Guys, imagine you are BLEEDING MONEY in a horrible economy with your engineers frantically finishing up to 400hp 4v 5.0L engine. Your engine team is bleeding about $2 million every month that they work out the kinks on this brand new engine.

Are you going to bleed away another $2 million a month to make mods to a DYING engine that will be THROWN OUT in 1 year?

Come on, if you really think you can run Ford better, study for the GMAT, get into a top 5 business school, prove your worth in the workplace and become a Ford executive. Then do a better job. Until then, your arm chair criticizing means nothing.

If you seriously think that running a multibillion dollar corporation is as easy as "just make it have 350hp!! problem solved!" and if you seriously think you could run it better, you are either one of a kind or suffering from delusions of grandeur.

Come on man, give them a break. 1) The economy sucks. 2) Ford has OTHER PRIORITIES than their sporty vehicle segment. 3) If it was that easy to make 350hp, meet all emissions and safety laws, and get it out inn time for 2009, WHILE making so many EXTRA sales, it would be have been DONE.

SHOW ME, IN NUMBERS ($), HOW FORD COULD BE DOING A BETTER JOB WITH THE 2010 MUSTANG.

 

I'd just like to point out that the past & current managament have run the company into the ground. It doesn't take a rockey scientist to fix many of the issues at Ford. Instead, the Big 3 are adverse to change and it's ultimately why they are in their current predicament. If Ford execs 5-7 years ago had listened to the consumer and made some common sense changes, Ford would be in a much stronger position.

 

Yeah I agree completely with that. They should have been more forward thinking and invested more in economical and higher tech passenger cars, especially when everyone else in the world was doing just that.

I still stand behind that coming out with a 350hp mustang for 2010 is not the solution to their economic problems though.. heh.

 

Nope, but building relevant products that the consumers want will help. Adding 50hp to the 4.6L would have cost Ford quite a bit of money. It's really too bad that Ford couldn't have had the 5.0L ready for the 2010.

Another thing that I think would have been "common sense" would be using the new 3.5L instead of the dated 4.0L. Since the majority of Mustang sales are V6 Stangs, this might have been an opportunity for the 2010. Maybe Ford doesn't have the mfg capacity, who knows?

 

If I'm not mistaken the 3.5L production is already used up for other models. They'd have to bring more units online and the production capacity isn't there.

 

How much does that horsepower cost in the direct competitors relative to the GT?

It depends how much it costs.

Perhaps, but it is really unknown...the people who want the highest horsepower are not the only ones who buy this vehicle.

Such as...?

What's inferior? The engine? Other things?

You sure about that? The Mustang has seemingly held sales leads over its competitors despite the engine outputs.

That's you but it doesn't summarize the total market make-up. If one looks purely at the V8-powered car volumes, we most likely would not make the business case for this car to even be built.

 

And when gas was cheaper, consumers loved the SUVs, and Ford listened to those consumers. The current situation is the culmination of multiple factors, not just singly management teams.

 

In my opinion, this post is a good way to keep perspective regarding the updated Mustang. There are literally hundreds of thousands of decision to plan, execute, produce, market, sell, and then support an automobile. In addition, trying to predict what all of the factors in a long-lead design and manufacturing process to get a car to market is a dicey proposition.

More power is just ONE decision point along the way.

 

+1 Tony .

 

Consumers also loved mini-vans in the 80s and early 90s. Ford put all their eggs in the SUV basket and neglected their passenger car lineup. It's a classic case of management not thinking long term.

 

Define "long term".

 

Kind of funny that you mentioned this since I was also considering an Audi A4, but when optioned out it was pushing $50k. The interior upgrades on the '10 have sealed the deal for me, not to mention that I will be saving $15k and getting the V8 instead. The Mustang had no problem outselling the Camaro/Firebird when they had the hp advantage.

 

x eleventybillion

Consumers loved the TAURUS in the mid-eighties/early-nineties. Seems to me like Ford had the "long term" foresight to bring to market the EXPLORER and EXPEDITION, both sales leaders and cash cows for over a decade.

They also sold nearly ONE MILLION F-series as recently as MY '04.

The "brilliant" import automakers had such great foresight that they, too, built BIGGER AND BIGGER trucks and SUV's; Titan, Tundra, Armada, Sequoia.


So, as Tony asked, define long term...?

 

Well IIRC, other than from the mid to late 80's. The Mustang has always been overpowered by the competition, but yet despite the fact of losing the crown in the pony car wars. Mustang has always outsold the competition by a 3-1 margin, and will continue to do so, even now.


And for those who are so hung up, on being faster over the competition. They can either modify they're existing Stangs, or they can simply wait for just one more year. Otherwise if that isn't acceptable enough, then by all means. They can always go straight ahead, and jump ship over to the competition !

 

Here we go again with all the whiners and complainers . I just have one question for you guys, why do you keep coming in here? Its like we've all known you don't like the 2010 for a while now. Its the same arguments over and over (no irs, not enough power, blah blah blah). Get over it already. If you don't like it, thats fine, but the constant complaining/trolling is VERY annoying. Its like you saying you hate baskteball, yet you go to the games and complain about it .....Last time I checked, this was an enthusiasts forum

 

Personally Jason, I've also been fed up with it as well. As the Mustang has always meant far more than just raw horsepower. It's also been an American Icon for 45+ years, in which people seem to forget that if it weren't for the Mustang. There would be no competition period.


That being said, I've been proud of being a Mustang enthusiast for well over 35 years. And I could personally care less, as to who has the faster car bragging rights. And the reason why Ford doesn't get hung up on it, is because they know full well that the competition will never settle for being second fiddle. Therefore, as a direct result. Ford would much rather place it's values upon designing the best overall, practical Pony Car instead. And as far as I'm concerned, that's what really matters more than anything else !

 

+1, Couldn't of said it better myself.

 

The economy didn't suck back when the 2010 was being planned and developed- SO there is NO excuse for not being able to give it 350HP.
It would NOT cost 2 million a month for an engine team- that's just a number one of you guys pulled out of you @$$.
Ford already HAS the engine, and they have had it for years.
There is no excuse to not have tweaked it more.

 

Yeah I pulled those numbers out of my ***, but that's how much things costs in the real world. You don't just have 5 engineers draw something up and go make it. You have teams. Oh, and they cost $100/hour per person.

Do you think Ford would CHOOSE to make less money? If they would seriously make more money doing what you said, they would be. Truth is, a difference of 35hp probably cannot be justified because it will not pay for itself in 1 year of sales.

They've thought this through alot more than you and I have.

 

U.S. Ford Racing will offer a dealer-installed supercharger that boosts power past 400 horses and preserves the Mustang's factory warranty. Optional on the new Mustang.

Something tells me a 3900-lb Camaro or a 4100 Challenger will not see anything but the new-style tail lights of a 3500-lb blown 4.6.