from someone else.

At the end of the day, just because it's offered in a configuration you don't like doesn't mean you're forced into buying it. Buy what you like. That's all that matters.

[Norm Peterson]

Originally Posted by seethruya

I think it was not only a brilliant idea but a stroke of genius with Ford calling this electric vehicle the Mustang Mach-E for this simple reason. Because they named it Mustang, everyone has to give their 2 cents. Which means people will talk about the vehicle. Press will look into the Mustang Mach-E and compare it to the Mustang. With articles like, does this vehicle deserve the Mustang name, does it honor the heritage, would a Mach-E GT beat the real Mustang GT?? All this free publicity simply because they called an electric vehicle Mustang. Controversy creates cash.

That works best in the beginning when the new vehicle is trying to get itself established. What's worst about this particular marketing episode is that it has some potential for changing the Mustang's whole image around to being everything it wasn't.

The Mustang as a more sedan-ish 4-door isn't much better.

The Mustang Mach-E GT, 480 HP and 634 FT/LB is nothing to scoff at.

Which is exactly the right kool-aid flavor for getting more enthusiasts on board.

I think it would make a great family vehicle when that time comes for me.

Probably would, either the E or the 4-door. But would you avoid buying those vehicles if they didn't have the 'Mustang' name anywhere in them?


Norm

[Norm Peterson]

Originally Posted by crysalis_01

What do you mean "you people"?

Just kidding. I actually agree with a lotnof your post. I mostly see a lot to postering aka fake outrage about things like this. A company naming a product whatever they want is what they're going to do. They spend the money for the kind of marketing research that we, enthusiast buyers, will never invest. We view it through a very specific set of filters and don't take into any company'd real goal...making money. If we enjoy the decision, great, they make money from us. If not, oh well, were niche and they'll make it from someone else.

At the end of the day, just because it's offered in a configuration you don't like doesn't mean you're forced into buying it. Buy what you like. That's all that matters.

It's not "fake outrage" to see the potential for the Mustang's image being changed to the point where the 20xx ponycar Mustang joins the 2003 Camaro. Keep in mind that Ford has no counterpart to the Corvette to keep the non-truck, non-SUV flame burning.


Norm

[SirJangle]

Originally Posted by FarmerFran

Saturn did, not sure who was first though.

Oh, I forgot about that one. Probably because the only Saturn that caught my eye was the Sky.