max2000jp

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(05fordgt @ February 28, 2006, 8:30 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
If you didn't know, the Mustang was all slated to be axed after the 1993 model finished production. Ford was all set to make the Probe (yes, that P.O.S Probe) the new "pony car". Once word got out, pretty much every Mustang club in the country wrote to Ford, and demanded that they don't do this. Good thing that they didn't because the Probe was not that nice of a car. If you have a GT, and that engine goes, be prepared to pay BIG $$$ for a fix. This is an example of Mustang owners voicing their opinions, and being heard.

And B.C, Don't tell me what I do and don't see. I can see just fine. I talk to the customers every day, since I sell Fords for a living. There are many things that blow my mind when it comes to the new cars we get. For example, the door handles on the new Explorer, BAD placement, just stupid. To think that engineers can think its great where they put them. Ford realized the mistake, and are fixing it for next year. The HVAC controls for the Fusion. I do wish that they were placed just a little higher on the center stack. The whole C1 Euro Focus chassis not selling here, blows my mind, but these are things I have absolutely NO control over. My whole thing is, Ford won't sink more money that is necessary into a car, that has really no competition. If the Mustang wasn't as good as it is, Car & Driver shouldn't have named it to their "10 Best List". A list that is 70% foreign.

About the next Mustang, When the Challenger comes out (and its been stated it will only be a 6.1, 6-speed auto, expensive, and in limited #'s like the Shelby, see Letters in new April Road & Track), and the Camaro (won't be out before 2010), the new 2009 Mustang will be out, and by then, I bet we will see a vastly changed, and improved car, with an IRS, and 6-speed, and more HP, and more creature comforts.

To the few of you out there (Max2000jp, B.C, Jack Frost), I apologize for having a positive attitude towards the brand I like. I choose to sell these cars for a living (I love my job), and it wouldn't be a good thing to have a bad-hiney attitude towards the vehicles you sell. It's always good to think positive, last time I checked. [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/headscratch.gif[/img]
[/b][/quote]

I've read and seen pictures of the "Probe" Mustang. The pics were from the late 80s, which was 15 years ago. A good example, but not relevant to current times.

The C&D 10 best is an honor, but the Mustang had a 50/50 chance of winning. It won "Best Muscle Car". The only competition to it would be the GTO. I've read and heard from sources that the Camaro will be out a lot sooner than you think(2008). The Challenger will be too around that time. Both have a couple nice features that the GT is lacking. Will Ford put a bigger engine, IRS, and 6 speed into the 09 Mustang?? Given the new competition, they better start development. I might very well jump ship to Chevy if the Camaro concept keeps its looks. The LS2/T56 is an unbeatable combination and an IRS rear would be great. The only thing I am concerned about is weight. I won't buy a heavy coupe. Competition is good and will ultimately lead to a better Mustang.

I can understand your loyalty and I wouldn't sell something I didn't believe in. I don't sell Fords, but did buy one. I've driven 20K trouble free miles in my GT and love the car. There are just a few things that I would change to make this truely a world class vehicle.

GT98

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(BC_Shelby @ February 28, 2006, 9:04 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
You're wasting your time, Jason. They can not (or choose not) to see it. Meanwhile, Ford continues to lose market share because of it. I'm so sick of the argument that Ford is losing out in sales to the imports because of legacy costs. For crying out loud, legacy costs have NOTHING to do with what vehicle or brand a customer CHOOSES. And those customers are increasingly choosing not to buy domestics. Why? Because they SEE - not "perceive" mind you, but SEE - real differences in quality and features.
[/b][/quote]

Your blind then..those Legacy costs that your claim have nothing to do with vechicle is wrong, they take approxmently 1-2K per vechicle sold that could go towards futher vechicle refinements that you and everyone else is complaining about. the domestics are fighting with one hand behind their back because this...

Oh for all you female ******* and whinning about the lack of heated seats and what not check this out, they are an option come 2007

http://forums.bradbarnett.net/index.php?showtopic=45912

Hollywood_North GT

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(GT98 @ February 28, 2006, 8:15 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
Your blind then..those Legacy costs that your claim have nothing to do with vechicle is wrong, they take approxmently 1-2K per vechicle sold that could go towards futher vechicle refinements that you and everyone else is complaining about. the domestics are fighting with one hand behind their back because this...
[/b][/quote]
So that's basically a tacit admission right there that domestic vehicles are NOT as refined as imports.

To be COMPLETELY accurate, domestics are also fighting with one hand tied behind their backs because of the UAW. My friend's cousin worked for GM in the U.S. and got $70K per year to drive vehicles from the assembly line to the holding lot. [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/eek.gif[/img]

Unions of this ilk are killing American competitiveness. Read the below (from a post on another site):

I work at a large Delphi plant as a contract worker in the Medical dept. I have been observing the nature of the situation from a different slant. I am not in the cadre' of the union people, or totally married to management. I will try and give you an honest observation. Much to my chagrin Mr. Miller (the new CEO) was correct in his initial commentary about the fact of the employees receiving 28.00 an hour with only eighth grade educations. It astounds me how these people were EVER hired, a complete breakdown in Human Resources. As you know paying 28.00 / hour promotes the potential of hiring some mighty sharp, educated, highly intelligent, productive and motivated engineering type employees. What we actually have is the other end of the spectrum. I see a way under-utilization of resources in the current situation. I'm am sorry to say I have come in contact with many employees that can't even write let alone read. What is wrong with this picture ? These folks can't be blamed though, they only have been trying to taste some of the American dream. This letter is not designed to down these people, it is only my observation. Management has failed miserably in it's hiring strategy.

Now believe me there are a lot of highly motivated intelligent employees working here, great people. There just is a large percentage (way too large) of sullen, lazy, bad tempered, mean spirited, drunken, substance abusing, hateful, thieving, ignorant, graspng employees. They really think they are owed something, not something--everything ! They make the best wages around and still are lousy. I observe very little if any loyalty to the Delphi company among the employees. It is a scary population. They are some mean people who react violently sometimes. There have been a couple of murders in our parking lot through the years and lots of vandalism and various other meaness, many drug busts, people beat up, a real Zoo ( I have had my tires cut a few times).

It has been explained to me that the Union has caused this attitude in congress with a weak knee'd management team. These same people that I have described become the Union leadership, not the sharp witted, intelligent people. It's my understanding that this is the problem across the board in the auto industry.

It's tough to tell the real truth in the Delphi fiasco because of Political Correctness. It doesn't go over to well in the managers meeting when it is brought to light that the mangement technique "sucks a mop" (a jail mop). It's also hard to hear as well as tell the real truth about the rank and file as they endorse their large paychecks with an X when depositing money in the bank. Management is the real problem in the equation or rather lack of management whom being an accumulation of foolish talking heads left over from better days frightened by the prospect of the Union membership grieving. There needs to be some clear talk not the cloud laden "mangement speak" with all it's acronyms and other corprate level babble.

Reality is a bitter pill and the EE's dont swallow very easily (remember I am in the Medical Dept). I was asked by someone what I thought would happen if the wages were cut. They will strike is what will happen !! They are too foolish to see the big picture. "They ain't a gonna take none of my paycheck away" is a common retort. I am sorry to be so cynical but my behavior has been modified from viewing the sickening reality of it all.

Sir this situation is a cancer and it is eating the industry from the inside. I make the observation that the Union will drive the company down, they are rotten. I am in there on the floor and see the attitudes and actions of employees in this pitiful scenario. I am thankful for my job but luckily I am in a profession that is easily hireable so the likely demise of Delphi does not cut me to the core. It makes me wonder where these employees will be hired if they lose, rather when they lose the Delphi job. The local community has no sympathy for these over paid lazy employees what-so-ever! Maybe they will get hired in fast food, uneducated and unskilled. Bless their hearts!!

It's a sad scenario, I really don't see much hope for the status quo to continue even close to the current situation in the whole auto industry, to a free thinking honest person it just "ain't right" ! It's the end of an era but from someone who has been there--done that, I'm sorry to say it is overdue. I remain your humble servant -- William

Hollywood_North GT

Here's a great example of a quality Ford product that the company ought to be making available to the North American market. This would give them a serious competitor against the imports over here. READ THE COMMENTS AT THE END OF THE ARTICLE, AND YOU'LL SEE WHAT PEOPLE REALLY WANT.

This is also a fine example of a high quality, practical - yet fun - coupe >> Focus Coupe-Cabriolet

05fordgt

B.C, I think we finally found something that we agree with [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/thumb.gif[/img] . The UAW is killing the American Auto Companies, with their unions and contracts, and wages, so forth and so on. That was a very insightful letter, thanks for posting it. And I am TOTALLY with you, I love the look of that Focus hardtop convertible. But there is no shot of that being sold here, NO SHOT! [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/banghead.gif[/img] (I wish it was though, it would sell like hotcakes)

Max2000jp, the Mustang Probe wasn't the car I was talking about, that was an IMSA race car. The regular probe was going to continue as Ford's new sporty car. Thank goodness it didn't.

About the Camaro. There is another post in the general vehicles section, that states the car won't be ready anytime before 2010. That date is coming directly from GM engineers. Its a great read. Plus, unless you can get Automotive News, the dealer industry publication, (not available on newstands) they too say it won't be before 2009 AT the earliest. GM hasn't even greenlighted the project yet, and when they do, then it takes 2 years to get things going, especially considering that the chassis that the car uses, isn't in production yet. However, the Challenger, thought, will be out by 2008. The only problem, like you said, is that these cars, while good looking (thought, I don't like the Camaro, to me it doesn't know what it wants to look like) both look to be heavy, and nearing the 4,000 lb mark. If so, not a good idea. A heavy coupe isn't a good seller, just look at the now dead GTO. Great engine, but a bloated car.

Max, to tell you, selling cars today is MUCH harder than it was 4 years ago. I'm only 29, and have been doing this for 9 years at the same place. I routinely put in over 60 hours a week, plus another 9 on Saturdays. I know Ford has to get things right, or I'm afraid what can happen. They need great cars to get thing going forward in a positive swing. Thank goodness for the Edge, and for other cars in the pipeline. [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/thumb.gif[/img]

max2000jp

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(05fordgt @ March 1, 2006, 8:03 AM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>

About the Camaro. There is another post in the general vehicles section, that states the car won't be ready anytime before 2010. That date is coming directly from GM engineers. Its a great read. Plus, unless you can get Automotive News, the dealer industry publication, (not available on newstands) they too say it won't be before 2009 AT the earliest. GM hasn't even greenlighted the project yet, and when they do, then it takes 2 years to get things going, especially considering that the chassis that the car uses, isn't in production yet. However, the Challenger, thought, will be out by 2008. The only problem, like you said, is that these cars, while good looking (thought, I don't like the Camaro, to me it doesn't know what it wants to look like) both look to be heavy, and nearing the 4,000 lb mark. If so, not a good idea. A heavy coupe isn't a good seller, just look at the now dead GTO. Great engine, but a bloated car.
[/b][/quote]


I get Automotive News and read it every week. I've read that GM is scrambling to get the car out in 2008 and by the latest 2009. It was a hit at North American auto shows and GM wants to capatilize on that. The engine and transmission are carryover peices. The Zeta chassis is almost done from what I've read. GM needs to work on the final interior/exterior styling, but it's been said that the concept will look very similar to the production version. Either way, I bet Ford is watching and is concerned. An LS2 powered Camaro with an IRS will steal sales from the Mustang.

Route 66

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(05fordgt @ March 1, 2006, 8:03 AM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
The only problem, like you said, is that these cars, while good looking (thought, I don't like the Camaro, to me it doesn't know what it wants to look like) both look to be heavy, and nearing the 4,000 lb mark. If so, not a good idea. A heavy coupe isn't a good seller, just look at the now dead GTO. Great engine, but a bloated car.
[/b][/quote]

I don't think the GTO didn't sell very well because of the weight, I think it's because of the looks. Who want's a fast cavalier. As far as weight, why then do the 300's and the Magnums sell so well? JMO Dang, why am I jumping into this mess?

*** edit ***
Oops, I see you said coup. My mistake. However, I do think if they make cars that look great, even if it's teadering on two tons, people will buy. There's a segment of people out there that buy for the looks, power, and then performance. Will a 4,000 lb. challenger whip up the track? Heck no. But there will be people that will buy it. (now remember, I'm refering to the concept cars. If Dodge waters down the Challenger to make it look like a car from today, there mistake.)

max2000jp

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Route 66 @ March 1, 2006, 12:24 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
I don't think the GTO didn't sell very well because of the weight, I think it's because of the looks. Who want's a fast cavalier. As far as weight, why then do the 300's and the Magnums sell so well? JMO Dang, why am I jumping into this mess?

*** edit ***
Oops, I see you said coup. My mistake. However, I do think if they make cars that look great, even if it's teadering on two tons, people will buy. There's a segment of people out there that buy for the looks, power, and then performance. Will a 4,000 lb. challenger whip up the track? Heck no. But there will be people that will buy it. (now remember, I'm refering to the concept cars. If Dodge waters down the Challenger to make it look like a car from today, there mistake.)
[/b][/quote]

I am really hoping that the Camaro and GTO aren't tanks like the GT500. Manufacturers need to realize that you don't need all this hp if you build a lightweight car. A lighter car handles and brakes better as well. Now if the governement implemented harsher fuel economy requirements, everyone would be designing lighter cars, but that's a pipedream.

65to05

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(05fordgt @ February 28, 2006, 8:30 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
If you didn't know, the Mustang was all slated to be axed after the 1993 model finished production. Ford was all set to make the Probe (yes, that P.O.S Probe) the new "pony car". Once word got out, pretty much every Mustang club in the country wrote to Ford, and demanded that they don't do this. Good thing that they didn't because the Probe was not that nice of a car.
[/b][/quote]


You are right on the Probe, but not on the timing. Ford never really intended to use the Fox platform from 1979-2004...they intended to do away with it in 1989. The original Ford Probe that came out in 1989 was originally intended as the replacement for the Fox Mustang and was to be called the Mustang. When word got out from enthusiasts, Mustang clubs, etc. that the next Mustang was to be based off of a Japanese designed FWD platform and would only offer 4 cyl and V6 powerplants, they went crazy.

Ford had a change of heart (which also had a large part to do with the fact that after the 1987 re-styling of the Mustang GT sales rose) and decided to offer the car as a separate model called the Probe.

There was a very good story from Car and Driver in 1989 about all of this, but I can't find it on the internet. If I can dig up a copy from home (I may have it) I'll post it here.

rhumb

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>(yes, that P.O.S Probe)[/b][/quote]

Hey, hey, the 2nd Gen Probe GT was a great little car [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/04.gif[/img] Now it was certainly a different type of performance car than the Stang and it was an utterly dopey idea for Ford to even consider it as a replacement for the Stang, but it was a great FWD performance coupe.

I should know, I still have mine after all these years and it's still a blast to drive, is hugely practical, and nice on the eyes, both inside and out. It garnered all sorts of "Best of" accolades in its day -- too bad Ford just let it whither on the vine, eventually replacing it with the insipid Cougar. [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/nonono.gif[/img]

05fordgt

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(max2000jp @ March 1, 2006, 11:17 AM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
I get Automotive News and read it every week. I've read that GM is scrambling to get the car out in 2008 and by the latest 2009. It was a hit at North American auto shows and GM wants to capatilize on that. The engine and transmission are carryover peices. The Zeta chassis is almost done from what I've read. GM needs to work on the final interior/exterior styling, but it's been said that the concept will look very similar to the production version. Either way, I bet Ford is watching and is concerned. An LS2 powered Camaro with an IRS will steal sales from the Mustang.
[/b][/quote]

Jason, that car can steal sales, IF its priced right. If you take the motor, and all the goodies, an LS2 Camaro RS/SS, or Z28, whatever they want to call it, will be expensive. Don't expect this car to be $25,000. I would expect it to be in the mid $30,000 range, for the top of the line model The cars do need to lose some weight. Even the Shelby is too heavy, at 3900 lbs.

max2000jp

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(05fordgt @ March 1, 2006, 3:46 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
Jason, that car can steal sales, IF its priced right. If you take the motor, and all the goodies, an LS2 Camaro RS/SS, or Z28, whatever they want to call it, will be expensive. Don't expect this car to be $25,000. I would expect it to be in the mid $30,000 range, for the top of the line model The cars do need to lose some weight. Even the Shelby is too heavy, at 3900 lbs.
[/b][/quote]

Jeff, I agree. I think that GM will price this car in the high 20s, similar to a GT Premium. GM had originally wanted the GTO to MSRP in that area, but currency fluctuations changed that. Even if it was a bit more money than the GT, I think the features would command that price. Heck, the LS2 is worth it [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/icon_mrgreen.gif[/img] 100 more hp and much more mod friendly does it for me!

05fordgt

Jason, the performance of the car will be awesome, but I'm just not too keen on the looks. Maybe I'll change my tune, once I see it, as I'll be going up to the New York Auto Show in April. I just don't like the back, too Vette'ish to me.

Vermillion98

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Jack Frost @ February 28, 2006, 10:27 AM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
What's so great about them?

Watch these episodes side by side:

Ford Mustang GT:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=63...2824&q=top+gear

Mazda RX8

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=35...2831&q=top+gear

Two reviews by the same tv show: Top Gear, the best automotive show bar none. Note that they didn't even bother taking the Mustang on their test track.
[/b][/quote]

[img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/rolleyes.gif[/img] Top Gear hates anything American. In the review I saw that they did of the 2005 Mustang, they tried so hard to find fault with the Mustang, but in the end, they begrudgingly admit that it has character. Top Gear is 90% European opinion/bias, 10% fact when they review American cars. It's not the best automotive show. It's the most biased against American products though.


<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Jack Frost @ February 28, 2006, 10:27 AM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
And again, my dream car would consist of the design and engine of the Mustang GT, coupled to the handling sophistication and refinement of the RX8.

Such a car, even at the price of the RX8...would be a *world wide* sales phenomenon.

It's the car Ford should've built.
[/b][/quote]
Are you aware that Ford has controlling interest in Mazda?

Hollywood_North GT

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(max2000jp @ March 1, 2006, 10:45 AM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
I am really hoping that the Camaro and GTO aren't tanks like the GT500. Manufacturers need to realize that you don't need all this hp if you build a lightweight car. A lighter car handles and brakes better as well. Now if the governement implemented harsher fuel economy requirements, everyone would be designing lighter cars, but that's a pipedream.
[/b][/quote]
That's all true, except for one thing: the trade-offs involved. Lightweight cars are nimble and thus handle well, but they sacrifice a certain amount of features, safety and structural rigidity in the process. Now I'm not saying you can't have BOTH in a lightweight car - you can - but the engineering development and costs go up significantly.

Ford would not spend that kind of money on the GT500. And the example is in the engine they used. They could have used the full aluminum block from the GT supercar, but chose not to, because the costs of manufacturing that lightweight block and making it as strong as cast iron would have taken the price of the Shelby up way too high for most buyers.

max2000jp

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(BC_Shelby @ March 1, 2006, 5:18 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
That's all true, except for one thing: the trade-offs involved. Lightweight cars are nimble and thus handle well, but they sacrifice a certain amount of features, safety and structural rigidity in the process. Now I'm not saying you can't have BOTH in a lightweight car - you can - but the engineering development and costs go up significantly.

Ford would not spend that kind of money on the GT500. And the example is in the engine they used. They could have used the full aluminum block from the GT supercar, but chose not to, because the costs of manufacturing that lightweight block and making it as strong as cast iron would have taken the price of the Shelby up way too high for most buyers.
[/b][/quote]

A simple economic concept called economies of scale my friend. A lot of technology was expensive and only available in higher end cars. Once it trickles down, it becomes a lot cheaper. ABS and Stability control would be great examples. 5 year ago only BMWs or Mercedes had this technology, now it's available in Fords!

Something drastic, like increasing CAFE standards, is the only way I see anything changing anytime soon.

Jack Frost

Ford and GM have nobody but themselves to blame over their pensions and legacy costs.

It's just poor management.

General Electric is bigger, and maybe even older than Ford. I don't see GE belly aching about how legacy and health care costs is adding 5 bucks to every light bulb they make.

GE is a highly profitable company, the largest in the world by market value, and competes in many segments all over the world from lighting, consumer electronics and appliances, turbines, nuclear energy, aircraft engines.

Why isn't General Electric isn't wrestling with 'legacy' issues?

Good management, that's why.

Hollywood_North GT

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(max2000jp @ March 1, 2006, 3:42 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
A simple economic concept called economies of scale my friend. A lot of technology was expensive and only available in higher end cars. Once it trickles down, it becomes a lot cheaper. ABS and Stability control would be great examples. 5 year ago only BMWs or Mercedes had this technology, now it's available in Fords!

Something drastic, like increasing CAFE standards, is the only way I see anything changing anytime soon.
[/b][/quote]
I agree with the economies of scale argument, I think I've even used it once or twice here myself. [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/icon_mrgreen.gif[/img]

But I think the example you give is best suited to the mainstream consumer cars. In the specific example I cite - a high performance niche coupe - anything competitive with the GT500 (i.e. BMW M3), that employs higher tech, is going to cost a lot more money. I think I read somewhere that putting the Ford GT aluminum engine in the Shelby would have added at least $10K (maybe a lot more) to the overall price of the car.

I'm just hoping the Shelby has heated seats. Someone here posted that the '07 Mustang GT will have the option, I must assume the '07 Shelby will get that option too.

GT98

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Jack Frost @ March 1, 2006, 7:04 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>


Why isn't General Electric isn't wrestling with 'legacy' issues?

Good management, that's why.
[/b][/quote]

No because they dont have the UAW to deal with as a Union. For a compairson...GE workers where paying $200 a year for medical, but until recently...UAW where paying NOTHING!

Evil_Capri

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Jack Frost @ March 1, 2006, 7:04 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
Ford and GM have nobody but themselves to blame over their pensions and legacy costs.

It's just poor management.

General Electric is bigger, and maybe even older than Ford. I don't see GE belly aching about how legacy and health care costs is adding 5 bucks to every light bulb they make.

GE is a highly profitable company, the largest in the world by market value, and competes in many segments all over the world from lighting, consumer electronics and appliances, turbines, nuclear energy, aircraft engines.

Why isn't General Electric isn't wrestling with 'legacy' issues?

Good management, that's why.
[/b][/quote]

GE is a much more diversified company then Ford and many of there other entities help offset their costs. Plus their Government contracts are a steady flow of cash that can be divested back into the company. Nasser wanted to turn Ford into a GE type of company with the MANY purchases he made during his reign. However, this backfired from the standpoint of neglecting the companies main focus, FORD. You are correct in your assesment of management. Ford is still feeling the effects of Nasser, and it's easier to dig the hole then to climb out of it.