In his review of the RHS drive UK version of the Mustang, Nat Barnes at the Express writes:
They say you should never meet your heroes.and later in the review:
But then that is the problem with heroes. They are rarely what you expect.If you care about these things, go read the whole thing and come back (again, link). I'll wait.
OK, here's his problem: Barnes is entirely missing the point of a Mustang. It's not about handling through twisty European passages, it's not about refinement. It's a damn American hotrod car at heart. It comes in a relatively inexpensive package with many performance features deliberately left out, because the manufacturer knows that on this car the buyers want to customize their own performance. In a way, Barnes pays the Mustang an unintended complement in the comparisons he makes to other cars that he feels the Mustang should emulate: BMW M3 Sedan @ $62.9k, BMW 428i @ $41.3k, Jaguar F-Type @ $95.2k, Audi A5 @ $50.8k. The respective sticker prices for Mustangs in V6 base and V8 GT are $24.1k and $32.6k. Is it right to compare cars costing two to four times as much to incomplete builds of the Mustang? Viewed through these economic and intended purpose lenses, the Mustang comes out very well. A better questions is, are some car snobs ready for the Mustang? Another question is, is the Mustang right for Europe?