Okay I am gonna expand upon the GTO thread argument here.

Classes Mustang Competes in-

Entry level performance coupe- V6 Mustang...an okay car, but throw out RWD (RWD and FWD is not a deciding factor in this group) and entries such as the Eclipse, RSX, and even Grand Am GT look better in terms of usability, space, and overall appeal. Definatly not the top of this class. Also with the exception of the Grand Am, the other cars have nicer interiors

Affordable Performance Coupe-Mustang GT..Arguably a good value, but 265 HP engine is now threatened by average family sedans such as the Altima, Accord, and Mazda6...true they may not be as fast, but when selling a car as dated as the Mustang (in terms of quality, Solid axle, ect)...you better have enough performance to blow an Accord away.

Halo Performance Car Mustang Cobra...a VERY fast car, but one with quickly visible weaknesses that show up when in competition with cars such as the Corvette and Viper which are every bit as fast and much better cars. Compare it against performance cars in its price class like the GTO, 350Z, and even RX8 and the only advantage it has is speed...loosing in fit and finish, interior, and total performance.

My point is that Ford needs to stop spreading the Mustang name so thin and focus on being one or two things. Make the GT more desireable. Move teh Cobra down market where it's weakness will show less and build a unique $50,000+ sports car to take on the Vette.

 

Few things I think are missed here.

First, a well driven Mustang GT will do a 100mph quarter mile. That may not seem impressive when you look at the 105 mph of the final LS6 based LS1s, but that is still blisteringly quick by ANY yardstick for a completely stock car. It's almost comical you insinuate that it would have trouble with a Honda Accord. That's like saying a hammer may have trouble smashing a fly... yes the insinuation was that bad. Don't forget: torque, gearing, horsepower curves, and the physics that favor RWD in play here.

Secondly, nobody buys a car like this on a logic basis. The reason the names like Mustang and Camaro (as well as Corvette) mean something is because of it's history & what it represents. Mustang is in fact in the same sales catagory as the Eclipse, Celica, & RSX, however it does steal sales from a car you mentioned, the Grand Am. But Grand Am is a small family car that comes in both sedan & coupe (think Malibu ). Just the same, Mustang still outsells the Grand Am coupe.

Finally, I don't think anyone with one foot in reality actually thinks that someone who has the means or desire to buy a Viper or Corvette is actually snooping around Ford showrooms looking at a Mustang!

Cobra is more of an extreme Mustang whose buyers are looking for a Mustang that's "badder" than any other. Ford looks at Cobra as their halo car, giving Corvette performance at a price over $10,000 less. If a Camaro SS buyer didn't go for a Corvette instead, or a Corvette buyer didn't go for a cheaper Camaro SS, then it quite a reach to try and say that Mustang and Viper/Corvette buyers are interchangeable methinks.

 

Since they sell about 160,000 - 200,000 Mustangs a year - more than most other cars, I don't think they are "spreading it too thin"
Looks like they are doing pretty well...

 

Wonder what happens if you add up Monte Carlo, Camaro, and Corvette sales..?

 

What about the Mach1?

Not that its at all realtive, but my kid's 96 GT is freakishly fast for a basically stock car with a S-1 supercharger. These cars are plentiful, cheap to insure, and have a huge aftermarket available to enthusiasts.

GM is up against that whole picture.

 

Just like GM did when they decided to make the LS1 Camaro/Trans Am the fastest ponycars on the planet...
making them uniquely low, lean, sleek, super fast, and "dedicated" performers?

The body changes, ergonomic issues, platform structure, and general daily liveability of the cars was changed SO DRASTICALLY in an effort to make the car the "best performer", that it "exclusive-ated" itself right out of general driveability and large scale desirability.

It was unquestionably the fastest ponycar yet... to it's death.

Now explain to me what Ford is doing wrong again?

 

F-body was going to die no matter what.....why not go out with a bang

 

I don't think Mustang is doing much wrong right now. Remember Ford has set up Mustang for success by eliminating all of its internal competition. This is why Mustang spreads from a $15k base "sporty" coupe to a $38k sports car. T-bird is upscale, the Cougar is gone, Focus is not a coupe. If you want a sporty coupe from Ford, pick your level and color Mustang. It's that simple.

 

Actually the Grand Am does have a nicer interior than the mustang and at least as nice as the Eclipse (for those that don't know, the Eclipse has the exact same dash as the Dodge Stratus)

 

guionM, I don't know where you got your numbers, but it is quite common for the 01 &02 LS1 F-bodies to trap 108-110 totally stock when M6 equipped. 100mph in the quarter is still impressive when taken in context with all the cars out there right now, but basically you are talking about '93 LT1 performance levels....that's 10 years behind the times.

Not trying to start a gripe fest over numbers just wanted to point out the discrepancy. I'd say 108mph is much closer to the typical 01/02 M6 LS1 trap speed.

 

If speed was "EVERYTHING!!!" the Mustang would of sold 40,000 units and the camaro would of sold 160,000+
.And if GM sold 160,000+ F bodies,It WOULD of STAYED not DIED.
Nuff said.........................


(guionM VERY good post BTW.)

 

http://www.musclecarclub.com/musclec...istory-4.shtml
http://www.edmunds.com/reviews/compa...1/page013.html
http://www.syclone.freeserve.co.uk/rivals.htm

Car & Driver & Motor Trend end up with similar results. You can say one can drive them quicker, but the same can be said about Mustangs as well. This is simply a yardstick for comparason purposes.

BTW, the supercharged, intercooled Mustang Cobra, which everyone who has tested one discovered that the car puts down nearly 390 horsepower at the rear wheels does the quarter by most all accounts at 110-113mph range, so I'd either be real suspicious at the 110mph Camaro runs, or I'd be inclined to believe that the Cobra can be run even quicker.

 

Ok, as long as you're consistent in the comparison data. Car mag Mustang to Car Mag F-body is completely valid. Thanks for clarifying.

And on your second point I'd say the Cobra could be quicker. Most ZO6's, similarly powered, push 114+.

I've personally witnessed a 100% stock 2000 SS (not having the benefit of the LS6 intake) run 12.94 at 110 mph. THis is a car that dynoed 316hp to the wheels. And Evan Smith has matched that trap speed in GMHTP a couple of times I believe, so it can be done. These cars (and drivers) are of course the exception, I'd say most '01 and '02's I see run between 107 and 108 trap speeds. Obviously the conditions must be favorable but it is not at all uncommon. A quick trip over to LS1.com can illustrate this point w/o too much searching.

 

75K+45K+40K = 150K

150K < 160K+

Cost to market and sell 3 cars > Cost to market and sell 1 car

Not sure what your point is...

 

Lets assume that the Monte Carlo died after 1999, Grand Prix coupe had disappered in 1997 and the Grand Am coupe had been killed off by GM in 1998. I am sure that such moves would have bolstered the sales of V6 F-bodies. Sure there would have been a loss in overall sales volume, much as Ford has lost some performance coupe market share from not having the Probe/Cougar or MN-12 coupes. However, the increased volume for the F-bodies would have made a better business case for a F5 design.

The Mustang is not a miracle, just an internal monopoly. If Ford hadn't killed every home-team competitor, I'm not so sure that we'd be seeing a 2005!