Team Mustang takes over F-car.....
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 16,176
From: Chicagoland IL
Team Mustang takes over F-car.....
Ok...here is a topic starter filled with landmines...but maybe also the catalyst for interesting discussion.
Frankly...I've been impressed with the work that "Team Mustang" has been doing lately.
They've taken the ancient Fox platform created a sales success with desirable, well imaged, interesting Mustangs.
So here goes....if Team Mustang were running the 4th gen F-body program...how might it have been different?
Let's have some interesting discussion.....
Frankly...I've been impressed with the work that "Team Mustang" has been doing lately.
They've taken the ancient Fox platform created a sales success with desirable, well imaged, interesting Mustangs.
So here goes....if Team Mustang were running the 4th gen F-body program...how might it have been different?
Let's have some interesting discussion.....
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 6,165
From: Sterling Heights, MI
Fake scoops. Lots of fake, tacky scoops. 
Seriously though, that's hard to answer. I would imagine the car would be a bit more upright and traditional than the current "Budget Vette" setup it is now. Then again, that would be hard to accomplish using the current chassis. I also believe that Ford has a bigger budget for Mustang than GM had for the F-body, that tends to help. Assuming they had to work with the budget the 4th Gen got, I'm not really sure we'd be seeing too much more in the way of special editions, blown SS/WS6's, etc. Not to mention the old "Corvette Rule" that team Mustang doesn't have to live under...
------------------
Mark
94 Z28, Red, A4, 3:23
Lone Mods--LPE CAI, !Lapeer Dragway.
(Hey, I'm a college boy I can't afford gobs of bolt-ons!)
Best time: 14.658 @ 95.1
with SES light on and Driver off! (First and only time at track)
The F-body will NEVER die.
Seriously though, that's hard to answer. I would imagine the car would be a bit more upright and traditional than the current "Budget Vette" setup it is now. Then again, that would be hard to accomplish using the current chassis. I also believe that Ford has a bigger budget for Mustang than GM had for the F-body, that tends to help. Assuming they had to work with the budget the 4th Gen got, I'm not really sure we'd be seeing too much more in the way of special editions, blown SS/WS6's, etc. Not to mention the old "Corvette Rule" that team Mustang doesn't have to live under...
------------------
Mark
94 Z28, Red, A4, 3:23
Lone Mods--LPE CAI, !Lapeer Dragway.
(Hey, I'm a college boy I can't afford gobs of bolt-ons!)
Best time: 14.658 @ 95.1
with SES light on and Driver off! (First and only time at track)
The F-body will NEVER die.
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 16,176
From: Chicagoland IL
Yeah, I also doubt that there would be wholesale architectural changes. But I could see some more specific aspects being different...like wheels for example.
I think those American Torque Thrust looking wheels on the GT and Bullit are some of the best looking wheels out there right now, and really add to the appeal of the cars that ride on them. A good looking wheel like that could have done alot to boost the appeal of the F-body.
I think those American Torque Thrust looking wheels on the GT and Bullit are some of the best looking wheels out there right now, and really add to the appeal of the cars that ride on them. A good looking wheel like that could have done alot to boost the appeal of the F-body.
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 16,176
From: Chicagoland IL
And also getting the right image for specific models. There is a very clear image and performance delineation between ..say the GT and Cobra.
I don't want to get into a Z/28, SS flame war on this...but IMO, that whole deal was pretty much bungled and really added nothing to the Camaros image, except confusion.
Is it a Z28/SS? Yes!.....Wait... No! It's an SS that starts life as a Z/28 but costs more ...and gives you the same performance. GOT IT!
Team Mustang, I think has been far more careful about cultivating the right image for the different Mustang models.
I don't want to get into a Z/28, SS flame war on this...but IMO, that whole deal was pretty much bungled and really added nothing to the Camaros image, except confusion.
Is it a Z28/SS? Yes!.....Wait... No! It's an SS that starts life as a Z/28 but costs more ...and gives you the same performance. GOT IT!
Team Mustang, I think has been far more careful about cultivating the right image for the different Mustang models.
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 564
From: Fletcher, NC, US
If Team Mustang was doing the 4th gen, hopefully they'd tone it down a bit on the steroids by completely redesigning the exterior, starting with the rear quarters.
Then if they had any brains to speak of, they'd offer a mid-grade engine, which would either be a supercharged version of the 3800 or a really anemic V8, either of which would have to have HP and tQ halfway between the 2 current engines.
Then they would realize that the f-body has integrated ground effects built into the body, for better or worse, and as such they'd place a mandatory BAN on add-on ground effects which are just pitiful.
They'd offer something unheard of in F4, a.k.a. variety, where a formula and a base Firebird would be something other than visually identical from the outside, which they are now.
They'd get rid of those dismal taillights, the dismal park-bench rear bumper, and the dismal built in bumper exhaust chop-offs.
They'd redesign the interior dash layout to be inviting and engaging, rather than leaving it in the intimidating / confusing / dysfunctional state it's in.
They'd make the rear ends where they hold up under load instead of falling apart. Or better yet go for a completely new IRS.
If they had a big enough budget to redesign the engine bay / cradle / firewall / dash, they should do it so that the engine can be worked on reasonably easily, unlike now, and so that passengers familiar with technical drafting don't get the urge to bust out their t-squares and get to drawing blueprints on the giant dashboard inside.
I'm sure there's more, but start w/ those and then they'd win over many new customers.
------------------
1982 Recaro Trans Am (Y84), LU5/WS6/CC1/G80/J65/etc. 3,082 orig. miles (7/24/2002) - http://ohok.com/82recaro
1985 Base Firebird, F41/LB8/GU5/etc. CB radio, 142kmiles. http://ohok.com/82recaro/kizzsfb.jpg
1984 Firebird S/E, WS6/LL1/MD8/etc. All original, 102kmiles. Sold 5/02 http://ohok.com/82recaro/kizzsse.jpg
Then if they had any brains to speak of, they'd offer a mid-grade engine, which would either be a supercharged version of the 3800 or a really anemic V8, either of which would have to have HP and tQ halfway between the 2 current engines.
Then they would realize that the f-body has integrated ground effects built into the body, for better or worse, and as such they'd place a mandatory BAN on add-on ground effects which are just pitiful.
They'd offer something unheard of in F4, a.k.a. variety, where a formula and a base Firebird would be something other than visually identical from the outside, which they are now.
They'd get rid of those dismal taillights, the dismal park-bench rear bumper, and the dismal built in bumper exhaust chop-offs.
They'd redesign the interior dash layout to be inviting and engaging, rather than leaving it in the intimidating / confusing / dysfunctional state it's in.
They'd make the rear ends where they hold up under load instead of falling apart. Or better yet go for a completely new IRS.
If they had a big enough budget to redesign the engine bay / cradle / firewall / dash, they should do it so that the engine can be worked on reasonably easily, unlike now, and so that passengers familiar with technical drafting don't get the urge to bust out their t-squares and get to drawing blueprints on the giant dashboard inside.
I'm sure there's more, but start w/ those and then they'd win over many new customers.
------------------
1982 Recaro Trans Am (Y84), LU5/WS6/CC1/G80/J65/etc. 3,082 orig. miles (7/24/2002) - http://ohok.com/82recaro
1985 Base Firebird, F41/LB8/GU5/etc. CB radio, 142kmiles. http://ohok.com/82recaro/kizzsfb.jpg
1984 Firebird S/E, WS6/LL1/MD8/etc. All original, 102kmiles. Sold 5/02 http://ohok.com/82recaro/kizzsse.jpg
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 16,176
From: Chicagoland IL
Also, I think that they would make sure that the Camaro's Z/28 emblems would look classier than a 1 cent plastic punchout.
[This message has been edited by Z284ever (edited July 24, 2002).]
[This message has been edited by Z284ever (edited July 24, 2002).]
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 3,180
From: Yadkinville, NC USA
Interesting concept for this thread! I wonder if anyone on the unofficial Camaro program inside GM will have any feelings towards this...
Anyhow, kizz hit on a very key word... variety.
I'm not sure that it is so much the platform or various performance levels that sell 180K per year, as it is the rainbow of colors, trim packages, options, etc. that allows a person to drive a car "unique" to them. At least unique enough so that they won't see 12 more just like it before they get home with it. It gets right down to even the wheel options like Z284 was speaking of... any of the tire/wheel options can be had on almost any variation of the car (save for z-rated mandates on high end performers).
Then again, look at the "limited editions" that have been sliced out of Mustang production - the 7-up cars, the Laser Reds, the 20th, 25th, 30th(very lame, but), the Mystic Cobras, the 35th anniversary models, the Bullitt, the Cobra R's(again - I question the validity but they ARE limited eds w/serial #'s), the ASC MacLarens, and so on. It seems like every year or so, there is "something new and special" to be had by a select few who want some exclusivity in a common car. That draws attention - and sales - to the model.
While I do love the Camaros agressive appearance of the 4th gen cars, I bet 75% of the ones I see on my daily commute (of 90 miles total BTW) are BLACK, with stock alloys, and tinted windows. I think the remaining 25% are split between grey and white, and still have the factory alloys and tinted windows! I find myself looking to windshields or back glasses for stereo or mod-company stickers to discern the cars from one another. Don't get me wrong, they don't look bad - they just all look "the same". I think that lack of diversity coupled with the lack of updating the body/interior contributed most to poor sales, and therefore would be where a "Team Mustang" would begin changing the F-cars.
Just .02. Nice topic.
Anyhow, kizz hit on a very key word... variety.
I'm not sure that it is so much the platform or various performance levels that sell 180K per year, as it is the rainbow of colors, trim packages, options, etc. that allows a person to drive a car "unique" to them. At least unique enough so that they won't see 12 more just like it before they get home with it. It gets right down to even the wheel options like Z284 was speaking of... any of the tire/wheel options can be had on almost any variation of the car (save for z-rated mandates on high end performers).
Then again, look at the "limited editions" that have been sliced out of Mustang production - the 7-up cars, the Laser Reds, the 20th, 25th, 30th(very lame, but), the Mystic Cobras, the 35th anniversary models, the Bullitt, the Cobra R's(again - I question the validity but they ARE limited eds w/serial #'s), the ASC MacLarens, and so on. It seems like every year or so, there is "something new and special" to be had by a select few who want some exclusivity in a common car. That draws attention - and sales - to the model.
While I do love the Camaros agressive appearance of the 4th gen cars, I bet 75% of the ones I see on my daily commute (of 90 miles total BTW) are BLACK, with stock alloys, and tinted windows. I think the remaining 25% are split between grey and white, and still have the factory alloys and tinted windows! I find myself looking to windshields or back glasses for stereo or mod-company stickers to discern the cars from one another. Don't get me wrong, they don't look bad - they just all look "the same". I think that lack of diversity coupled with the lack of updating the body/interior contributed most to poor sales, and therefore would be where a "Team Mustang" would begin changing the F-cars.
Just .02. Nice topic.
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 16,176
From: Chicagoland IL
Right, Proud...variety and creation of interest.
The point of this thread is not so much to say what or, what not, Team Mustang could have done with an unlimited budget...but to talk about the relatively inexpensive ways that Mustang was able to get more appeal and more sales....and apply those ideas to the F-body.
Nothing could realistically have changed the Camaro's architecture, basic styling, or size ( unless there was money for a complete redo).
But I believe, much could have been done to increase appeal and interest in the F-body, with just some detail upgrades done right (wheels for example), and greater differentiation and "specialness" of models like Z/28.
The point of this thread is not so much to say what or, what not, Team Mustang could have done with an unlimited budget...but to talk about the relatively inexpensive ways that Mustang was able to get more appeal and more sales....and apply those ideas to the F-body.
Nothing could realistically have changed the Camaro's architecture, basic styling, or size ( unless there was money for a complete redo).
But I believe, much could have been done to increase appeal and interest in the F-body, with just some detail upgrades done right (wheels for example), and greater differentiation and "specialness" of models like Z/28.
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 85
From: S.F. Bay Area, Ca
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Z28Wilson:
Fake scoops. Lots of fake, tacky scoops.
</font>
Fake scoops. Lots of fake, tacky scoops.
</font>
------------------
my car-Black with black leather interior 99 Camaro SS, A4, T-tops and lots of options
my old car-(sold to my brother 7-13-02) white 98 V6 A4, leather, t-tops, exhaust and intake mods
Registered User
Joined: Sep 1999
Posts: 1,873
From: South Jersey
- Functional hood scoop would be replaced with non-functional "Scam Air".
- Performance models would feature 17" wheels.
- Would be 'freshened' once in a while, and more than a bumper change.
- Would have a replacement model in the works too.
------------------
If it breaks, it wasn't high performance enough.
2001 Mustang Bullitt GT
2000 Jetta M5
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 2,574
From: Arlington, Texas
They should limit Camaro/Firebird production to 25,000 units like the T-bird, then declare them "SOLD OUT FOR THE YEAR", and call it a sales success. Then mark them up at the dealership due to it's "high demand to supply ratio".
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 16,176
From: Chicagoland IL
Purely subjective on my part, but; nicer exhaust note.
I've always preferred the "mellodious rumble" of the GT/Cobra over the "coarse raspiness" of the LT1/LS1's tone.
[This message has been edited by Z284ever (edited July 25, 2002).]
I've always preferred the "mellodious rumble" of the GT/Cobra over the "coarse raspiness" of the LT1/LS1's tone.
[This message has been edited by Z284ever (edited July 25, 2002).]
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 6,165
From: Sterling Heights, MI
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Z284ever:
Purely subjective on my part, but; nicer exhaust note.
I've always preferred the "mellodious rumble" of the GT/Cobra over the "coarse raspiness" of the LT1/LS1's tone.
</font>
Purely subjective on my part, but; nicer exhaust note.
I've always preferred the "mellodious rumble" of the GT/Cobra over the "coarse raspiness" of the LT1/LS1's tone.
</font>
------------------
Mark
94 Z28, Red, A4, 3:23
Lone Mods--LPE CAI, !Lapeer Dragway.
(Hey, I'm a college boy I can't afford gobs of bolt-ons!)
Best time: 14.658 @ 95.1
with SES light on and Driver off! (First and only time at track)
The F-body will NEVER die.