Thursday, March 12, 2009

Let me clarify for the "anonymous" Stangpede Mustang owning commentor

I took these two shots to demonstrate the different look from the last design, to the new retro design. I like the bottom photos/ design far more. It gives a distinct look instead of the cookie cutter look applied to the Ford Tempo, Taurus, Thunderbird... etc etc

The comment:
Wow my car gets some recognition on the net and it turns out to be an insult....Im the owner of the Silver Mustang GT with black stripes and hardly think my car is cookie cutter seeing as I have put thousands into customizing and it doesnt look like a stock stang at all. Ouch! :( Anonymous
Response to comment:
anonymous? really? forgot your name?
Beef up your game anonymous. You really got your feelings hurt?
So, it's true. Mustangs sometimes compensate for low testosterone levels. I'm not saying you should be careful that your dress doesn't get caught in the door... but are high heels rough on Mustang carpet?
On to your mustang... with about 140 thousand Mustangs a year made from 94-2004 (the SN-95 design) that look about the same, that comes to about a million and a half Mustangs that most people can't tell apart.
But that wasn't what I wrote in the original post about Mustangs in general, not singling yours out in particular.
I compared the last design of the SN-95 Mustang to all the rest of Fords 1990's designs. They have common design traits that make the Tempo, the Mustang, the Thunderbird, and the Taurus all look similar. That has to be 4 models, and millions of cars... that are similar. Hence, the design is cookie cutter. Especially compared to the "retro" 2005-09 S197 model. Which has the looks I prefer, it's less jellybean, and isn't mistaken for the other Fords... ever. And that is why the SN-95 is a cookie cutter.


  1. jesse your a piece of shit "anonymous" is a friend of mine, he spent his time his money the customize the car the way he wants it, not for you but for him. next time your thinking about insulting someones car don't!

  2. Anonymous2:10 PM

    FYI...its sn-95 not sn-94

    if you going to be a reviewer please get your model numbers right....

    -a guy who knows mustangs -

  3. Anonymous12:20 PM

    thanks for posting my corrective comment. its very noble and i appreciate that you post criticisms from others. if its any consolation i bookmarked your blog and it will be a regular spot i check. you dont need to post this comment. just wanted to say thanks.

  4. Krystian Schlesinger12:14 PM

    This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.