Jump to content
TEAM SHELBY FORUM

2009 Boss Mustang


1970boss302

Recommended Posts

Well, let me add this to the equasion. If NASCAR goes to the Mustang/Camaro/Chalenger bodies for the busch series, how will this effect the development of the Mustang? I see sales of busch tickets and pony cars going through th roof!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 869
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Well, let me add this to the equasion. If NASCAR goes to the Mustang/Camaro/Chalenger bodies for the busch series, how will this effect the development of the Mustang? I see sales of busch tickets and pony cars going through th roof!

 

Yeah, I think you're right.

 

I am concerned that NASCAR will devalue 'brand' as they are prone to do (htat way the manufactureres can't hold them hostage -- long stories from days gone by). I'd much rather see more in the SCCA/road-course venues.

 

I guess the sanctioning bodies will determine the CID displacement -- Ford has often been snookered in such arrangements in the past (the refusal of SOHC 427 being one example, the aero Taursus being penalized another, yet the old Superbird qualified with no problem -- hmmmm... can you say brand extortion?! ;-)

 

If the CID limit is over 350cid Ford will be at a severe disadvantage, IMO, because the small bore spacing of the modular will force undersquare/stroker designs which, while fine on the street, will limit potential in racing. Also restrictor plates tend to impose a slight but disproportionate penalty on longer stroke engines do to exaggerated pumping losses HP-for-HP.

 

If superchargers are allowed, it will also be challenging for smaller s/c'd engines since it's a whole 'nother system that can fail.

 

If the CID limits are set considerably more than 350cid, then Ford has no choice but to have a [big] block with larger bore-spacing.

 

Somehow, based on past gamesmanship, I've developed a dislike of how NASCAR runs their ship, but I think pony-car Busch series will generate huge interest regardles of the rules or their 'fairness' to existing design-points.

 

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is anybody else wondering if Ford corporate is no longer equating "win on Sunday, sell on Monday"?

 

 

Dunno, Rob. They're sure saying the right words for Mustang -- but talk is cheap. I think they'd have to be totally asleep at the switch to not see this as a major opp (re-invest), esp since they're out of the gate first, as opposed to a way to push some money to the bottom line (milk the cow). They say they've seen the light of 'constant improvement' over 'milking.' We shall see.

 

I hope they also realize that the phrase's real power is much broader now, IMO. The Saturday winners are the de facto consultants to a broad slice of the marketplace: friends, family, business associates, etc who look to enthusiasts for purchase insight and guidance. And enthusiasts suck spin away from other brands (which there are more of today than ever before) .If a company looses it's enthusiasts, it looses a powerful piece of believeable market influence that cannot be achieved with conventional advertising -- and is much cheaper and more durable than advertising. And to keep enthusiasts you have to give them the goods to win with. The rest of the products need to be winners too, but the leverage of the enthusiast population is much broader and far reaching -- more levered for each dollar spent, I think.

 

If they still believe that, as people like Bunkie Knudsen and John Coletti sure did, I think life will be better for Ford -- and us!

 

;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see or hear or read about Stangs winning in any of the sedan(GT) events, or even when I watch the American made Speed GT stuff. I see Honda(Acura), I see Dodge(SRT Viper) , GM(CTS-V) and Vette, and even Hyundai. I do not see any Ford anything. And I also recall Ford buying the other half of COSWORTH, not the important part,and nothing new has come from that either. I see SRT neons, and other cars racing hard at the last major U.S. road courses, along with subsidiary Ford brands like Jag and MAZDA, but no Focai or Stangs. The only place I see Stangs in the media is the great drag coverage(print) with 5-20 YO cars that have not been stock since the day they were purchased. Is it perhaps my embittered view that Ford never sold a single FR500 nor a boy or man racer?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually the S197 Mustang has done quite well in road racing. The FR500C won the 2005 Grand Am Cup GS class championship. Just this weekend one took pole position in the Grand Am Cup race at Miller Motorsports Park in Utah. Mike Davis just debuted his new Mustang in World Challenge a couple of weeks ago at Road America (see attached photo). I am hoping we'll see some Mustangs in Grand Am GT class next year. Perhaps in another 2-3 years there will be a revived Trans Am series pitting Mustangs against Camaros and Challengers, just like 40 years earlier!

post-6773-1157328081_thumb.jpg

post-6773-1157328081_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Mustang has done well in the Grand Am cup, although their success has been muted in '06 with rules changes put in place after the '05 campaign saw Mustangs dominate. The other teams complained so the Mustangs were penalized. My idea of true racing is if you can't compete, you need a better mousetrap, not a rule change but I digress. :rant:

 

The notion of a Pony car based series in the NASCAR Busch series is interesting from a awareness perspective, it would certainly generate more interest in the Pony cars as a marketing segment. However, I cannot believe NASCAR would be willing to undergo such a radical change without assurances from the auto manufacturers that they would support that strategy and produce cars to fill that segment. Ford is the only manufacturer to demonstrate consistent commitment to the Pony car segment through the years with the Mustang. Without that committment, I don't believe NASCAR would embark on such an adventure. We all know NASCAR would NEVER allow a Ford-only division to exist. While I certainly think a Mustang belongs in a sedan road racing series like Grand Am, Trans Am, etc., I don't object to a NASCAR division using a Pony car for the Busch series. It would certainly separate that division from the Cup cars and promote the division as a stand-alone series.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with you Fanatic in principle.

 

I'm wondering how NASCAR would 'class' them. What I mean is ...should a Busch-pony series be Mustangs, Camaros, etc as race-prepped 'stockers' more like the old days? Or more like the present Busch series cars, but just with Mustang/Camaro skin?

 

I much more prefer the former, but it seemed clear (by implication -- vis-a-vis Roush comments of 6-8 weeks ago) that if that were the case, it would take too long and too much money to bother (my paraphrase) and that if it were under the existing rules they'd just adjust the WB and change skins. In fact, I think that's what they are already playing with.

 

To me, that would defeat the whole purpose, from an enthusiasts' viewpoint, to starting a Busch-pony series. But maybe that's just me. My fear is that's exactly what will happen: 100% of NASCAR's advertising benefit, reduced development for the teams, but low brand 'authenticity' -- maybe just engine, and the way Roush reacted (my reading of the nearly incomprehensible rambling in that article quoting him) it sounded like engines would be identical too -- probably = done deal.

 

That's why I was saying I prefer the SCCA approach -- at least the teams would actually start with actual cars <lol> as opposed to NASCAR where the only thing reminescent of the car is the airbrushing and some of the engine castings. Of course, I think both will happen.... and more. (Roush has supposedly already been working on a dual-turbo racing version of the recently announced F-series 6.4L clean-diesel for NASCAR truck racing.)

 

Of course, if NASCAR/Busch did go with a more 'stock' racer rules-set, Ford could be at a real disadvantage if displacement is set at anything over 5.0L for all the reasons we've talked on. So you can count on intense GM/DCX pressure for 5.8-6.2L which would force business as usual (same engines and just reskin).

 

I'm also not suprised that they made GrandAm rules changes to 'tame' the stangs. I don't know specifically why, but let's just say, historically, GM is the bully on the block when it comes to applying sanctioning-body leverage. The days of 'let the best car win' went out the window with factory and sponsorship 'bribery' IMO. Don't mean to sound cynical, but there hasn't been a truly level playing field in any of the major-league race sanctioning bodies, with the possible exception of NHRA, for a long time now, IMO. And even NHRA has skunked Ford in the past under intense pressure by the others when their offering was 'too good.'

 

I don't have a lot of facts to back these present-NASCAR feelings up and maybe things have changed for the better, but I highly doubt that. Racing has become an advertising/gate/licensing-revenue sport with racing-as-necessary, as opposed to a racing sport with revenue streams as reasonably managed spin-offs.

 

(I see a whole 'nother excessive ADM-like 'free-market economy' argument in this, but I won't go there <lol>)

 

:rant:

 

PS - the Focus "world rally car" has, unexpectedly, taken the rally world by storm this year -- who'd a thunk! :happy feet:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dan, I think we would both love to see NASCAR return to its roots and institute a stock series. Using a Pony car as the basis for that class would be terrific. However, given the dollars "invested" by sponsors and teams in fielding a Busch car, making such a radical change is simply out of the question. Even if the "business case" from the fans perspective would support such a series, corporate sponsorship and their dollars rule the day - the golden rule in absolute effect - he who has the gold, makes the rules.

 

The most likely scenario is as you described - a shorter WB car than the current Busch car with a Pony car "skin". The only part resembling a factory car would be the airbrushed running Pony on the grille. NASCAR has pretty much mandated most of the car design for the Busch and Cup series so there very little manufacturer differentiation anymore other than a different snout design.

 

I hold out little hope that a Mustang in NASCAR will be anything more than a reskin of the current car.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

PS - the Focus "world rally car" has, unexpectedly, taken the rally world by storm this year -- who'd a thunk! :happy feet:

 

Yes and based on a car that is not available in N.A. This is all keeps going in a circle with the lack of direction in Ford Racing for some long years now. Corporate gets its fanny fluffed by some hospitality /PR team, and go off in an ill considered rush to get a Ford(other corporate brands as well) painted car on the track. And then because of an oversight leadership team, they fritter away the equity in whatever the next reaction based event catches thier attention. I think most of you know the examples I might use, but the latest in a long line might just be Aston. They finally get to where they can compete against GM with the vette and then they leak that the sale of Aston is iminent. Thereby undercutting the brand, the team and any link to Ford. Let alone this Ford racing thing, whatever it may turn out to be. Ford and Mazda exclusivly brand the powertrains in CHAMPCAR and its under series, just as the hottest properties announce that they are heading for stock car racing. And the relevence of stock car racing in the States to engineering development is laughable. And of course they then point out that the investment in racing is one of diminishing returns and should be cut back. Again , I really do understand that racing and high performance are a very small part of car and truck sales as a percentage of the whole, but I have a hard time with the lack of understanding about what a huge bang for the buck it can offer a company in need of good PR and some double quick engineering solutions.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dan, I think we would both love to see NASCAR return to its roots and institute a stock series. Using a Pony car as the basis for that class would be terrific. However, given the dollars "invested" by sponsors and teams in fielding a Busch car, making such a radical change is simply out of the question. Even if the "business case" from the fans perspective would support such a series, corporate sponsorship and their dollars rule the day - the golden rule in absolute effect - he who has the gold, makes the rules.

 

The most likely scenario is as you described - a shorter WB car than the current Busch car with a Pony car "skin". The only part resembling a factory car would be the airbrushed running Pony on the grille. NASCAR has pretty much mandated most of the car design for the Busch and Cup series so there very little manufacturer differentiation anymore other than a different snout design.

 

I hold out little hope that a Mustang in NASCAR will be anything more than a reskin of the current car.

 

 

Agree, Fanatic... it just seems so 'empty' to root for a .020" thick logo <lol> Are we who root for actual brand engineering in such a minority now (I guess that's rhetorical ;-)? Are the typical NASCAR fans 'brain dead' or are they quite aware and it just doesn't matter? Or is this just another case of "generational gravity" since it's been this way for so many years now.

 

Damn, I must be stubborn -- what would I be rooting for ...besides paint and a driver <lol> It gives me the same sick feeling of the dead performance epoch of the late 70s-80s -- things going wrong and nothing you can do about it. It makes me feel like a hostage - like I'm just a ticket-sale and nothing more. I guess that's why I haven't attended a NASCAR race for over 20 years. I find it so difficult to support something 'plastic' or that I can't believe in. <sigh> ;-) It's just so wrong now that there are meaningfull cars again. (Sorry for the rant; certainly not directed at anyone here)

 

 

Yes and based on a car that is not available in N.A. This is all keeps going in a circle with the lack of direction in Ford Racing for some long years now. Corporate gets its fanny fluffed by some hospitality /PR team, and go off in an ill considered rush to get a Ford(other corporate brands as well) painted car on the track. And then because of an oversight leadership team, they fritter away the equity in whatever the next reaction based event catches thier attention. I think most of you know the examples I might use, but the latest in a long line might just be Aston. They finally get to where they can compete against GM with the vette and then they leak that the sale of Aston is iminent. Thereby undercutting the brand, the team and any link to Ford. Let alone this Ford racing thing, whatever it may turn out to be. Ford and Mazda exclusivly brand the powertrains in CHAMPCAR and its under series, just as the hottest properties announce that they are heading for stock car racing. And the relevence of stock car racing in the States to engineering development is laughable. And of course they then point out that the investment in racing is one of diminishing returns and should be cut back. Again , I really do understand that racing and high performance are a very small part of car and truck sales as a percentage of the whole, but I have a hard time with the lack of understanding about what a huge bang for the buck it can offer a company in need of good PR and some double quick engineering solutions.

 

 

Yeah, and likely not until MY '10.

 

This is why HTT, no matter how bright he is, needs mentoring -- the things you can't learn in business school or in less than 5-10 years engaging in strategy battles with the folks crosstown

 

And a little left-hand not knowing what the right hand is doing? Or more of above applied more globally?

 

Amen! This is the biggest miss or there are other things we just don't get -- it seems they don't realize that the head of that serpent is connected to the tail in a self-fulfilling way. It jsut seems to go unnoticed or there's 'collusive' conditions invisible to us mere mortals ;-)

 

Of course, in the grand scheme of Ford's (and GM's for that matter) problems, these things may seem small, but I think they're ironically indicative of years of 'milking' in the motorsports arena too. Maybe we're just wanting 'instant coffee' given the givens, and Ford might actually be fairly well focussed on some of this -- and possibly as frustrated as we are ...that I could, reluctantly, live with if truly an interim toward a better tomorow (hey, I can hope ;-)

 

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does anyone in FORD know when the Mustang BOSS will be introduced ??????????

 

 

Hi 1970boss302... I'm sure folks in Ford know what's up. What I;ve heard from someone (who I don't know personally) who says he works for Ford is that the Boss is a definate go as next years flavor-of-the-year.

 

Separately we've heard that Boss 302 mules look like GT500s (without blower whine <lol>) so hard to spot 'em if they're out there.

 

Supposedly Ford has said it will be introducing a new flavor each year and each will be sold for two years (maybe 3 for the GT500?? dunno). If that's so the Boss would be sold for MY '08-09, possiblt followed by a new Mach (same Ford guy told me Mach follows Boss 302, but that the mach plan was not locked yet (as of July).

 

That's all I 'know' if you can call that knowing anythng -- but that fellow was emphatic that the Boss is locked-in and proceeding full-speed (whatever it is).

 

We suspect it's based on a 5.0 Cammer derivative in a body posibly based on the GT-R -- pure speculation, but fairly likely unless Ford is going to spend a bunch on inventing all new pieces -- unlikely.

 

How confident am I in this? I'm not. I think the Boss 302 happening is accurate. Exactly when -- less confident. Exactly what -- completely speculative, but based on good judgement.

 

Hope that helps ;)

 

Anyone having anything else to add... please do...

 

-Dan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi 1970boss302... I'm sure folks in Ford know what's up. What I;ve heard from someone (who I don't know personally) who says he works for Ford is that the Boss is a definate go as next years flavor-of-the-year.

 

Separately we've heard that Boss 302 mules look like GT500s (without blower whine <lol>) so hard to spot 'em if they're out there.

 

Supposedly Ford has said it will be introducing a new flavor each year and each will be sold for two years (maybe 3 for the GT500?? dunno). If that's so the Boss would be sold for MY '08-09, possiblt followed by a new Mach (same Ford guy told me Mach follows Boss 302, but that the mach plan was not locked yet (as of July).

 

That's all I 'know' if you can call that knowing anythng -- but that fellow was emphatic that the Boss is locked-in and proceeding full-speed (whatever it is).

 

We suspect it's based on a 5.0 Cammer derivative in a body posibly based on the GT-R -- pure speculation, but fairly likely unless Ford is going to spend a bunch on inventing all new pieces -- unlikely.

 

How confident am I in this? I'm not. I think the Boss 302 happening is accurate. Exactly when -- less confident. Exactly what -- completely speculative, but based on good judgement.

 

Hope that helps ;)

 

Anyone having anything else to add... please do...

 

-Dan

 

I suspect you're close to right. The Ford rep I talked to said there were a lot new models coming as early as next year. As far as all new pieces, we couldn't afford the car. :shift:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Anyone having anything else to add... please do...

 

 

 

The most pertinant tidbit I have is that in a recent article on the GT500, H.T.T. multiple times refered to taking weight out of the platform as a path to higher performance. He then refered to the racecars on the S-197 platform as examples of what that might look like. They all had Al. engines so.... :shrug:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The most pertinant tidbit I have is that in a recent article on the GT500, H.T.T. multiple times refered to taking weight out of the platform as a path to higher performance. He then refered to the racecars on the S-197 platform as examples of what that might look like. They all had Al. engines so.... :shrug:

 

Isn't the race ready mustang about 125K? and that is without air conditioning or the Shaker 1000.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isn't the race ready mustang about 125K? and that is without air conditioning or the Shaker 1000.

 

H.T.T. on weight loss.... "We've optimized the performance of this car to the full limit of the Mustang platform. I don't anticipate raising the max performance ratings above this level. However, there is still oportunity for us to deliver improved real-world performance by taking weight out."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

H.T.T. on weight loss.... "We've optimized the performance of this car to the full limit of the Mustang platform. I don't anticipate raising the max performance ratings above this level. However, there is still oportunity for us to deliver improved real-world performance by taking weight out."

 

 

Does this mean Ford will only sell Mustangs to skinny people?!?! :hysterical:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That Winding Road article is nice. The side by side specs were handy too -- thanks...

 

For those who haven't subscribed, here's the two related vid links:

- GT500

- Shelby-GT

 

-Dan

 

H.T.T. on weight loss.... "We've optimized the performance of this car to the full limit of the Mustang platform. I don't anticipate raising the max performance ratings above this level. However, there is still oportunity for us to deliver improved real-world performance by taking weight out."

 

 

Hmmm... Is this good HTT insight or an indisputably PC mastery of the obvious <lol>

 

I guess it's true under some assumptions:

- limit of mustang platform = Conservative Fully Warranty 500HP S197

- don't anticipate raising max = more HP is not in the current plan (never is until it is ;-)

- imprv perf by taking out weight = Hmmm. this is the interesting one...

 

Possible weight reduction stratagems:

- alloy motor

- basic/'R' interior

- fiber panels

- ...

 

Wonder if the revised pony will buid any lightening into the platform itself, or at least plan the structure such that it's more amenable to weight savings replacements/upgrades/follow-on.

 

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That Winding Road article is nice. The side by side specs were handy too -- thanks...

 

For those who haven't subscribed, here's the two related vid links:

- GT500

- Shelby-GT

 

-Dan

Hmmm... Is this good HTT insight or an indisputably PC mastery of the obvious <lol>

 

I guess it's true under some assumptions:

- limit of mustang platform = Conservative Fully Warranty 500HP S197

- don't anticipate raising max = more HP is not in the current plan (never is until it is ;-)

- imprv perf by taking out weight = Hmmm. this is the interesting one...

 

Possible weight reduction stratagems:

- alloy motor

- basic/'R' interior

- fiber panels

- ...

 

Wonder if the revised pony will buid any lightening into the platform itself, or at least plan the structure such that it's more amenable to weight savings replacements/upgrades/follow-on.

 

.

 

 

I would agree that 500 hp is the max that Ford would be willing to offer with a full warranty. You can bet though that Ford will examine every warranty claim on the Shelby closely and deny anything that resembles modification.

 

On the weight reduction issue, I don't think Ford will lighten the platform, there are too many safety and cost implications. Re-engineering one or two components for lighter wieght would ultimately produce a total redesign of the platform in order to maintain safety standards because of the dependencies engineered into all components within the car "system".

 

In addition to the items Dan mentioned, I think we could add:

- Lighter wheels

- Alloy spare

- Alloy/tubular suspension components

- One-piece carbon fiber or aluminum drive-shaft

- Omit power seats/power lumbar

- Omit upgraded stereo

- Omit side airbags

- One-piece carbon fiber or aluminum drive-shaft

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would agree that 500 hp is the max that Ford would be willing to offer with a full warranty. You can bet though that Ford will examine every warranty claim on the Shelby closely and deny anything that resembles modification.

 

On the weight reduction issue, I don't think Ford will lighten the platform, there are too many safety and cost implications. Re-engineering one or two components for lighter wieght would ultimately produce a total redesign of the platform in order to maintain safety standards because of the dependencies engineered into all components within the car "system".

 

In addition to the items Dan mentioned, I think we could add:

- Lighter wheels

- Alloy spare

- Alloy/tubular suspension components

- One-piece carbon fiber or aluminum drive-shaft

- Omit power seats/power lumbar

- Omit upgraded stereo

- Omit side airbags

- One-piece carbon fiber or aluminum drive-shaft

 

 

So, are you thinking, Fanatic, that the revised MY '10 (or ?) mustang would be essentially a reskin and minor step-wise engineering refresh, as opposed to more of a ground-up? (but , accommodating two sets of motor mounts<lol>)

 

---------------------------------------------

 

I'm always amazed how much weight can be added with options. Back in the day, enthusiasts would opt only the performance stuff (since you didn't have to de-opt because everything was essentially a la carte) but even that can add a bunch: engine, brakes, coolers, fluids, hi-end interiors, pre-reqs, etc.

 

 

Here's some nums I've tracked down -- amazing since even the diff betw a small-block289 and a Boss429 motor (alone) is only about 230lbs (480-710lbs) -- less in many cases -- yet look at the diffs in car weights as the mustang/shelbys got more 'mature':

 

65/66 mustang: 2,465/2,488(HT), 2,515/2,519(FB), 2,650(vert)

65/66 shelby: 2,800(FB)

 

67 mustang: 2,578(HT), 2,605(FB), 2,738(vert)

67 shelby: 3,548(GT350), 3,825(GT500)

 

68 mustang: 2,696(HT), 2,723(FB), 2,856(vert)

68 shelby: 3,640(GT350), 3,680(GT500)

 

69 mustang: 2,835(HT), 2,860(FB), 2,945(vert)

69 shelby: 3,689(GT350), 4,230(GT500)

69 boss302: 3,250

 

70 mustang: 2,875(HT), 2,899(FB), 2,985(vert), 3,406(mach)

70 shelby: 3,689(GT350), 4,230(GT500)

70 boss429: 3,530

 

71/72 mustang: 3,080(HT), 3,050(FB), 3,050(vert), 3,180(mach)

71 boss351: 3,123(FB)

 

73 mustang: 3,189(HT), 3,240(FB/CobraII), 3,366(vert), 3,261(mach)

 

06 mustang: 3,483-3,518(coupe), 3,614-3,658 lbs(vert)

06 Shelby GT500: 3,920?(coupe), 4,030?(vert)

 

 

The weight diff betw the GT500 Shelbys and the base models is staggering (up to 1,300+lbs more than base), yet the Mach(428) and Boss429 kept weight reasonable (Boss is all fiberglass panels fron the A-pillar forward) and weighed no more than the current base mustang. Of course the new mustang is enormously better built by any standard.

 

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, are you thinking, Fanatic, that the revised MY '10 (or ?) mustang would be essentially a reskin and minor step-wise engineering refresh, as opposed to more of a ground-up? (but , accommodating two sets of motor mounts<lol>)

 

---------------------------------------------

 

I'm always amazed how much weight can be added with options. Back in the day, enthusiasts would opt only the performance stuff (since you didn't have to de-opt because everything was essentially a la carte) but even that can add a bunch: engine, brakes, coolers, fluids, hi-end interiors, pre-reqs, etc.

 

 

Here's some nums I've tracked down -- amazing since even the diff betw a small-block289 and a Boss429 motor (alone) is only about 230lbs (480-710lbs) -- less in many cases -- yet look at the diffs in car weights as the mustang/shelbys got more 'mature':

 

65/66 mustang: 2,465/2,488(HT), 2,515/2,519(FB), 2,650(vert)

65/66 shelby: 2,800(FB)

 

67 mustang: 2,578(HT), 2,605(FB), 2,738(vert)

67 shelby: 3,548(GT350), 3,825(GT500)

 

68 mustang: 2,696(HT), 2,723(FB), 2,856(vert)

68 shelby: 3,640(GT350), 3,680(GT500)

 

69 mustang: 2,835(HT), 2,860(FB), 2,945(vert)

69 shelby: 3,689(GT350), 4,230(GT500)

69 boss302: 3,250

 

70 mustang: 2,875(HT), 2,899(FB), 2,985(vert), 3,406(mach)

70 shelby: 3,689(GT350), 4,230(GT500)

70 boss429: 3,530

 

71/72 mustang: 3,080(HT), 3,050(FB), 3,050(vert), 3,180(mach)

71 boss351: 3,123(FB)

 

73 mustang: 3,189(HT), 3,240(FB/CobraII), 3,366(vert), 3,261(mach)

 

06 mustang: 3,483-3,518(coupe), 3,614-3,658 lbs(vert)

06 Shelby GT500: 3,920?(coupe), 4,030?(vert)

The weight diff betw the GT500 Shelbys and the base models is staggering (up to 1,300+lbs more than base), yet the Mach(428) and Boss429 kept weight reasonable (Boss is all fiberglass panels fron the A-pillar forward) and weighed no more than the current base mustang. Of course the new mustang is enormously better built by any standard.

 

.

 

 

Dan, I personally don't think the MY '10 Mustang will be anything more than a reskin and an engineering update. I'd certainly love to be wrong about that one!! :)

 

I never realized until I was reading through your post how much weight the 'Stang gained, particularly the Shelby's, and especially between '66 and '67. Now I realize the '66 was a 289 and the '67 GT500 was a big block car, but sheez 1,000 lbs, that's insane! Excellent data as always, thanks for keeping me informed.

 

Sure would like to see the new Boss tip the scales with the same weight as the '69's - 3,250 lbs!! :yup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IS FORD JUST JERKING OUR CHAINS WITH ALL THIS MUSTANG MANIA

 

WE NOW HEAR THERE MAYBE A BULLIT CAR NEXT YEAR ?????????????

 

WE ALREADY HEAR ABOUT A BOSS NEXT YEAR ?????????????????????

 

THEY CAN ONLY PRODUCE 160,000 TO 190,000 MUSTANGS AT THE PLANT

 

WERE ARE ALL THESE CARS COMING FROM ????????????????????????????

 

FORD ARE YOU IN THAT MUCH DISARRAY ??????????????????????????????

 

IS SHINODA MAKING THE BOSS LIKE SHELBY THE SHELBY GT ???????????

 

WITH THE NUMBERS I DON'T THINK FORD WILL MEET THE SHELBY GT500

 

NUMBERS OF 9,000 TO 10,000 CARS.

 

WHAT THE READ TRUTH ?? CAN NAYONE SHED SOME LIGHT ????????????

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IS FORD JUST JERKING OUR CHAINS WITH ALL THIS MUSTANG MANIA

 

WE NOW HEAR THERE MAYBE A BULLIT CAR NEXT YEAR ?????????????

 

WE ALREADY HEAR ABOUT A BOSS NEXT YEAR ?????????????????????

 

THEY CAN ONLY PRODUCE 160,000 TO 190,000 MUSTANGS AT THE PLANT

 

WERE ARE ALL THESE CARS COMING FROM ????????????????????????????

 

FORD ARE YOU IN THAT MUCH DISARRAY ??????????????????????????????

 

IS SHINODA MAKING THE BOSS LIKE SHELBY THE SHELBY GT ???????????

 

WITH THE NUMBERS I DON'T THINK FORD WILL MEET THE SHELBY GT500

 

NUMBERS OF 9,000 TO 10,000 CARS.

 

WHAT THE READ TRUTH ?? CAN NAYONE SHED SOME LIGHT ????????????

 

 

I guess I don't see a problem. Supposedly, each niche vehicle runs for two years and each year there's a new one. So never more than two being produced concurrently. Mustang volumes would seem to fit well withing the capacity nums you stated even a second niche vehicle is done next year (boss?) with year two of the GT500, so sounds ok to me, unless I'm not understanding....

 

.

 

 

Dan, I personally don't think the MY '10 Mustang will be anything more than a reskin and an engineering update. I'd certainly love to be wrong about that one!! :)

 

I never realized until I was reading through your post how much weight the 'Stang gained, particularly the Shelby's, and especially between '66 and '67. Now I realize the '66 was a 289 and the '67 GT500 was a big block car, but sheez 1,000 lbs, that's insane! Excellent data as always, thanks for keeping me informed.

 

Sure would like to see the new Boss tip the scales with the same weight as the '69's - 3,250 lbs!! :yup:

 

 

Yeah, 3,250! From your lips to HTT's ears <lol>

 

Even the '66 GT350 -> '67 GT350 added about 750 lbs !!!(many of those nums are from Brad Bolwing's book).

 

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess I don't see a problem. Supposedly, each niche vehicle runs for two years and each year there's a new one. So never more than two being produced concurrently. Mustang volumes would seem to fit well withing the capacity nums you stated even a second niche vehicle is done next year (boss?) with year two of the GT500, so sounds ok to me, unless I'm not understanding....

 

.

Yeah, 3,250! From your lips to HTT's ears <lol>

 

Even the '66 GT350 -> '67 GT350 added about 750 lbs !!!(many of those nums are from Brad Bolwing's book).

 

.

 

 

Let's hope HTT and Bill Ford ARE listening to us!! :) Build a new Boss faithful to the original and we will BUY!!

 

Honestly, I don't think we will see the Boss before MY '09 or possibly later. The Bullitt appears to be the SE on the near horizon. Ummm....a Bullitt in '08 and a Boss in MY '10....ohh the possibilities :happy feet:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's hope HTT and Bill Ford ARE listening to us!! :) Build a new Boss faithful to the original and we will BUY!!

 

Honestly, I don't think we will see the Boss before MY '09 or possibly later. The Bullitt appears to be the SE on the near horizon. Ummm....a Bullitt in '08 and a Boss in MY '10....ohh the possibilities :happy feet:

 

hmm

post-6945-1158674805_thumb.jpg

post-6945-1158674805_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's hope HTT and Bill Ford ARE listening to us!! :) Build a new Boss faithful to the original and we will BUY!!

 

Honestly, I don't think we will see the Boss before MY '09 or possibly later. The Bullitt appears to be the SE on the near horizon. Ummm....a Bullitt in '08 and a Boss in MY '10....ohh the possibilities :happy feet:

 

 

That would actually make more sense given HTT's weight reduction words (whatever they meant <lol>). The bullitt would work great on the existing platform. And if the Boss can be lighter and exquisitely competitive in a Camaro/Challenger/Boss road racing context, I'm ok waiting a couple more years.

 

Well, I guess we'll have to hope Alan Mulally is listening too (not! he's not only not a car guy, he probably doesn't even drive a car unless he has to! ...hopefully it's Ford). But WCF is still the key guy. As COO he runs the business. Actually, I think as long as HTT is making his number, performance cars will get a free ride over the next few years. Performance cars are too small a niche for WCF to expect it to carry other areas, so I'm hoping it'll be used as a self-sustaining reinvestment/growth wedge so it can prevail against upcoming competition. To my mind that's the only smart way to do it and that gives HTT some lattitude, I think, not presently enjoyed elsewhere in Ford. And since the vast majority of Mustang sales are in North America, the Mustang and Fusion could become the poster children of Ford's turnaround (hopefully) -- all good for us I think

 

;)

 

 

hmm

 

 

Yeah, still nice...

 

What does cost, etc... are you ever going to post some info/numbers ???? :)

 

thanks

 

-Dan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dan, I agree, as long as HTT is making his profit numbers, the high performance cars won't get too much scrunity (as long as the budget investment remains unchanged). The challenge will be developing a truly unique SE Boss with those limited dollars. I believe the Boss won't appear until MY '09 or '10 at the least due to the fact that a legitimate NA V8 engine doesn't exist currently and Ford doesn't have the captial to develop one. We can only hope the rumored "Hurricane" or "Boss" engine finally sees the light of production and Ford see's fit to develop a Hi-Po 5.0L version for the Boss. Here's to hoping... :party:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would be a BIG boost for Ford to come out with a Boss in 2009.

40th anniversary addition. Take the Mustang GT and drop in the

Shleby 500 motor with limited options. Match the 1970 Boss strips

and you would have a winner that would sell like hot cakes.

Are you listening FORD time to make money again in the USA

 

 

 

 

I think your're right,and I'd buy that........I could care less about the Shelby name on that Mustang.Put that drive train in the regular Mustang and call it what you want.The prices on that Shelby now are a BIG JOKE,but it's the STUPID public that are driving the price up.Wait till these MORONS find out how bad they took it in the ass!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! HA! Ha! :wacko:

 

I agree with all your choices except the 5 speed. I also would like to see a close ratio 6 speed. But there is no way in hell this car will be built like that and not be gouged by those greedy a hole dealers. When will Ford step in and more strongly "suggest" prices so their brand isn't further tarnished by these things, just like what is going on with the GT500. I like someone's point on another thread also, they can build like 900,000 F150 trucks, and cannot build more than 10,000 GT500's for people who want the car?????? Doesn't seem fair or just.

 

 

 

Ya,A-MEN 100 times,couldn't have said it better myself....... WOW!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...
...