C&D: Over 400 HP
#221
Tasca Super Boss 429 Member
Here's the Cramer-Mulally interview:
Part 1: http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?play=1&video=1355645178
Part 2: http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?play=1&video=1355657649
Part 1: http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?play=1&video=1355645178
Part 2: http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?play=1&video=1355657649
I totally missed it when it aired.
#222
Team Mustang Source
I'm not saying I want a crappy interior, I am saying that I don't want to pay for all of these luxury items that in my opinion are not necessary on a Mustang. If they want to make them options, that is fine, but don't make them standard which is what you seem to be campaigning for. That raises the price of the base model, and puts it out of reach of many, many loyal Mustang fans.
The biggest reason we have had a Mustang for 40+ years is great performance value for the money....not heated seats and $2,000 navigation systems that tell me how to get from my house to my work each day.
The biggest reason we have had a Mustang for 40+ years is great performance value for the money....not heated seats and $2,000 navigation systems that tell me how to get from my house to my work each day.
#225
The 2010 Electronics Package is much more than just "Nav". People don't seem to get that. It's awesome. The entire climate control system, radio, jukebox, cd player, phone, weather, sports scores, movie listings, traffic, road conditions, EVERYTHING is integrated. You aren't paying $2000 for just "nav".
Last edited by eci; 12/11/09 at 08:24 PM.
#227
FR500 Member
Join Date: August 15, 2005
Location: Honolulu
Posts: 3,083
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not saying I want a crappy interior, I am saying that I don't want to pay for all of these luxury items that in my opinion are not necessary on a Mustang. If they want to make them options, that is fine, but don't make them standard which is what you seem to be campaigning for. That raises the price of the base model, and puts it out of reach of many, many loyal Mustang fans.
The biggest reason we have had a Mustang for 40+ years is great performance value for the money....not heated seats and $2,000 navigation systems that tell me how to get from my house to my work each day.
The biggest reason we have had a Mustang for 40+ years is great performance value for the money....not heated seats and $2,000 navigation systems that tell me how to get from my house to my work each day.
#229
Legacy TMS Member
Now if you wanna get really archaic, try a 60's something pickup with bias-ply tires composed mostly of nylon,
#230
eci's right, the new Nav/electronics package is a big step up from the base or mid-level option equipment.
Personally, I don't think a 'base' equipped GT is a stripped down car, not by today's standards. If you want a little more substance, step up to the GT premium for $400, then don't get any other options. If anything, we should all be fortunate that we've got the ability to get everything we could ever want and more on the car and all find something we like on it. Sure, it doesn't have manual windows, but those things are all but extinct, mainly for cost cutting measures.
Personally, I don't think a 'base' equipped GT is a stripped down car, not by today's standards. If you want a little more substance, step up to the GT premium for $400, then don't get any other options. If anything, we should all be fortunate that we've got the ability to get everything we could ever want and more on the car and all find something we like on it. Sure, it doesn't have manual windows, but those things are all but extinct, mainly for cost cutting measures.
#231
Well back in the day, it wasn't that bad, especially compared to the GM stuff of the same time. Just about every GM car I've riddien in an driven from the 80's to some point in the 90's would develop droppy headliner syndrome. Whatever GM used to bond the fabric to the liner would seperate and the **** head liner would hang about four or five inches down. .
Now if you wanna get really archaic, try a 60's something pickup with bias-ply tires composed mostly of nylon,
Now if you wanna get really archaic, try a 60's something pickup with bias-ply tires composed mostly of nylon,
#232
Member
Join Date: December 12, 2009
Location: Modesto, Ca
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well back in the day, it wasn't that bad, especially compared to the GM stuff of the same time. Just about every GM car I've riddien in an driven from the 80's to some point in the 90's would develop droppy headliner syndrome. Whatever GM used to bond the fabric to the liner would seperate and the **** head liner would hang about four or five inches down. .
Now if you wanna get really archaic, try a 60's something pickup with bias-ply tires composed mostly of nylon,
Now if you wanna get really archaic, try a 60's something pickup with bias-ply tires composed mostly of nylon,
#233
Ironically, that is the biggest advantage Ford has with the Mustang -- you can configure it is so many different ways, and choose from a long list of options to make just the car you are looking for.
Just want a cheap, fast V8? No problem.
Want a grand touring car with all the bells and whistles? No problem.
Didn't get exactly what you wanted from Ford? No problem, visit the aftermarket and build it exactly the way you want to.
#234
The 2010 Electronics Package is much more than just "Nav". People don't seem to get that. It's awesome. The entire climate control system, radio, jukebox, cd player, phone, weather, sports scores, movie listings, traffic, road conditions, EVERYTHING is integrated. You aren't paying $2000 for just "nav".
So then I thought, hmm... I can live without a digital climate readout for $2,195. So instead opted for the shaker 1000.
Worked out well!
#235
Mach 1 Member
Join Date: April 11, 2006
Location: Ohio
Posts: 911
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Personally, I don't think a 'base' equipped GT is a stripped down car, not by today's standards. If you want a little more substance, step up to the GT premium for $400, then don't get any other options. If anything, we should all be fortunate that we've got the ability to get everything we could ever want and more on the car and all find something we like on it. Sure, it doesn't have manual windows, but those things are all but extinct, mainly for cost cutting measures.
If/when I order a 2011 or 2012 5.0 GT it will likely have the Track Package and very few, if any, other options. I definitely prefer minimally optioned cars, and given the choice order or buy them that way.
#236
Bullitt Member
Join Date: September 9, 2009
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 489
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No but last night Alan Mulally was in the same room with Jim Cramer on the set of Mad Money. When Jim Cramer asked what is so special about Ford products, Mulally mentioned a "dynamite Mustang" among other new offerings (Fiesta, Taurus, etc.) Does Mulally know something we don't know?
Regarding the upcoming V8 5.0 engine: Lexus uses a V8 5.0 engine in the ISF and it produces 416 hp and 371 tq with direct injection and variable valve timing on the intake side. It will be interesting to see if Ford can match this engine output without using direct injection.
Regarding the upcoming V8 5.0 engine: Lexus uses a V8 5.0 engine in the ISF and it produces 416 hp and 371 tq with direct injection and variable valve timing on the intake side. It will be interesting to see if Ford can match this engine output without using direct injection.
Only 1 month until Detroit.
#238
#239
Mach 1 Member
Join Date: May 16, 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think I'd rather have lower peak hp and higher torque than a motor you have to rev this snot out of. Isn't that point of a V8? Low end grunt? I'd rather have more "usable" power down low.
It would be great in a Boss, but for the GT I'd prefer more power in the bottom of the rev range. I know this is all just speculation and guessing, and there is more to it than that, but generally speaking, I'd sacrifice a bit of peak power for some better torque.
It would be great in a Boss, but for the GT I'd prefer more power in the bottom of the rev range. I know this is all just speculation and guessing, and there is more to it than that, but generally speaking, I'd sacrifice a bit of peak power for some better torque.
#240
Mach 1 Member
Join Date: November 3, 2009
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 626
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts