Looks like I'm going to have to do it for you (to avoid being embarrassed for such a performance-lost soul). I'll get back to you later.

 

The anticipation is killing me.

 

Still far too many engine choices.

This is more like what it will be:

V6 - 3.7L 4V - 275 HP
GT - 5.0L 3V - 340 HP
Boss - 5.0L 4V - 375 HP
SE TBA - 6.2L - 450 HP

 

There now ... that's much better (but I still think they could slide a 5.4 in there somewhere) ...

I'm still going to give my rendition later ...

 

Thats not bad, the 375 is right in there if GM uses a 400 hp V8, if GM uses a 430 to 450hp V8 for its regular V8 Camaro, Ford needs to move the 6.2 SE to Boss status and the Boss V8 to GT status. I have a feeling that the 306hp V6 in the new CTS will be going as the base V6 for the F5 as Cadi will get a larger and more powerful version of that engine in the near future.

Of course that competive 375hp is predicated on GM having a 3800 to 3900 lbs F5 with a 6 spd and IRS suspension to soak up some power compared to Ford using a 375hp V8 in a 3500 lbs Mustang with a 5 spd and SRA rear along with 17 & 18 wheels compared to the 19 or 20's the F5 will probably have.

 

That list is asssuming regular fuel injection, I'm expecting/hoping GDI will come hand-in hand with the 5.0, which should put it on the sunny side of 400 hp. And I can't imagine the TT 5.0 having less than 500.

 

I primarily revised my lineup because I think there was too much 'hp overlap'. In other words there were too many engines making similar amounts of power which creates an atmosphere where it is easy to confuse customers....not to mention the potential for cannibalism But IMO limiting the Mustang to four engines is too restrictive at this point.

Variety is a plus in cars like the Mustang and while have to give clearly defined options I don't think four options is enough to capitalize on what the Mustang could do. For me the trick here is to think more along the lines of a budget 911 in terms of model line layout and less like what Ford is doing now. I also don't believe Ford has been ambitious enough with Mustang or it's platform in terms of market coverage. My plan reflects both of these since I'm discussing what should be IMO and not what Ford will actually do.

Since this provides the perfect opportunity to expand on that (and since the OHV question is now a dead topic).........

Circa 2012 or so.....

Base: 3.7L DOHC V6: 285hp 6-speed auto or manual

GT: 3.7L TTC V6: 365hp 6-speed auto or manual

Boss 302: 5.0L DOHC V8: 425hp 6-speed auto or manual

(production of above three models to equal ~140,000 units per year.)

GT350: 5.0L TTC V8: 505hp 6-speed auto or manual, production ~10,000 units per year domestically

Boss 427: 7.0L DOHC V8: 625hp 6-speed manual, production ~2500 units per year domestically

GT500: 7.0L TTC V8: 685hp 6-speed manual, production ~1500 units per year domestically

......the top two models display my desire to see the Mustang expand to compete with car like the GTR in performance and price. IMO the GT500 has demonstrated handily that people will consider a Mustang in that price range and has arguably helped pave the way for a production model foray into this kind of msrp territory. Since Ford is in no financial condition to produce a stand alone competitor in that price range, and since the Mustang seems to play just fine there, using the Mustang to compete here makes the most senes.

 

I'm right there with you

 

I think they have to wait for the next-gen 'Stang to try and tilt at the GTR, but I agree its plausible. The key is to focus on a Muscle-Car Grand Tourer rather than attempt to do the ZR-1 route and attempt to make a Supercar.

However, don't completely write off a more direct competitor to the GTR and Z06. We now know that a reborn RX-7 is all but certain in the next 3-4 years; if Ford wanted to do a new Cobra priced competetively with the GTR/Z06 then the RX's platform would present a golden opportunity to do so. With much of the R&D already done by Mazda and the core product situation back on track by 2011-13, I think its very do-able.

 

I agree. And when I make statements like the one we are discussing I typically am referring to the all new '2012' model since what we'll get in 2010 and even 2011 is likely already written in stone so to speak.

 

I agree that Ford has not been ambitious enough with the current Mustang. This lack of ambition and unwillingness to give Mustang customers what we want, an affordable Mustang performance model with 350 - 400 HP, is reflected in the sagging Mustang sales over the last 9 months.

Given Ford's history with the Mustang and the fact that we're now into the 4th model year of the S197 and only have 3-1/8 engine variants, I find it unlikely that we will ever see more than 4 engine options in the Mustang.

You're 911 comparison is a bit off since the 911 starts at 4 times the price the Mustang.

I would also like to see a nice shopping list of engines to choose from. But given how the auto biz works these days, it's not reality.

 

IMO the difference between the Ford and the Porsche is the price range the 911 covers and not the price it starts at. My point being that the Mustang could and should cover a much larger price range, which would make room for a greater variety of engines. I think Ford could see success with a Mustang that started at the current 20k or so and went as high as 75k, if the higher end model/s provided the content necesary to justify the price tage

I actually agree that we are extremely unlikely to see such variety, but I think the problem has far more to do with the status quo and misconceptions within the industry that actual shortcomings. Again, it's a list of what I would like to see and what I think would work better than the status quo.

 

Given Ford's painfully slow move with this sort of technology, I'm wonderin if I'll see GDI on a Ford within my lifetime.

Therefore the #'s I gave were conservative and low tech. Hopefully we'll be pleasantly surprised and havd GDI, higher HP #s and better MPG in the next Mustang itteration.

With GDI the #'s could be more like:
V6 - 3.7 - 300 HP
GT - 5.0 3V - 360 HP
Boss 5.0 - 400 HP

But I'm not holding my breath.

 

The current 911 price range runs from $73K to $150K, a 2:1 price range. (although it's next to impossible to buy a stripped 911 for $73K)

The Mustang runs from $20K to $45K a 2.25:1 price range.
I do not believe that the Mustang can support a high end model that cost much more than the GT-500. If you look at a lot of other car models I think you'll find a 2:1 price range is about all the market will support.

 

I believe it has more to do with the economics of the car business. Remember for every engine option EPA testing & certification is required, CAFE calculations, computer code, suspension differences. All those differences must be documented and spare parts planned for an put in inventory. Those production related costs are higher than the R&D cost of an engine variant.

Show me a car that is in the price range of the Mustang that has 6 or 7 engine options. Many vehicles have only 1 available engine.

 

Worth mentioning also is that the next 911GT2 is taking the Porsche to 200k and change making the Porsche more like a 3:1 ratio than 2:1. And while simple ratios may work sifficiently well in some comparisons I would argue that, realistically speaking, jumping from a 75k to a 200k plus car is a bit more extreme than 20k to 75k. That said....

If we're talking in terms of accepted norms I agree, but then the Mustang defy's the norm with the GT500 blatantly defying it right now for that matter. I am no fan of ADM's but the fact that the market has literally over-ridden Ford's own msrp and arguably turned the GT500 into a 60k car for the first two years of this model run says a great deal. If Ford had created a GT500 with that price tag in mind, equipping it with IRS, better dynamics, better balance, and an even stouter drivetrain such a car would have obviously commanded similar prices for far longer since real world value would be better.

I think the GT500 has made it clear that the market is ready for a 65k Mustang, if not in huge number, particularly if Ford happened to bundle a truly worthy car into that deal. IMO 8,500 units a year of such a model, skipping a year every time a new model debuts, would be easily sustainable given what we have seen with the GT500. In my wish list I'm conservative since I have two models that would sticker for 55k or above and combined I only argue for 4k units a year combined production-wise. Arguably combined production should be closer to 10k units assuming these cars would be for sale only in the domestic market.

Just my opinion.

 

I see your point, but I can't agree. Ford had to certify the Bullitt and that is a relatively low margin car which is going to be built in very limited numbers. Typically it's development and integration of the hardware necessary to make a SE car that causes profitability problems when push comes to shove, with potential lack of demand being the worry......again, I'd argue that the GT500 proves this isn't the issue Ford likely thought it to be.

As for vehicles in the Mustang's price range. First, if we are talking about a car covering as vast an array of pirces as I allude to above then we really don't have any direct comparisons to draw. And this isn't the only are where the Mustang proves problematic. For example, in terms of volume the Mustang is in a realm no other coupe can hope to touch.

There is simple nothing in production you can benchmark the Mustang against anywhere near the Ford's price range.

 

How about this line up:

#3300 to#3600
Mustang ST---3.5L D35 V6 275hp/265ftlb, 5sp Manual/5 sp Auto 22/29 mpg
Mustang GT--- 4.6L D46 V8 360hp/360ftlb 5 sp Manual/5sp Auto
Mustang Boss— 5.0L boss V8-400hp/435ftlb 6 sp. Manual/6 sp. Powershift

Mustang Twin Force—3.7L D37 V6 TT-400hp/400ftlb6 sp. Manual or 6 sp Powershift All aluminum IRS/Brembo 4 Piston brakes/Recaro's/(3400#) (Think 86 SVO )24/30 mpg
SVT Shelby GT 500 Mustang------ 6.2L V8 TT-500hp/650ftlbs 6 sp Manual or 6 sp Powershift HD IRS/Recaro's/Brembo's/HUD/Ultralight 18"wheels.

 

Unless I'm mistaken, other than the vibration damper, the Bullitt engine is essentually the FRPP power pack also as used on the Shelby. So the R&D & certification costs are spread over 2 Mustang models and a healty aftermarket business.

Given sportyness and volume the BMW 3 series would be the best comparison I could give to the Mustang. IIRC BMW sells around 100K / year of them in N America and 230K / year globally. I no longer pay attention to what all the global engine choices are, but in N American there are only 3. The 3 series also runs just over the 2:1 price range rule starting at $33K and running to about $70K for a M.

 

It's too early to see how the GT2 plays out. In the past the 911 has had over the top special models which were extremely low volume and short lived. I haven't been following the GT2, what's planned production and product life?

As far as the GT-500 goes, it's a 1 time short term phenomona, driven by nostalgic baby boomers and the Shelby name. By the end of GT-500 production the ADMs will be long gone. Look how even the Ford GT went from $50K ADMs to selling below sticker in 2-1/2 years.