Hollywood_North GT

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(RICVA05 @ February 23, 2006, 3:34 AM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
What I am trying to say is if people are complaining about the fact that Ford might use some plastic in there interior and does not have IRS the reason for that is to keep the cost down for the average American. If you read through some of the posts ford is constantly being bashed for making an affordable car for the average man and all the extras that some people have said they want will drive the cost of the Stang up.
[/b][/quote]
I addressed all of that in my post above.

The "build 'em cheap and they will come" argument is getting old. How's that approach been workin' out for Ford so far? Cause last time I checked, Ford was continuing to lose market share (and money) while companies like Toyota turn record profits.

GT98

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(BC_Shelby @ February 23, 2006, 6:47 AM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
I addressed all of that in my post above.

The "build 'em cheap and they will come" argument is getting old. How's that approach been workin' out for Ford so far? Cause last time I checked, Ford was continuing to lose market share (and money) while companies like Toyota turn record profits.
[/b][/quote]

In an apples to apples comparison of Ford Vs Toyada, what do they offer that even comes close to the total package that the Mustang is? uh Nothing

Anyways..the Mustang isn't the end all or even the cause of Ford's woes...

Jack Frost

Very interesting regarding those recent sales stats.

It appears that my assertion that the initial stellar sales were indeed recycled Mustang buyers...and that the raison d'etre of the car...to bring in *new* customers...is not bearing fruit.

Do we have another 'new' thunderbird in the making here?

Somebody on this thread asked me why I purchased an '05.

Well, it's because the car indeed tugs at the heart strings...but that's it. Also, it's because my family is a long time Ford family

My Father has owned a Galaxy 500, Cougar, Lincoln LS. I've owned a '90 Mustang GT...and currently a Ford Focus and the '05 Mustang GT. I also believe that this gives me every right to berate Ford over the shortcomings of the '05 Mustang.

Somebody brought up the Focus RS. I've spent many years working in Europe recently. I *LOVE* the RS. I don't understand why that car was never brought to North America. Now there is a *WORLD CLASS CAR*.

Does Ford really think that North Americans are so obtuse that we couldn't appreciate a true *WORLD CLASS CAR*?

Somebody also tried to retort some of my points by saying 'Americans prefer 8 cylinder RWD cars'. Well let me tell you...it's not just Americans that prefer 8 cylinder RWD cars...EVERYBODY DOES. All BMW's, Mercedes and most sought after Euro cars are RWD...and the really good ones are 8 cylinders.

Clearly, at this point I'm very pessimisstic regarding Ford's fortunes. I'm sick and tired of everybody excusing the shortcomings of the Mustang with the attitude that 'oh well, you're getting 300 hp for such a cheap price'. Well I for one don't want a CHEAP car...I'm not in high school anymore.

What good is that 300 hp when it's mated to a box-of-rocks 5 speed, a 1970's suspension, wooden-feel brakes and an interior fashioned after a fischer-price toy line-up?

Ford shoulda stepped up to the plate and given Mustang lovers *all over the world* a great *WORLD CLASS CAR*. They had every opportunity to do so. For $5 to $10k increase in price...I still would've bought one.

If the current gen Mustang is the best Ford could do...then sadly I must say this is the last Ford product I will own.

Bravo to the members like BC Shelby and other's on this thread that see the writing on the wall for Ford.

GT98

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Jack Frost @ February 23, 2006, 11:59 AM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
Very interesting regarding those recent sales stats.

It appears that my assertion that the initial stellar sales were indeed recycled Mustang buyers...and that the raison d'etre of the car...to bring in *new* customers...is not bearing fruit.

Do we have another 'new' thunderbird in the making here?
[/b][/quote]

I dont think so...your attacking a new car thats been on the market just for a year and half and only in some quantity for uh maybe the past 6-8 months???

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>
Clearly, at this point I'm very pessimisstic regarding Ford's fortunes. I'm sick and tired of everybody excusing the shortcomings of the Mustang with the attitude that 'oh well, you're getting 300 hp for such a cheap price'. Well I for one don't want a CHEAP car...I'm not in high school anymore.

What good is that 300 hp when it's mated to a box-of-rocks 5 speed, a 1970's suspension, wooden-feel brakes and an interior fashioned after a fischer-price toy line-up?

Ford shoulda stepped up to the plate and given Mustang lovers *all over the world* a great *WORLD CLASS CAR*. They had every opportunity to do so. For $5 to $10k increase in price...I still would've bought one.
[/b][/quote]

You might have bought one, but who else would ? Lets not forget that better then 50% of Mustang sales are V6 models that retail for less then $25K Ford can't go running its company the way you want it, they run it so they can make money...I dont see what the big deal is...your ragging on a car you own because you thing its cheap. If it doesn't suit your needs or wants, why dont you get something that does? Or are you around here just to tweak people off with your comments?

05SatinGT

Harald:

It sounds like you should sell that crappy Mustang and get something more to your liking. Why drive a car that infuriates you so much? May I suggest -- Toyota has the Celica .. oops not anymore stopped making them right? How about a Supra? Oops again. They can sell you a nice Solara for about $32K. Or how about a Prius for around $30k -- now that would be fun [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrinjester.gif[/img] Eclipse? Tiburon? Same price as a Mustang but .. oh well you get the point.

The Mustang is not good .. it is a GREAT car that no one can compete with at it's Price point! And it is admired in other markets as well.

Ford should be given credit for bringing this car to the masses!

05fordgt

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Jack Frost @ February 23, 2006, 11:59 AM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>

My Father has owned a Galaxy 500, Cougar, Lincoln LS. I've owned a '90 Mustang GT...and currently a Ford Focus and the '05 Mustang GT. I also believe that this gives me every right to berate Ford over the shortcomings of the '05 Mustang.

What good is that 300 hp when it's mated to a box-of-rocks 5 speed, a 1970's suspension, wooden-feel brakes and an interior fashioned after a fischer-price toy line-up?

Ford shoulda stepped up to the plate and given Mustang lovers *all over the world* a great *WORLD CLASS CAR*. They had every opportunity to do so. For $5 to $10k increase in price...I still would've bought one.

If the current gen Mustang is the best Ford could do...then sadly I must say this is the last Ford product I will own.
[/b][/quote]

Harald, you have every right to say what you want. But to say that because your father owned a few Fords gives you the right? You can say anything you want, that is why this site is great. We can voice our opinions. You don't have to mention your family members purchases in the past. My fathers owned many a Ford, and currently has several Model A's and T's, and a '66 Mustang, and a new F250, but I don't bring it up. [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/dunno.gif[/img]

You say that if they made the car $5K to $10K more, you would have still gotten one. Well, to tell you, I wouldn't have been able to! I'm not rolling around in $$ like you are. I saved for years to be able to afford a car like this, after never having the thought to own something so awesome. I'm sure many others on this site, and not on this site would have been in the same boat had the car cost alot more money. Many more wouldn't have been able to afford it. This car is for the masses, plain and simple.

And about the car, as quoted above. The 5-speed in my '06 is great, no play, and no issues with 2-3rd shift. Great stock shifter. Yeah it has an SRL, instead of an IRS. That's another debate that's been beaten to death for the past several years now. Let it go already! Brakes feel fine on my car, and everyone I have sold GT's and V6's to, no one has come back to me complaining that their car is horrible. They love their new Mustangs. Interior- I personally like it. So does everyone I showed it to. I'm not blind, it's not perfect, but again, what car is!

And about the best Ford can do, in regards to vehicles. Have you driven the Fusion yet. One heck of a car, for not alot of money. Even the magazines love it, especially considering it AMERICAN. And wait till the Edge CUV comes out. This will go over BIG!! And by the way, you thing Ford's the only can to have issues. Every car has issues, even exotics. Some love them, some hate them.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(05SatinGT @ February 23, 2006, 1:03 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
Harald:

It sounds like you should sell that crappy Mustang and get something more to your liking. Why drive a car that infuriates you so much? May I suggest -- Toyota has the Celica .. oops not anymore stopped making them right? How about a Supra? Oops again. They can sell you a nice Solara for about $32K. Or how about a Prius for around $30k -- now that would be fun [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrinjester.gif[/img] Eclipse? Tiburon? Same price as a Mustang but .. oh well you get the point.

The Mustang is not good .. it is a GREAT car that no one can compete with at it's Price point! And it is admired in other markets as well.

Ford should be given credit for bringing this car to the masses!
[/b][/quote]

Great post 05SatinGT, great post. [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/thumb.gif[/img] I'd like to go back a ways if I may. No one seems to bring up the late 90's, in regards to the performance cars back then. It was a time of fast import cars, 300ZX TT, Stealth R/T TT, 3000 GT VR4, RX7 TT, Supra Turbo. What happened to all these cars. They all went out of production. And why was that. The prices of these cars, when they were first introduced, were good to fair, but got totally outrageous by the time they all went away.

I remember being at the Philly Auto Show in 1996, the last year of the 300 ZX. The Z was always in my top 10 car lists. At the show, I sat in a 2+2 model, and saw the price, over $42,000! [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/eek.gif[/img] , and it wasn't even the Twin Turbo. That was $46,000! I loved that car, it was amazing, but the price killed it. Same with all the others. 1996 Supra Turbo, with options was well over $50,000! Those cars were amazing for their time, but price just did them in. The Mustang is in the exact price poiint it needs to be in. This is where the SE's can fit in. More money, more ammenities. I love my car, and NO ONE will ever take off my hands.

Again John, great post. I agree with everything you said in the above quote. [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/thumb.gif[/img]

V10

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TomServo92 @ February 22, 2006, 9:42 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
One question (and I'm asking because I honestly don't know the answer): was the LS being heavily discounted due to dealers trying to clear them from the lots? I'm interested to know if that's the cause of the higher sales or was it simply because the LS is a more desirable car? [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/dunno.gif[/img]
[/b][/quote]

What I am referring to is that when the LS went on sale in June of 1999, it averaged about 4,000 / month for the 1st 4 months. There were NO incentives on the LS at that time. IIRC the LS was on sale for over 1 year before it had any incentives. In calendar year 2000 the LS averaged 4,253 / month.

For the Zephyr's 1st 4 months on sale is is averaging less than 2000 / month, half what the LS started out at and there is already a $1,000 rebate on the Zephyr. Even if we throw out October because there may have been inventory shortage, the Zephyr is averaging only about 2,150 / month.

V10

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(GT98 @ February 22, 2006, 9:45 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
But how many of those SN95 where sold due to discounts and incentives? I'm sure that even though that S197 is selling less...Ford is making more $$$ off them. Well have to see the long term sales year to year of the S97 before we say the car sucks in sales or not...lets also remember that there is still long wait for GT's if you want one..helll it be 4 months before I get mine!!

Also Mustang Sales for 2005 where up 24% over 2004

Another thing to consider about how "bad" the S197 sales are...2002 the sales where 138K and in 2003 only 140K units...so going by those numbers, the new mustang is doing fine
[/b][/quote]

You cannot compare the last year of the old Mustang to the 1st year of the new Mustang.
First of all, the old Mustang stopped production in early May 2004, so there was a shortage of Mustangs in CY 04
Second, the 2004 sales #s include both 2004 Mustangs AND 2005 Mustangs for the last 4 months of CY in 2004.
Third, when the 1999 Mustang was introduced it sold 166,915 for CY 1999 WITHOUT incentives.
CY 2000 the old Mustang sold 173,676 with very limited incentives
CY 2001 the old Mustang sold 169,198, without incentives until the end of the year

Compare that to 160,412 sales for CY 2005 with the new Mustang and suddenly sales of the new Mustang isn't all that impressive. And yes back in 1999 & 2000 it was hard to get the exact Mustang you wanted, GT, manual trannie just as it is now with the new Mustang.

TomServo92

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(V10 @ February 23, 2006, 6:00 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
What I am referring to is that when the LS went on sale in June of 1999, it averaged about 4,000 / month for the 1st 4 months. There were NO incentives on the LS at that time. IIRC the LS was on sale for over 1 year before it had any incentives. In calendar year 2000 the LS averaged 4,253 / month.

For the Zephyr's 1st 4 months on sale is is averaging less than 2000 / month, half what the LS started out at and there is already a $1,000 rebate on the Zephyr. Even if we throw out October because there may have been inventory shortage, the Zephyr is averaging only about 2,150 / month.
[/b][/quote]

OK, that wasn't clear in my mind from your first post.

V10

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Jack Frost @ February 23, 2006, 11:59 AM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
Do we have another 'new' thunderbird in the making here?
[/b][/quote]

Unfortunately I think we do have another T-bird in the making.

For the last 7 months Ford has been building about 4,000 more Mustangs per month than the # of Mustangs that have sold per month.

Dealer inventory is building, around me there are now plenty of Mustangs sitting on dealer lots. The only ones that are still hard to get are GT manual trannies.

But in spite of lots of dealer inventory, the dealers are still pretending that there is a shortage and are asking above sticker. This is exactly what killed the T-Bird and it is now negatively affecting Mustang sales.

I did a quick on line inventory check and found over 120 Mustangs listed in stock within 1 hour of my house. I checked 2 dealers this week and was surprised to find more Mustangs on these 2 dealer's lots than what was shown on line. The 1st dealer showed only 1 GT in stock on line but they have 4 of them on their lot. The 2nd dealer showed 2 GTs but had 6 on their lot.

Hollywood_North GT

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Jack Frost @ February 23, 2006, 8:59 AM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
Bravo to the members like BC Shelby and other's on this thread that see the writing on the wall for Ford.
[/b][/quote]
There's nothing to celebrate in that statement. Ford has serious problems and needs to address them, but I for one hope they do.

Mixed feelings on the Stang. It looks terrific, goes like stink, and is a big step up from the previous generation. But ask yourself this: is it as good a car, relatively, for its generation as the 1967 Mustang was for that generation?

I would submit it's not. I would submit Ford vehicles are not as globally competitive as they were in the 1960s, and that probably has a lot to do with the fact that there wasn't much competition in the 1960s.

The world changed, but Ford didn't change to keep up. Now they're having to play "catch up."

I criticize the Mustang on the exact same points as you, Harald. But I think Ford has been adopted by the "working class stiff" who has a limited income but still wants an "exciting" car. And Ford has consequently positioned itself over the years to market to that group. So the "look at what you get for the money" crowd make a very valid point.

Our point is that if Ford wants to expand its market share beyond that group, it must offer no-compromise cars, and my hope is that SE Mustangs may cater to that particular demographic.

Then everybody is happy.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(GT98 @ February 23, 2006, 9:34 AM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
Ford can't go running its company the way you want it, they run it so they can make money...
[/b][/quote]
They do? So how come they're not making any then?

Instead of arguing with him for argument's sake, you should consider his comments carefully, because several of the points are valid.

Hollywood_North GT

Another way to look at it:

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><span style="font-size:12pt;line-height:100%">Have GM and Ford ignored trends that began on the coasts?</span>

Are the Golden and Sunshine states along with their coastal neighbors partially responsible for the dismal fiscal state in which GM and Ford find themselves? That’s Doron Levin’s opinion.

Levin, a columnist for Bloomberg News, writes how GM and Ford have failed to recognize the impact that foreign automakers have had on consumer taste, which penetrates the U.S. in major coastal markets such as Los Angeles and Miami, and then trickles into the Heartland and the rest of the country's interior. Instead, the two manufacturers have pushed their dealerships to continue selling out-of-date models.

"I mentioned that GM seemed to be out of touch with the local market," said Martin Swig, a now retired car dealer at a meeting with GM representatives to set up new dealerships in San Francisco. "A GM executive responded: 'It sounds to me like you've got a bad attitude,' he said, leading the GM executives to end the meeting. They were so arrogant."

The two automakers’ current actions are not helping either, according to Levin. GM’s brand consolidation is giving rise to complaints by dealers who say the representatives are woefully unknowledgeable over so many brands. And Ford's "Blue Oval" reputation appears to be lower than Paris Hilton's neckline on consumer's list when buying new vehicles in markets like Washington.[/b][/quote]

Jack Frost

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(05fordgt @ February 23, 2006, 2:13 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
everyone I have sold GT's and V6's to, no one has come back to me complaining that their car is horrible.
[/b][/quote]

I've never said the Mustang was horrible...and if I did I take it back.

What I have said, however, the thesis of my arguments is that Ford missed the mark at a critical juncture in it's history. A golden opportunity just got on the bus and left the station during a time when Ford is on life support.

I'd like to know your thoughts regarding why Ford is losing market share and rated as junk status by every bond rating agency out there.

I'm not trying to put you on the spot...rather, I'd like your geniune opinion.





BTW, the Fusion looks great. I do believe it's a car that deserves a serious look by anybody buying in that segment. And tell the factory to bring the Focus RS to our shores. I'd be lining up to buy one.

GT98

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(V10 @ February 23, 2006, 7:10 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
Third, when the 1999 Mustang was introduced it sold 166,915 for CY 1999 WITHOUT incentives.
CY 2000 the old Mustang sold 173,676 with very limited incentives
CY 2001 the old Mustang sold 169,198, without incentives until the end of the year
[/b][/quote]


Can you prove that there wasn't any incentives on these vechicles? To include special financing rates?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(V10 @ February 23, 2006, 7:43 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
Unfortunately I think we do have another T-bird in the making.

For the last 7 months Ford has been building about 4,000 more Mustangs per month than the # of Mustangs that have sold per month.

Dealer inventory is building, around me there are now plenty of Mustangs sitting on dealer lots. The only ones that are still hard to get are GT manual trannies.

But in spite of lots of dealer inventory, the dealers are still pretending that there is a shortage and are asking above sticker. This is exactly what killed the T-Bird and it is now negatively affecting Mustang sales.

I did a quick on line inventory check and found over 120 Mustangs listed in stock within 1 hour of my house. I checked 2 dealers this week and was surprised to find more Mustangs on these 2 dealer's lots than what was shown on line. The 1st dealer showed only 1 GT in stock on line but they have 4 of them on their lot. The 2nd dealer showed 2 GTs but had 6 on their lot.
[/b][/quote]

Where do you live? You cannot base your findings just on whats happening in your part of the US/world as a whole. Some cars sell better in other markets then they do others. As for dealer mark ups...haven't seen any in my area and no resistance to honouring Plan prices either. Your local dealers might have inventory, but how long does it stick around? 60 days is considered opitimal stocking for any car or truck. Anything less then is considered a shortage.

instigator311

The last time I checked, the Mustang was an "American" Muscle car, so who cares about foreign markets?

Sales are obviously going to go down and average out now that the initial hype is over, and there is only an increase in dealership stock because Ford is finally catching up with production. Every car company has numerous cars of the same model on hand. I passed a Chrysler dealership this weekend that had atleast 15 silver 300 C's on the lot. Even if they manage to sell 15, all of the buyers wanting silver is gonna be a long shot.

A lot of people complain that the Mustang is too cheap, but isn't that what the whole point of the Mustang was? To be an affordable sports car? I don't know about the rest of you, but have you sat in any other cars lately? I'm pretty sure they all have cheap materials for the interior, it's just the way cars are made these days. If you want heated seats, then stop being lazy and go warm the car up before you get in it.

I don't think Ford makes bad cars, people just have a bad attitude towards Ford. Maybe if we focus on the positives, instead of the negatives, then we can help change Ford's reputation. Every car company has its downsides, Ford's are just over exploited. And now trying to get back on topic, I just hope the 2009 Mustang gets enough power to compete with the Challenger and Camaro. Considering the 1969 was my favorite year, I would love some more aggressive styling cues. [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/04.gif[/img]

exarkun

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(instigator311 @ February 23, 2006, 9:15 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
And now trying to get back on topic, I just hope the 2009 Mustang gets enough power to compete with the Challenger and Camaro. Considering the 1969 was my favorite year, I would love some more aggressive styling cues. [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/04.gif[/img]
[/b][/quote]

oh yea...... [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/thumb.gif[/img]

next topic.

Evil_Capri

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(V10 @ February 23, 2006, 7:43 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
Unfortunately I think we do have another T-bird in the making.

For the last 7 months Ford has been building about 4,000 more Mustangs per month than the # of Mustangs that have sold per month.

Dealer inventory is building, around me there are now plenty of Mustangs sitting on dealer lots. The only ones that are still hard to get are GT manual trannies.

But in spite of lots of dealer inventory, the dealers are still pretending that there is a shortage and are asking above sticker. This is exactly what killed the T-Bird and it is now negatively affecting Mustang sales.

I did a quick on line inventory check and found over 120 Mustangs listed in stock within 1 hour of my house. I checked 2 dealers this week and was surprised to find more Mustangs on these 2 dealer's lots than what was shown on line. The 1st dealer showed only 1 GT in stock on line but they have 4 of them on their lot. The 2nd dealer showed 2 GTs but had 6 on their lot.
[/b][/quote]

Really? You think we do have another T-Bird in the making? I would say two major issues with the T-Bird were styling and lack of power. I seem to recall the forcast of T-Bird production for only a few years to begin with, a la the Ford GT. But I do think that overall the T-Bird was poorly executed.

As far as the production number for the 1999, 2001, 2002, etc. vs 2005 . . . .

I wonder what percentage of Mustangs from 1999-2004 were designated for fleet sales? It's a well known that Ford produced cars (Taurus especially) and pushed them on Hertz, among others. I'd be curious to see fleet percentage for the 2005 vs. previous years since Ford has seemed to be lowering fleet sales, and they sold Hertz.

Hollywood_North GT

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(instigator311 @ February 23, 2006, 9:15 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
The last time I checked, the Mustang was an "American" Muscle car, so who cares about foreign markets?
[/b][/quote]
Well, foreigners do. Ya, know, those same foreigners who are killing Ford and GM in sales in their own domestic market.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(instigator311 @ February 23, 2006, 9:15 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
A lot of people complain that the Mustang is too cheap, but isn't that what the whole point of the Mustang was? To be an affordable sports car?
[/b][/quote]
Affordable? Yes. Cheap? No. There's a difference.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(instigator311 @ February 23, 2006, 9:15 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
I don't know about the rest of you, but have you sat in any other cars lately? I'm pretty sure they all have cheap materials for the interior, it's just the way cars are made these days.
[/b][/quote]
Um, actually, yeah I have. Lots of them. Have YOU?

Most import cars at the Mustang's price point have a higher level of interior fit and finish. That's just a fact whether you like it or not. The new Stang isn't bad...but it looks like a 3/4 job to me; that they cut corners to keep the price down.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(instigator311 @ February 23, 2006, 9:15 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
If you want heated seats, then stop being lazy and go warm the car up before you get in it.
[/b][/quote]
Yeah, that's good advice. [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/rolleyes.gif[/img]

V10

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(BC_Shelby @ February 23, 2006, 8:40 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
But ask yourself this: is it as good a car, relatively, for its generation as the 1967 Mustang was for that generation?

I would submit it's not. I would submit Ford vehicles are not as globally competitive as they were in the 1960s, and that probably has a lot to do with the fact that there wasn't much competition in the 1960s.
[/b][/quote]

I hate to tell you this, but the 1967 Mustang was NOT really a good car, relatively, for its generation.
The 67 Mustang was little more than a warmed over 1960 Falcon, so its platform was already 8 years old.
It had crappy leaf springs in the rear that sagged and had bad axle wind up when more state of the art cars like GMs had coil springs in the rear. It also had crummy strut front suspension compared to the Camaro's double a arms and a unibody that wasn't all that stiff. Interior appointments were pretty spartan, even for 1967.

And don't anyone try arguing with me, I had 2 different 67 Stangs, I know how bad they were.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(GT98 @ February 23, 2006, 11:13 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
Can you prove that there wasn't any incentives on these vechicles? To include special financing rates?
[/b][/quote]

Can you prove there was incentives?
The job is yours, I know what was going on back then.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(GT98 @ February 23, 2006, 11:13 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
Where do you live? You cannot base your findings just on whats happening in your part of the US/world as a whole. Some cars sell better in other markets then they do others. As for dealer mark ups...haven't seen any in my area and no resistance to honouring Plan prices either. Your local dealers might have inventory, but how long does it stick around? 60 days is considered opitimal stocking for any car or truck. Anything less then is considered a shortage.
[/b][/quote]

New England.
We have a shortage of 06 Mustangs up here compared to the glut I see when I check inventory in other parts of the US. In spite of our relative shortage I see V6s that have now been sitting on dealer lots for 3 - 4 months, well beyond the optimal inventory time. There are now plenty of GT autos on dealer lots too. The only thing that is in short supply up here is manual trannie GTs due to Ford's screwed up allocation. I have checked on line inventory in other parts of the county and see lots of GT manuals in some areas.

Klay

I don't know where you get your info v10 but there was definately incentives on mustangs in those years you pointed out. I know for a fact by personal experience that there were in at least 03-04. Fact is, 05+ mustangs haven't got any incentives until recently. They actually sold a lot of them above msrp. Plus, have you guys forgotten about hurrican katrina already? Don't you think just a few of those people would have bought the mustang had their homes not been destroyed or worse died?

I am just amazed that some of you think you deserve so much for just 25k. I won't get too much into the live axle vs IRS debate but the stang performs fine as is on the road.