2015 Mustang: Top 10 Facts You Need to Know

2015 Mustang: Top 10 Facts You Need to Know

9. Technology Updates

It isn’t every day that Ford brings out a new Mustang. In fact, the fourth and fifth generations both lived for roughly a decade, so you can probably understand why modernizing the new car is so important. The cabin probably won’t change much for the next five years.

So what’s new? Pretty much everything, but here are a couple of the highlights. Ford is integrating a touch screen with its MyFord Touch infotainment system. Depending on how you feel about the system, that could count for a mark in either the “win” or “lose” column.

But there’s good news in the technology department even if you think MyFord Touch stinks. The car also gets blind spot monitoring and rear cross traffic alert systems, both of which will make the heavily raked coupe easier to manage for daily driving.

  • chavitz

    Mustang is still an old time fashioned, heavy, clumsy, low-tech, and poor reliability junk.

  • Tee

    Well, I know you’re a troll looking for a response so here goes. Yeah, the Mustang is not perfect but it doesn’t cost way near as much as those other cars to which you are inevitably comparing to it. I have owned a few Mustangs over the years and reliability has always been there. Compared to some Dodge and Chevy vehicles I’ve owned during that time, my Mustang was rarely a draw off my bank account. Low tech is not something I’d use as an adjective for the 5.0 engine. Ask any reputable magazine or person who is in the business and they’d laugh at your suggestion. Maybe weight is not its friend but it doesn’t seem to curtail it around the track.

  • Johnson Kevin

    A friend put over 300K on his 1989 Mustang before changing the motor, and not because it failed. It was just tired. I have over 200K on my stock 1987 Mustang and it has the same motor and transmission as the day it left the factory. Fires up every time and has never left me stranded. In addition both cars when purchased help to support out economy and your parents…..and you.

  • Scritti Politti

    What about weight? Weight reduction was supposed to be one of the major goals for the new car. The Mustang has become a fat-ass, which NEEDS 400 HP just to haul its bulk down the street.

    And lowering the car was a bad idea, as our infrastructure crumbles and roads get worse. That front air dam won’t last a day on Santa Monica’s disgraceful streets.

  • Doug

    I am not a fan of the body look and wrap around head lights, so I am glad I put a blower on my S197 2006 V6 (roots style from explorer express with intercooler), some chassis upgrades and a Cervini’s hood and spoiler with painted stripes (Joe’s custom restoration, Freesoil MI.). Now, for the power, it is on par with a good muscle car of the early 70’s (300hp at the wheels), and does not get beat by a prius, which was unacceptable. With the chassis upgrades, it corners like a cockroach being chassed by a broom. I already want more power though, but it’s a bad little V6, with a more retro body style. I give a big “thumbs down” out my window to any Government owned Camaro I see, but the dupes don’t know why. It is because government is not suppose to take over our capitalism, because it is called communism when that happens. Happy health care.

  • Doug

    If you would rather support communism, buy a government owned car like a 2009 or later Camaro/Challenger. If your American, Ford is your only choice. Just saying.

  • Doug

    A modern car on 1940’s streets would be a blast. No pot holes. Yes, the USA used to be better. They call it progress.

  • Doug

    I can’t imagine any muscle car lasting over 200K stock,—unless you drive like Helen Keller and upkeep the car at half the recommended intervals.

  • 83ragtop50

    Butt ugly and so is the frontend. I’ll not be buying one of these.

  • g-rant

    I redline mine almost everyday, its called maintenance and not being a lazy, cheap ass. Putting good quality replacement parts and doing fluid changes when recommended, if your cars breaking down 95% of the time the owner is to blame.

  • chavitz

    Those trolls usually get low scores in IQ test , but high scores in lie test

  • Jeffrey Lee Virgin

    Nobody cares about your car except you. Mustang had 30 plus years of ugly , the 70’s right up to 2004. We agree on one thing, the 2015 is back to ugly. I own a Mustang, love the new Camaro too. It is possible to like both cars.

  • Jeffrey Lee Virgin

    Health Care is a basic human right, I am sorry for your ignorance.

  • Jeffrey Lee Virgin

    Camaro and Challenger are built in Canada . Canada has health care, and pays the people who build them higher wages than the U.S. Sounds like communism to me.

  • Jeffrey Lee Virgin

    So is your Momma.

  • yo

    Dear Ford,
    Please get to work on a hot rod Lincoln version of this immediately. Do not wait till 2017. It needs to happen by 2015!!
    Thanks, car guys of the world

  • yo

    hahahah. that was awesome

  • ProfessorKnowItAll

    I applaud your enthusiasm. I also hope you realize that buying a product from Ford, GM and Chrysler has about as much effect on the economy as any other vehicle does in actual economic stimulation. Fact is, Japanese and German companies build cars and trucks here, too. In fact, the most “american” vehicle – if you decide by content – has often been one with a Japanese badge. #MindBlown

  • Joe Louis

    Agreed!! Except it won’t ever happen. If you’ll see anything “hot” out of Lincoln, it’ll be an engine fire related recall… Or so it seems. Wonder if the 2.3L can hack it at “hard” driving…

  • Timmay

    I just looked at the Ford site and they’re taking $1,000 off the “old” mustang now. A grand is a grand, but I bet you could browbeat them down by quite a bit once the new one comes out. #GLHF!

  • tommorofski

    Jeffrey, a little bad news for you. the world and/or the U.S. taxpayers (you know, the workers) DO NOT owe you anything, including health care. YOU owe YOU a little personal pride to work and provide for you and yours.

  • Johnson Kevin

    That’s part of the problem in my opinion. The fact of the matter is what truly matters is where the profits go. Profits that go to the home office are what allow a company to continue research, development, production and employing humans. When a ‘foreign’ car is purchased, those funds leave these shores and go to the home country from where the automobile was born. We can print more money, but that leads to inflation.
    By the way, the Japanese, Germans and Koreans could not care less about American workers. They build cars here because it makes financial sense and they don’t want a repeat of what happened in the early 90’s. Remember Americans were taking baseball bats to foreign cars in parking lots. That was a PR nightmare for the Japanese. Well guess what, they found a solution. Build the cars here plus save on import taxes then tell the Americans how they build them in Tennessee. That should keep us nice and quiet during the next economic downturn. ProfessorKnowItAll, you are a sheep. Wake up. By the way, we’re friends by default because we’re fellow Americans; we have more in common that we don’t.

  • Johnson Kevin

    or it’s a 1986 Hyundai Excel.

  • gcaseley

    If I wanted a car that looked like a fusion ,I’d buy a fusion. Epic fail on the new mustang!

  • 2013v6owner

    take the horse off the grill, put in flat rear taillights, and remove the “Mustang and Ford tags”

    Slap some SCION logos on it and hit the road running!

  • CaptK.

    I like the new styling , it just doesn’t look “Mustang”. Finally , no more solid rear axle! ( they are for trucks) How did Ford slip in the 2.3 turbo 4 ? Mazdaspeed lovers will be checking that out.
    Its a great engine after Mazda tweaked it, but remember its about 145 CI. , rated 300 hp and available with automatic . ( First time for a turbo version)
    Drive reports please……..

  • Norm Peterson

    Whether it is or isn’t is moot. What matters is if it’s going to be done it at all, it has to be done thoughtfully and workably. Not on the arbitrary and way too compressed of a schedule that results from trying to meet campaign promises.
    40-odd years ago the promise to place a man on the moon only had to involve those willing to take the risk. Universally mandated stuff of any sort does not fall into the same category.
    FWIW, there is more than enough “Mustang-ness” about this new one to avoid confusion.

  • Norm Peterson

    ” Finally , no more solid rear axle! ( they are for trucks)”
    Care to provide some real tech for disparaging the S197’s arrangement like that?
    You might be interested to know that a stockish S197 will run an autocross course nearly as quickly as a similarly stockish non-Z06 C5 Corvette. In fairly lightly modified form (but still A/C’ed and fully daily-drivable) it can outrun that C5. Autocross arguably being the most demanding test of stock and stockish vehicle handling.
    I’m not anti-IRS (unless the IRS is poorly to no better than indifferently engineered). Just anti-“solid axles are crap because they’re not IRS”.

  • Mark Andrews

    Far Out,! I love all cars but there are always e few in which take on slight subtle changes,such as this Mustang for added safety, comfort and convenience it makes the whole driving experience so much nicer,need to get back to driving being an enjoyable experience ! Love um All

  • Jim Mc Cool

    Great car, but not changed enough to draw the attention it deserves. I would like them to throw away that useless rear seat and shorten the car at least a foot or so. This would save a lot of weight and give the car a new more powerful look.

  • Ed

    Hoping it comes in under 3000 lbs for good weight to hp #’s, otherwise I’ll stick this motor/trans in my 1900 pound 93 fastback and Flyyyy.

  • Scott

    No it’s not.

  • Michael Fournier

    personally I could do without the 2.3 turbo or put it in a FocusRS I like my stang with a Growling V8 (they could keep the V6 also) for me the Mustang GT is the base model I do not even consider anything else except a Boss or the Bigger V8 of the Shelby GT. I liked he 05-09 retro style (I own a 09) But I admit it was time for some modern updates. (I have no problem with my 09 having a Live Axle it handles fine the benefit the IRS will give is less unsprung weight and a better ride comfort. (less unsprung weight means you do not need as stiff spring rates and dampers) I will need to see some performance numbers and I personally do not like MacPherson struts I would have preferred adjustable Coilovers on front and back (but I also understand MacPherson struts are cheaper. But I am sure the after market will have a easy fix for that soon.

  • TG

    I am so glad that Ford finally decided to do away with the Mustangs 4×4 ride height and lower the car over the tires. Now you won’t have to run right out and buy new springs as soon as you get it home from the dealership.

  • Mitch

    Autocross courses are very tight and twisty so saying that one vehicle is “nearly” as fast as another on one isn’t saying much at all when those races are won by mere seconds or even tenths of a second. Comparing modded vehicles with one another is even more irrelevant. Yes, solid rear axles really are for trucks and also straight line performers. By going IRS Ford is breaching into true sports car territory with the Mustang. Be happy about it!

  • Mitch

    Not sure what you’re talking about, Ford has most definitely accepted money from our government… look it up. No need to work your skewed politics into a car enthusiast forum.

  • Norm Peterson

    I’m afraid you’re missing my point. IRS is not necessarily superior just by the mere fact that the rear wheels are no longer rigidly connected to each other in five degrees of freedom out of six. It still has to be done up well, and not all of them have been.
    That a solid axle Mustang can run as close to the lighter and lower Corvette as it does is as good an indication as any that it is not as inferior as the “a car has gotta have IRS to be any good” crowd keeps insisting that it is. That’s my other beef, it’s like as soon as IRS is mentioned, suddenly any stick axle arrangement is an abysmal failure and only worthy of scorn. An opinion not truly supported by actuality.
    I really do hope the S550’s integral link IRS is better. I expect it to be, and assuming that it is, that will be because of its detail design and engineering, not because of the general rear suspension category it belongs to.