Mustang Evolution?

[RUFDRAFT]

Okay - flame suit is on and active!

 

How many of you think it's time for the Mustang platform to move on to the next evolutionary level?

 

Is it time for a new platform/styling?

 

Perhaps a FI six cylinder?

 

Transaxle to improve f/r bias?

 

All wheel drive?

 

Maybe even mid-engined?

 

Lighter - better MPG?

 

Two seater?

 

Ford doesn't have any competition for the Vette.

 

Is it time?

[SC2004arispe]

Okay - flame suit is on and active!

 

How many of you think it's time for the Mustang platform to move on to the next evolutionary level?

 

Is it time for a new platform/styling?

 

Perhaps a FI six cylinder?

 

Transaxle to improve f/r bias?

 

All wheel drive?

 

Maybe even mid-engined?

 

Lighter - better MPG?

 

Two seater?

 

Ford doesn't have any competition for the Vette.

 

Is it time?

 

NO! First of all its a 4-seater, let keep it that way. Second, Mustang must allways stay true to its roots(rear whl. dr). And why would you want to change a look that is liked by so many.

 

........a new platform would be nice... can anybody say Hydra-formed....diet..

[RUFDRAFT]

I don't know.

 

Life is change.

 

Who says it has to have 4 seats?

 

And - they've never really been full seats.

 

I've never used the rear seats in my Mustangs.

 

How many people do you think do?

 

I guess all the talk here about comparing the Shelby to the C6 brought this to mind.

 

Why hasn't Ford gone toe to toe?

 

The price of a Shelby is right there with a base Vette.

[Jolly Roger]

I don't know.

 

Life is change.

 

Who says it has to have 4 seats?

 

And - they've never really been full seats.

 

I've never used the rear seats in my Mustangs.

 

How many people do you think do?

 

I guess all the talk here about comparing the Shelby to the C6 brought this to mind.

 

Why hasn't Ford gone toe to toe?

 

The price of a Shelby is right there with a base Vette.

 

 

Sounds like a great idea, but it doesn't sound like a "Mustang". Maybe a Rocket, Comet, Photon, Hornet, or, my favorite, the RUFDRAFT , but this car isn't a Mustang. If they build a car like the one you described, it should be a new model.

[KingCobra]

Sorry Bryan,

 

I have to agree.

 

I would like to see Ford build a car to compete with the vette,

 

they already designed on, it's called the Shelby GR-1.

 

Direct competition that should price out between the C6 and the Z06.

 

 

KingCobra.

[RUFDRAFT]

Price out between??

 

You've read numbers on this concept?

 

Ford needs a two-seat $45k car to compete apples to apples - toe to toe.

 

And - production numbers high enough to supply demand.

 

Anything with Shelby on it will price it out of that market, IMHO!

 

 

Base C6 is about $44.5 - ZO6 is what - $65k? base? That's a $20k spread.

 

Doesn't this Ford/Shelby concept have titanium or kryptonite body panels? $100k. Easy.

[requis]

I don't know.

 

Life is change.

 

Who says it has to have 4 seats?

 

And - they've never really been full seats.

 

I've never used the rear seats in my Mustangs.

 

How many people do you think do?

 

I guess all the talk here about comparing the Shelby to the C6 brought this to mind.

 

Why hasn't Ford gone toe to toe?

 

The price of a Shelby is right there with a base Vette.

 

 

I have and will deffinitely use the four seats. While My kids are young they are awesome! (both the seats and the kids) The whole family fits in for those saturday morning drives to Nanna's 2.5 Hours

 

So I'd say create a new model, leave the Mustang simply evolve it. How about a 500 HP Hybrid?? Ford would mop up the competition....okay well sort of

 

Cheers,

 

Requis

[07 Shelby Cobra]

Oh Bryan you're so so Silly! :wacko:

Keep the Mustang as it is. Forty + years later it's still what it was meant to be. Rear wheel drive, fast cheap V8 fun for the working man. I'll have to at least give Ford Kudos for that! If they hadn't listened in 87' we'd all be driving front wheel drive Probes!

Daimler, GM.........shame on them. They've completely lost the Vision. :blink:

[svttim]

Sorry Bryan,

 

I have to agree.

 

I would like to see Ford build a car to compete with the vette,

 

they already designed on, it's called the Shelby GR-1.

 

Direct competition that should price out between the C6 and the Z06.

KingCobra.

 

 

 

Here, here! Ford, Build it!

[flattusmaximus78]

Keep it two door, keep four seats, use a 302, all wheel drive and better suspension, brembo brakes, a decent interior, a better flowing exaust system from the filter to the exaust for better wheel horse power, lowered a little.

 

Now I could say that would be very interesting so see, the car does need better handeling weather you like it or not.

 

But if I had a choice to pick what would be on a new style mustang well... I'd go with a 429 motor, with very very large rear tires for an aggressive styleing que, front Good flowing exaust that is funtional as well as loud, a functional hood scoop, smaller front tires. Some cragar rims, aluminum d/s, 6 speed manual, possibly carbon fiber body like the vettes... It really need to be light on its feet!

[RUFDRAFT]

429? Light on it's feet?

 

Okay - I guess this isn't the venue for suggesting a change in the Mustang.

 

I suspected as much.

 

However - I still feel Ford needs an "affordable" 2 seater to compete with the bow tie.

 

And it needs to be priced accordingly.

 

It doesn't need more hp than the Vette - let's work on handling - braking - mpg - build quality - intererior materials. Read the Vette forums - if there was an alternative - there'd be a lot of guys jumping ship.

 

Bill - can you hear me now? :happy feet:

[flattusmaximus78]

The old 1969 429 boss did 0-60 in 5 seconds flat, and the 1/4 in 13.7... with modern technology and lighter materials it's not impossible, but I'm not looking for a gt500 machine Im looking for somthing with say 350-380 horse in the 35,000 dollar range. Because everyone wants a 400 horsepower car in the 35 thousand range.

[RUFDRAFT]

Okay - I surrender!

[Fastbackman]

I agree that Ford could use a two-seater in that price range to compete against the vette, but it should definitely be something besides a Mustang.

[old guy]

The simplest comparison... It'd be like GM building a 4 seat corvette. No matter what you called it, it wouldn't be a corvette. Same with Mustang.

[RUFDRAFT]

Okay - okay!

 

I'm waving a little white flag!

 

What - was I thinking?

[Evil95GT]

This is JMHO.......

 

Ford should restyle the Mustang. However, as a Vette competitor, Ford needs to sprout the testicles and build the Mach III concept car they introduced over 10 years ago.

 

At that time, they claimed the market had no room for a two seater sports car. Then they made the Thunderbird roadster. :rolleyes: Like I said, they need to nut up and build the car they teased everyone with.

[ratnacage]

Ford should build something to compete with the vette, yes, but to suggest some derivative of the Stang is non sequitur.

 

The mustang for sure can be made to compete with the vette in terms of raw performance, but the two have never nor can ever be in the same class. The Mustang is like the tough kid that can kick some rich kids ass, but his ability to do that doesn't earn any respect or points within the rich kid's circle.

 

When comparing the vette to the stang you can't lose sight of the fact that there is a significant emotional component and the one simply doesn't register the same with the other's base. If Ford wants to compete with the vette, the Ford must be a true coupe in the sense that it must have only two seats, and of course be grossly overpowered, but have refined handling.

 

...but never a Mustang!

[DVS2XS]

The reason the Mustang has been more sucessful than its competitors is thet it has stayed true to its roots. Affordable performance with 4 seats.

 

2-seat sports cars are tought to sell. More competition in a much smaller market. To do it well, Ford would need to start from scratch and price it for the correct market. Competing directly with the Vette may or may not be a good idea for Ford At this time.

 

Offering a lighter (2800 lbs MAXIMUM) 2-seater than the Vette with a high tech V6 and turbos or superchargers that merges the best ideas of the Vette, the Buick GNX, and the Skyline GT-R would target a new market that the U.S. Automakers have avoided before.

[BoneDoc]

I have some great ideas for the "new" mustang: :rolleyes:

 

...maybe we need an "environmentally friendly" mustang that plugs in and charges like a cell phone?

 

...or maybe one that comes with a couple of potted plants on the rear deck to help eat up some of the Carbon dioxide that it produces?

 

...or maybe we could mount solar panels to help charge it on sunny days?

 

...Maybe one that runs on garbage?

 

...maybe with a cappuchino machine built in to the dash?

 

NOT FOR ME!

I want a gas guzzlin', rubber burnin', MONSTER of a car that leaves tree huggers choking in the fumes behind me after i burn out in front of them! That's what a mustang is.... that's what a mustang should be... always!

 

 

Tree Huggers--------> :bowdown:

 

 

 

that's all i have to say about that. :D

 

just my $.02

[RUFDRAFT]

Doc - even if I change teams and by a C6 - I'll have to keep hangin' here - and you're one of the reasons why I would!

 

The wife works (when she can) for Grady-White Boats here in Greenville, NC.

 

Their newest model is a 36 footer - with three Yamaha 250's. It burns a gallon per mile! Ha.

 

They start at $450k - they build one a week - and they're pre-sold for a year and a half!

 

Look honey - I caught these three King Mackerels today! I only spent $250 on gas!

 

Let's ride while we still can.

[68fastback]

Okay - flame suit is on and active!

 

How many of you think it's time for the Mustang platform to move on to the next evolutionary level?

 

Is it time for a new platform/styling?

 

Perhaps a FI six cylinder?

 

Transaxle to improve f/r bias?

 

All wheel drive?

 

Maybe even mid-engined?

 

Lighter - better MPG?

 

Two seater?

 

Ford doesn't have any competition for the Vette.

 

Is it time?

 

 

.

Oh, RUF, you've done it again.... ;-)

.

It's been time since '53, '55, or '64.5 (or any year thereafter) depending on how you look at it. I don't know that Ford will ever bite the bullet on development expense (certainly not soon, and certainly not in the past 50 years or so) to bring parity betw the 'vette and the 'stang (or anything else, I fear). Problem is, it will never get any easier and it will always look like a bad idea to the beancounters who measure success one saved dollar at a time. Ford can't save its way to a brighter future. It has to lead, and it has two gaping holes in the product line: a modern rear-drive family car with a v8 option (like a 500 with steroids optional) and a true performance sports car (like...). Should the mustang slide up-scale to eventually address the latter? I think not, because there's no good reason to cash out all that brand mindshare with the auto buying public when a 'vette challenger (pardon that word ;-) could be a separate brand targeting fresh mindshare for Ford.

 

The hard truths are that a crash-test worthy 8-lb/HP sports car cannot be light weight unless it uses expensive aero-space (and exquisitely tailored) technologies, like those used in the FordGT, JagXKR, and the 'vette, let alone Ferraris and Lambos. So that forces such a vehicle to a non-'stang platform ...or have base stangs carry much more expense to spread development costs, ...or have two different stang technology bases, ...or belly-up with new development $$$ for several years to make it a true sports performance player-- the first two of those alternatives will never happen, the latter won't likely happen until the red ink is stemmed. So we've gone full circle, I think!

 

But, if Ford chooses to bite the bullet, there's no doubt in my mind it has the talent to develop a lightweight game-changing true sports-segment road car. It just doesn't have (and never has had) the will because Ford is sooo conservative (also one of its strengths over the long term) and such brave new 'risks' always look bad on paper (whether they are or not)! But times change and that could too.

 

If Ford were to try to retarget an existing platform, like the JagXKR and reskin it for a 'vette/viper-like sports performance segment, I think it could work, but the price points would be high and I don't think Jag, already with sales way down, would think it's such a good idea ;-) And the beancounters will cheerfully quantify just how bad an idea that is because they haven't a clue that similar platforms targeting two dramatically different mindshares (luxury sport vs sport performance) do not significantly cannibalize each other -- they capture mindshare in separate market spaces. Did Mercedes worry that the Dodge variant would cannibalize Mercedes sales -- no way! Did GM hesitate to bail out Saab with its 'Saabaru' 9-3 transplant only to dump it's interest in Subaru anyway (ok, that's a bit different and goes to GM's more ruthless corporate lifestyle, whereas Ford is much more of a nurturing/cultivating corporate parent as with Jag/Volvo -- but you have to do what you have to do).

 

Aside from the Ford politics, the Jag XKR platform is really nice.. Torsen Diff, IRS, lightweight, great balance, torsional rigidity, modular compatible, the right hard-points for a long-hood sports shape -- what's not to like except the price? Could a XKR be down-scaled sufficiently and still cover it's price points. If it screams and whips 'vettes -- absolutely! (The 'vette isn't an exceptionally comfortable or practical car, but it is well tuned to what drives mindshare in its market segment)

 

Remember, the modern 'vette development started at a point before the full awareness of the ongoing domestic market share compression set in. And, once started, GM has had the profound luxury of only having incremental develoment expense in an existing well-defined market and at price points to support incremental improvement. And they've done a nice job at incremental cost-performance engineering and refinement to keep it competitive in its segment.

 

I would hold up to Ford the fact that the Viper's entree into that segment went so well (the early Vipers were little more than unpractical unrefined hot-rods with a hulking truck motor) not because the car was great, but because they gave that segment a choice!!! Ford, are you listening??? If Ford had the luxury of having prior 'vette volumes on the FordGT over the past 15 years, the Ford GT would be priced right with a 'Z06 and would be at least 200 lbs lighter than it is -- right witht the 'vette. At that weight, even with it's present engine, it would be an awesome z06 killer at $70-75K because it has the weight in the right place. But it's MSRP is twice that and it weighs 200 lbs more because it hasn't had the benefit of volume and incremental development. And the Ford GT is nothing short of amazing given its highly compressed development -- it is in fact a tour-de-force of Ford engineering.

 

Can you tell that this gap in Ford's product line gauls me no end? The only way I can realistically see to fill it is for Bill Ford to bet his job on it -- sort of like he did on this whole series of hi-po 'stangs coming at us. Given some red ink going black over the next five years, maybe, just maybe, Bill will be heard again. If it's not too late. Too many in Ford, I fear, see performance and the environment as adversaries. It's really performance and CAFE mandates that are at odds since Ford has to make a lot of mustangs to contain the lower mileage of the GT500 in the segment's CAFE numbers. Again, a lighter platform would help that dramatically (across all mustangs or whatever model is the sports performance marque at Ford in the future) since there would be much more CAFE headway, so to speak, for the peformance models to draw against and lightweight performance models would draw on it less.

 

If it is just too late for this enlightement (oil prices and all, I don't know), then Ford needs to leapfrog the competition and insert a truly disruptive technology in the mix to get out ahead of the curve and have the benefit of future incrementals in it's favor over the competition. Someting like the hi-po V6 turbo gas-electric hybrid sports sedan with integrated solar-by-day and plug-and-play-overnight recharge. I guarantee Toyota will market that in the next 5-8 years, if not sooner. If Ford wants to lead it needs to pick at least one heart-pounding mind-share-stealing car, of any usefull technology they believe has long term potential, and choose to lead and dominate in that segment -- failure is not an option. Do it well and we will buy it.

 

- End of Tome - <and thanks for your indulgence>

 

Ford, we love you... now go get your act together and give us a future worthy of our continued loyalty -- and thanks for the GT500 as a token of your good intentions.

[RUFDRAFT]

Man - you do type well! And like to type!

 

It's too late for me to address all your points here tonight. I'm getting weary.

 

I'm just going to comment on a few points.

 

If the General can produce the Vette - as it has for how many years - why hasn't the Ford family stepped up to challenge? The Ford GT (supercar): why? Is it some retro-issue with Ferrari from the LeMans BS of the '60s? Why build a car that costs twice as much as a Z06? What is the point? $160k? Let Leno have his own garage crew build him a replica. How many loyal Ford people can afford a GT? Who are the people that have made profits for Ford? Us. Build US a Corvette competitor. Do you hear us, Bill? If you build it - we will buy. Meantime...

 

I've been a diehard Mustang fan forever. I've suffered through all the years of Camaro hp advantages.

 

The recent Thunderbird is a shame.

 

Way back in the '50s - someone at GM said let's make the Vette a performance car - and someone at Ford said let's make the T-Bird a four seater and make more money.

 

Bullshit.

 

Roll up your sleeves, Bill. Give us a competitor for the Vette.

 

Meantime - I'm test driving a C6 this week.

[68fastback]

Build US a Corvette competitor. Do you hear us, Bill? If you build it - we will buy.

 

Amen to that, RUF.

 

The point is that, starting from scratch, if Ford decided to compete in that segment, Ford would have to throw big money at it. And with much bigger problems to attend to, that either won't happen or can't happen quickly with good cost points. And all the best intentions can't change that in the short term.

 

I am not fond of the 'vette and have no desire to own one. And given price parity (which would come with volume) I'd take a FordGT any day over the 'vette. Lacking that, it's a mustang for me -- the only question is which/when and there'll be some nice choices coming ;-)

 

You wouldn't really buy a C6 would ya? You don;t want to be one of those 'snooty' types now do ya? ;-)

 

Peace...

[RUFDRAFT]

Snooty types? Me?

 

What do you think?!

 

I'm just finding it hard to give up more money for a Mustang (I don't need 4 seats - and I'm not going to race the car) than a Corvette.

 

It's almost surrreal. Think about it from a disinterested point of view: Five years ago, if someone told you that Ford would build a Mustang that costs as much (MSRP) as a Corvette - what would be your response?

 

This Mustang has a lot of "aura" around it - because of Shelby's name on the rear end.

 

I just don't know!

[CobraCrazy]

Introduce a new car to do that, not a Mustang

 

 

I agree with this response. Maybe this should be next Capri or Cougar. V8 though.

[JETSOLVER]

some of us have been sort of discussing this for a while in this thread Next Mustang so I'll save the trench warfare for there. But think about this. As long as the car is instantly recognizable as a mustang(long hood, short deck, pony greenhouse) then who would object if we hade a small, light, hypereffiecient V-8(or even a six?) and a couple of instant tourqe, streetlight hero electric engines on the front of the car. There you go. All Wheel drive, electric hybride, and a known loyal, large customer base. Ford has allready licsenced the technology(sorry die hards, its true) so there is a way around the NIH mentality. Lil' Bill gets his greenness, I get a cheap balanced performance car, and everybody gets a car that isn't as gawdawful to look at as say a Prius. The capability is there, Ford just needs real leadership in MAKING the belief that they have the product no one can be without. Keep in mind that the next restyle on this platform will take it out another 4/5 years. So the large investment in the first Mustang dedicated platform will have ten years under it by then. Start now, and start leaking the news around 2010 that Ford is going to redefine THE ponycar, let GM suck hind tit for being late again. Tell you what Ford. You pay me a living wage without all the adversarial baggage you have with your unions, and I'll come and put at your disposal my 15yrs+ of areospace materials technology experiance and BUILD THE DARN THING FOR YOU!!

[68fastback]

some of us have been sort of discussing this for a while in this thread Next Mustang so I'll save the trench warfare for there. But think about this. As long as the car is instantly recognizable as a mustang(long hood, short deck, pony greenhouse) then who would object if we hade a small, light, hypereffiecient V-8(or even a six?) and a couple of instant tourqe, streetlight hero electric engines on the front of the car. There you go. All Wheel drive, electric hybride, and a known loyal, large customer base. Ford has allready licsenced the technology(sorry die hards, its true) so there is a way around the NIH mentality. Lil' Bill gets his greenness, I get a cheap balanced performance car, and everybody gets a car that isn't as gawdawful to look at as say a Prius. The capability is there, Ford just needs real leadership in MAKING the belief that they have the product no one can be without. Keep in mind that the next restyle on this platform will take it out another 4/5 years. So the large investment in the first Mustang dedicated platform will have ten years under it by then. Start now, and start leaking the news around 2010 that Ford is going to redefine THE ponycar, let GM suck hind tit for being late again. Tell you what Ford. You pay me a living wage without all the adversarial baggage you have with your unions, and I'll come and put at your disposal my 15yrs+ of areospace materials technology experiance and BUILD THE DARN THING FOR YOU!!

 

 

Amen, amen, JETSOLVER... and I'll keep the bean counters focussed on how to quantify the best plan alternatives to exploit that, rather than focusing on quantifying just the financial 'risks.' The corporate strategists (like myself) need to render explicit the assessment of core competancies against plan alternatives and competitive risk of NOT executing the plan; never the beancounters driving the business with the risk of the plan in terms of expense. With the right plan, expense is the engine of opportunity that generates revenue -- it's to be embraced if you have the right plan, not avoided by deault.

 

It's analygous to lawyers: never let them control you with least-risk assessments, tell them what you need to accomplish and direct them to manage the risks with best-practice.

 

And the irony is, Ford has great building blocks and technologies.... that's why I'm hopefull. If they want to really be bold, target the most leveraged leadership paybacks with the most competitive core competencies and let GM and the others eat your corporate ,dust!

 

(and once again, enjoying your posts here ;-)

[RUFDRAFT]

You guys are using too many big words for me.

 

I have to visit another thread.

[68fastback]

 

 

Think about it from a disinterested point of view: Five years ago, if someone told you that Ford would build a Mustang that costs as much (MSRP) as a Corvette - what would be your response?

 

 

 

... well, it's hard for me to think of ANY car from a disinterested point of view. I love cars and I'm a technologist and strategist. But, being a mustang lover, I guess I'd wonder what made it cost $41K. And when you told me it's an awesome looking 525crankHP DOHC V8 reinterpretation of the old Shelby fastback, I'd wanna know where I can get one (at MSRP)!

 

I mean, the 'vette is ok, I guess, but I don't like the styling, I don't like the lack of comfort, I don't mind only 2-seats but 2+2 fastback I like more, and I don't like the 'vette's low clearance and fragility (ask any corvette owner who drives rough roads a lot). I do like the weight and balance. The engine is pushrod OHV not DOHC, analygous to a '50s flathead compared to the '50s Y-block OHV. Flathead was simpler and made as much power as the first Y-block, but it's an ancient design with fundamental limitations now relegated to my lawnmower. Guess what, the latest technology in lawnmowers is now pushrod/OHV (there's a clue ;-). But in cars it's DOHC. GM will be going DOHC just as soon as they can no longer milk the OHV cash-cow any longer, which they've done an admirable job at, but it will ultimately go the way of the flathead. It's just about llow-cost right now, and the 'vette is a good value IF YOU LIKE IT. You don't see any pushrod/OHV Ferraris, Lambos, etc? Any OHV pushrod F1 cars? Ford-Cosworth pionered the modern DOHC in racing because it's breathing is superior to OHV. Unfortunately we haven't yet gotten to the high-revving, oversquare designs that DOHC was made for, because a new HP war erupted and turbos and blowers are easier than retooling a new engine series with larger bore-spacing (can't get more oversquare cubes from the mod without more bore spacing or more cylinders). Ok, DOHC isn't being exploited in it's current undersquare, hi torque implementation -- it's still evolving, but it's still a superior design and all the GM pushrod-hype in the world can't change that. (Tiny 186cid oversquare DOHC Ford-Cosworths were making 500HP at 10Krpm in F-1 cars 40 years ago!) So I want a DOHC V8 in an awesome-looking, durable, comfortable, mustang and the Shelby/heritage/anniversary stuff is just a real nice big bonus for me.

Is that worth $41K, you bet!

 

But I certainly respect anyone who feels for the 'vette the way I feel for mustang -- history and heritage is palpable for both. I say if it's right for ya, go for it! It's just not right for me.

 

PS - you know the new Camaro will be OHV too. GM has to make it cheap and with the old OHVsmall-block heritage and vast parts bin it's a no brainer for GM. Of course GM could go with the lighter DOHC Northstar, but it costs more so there's no chance of that happening. Better often costs more, but the camaro will go as cheap as it can -- a strong card for a new entrant.