Do you think the 94-98 is a high point in auto design history?

Photonfanatic · Sep 8, 2013

I think that the 94 bodystyle, is one of the high notes in automotive design history. I'm talking about the artwork and aesthetic value here. The way the outside of the car looks, and feels. I fell in love with the 94-98 bodystyle the very first time I saw it. I don't think it will ever wear off. Even back then, it somehow had the look and feel of a much higher priced car than it was, say something like a Ferrari. It just has its own unique look that I don't think I've seen outside of the world of supercars. I really think Ford knocked it out of the park with that design. It was perfect for its era, which was that of the round cars with flowing and merging body panels. They still do, just not to that extent these days. The lines have gotten sharper in newer cars.

Do you feel the same way that I do about the bodystyle? I think that the bodystyle of a 94 Mustang is one of the top 10 great and unique bodystyles in automotive history. Of course there are others, with their own merits that not all others share. But its definitely one of a kind, and I have doubts as to whether Ford could actually outdo themselves in this area when it comes to the mustang. I'm talking about for its time. Of course by now its old and simply wouldn't be in style, were it still being produced today. But the S197 ain't got sh1t on the looks (again, for its time) of the 94 bodystyle. Part of that is because the S197's "time" came and went back in the 60's. But even the Fox doesn't really compare, and I while it does look good, I can't put the Fox bodies in the same category when it comes to the artwork.

uncltrvlnmatt · Sep 8, 2013

I think in the grand scheme of things, the 94-98 Mustang will be closer to the bastard years of the Mustang 2, than the greatness of the 64.5-70 Mustang body styles.

This is the time frame when Ford was thinking of calling the Probe a Mustang, and had a huge backlash. They needed a quick fix because the Fox body was way over due for a real face lift. So the sn95 was born.

Overall the body style looks good, but from certain angles it is just a mess. Especially looking at the rear quarters from the front of the door area.

Ferocious · Sep 8, 2013

I think it's pretty poorly designed. It looked good 15 years ago but it's not a design that holds its age very well.

The form is too round, as opposed to sharp like most newer cars.
The fact that it has no flared fenders makes it look very outdated as well.
My car has like 4 fake vents which just shows the quality design.

Personally, I would never buy these care to leave stock. They look like absolute ass.
However, lowered on some wheels that fill the wheel wells with some spacers out back makes them look 10000x newer.

Orange 94 · Sep 8, 2013

Ferocious said:
My car has like 4 fake vents which just shows the quality design.

?

I don't think the sn95 is a "high point in auto design history". But they were a pretty good leap of improvement from past cars.
As for design, i love the roundness of the car. Absolutely love the look of the car. It seems to flow perfectly. I love the 2 lines that go to the side scoop. Also the beautiful line that goes from the front of the car, under the window and around the trunk. I like the sn95s more than the new edges because of the roundness.

However there is things like the height of the car that needs to be changed, but isn't that the whole point of mustangs? Mustangs are know for their customization capabilities and huge aftermarket. They don't need to be a perfect car like a Ferrari straight out of the factory IMO. I'd rather have something different and my own.

That being said these cars are hard to appreciate until you really look at them closely and know everything about them. So they are mostly only loved by the people that own them. They're typically not a show stopper unless a lot of work has been put into them. For the day these cars were a big deal but didn't really get noticed for it. I feel they are sort of an underdog.

I think people compare these cars too much to brand new cars. Lots of people don't see how much cars have changed in like the last like decade. In the last decade the power of sports cars has basically doubled AND they get better fuel mileage. Even look at the difference between a 94 and 04 cobra... 20 years ago 300hp was still a great number, now mini vans are making that. Apples to oranges comparing our cars to new ones.

Also I hate when people compare the sn95 to the mustang II... :deeplist::nono:

Twista · Sep 8, 2013

Ferocious said:
I think it's pretty poorly designed. It looked good 15 years ago but it's not a design that holds its age very well.

The form is too round, as opposed to sharp like most newer cars.
The fact that it has no flared fenders makes it look very outdated as well.
My car has like 4 fake vents which just shows the quality design.

Personally, I would never buy these care to leave stock. They look like absolute ass.
However, lowered on some wheels that fill the wheel wells with some spacers out back makes them look 10000x newer.

Wow i have found no one that agreed with me when i said sn95 looks like ass when stock. I wouldn't own this thing if i had to keep it stock looking. The new edge GT looks much better stock and the 03-04 cobra blows the 94-98 cobra out the water when stock.

Orange 94 · Sep 8, 2013

Twista said:
03-04 cobra blows the 94-98 cobra out the water when stock.

I acutally like them about the same...

I think I'd rather have a 94-98 cobra to have something different... everyone has a termi.
Only thing is the motor...

Twista · Sep 8, 2013

Orange 94 said:
I acutally like them about the same...

I think I'd rather have a 94-98 cobra to have something different... everyone has a termi.
Only thing is the motor...

I would expect that from you. (thats a good thing btw)

turion94 · Sep 8, 2013

My stock 1994 GT gets compliments all the time. 20 years later it still looks good.

Comparing it to the Mustang II or a Ford Probe is just wrong...

Orange 94 · Sep 8, 2013

Twista said:
I would expect that from you. (thats a good thing btw)

Why?

Cause I'm a odd ball?

Ferocious · Sep 8, 2013

Orange 94 said:
?

I was talking about the side scoops and hood vents being non-functional on my car

uncltrvlnmatt · Sep 8, 2013

Will said:
My stock 1994 GT gets compliments all the time. 20 years later it still looks good.

Comparing it to the Mustang II or a Ford Probe is just wrong...

Never compared it to the Probe or Mustang 2.

white95 · Sep 8, 2013

We all like them or else we wouldn't own one..

ttocs · Sep 8, 2013

I was 18 when that car came out so I think almost anyone around those years can find a model that the liked and fell in love with. For me it was the 94 and I can remember driving around town the first few weeks with the 2nd one in a small Midwest town and it was amazing the looks/gawks it got at lights and parking lots, you would have thought it was a Ferrari. I do think the interior is better then anything they made before or since though as I am not big on the new interior myself.

MustangChris · Sep 8, 2013

Ferocious said:
My car has like 4 fake vents which just shows the quality design.

hahaha. so true.

you guys have to remember, we have pony cars. not super cars...

Ford purposely has to build these cars with "improvements needed" in order to allow their consumer base to customize and build them as they desire. -- That being said, they have to be good enough to last, but bad enough that they are cheap to purchase and fun to build.

Even the well-made new 5.0s need love, just look at Paul putting Shelby junk in the interior, big-brake system, and bad ass wheels on the thing....

If they made a "awesome-o mucho fantasticy car or awesome" it would be called the Ford GT and none of us would own one. lol.

I love the lines of our cars (side scoops, mainly) -- i love the round body (a testament to the mid-90's styling of the auto industry) -- i love the front end.

My *only* complaint about the styling of our cars is the rear spoiler.... it doesnt flow well with the rear bumper at all.

GTfiveoh · Sep 8, 2013

MustangChris said:
My *only* complaint about the styling of our cars is the rear spoiler.... it doesnt flow well with the rear bumper at all.

An s281 spoiler will take care of that!

MustangChris · Sep 8, 2013

GTfiveoh said:
An s281 spoiler will take care of that!

indeed.

1997GT4.6 · Sep 8, 2013

I feel the same as OP about the 94 being a turning point. Credit is not given to the SN95 when it began what the mustang is today imo. I still believe the sn95 body style is timeless. I get people thinking its a much newer car; the look on their faces is funny when I tell them its a 97. The terminator developed from the 96 Cobra, yet the sn95 cobra gets overlooked

But oh well, can't change the stereo type that already exists.

MustangChris · Sep 8, 2013

i remember when I was washing my car the first week I had it an old guy stopped by and was like "great mustang! What year is it? The new 2006?" I was like "No. Its a '96" You should have seen his face....

He's a pontiac guy (had the CLEANEST fierro I've ever seen) so I dont hold it against him

Photonfanatic · Sep 8, 2013

Ferocious said:
I think it's pretty poorly designed. It looked good 15 years ago but it's not a design that holds its age very well.

The form is too round, as opposed to sharp like most newer cars.
The fact that it has no flared fenders makes it look very outdated as well.
My car has like 4 fake vents which just shows the quality design.

Personally, I would never buy these care to leave stock. They look like absolute ass.
However, lowered on some wheels that fill the wheel wells with some spacers out back makes them look 10000x newer.

That's why I mentioned "for its time". On the subject of time, newer cars be dam'd. They have their time and soon enough they'll be exactly like the aging SN-95, in the face of what is new. I think that the 94 Mustang fits into its decade with near perfection, which is an area where almost all other cars fail. When it comes to that, the S197 doesn't hold a candle. Which of course, is because its basically just a re-hash of a 60's bodystyle. Don't get me wrong, I really like the 60's bodystyle and that's why given the choice, I'd own a 60's mustang and an S197. But its still a rehash. It was never intended to be anything but a rehash. Retro was in style.

I didn't mention the aftermarket in the OP because I kind of considered that a given. Mustang wouldn't be Mustang without the aftermarket. It just wouldn't have the same soul. Even Ford recognizes that and designs the cars accordingly.