Yeah, good points. This is certainly, to a large degree, academic in lieu of real hard numbers on either cost or performance, just trying to work with what we got. I guess one of my thoughts/hopes regarding the price and it not being set yet is that perhaps if we do raise enough aware about it, that might shame Ford into being a touch less greedy and think more of long term customer satisfaction than squeezing every nickel out at every immediate opportunity, a trait I sadly think is shared by Detroit in general to its great long term detriment. That short term, pure narrow $ focus is the reason Detroit is having such problems in the first place IMHO. If they'd spend a bit more for R&D and actual product quality and content in the first place, they wouldn't have to bribe the public with ruinous incentives and rebates to buy their product.

And I also agree with you, if they hold the same relative price point with the '07 SVT as they have with the GT and Base Stangs, then great, I may well be busting into my penny jar too.

The supply and demand thing is true, of course, but I think the main factor is the lack of competition. Ford simply may well be able to demand much more $ above their own costs than they otherwise would if there were a Camaro or Firebird breathing down their necks. Sadly, that is a bad thing for us for that extra premium comes straight out of our pockets.

The M3s, fanstastic cars though they are, are overpriced too and represent even less of a bang for the buck as a result of that, so I am fair with my critique and not just pick'n on poor little GT500 on that.

 

I don't care if they sell for 40K, I will buy a used one in 2009 for 20K! There's already Mach1's for sale for 14K and less. I hope the domestic automakers keep up this new muscle car war! there will be some great deals out there in a few years!

 

Of course, if the cost of gas keeps rising, don't expect manufacturers to continue to build these muscle cars.

 

...
The supply and demand thing is true, of course, but I think the main factor is the lack of competition. Ford simply may well be able to demand much more $ above their own costs than they otherwise would if there were a Camaro or Firebird breathing down their necks. Sadly, that is a bad thing for us for that extra premium comes straight out of our pockets.

The M3s, fanstastic cars though they are, are overpriced too and represent even less of a bang for the buck as a result of that, so I am fair with my critique and not just pick'n on poor little GT500 on that.
[/b][/quote]

I have to disagree. I think there's a lot of competition, just not the same players. Instead of the camaro and firebird we now have: GTO, EVO, STi, 350z, G35, S2000, and RX8. While most of these will not offer the same straight line speed, many of these will out handle and possibly out class (through technology, luxery, and/or brandname) a GT500. Then there will be the used C6 market which will fall flat into the GT500 price range. Then add to that the rumors of a new Skyline GTR, Supra, and RX7 returning. Things are heating up in the sports car arena.

 

Woohooo, joy for the enthusiast! Hopefully Ford will be mindful of this onslaught in their pricing decisions. They could really cement their bang for the buck crown if they do forego short term greed for a long term success. Better that than after all these makes start nipping at the GT500 and going the rebates and incentives route (how embarassing that would be for SVT, but then, that's an opium Detroit has a hard time turning away from).

Let's get the engineers back in charge and start building better cars for less that will sell on their own merits rather than lesser cars for more that require customer bribery to offload.

 

I actually don't agree. It would certainly take a toll on large trucks and maybe even more "affordable" performance cars like the Mustang GT. But, cars like the GT500 are not what one could call a "rational" decision by any stretch and I don;t see gas prices making a significant diffrence in demand for these cars.

The landscape has changed a great deal since the early seventies when insurance prices, emissions standards, and gas prices conspired to end the original muscle car era. Certainly, emissions standards could stop the new muscle car era cold if the govt. takes a notion to do so. And insurance could still put a large enough squeeze to diminish the current trend toward high powered cars should premiums get ridiculously out of hand.

But, IMO gas could go to $3.00 a gallon for regular and you would still see these limited run, ultra-high performance cars.

 

You and me both. Plus the maintenance on the thing after the newness and free maintenance wears off, your really looking at some serious $$$. My cousin had a '01 540 w/ the M accessories; wheels, steering wheel, front lower valence, etc. and his biggest complaint was parts, not labor, especially brakes and rotors. That's all I ever heard, until he traded it His dad's got a body shop so labor wasn't the issue. But anyways, $53K+ for and M3, nope, not me.
[/b][/quote]


With the expected markup on the GT500, I have a bad feeling the price won't all that far away from an M3.

On the cost of maintenance note, I sold my 95 325is for my Mach 1, and found the parts surprisingly reasonable. I bought cross drilled rotors and brake pads for the front for $110.

 

How's this for perceived value.....when i buy a Shelby Cobra GT500, for D-Plan!!!!!!! And i don't care how far i have to search, if my dealer doesnt do it. Because i think we have learned, that there is always a dealer out there, looking to put a number on the board!

:worship:

 

I actually don't agree. It would certainly take a toll on large trucks and maybe even more "affordable" performance cars like the Mustang GT. But, cars like the GT500 are not what one could call a "rational" decision by any stretch and I don;t see gas prices making a significant diffrence in demand for these cars.

The landscape has changed a great deal since the early seventies when insurance prices, emissions standards, and gas prices conspired to end the original muscle car era. Certainly, emissions standards could stop the new muscle car era cold if the govt. takes a notion to do so. And insurance could still put a large enough squeeze to diminish the current trend toward high powered cars should premiums get ridiculously out of hand.

But, IMO gas could go to $3.00 a gallon for regular and you would still see these limited run, ultra-high performance cars.
[/b][/quote]
Yeah, I agree, there will probably continue to be a niche market for these vehicles. After all, they pay far more for gas in Europe and people still buy Ferraris. But the high horsepower wars we're seeing in the US among more and more models will definitely reverse if the price of gas keeps going up.

 

If all the body parts were available to make-over a GT, would you do it and save $$? Just curious...thanks!

 

If all the body parts were available to make-over a GT, would you do it and save $$? Just curious...thanks!
[/b][/quote]

I was being a little over-the-top there... but, honestly, while I do want something more powerful than the GT, I'd be happy with less than 475hp if it made the car cheaper.

As in, some part of me is still hoping for a blown-4.6 "GT350" to be announced soon!

 

What about a non-supercharged 5.4L 3V 375hp GT350 for $32K? That would be my vote...

 

I'd be perfectly happy with a blown 4.6L 4V. And I'd be ecstatic if it had an aluminum block...