hatchback vs. coupe.
 

ok. what does everyone prefer? i say coupe but i'd like to know everyone else opinion.

My vote for the coupe I plan to get one soon..

Coupe of Course!
 

I've owned two of them.

Notch back baby, notch back

Coupe! :D

'Notch hands down.
I don't think there's any disagreement here. There are some nice hatch's out there too.

Coupe vs hatchback
 

Hatchback.

Ordered mine new from Ford in '90 and never regretted it.

The coupe is sharp; lighter and so on but I still like my hatch and the extra carrying room it offers me. No regrets.

Re: Coupe vs hatchback
 

Mr 5.0 is right about the trunk space. The coupes have almost no trunk.

COUPE, i vote that way because both my stang's have been coupes, & my 69 cougar-rip , but i dont knock the hatchback either, both actually look better than the long door f- bodies, :cool:

Coupe

I think it's a much cleaner, more aggressive look.
Hatch's do have more trunk/storage space, but that isn't why I purchased my Mustang.

E

I like My Hatchback for carrying stuff to the track! just fold down the 2 seats and can get a set of tires in there easy.

if your goin for a full out drag car id go with the notch back definatly because its lighter. But i have a Hatchback and love it. I think it looks alot better then the notch back plus the trunk space is nice. Its still a 5.0 either way you go its more of a personal opionion of which you think looks better. good luck with the decision.

i own a hatch but wish it was a notch. notches are so much better. my vote, notch

what i would like to see is a side by side comparison of each. this would help a lot being i'm a visual person.

Hatchback by far.

Here's what you'll see. The notch looks like a chimp designed it. Big up front, itty bitty rear grafted onto it. I can only think people like it now because they've figured out the body is stiffer and it's slightly (not much) lighter. Otherwise there would be a heck of a lot more coupes around from people buying them originally. It wasn't too many years ago that the coupe practically had to be given away.

The coupe has poor aerodynamics, no trunk space, weighs a meager 60lbs less than a hatch, and is dumb looking in my opinion.

The hatchback can haul a V-8 engine in the back if you remove the hatch, or haul my papasan chair with the hatch closed, or hold groceries, or do a short camping trip for 4 people, and look good doing it. The aerodynamics are better as well. To say any fox body car has better aerodynamics than another car usually means comparing it to a Jeep, lol.

Chalk another vote up for the hatch back. Much better looking, and more practical. I hauled a christmas tree in mine last year. No way I was doing that in a notch.

Notches have thier advantages of course, but for a street car, I say hatch. Drag only car, a notch would be the way to go.

Hatch!!!! :)

I SAY BOTH...... I HAVE A
HATCH RACECAR A COUPE
FOR A DAILY DRIVER. I CANT
FIND ANYTHING WRONG
WITH EITHER BODY.... JUST
MY .02.



FLEA

You forgot to mention the extra squeeks and increased road noise associated with the hatch.:D

I agree with Unit. Hatchback's look a heck of a lot better. If there was one thing I would change about the hatch it would be how fricken noisey they are going over a bumpy road.:(

Another vote for the hatch! I think it just looks tougher.

The squeeks and rattles associated with the hatchback can be largely eliminated by subframe connectors, welding torque boxes, and making sure stuff is put together tightly.

Unit is right. i owned a rattle box before the subframes, now moise is almost nill, i just think the coupes are better looking, and good for racing. what else would do with your Stang? i wouldnt call it a "practical" car for what it was designed for, but it does haul some decent space for me having a hatch. if i wanted more room i would but a bigger car, like my T-Bird! Stang is a sports car with practical car ideas. a posi quad shock, roller cam, true dual exhaust, and low profile tires make it mostly a modern muscle car, but that is just my opinion. a RELIABLE modern muscle car!

Im really surprised at the number of people who think the coupes are better looking.

The fox body stang isnt a particulary sharp car to begin with, but the hatches in the GT style look decent in my opinion.

I think the 87-93 Coupes are the nicest looking mustangs compared with any other mustang (or any other car) for that matter. The 87-93 LXs and GTs are really dated by their "boxy" style. The Coupes on the other hand, while retaining SOME features which date the car (head and taillights for example), have a smoother line to them. Therefore I think this makes them more of a timeless car.

It took me 9 months to find my Coupe. When I purchased it in the summer of 1995, it had 21,657 miles and was as clean as it is today (ok, maybe it's a little cleaner today - but I'm just anal. :D ) Anyways, there were probably 6-8 hatches available at the time (in the newspaper) while this car had three serious buyers in literally hours after the newspaper was delivered to my door. A 1991 car that stickered for $14,500 or so was sold to me for $9,200. I was very fortunate to get it.

So, I don't know about Kell's statement regarding the plethora of coupes a few years ago. It definitely wasn't / isn't like that in this area.

E

Hatchback baby. Mine is stock, I had 2 12" subs, and there was still almost no sqeeks.


Here's mine.

I had to link this to another post. It wouldn't let me repost the pic.

Roominess eh?
I think the Stang is an almost perfect comprimise of sport and luggage capacity and makes for an almost perfect "road trip mobile".

I have enough space to fit 2 suitcases, sleeping bags and a tent in the trunk and a cooler in the backseat.

Hatchback all the way. They simply look better

LOL. Yeah, the notch is pretty sleek and smooth. That's why they called it a notch. As in notchy. As in, not smooth.

The dated boxy style of the Fox body. Ummm... it is a style that's 15 years old. I would think it would probably appear a little dated. The coupe is very dated as well, and the completely erratic style to it was poorly designed. Last time I checked, the 1965 Mustang also appears a little dated, lol.

302 LX Eric I never said they were plentiful at any time. Quite the opposite. What I said was if they had been nice looking, more people would have purchased them, and because of more people buying them, there would be a greater demand so more would be around today. Since there were very few purchased, they were not a nice looking car, or practical so people didn't want them.

Yeah, you just don't see any coupe style cars these days. They are all hatchbacks. :rolleyes: :p ;)

Seriously though, I LOVE hatchbacks...both my daily drivers are/were hatches. They are VERY versatile. Unfortunately, hatchbacks have pretty much fallen off the market for some reason. Most people these days prefer cars with trunks.

It's all just personal preference really. I don't think someone can say either the hatch or the coupe is "better". It's the same platform so they are pretty much the same car.

Just because there are a lot of a coupes on the road doesn't mean somehow all coupes retain current styling cues. Like I stated above, maybe you think a 1965 Mustang coupe is modern looking? How about a 1975 Mustang II coupe?

I think you can certainly argue one car to be better than the other. The hatch offers significantly more practicality than the coupe, and in my opinion, looks smoother and much more aggressive than the coupe.

Currently, hatchbacks are making a comeback due to more rigid body structures that eliminate the squeeks and rattles associated with the hatch cars.

You guys are all crazy! I wouldn't own a hatchback lx. If I owned a hatchbach, it would be a GT. To me the hatchback lx is just plain ugly, though I have seen some fixed up nice.

Just imagine, if you will.... a 91 black notch with blacked out windows. A stroker engine and a sweet rumble pulling out from a side road, is that a blower I hear?? Man, it just ain't the same as a hatch lx. As far as the weight difference, I believe its more than 60#s but I guess I'd have to look it up. As far a people recently figuring out it was more rigid... We've known that for a long long time...

BTW Unit, that new GT rocks!! I love that color! Beautiful car!!

AAHHHhh MAN!!! I love those thrush rims and tinted headlights!! Blacked out windows and a 75 shot?!?! SSShhhheeesshhhh... I'm trying to stay out of debt right now!!!!

but I'm not going to....;)

Maybe your right Unit, that number rings a bell and I think you are right. None the less, I wouldn't own a hatch unless it was a GT..

I've been thinking of taking my motor out and putting it in a 89-93 notch or..... a 67-68 mustang or cougar(converting to FI). Hmmm...

Make it a white coupe that looks like it just rolled off the show-room floor, except this Pony has 450+ HP from a nasty 331 cu. in. stroker and a little assitance from a ProCharger D-1SC.

That's what I'm in the process of building. :D Gosh, I can't wait much longer!!!

Coupes or Hatchbacks, they're all Mustangs. :)

E

I have a hatch which I love but I would have to say COUPE

something like this?:
Mike's
Mike's again
just sweeeeeeeet........:cool:

Something like that:)

Another vote for coupes
 

I have to agree with rbatson, the LX hatch is a little wimpy looking IMO, all hatchbacks should be GTs. The coupes have a stance that the hatch can't compare to, and I think the coupes look more aggressive. Plus I owned an 89 GT before I bought my coupe and the coupe is MUCH stiffer and stable on the road.

Lates
ROB

coupe or hatch
 

i would saw a coupe

Hatchback for me
 

i love both hatchback and notchback but if i had to choose i would choose the hatchback, and if it was between a LX and a GT i would choose LX anyday. I have had people actually offer to buy my hatchback on the spot just cause it was an LX?? my bro(budman94gt) chooses notch cause he wants a 91-92 notch to build as a dragcar.

mike

Notchback for me. I prefer small compact looking cars. I prefered the Firebird Formula over the Trans-AM also. Smaller, sleeker. The coupe has a nice line that goes from the front of the car to the back.

Well, I guess my sig gives me away. Neither one is a show queen, just old well kept cars that I love. If I had enough garage space, you can bet that I’d own a couple of hatches too.

Wow, i somehow missed this thread, my name gives away my preference, but no....i wanted an lx hatch, this is all the guy had, besides another car, an aod coupe, so i settled with this, but man, i would never own a hatch now, id say they are 100 lbs heavier, im sure the hatch is more aerodynamic, who cares, I like the gt's, just they are real common......

I cant believe you unit?? you are putting down everyone that might be faster or look better than your 87? tell ya what units, if any stock 87 5.0 could hang with an ls1, it wouldnt be a hatch car, 87 sd notch, maybe down at 13.6 with gears and traction, 87 gt, maybe 13.9's @ 99....... and with 273 gears, buahah, maybe 96 mph, just being realistic.

The only comment I have is several people seem to think the notchback is better for drag racing and I think the hatchback is better due to the weight distribution being more to the rear of the car therefore increasing rearwheel traction.

Do alittle more research....

Are you saying the hatchback isn't heavier in the back? I think it is and the hatch would obviously have an aerodynamic advantage.

Drag racing is all about light weight, and the notch has it over the hatch. end of story. If your worried about traction, your not serious. If you were serious, you would have slicks, etc...to take care of any traction issues.