Lookie what I got today:


This is the second email survey I got from Ford...the other was on a future B-car when I just got rid of the SVT Focus I had

 

Same here, it hit my mail box and about 5 minutes later was sent back out with the choices I selected plus my comments

 

I wonder where the hell that 5L engine is coming from...suppostly Jaguar is supposed to have a 5L V8, but in a Mustang?

 

I thought the 4.6l went 0-60 in around 5 seconds, not 5.8

 

those questions are very intresting!!

 

These would be my responses, on a scale of 1 to 5:

×Engine X - 4.6L V8, 300 Horsepower, 0-60 in 5.8 seconds with fuel economy of 17/22, base price ×Engine Y - 5.0L V8, 370 Horsepower, 0-60 in 5.2 seconds with fuel economy of 17/23, $1000 more than X
×Engine Z - 3.5L V6, Twin Turbo, 370 Horsepower, 0-60 in 5.2 seconds with fuel economy of 19/25, $1000 more than X,
Imagine if the engine of your choice was made outside of the U.S by the following Manufacturers. To what extent, if any, would that impact your consideration to buy another Mustang?

×Jaguar
×Land Rover
×Mazda
×Volvo
If you were in the market today to purchase another Mustang, how desirable would you find the following features?

×20" wheels
×Heated washer fluid
×Independent rear suspension
×Adaptive cruise control
×Heated and cooled cupholders
×Paddleshift on the steering wheel (allowing you to change gears from the steering wheel)
×6 speed transmission
×Rear video Camera
×Rear park assist
Now assume each of these features are optional. If you were in the market today to purchase another Mustang, how desirable would you find these features at the given price?

×20" wheels ($1,295)
×Heated washer fluid ($25)
×Independent rear suspension ($200)
×Adaptive cruise control ($995)
×Heated and cooled cupholders ($75)
×Paddleshift on the steering wheel, allowing you to change gears from the steering wheel ($100)
×6 speed transmission ($100)
×Rear video Camera ($375)
×Rear park assist ($250)
*How interested would you be in purchasing a Mustang with a retractable hardtop?

My personal comments:

Engine Y: Presumably the 5.0 is coming either from the soon-to-be-enlarged Jag AJ V8, which I always thought was a great motor, or perhaps a production version of the Cammer 5.0. Either would be great, though I'd give the edge to the Jag motor.

Engine Z: This does give credence to the rumor that they are seriously considering a TT3.5. While I might prefer Engine Y for tone and heritage, Engine Z would be awesome too, especially at the same price point as Engine Y.

As to where they came from in the Ford family tree, either of the four would be perfectly fine. Interesting that they're contemplating foreign sourced motors here, perhaps the Jag/Rover link for the 5.0 and perhaps Mazda/Volvo will do the TT3.5? Not concerned as where the motors come from as long as we get great motors.

20" wheels? All style over function, not interested in pimping my ride, especially at $1.3K for pure posing. Geez, what are they casting these things out of, platinum?

Heated washer fluid? Why not, at only $25. Hell, they ought to make it standard for that little and market what a full-featured car the base, or at least GT, Stang is.

IRS? For only $200! Are you kidding! I'd take it for 5X that easily, probably 10X. This absolutely shatters the specious lie that IRS was innately too expensive. Probably the Aussie Control Blade piece, which has proven to be an excellent, affordable and rugged item down under.

Adaptive CC? Not interested, especially at a grand. The Stang is a car to be driven, not ridden.

Heated/cooled cupholders? Who cares? $75 bucks, I guess, but really, who cares.

Paddleshift? $100 bucks, sure, whatever. Presumably this is just for the ATX and not some DSG type tranny, which would be truly interesting -- ought to be standard on any ATX these days anyway, too late to be any great technological/feature push forward here to crow about.

6 speed tranny? Should have been standard a decade ago. Kind of silly as a $100 option (why bother with a 5 speed?), but if that's what it takes to get one, then of course.

Rear video camera? Dopey in a Stang, even at $3.75.

Rear park assist? $250's not too bad, probably go for it for dark parking lot piece of mind.

Retractable hardtop? Stang verts not my cup of tea to begin with, and a significantly greater toll on weight, complexity, price and luggage space make it that much less so. But the So Cal bleach blondes in the V6 Ponies would probably like it, so whatever.

Overall impression of questionaire: Sounds like Ford's getting serious about bringing the Stang fully up to date as a fully featured and fully capable 21st century performance car rather than resting on retro laurals riding on rather retro engineering in a market segment of one. I'll bet the Camaro and Challenger breathing down their necks is forcing a lot of this now -- ah, the power of real competition.

If they really do bring most of this stuff to market (don't discount the bean-counter's capacity to be penny-wise and pound-foolish and undercut a lot of this), especially the substantive stuff rather than fluff like heated cup holders (did they really ask this?), then the future looks a lot brighter for the Stang. Combine this real engineering meat with a decent styling update and the Stang may well hold its own against its upcoming challengers quite well.

 

So IRS only cost $200 after all.
So much for all the BS about it costing $2,000.
In 2004 I was one of the people who argued that IRS would cost only a couple hundred $$ more than a ox-cart axle and the $2,000 # thrown out was total BS.

In any case, here's what I put at the end of the survey for my wishes:
#1. Independent rear suspension
#2. 350+ HP normally aspirated V8
#3. Better brakes, even if optional
#4. Hidden radio antenna
#5. HID headlamps
#6. Adaptive headlamps
#7. Power Driver's seat memory
#8. Adjustable pedals
#9. Steering wheel telescope
#10. Smart Key - Keyless Ignition

 

Autoweek that came today "confirmed" 2010 jaguars will have an all-new (only very loosely based on AJ V8) 5.0L V8. It'll be supercharged in the Jags, but from the looks of this, Mustang will get it N/A. So Ford kills the 5.8L BOSS developement and puts those resources into the 6.2L and 7L instead, and some of Jag's costs are offset by the Mustang's sales.

Sounds good to me.

 

I would be up for a 7.0L Boss V8!

 

Man, I never get this good stuff! I did get an e-mail survey for the Edge last year but, never anything for the Mustang. I can't even sign up on MyFord because someone else signed up with my VIN!

 

For those who didnt get the email, there is a link on the first page of the 2005-2007 Mustang Forum to take it online.

 

Actual... 4.9 sec... R&T April/2005. This survey is citing almost a full second slower. That's insane

 

Got a link? or is it paper?

I can't see Ford killing the 5.8L Boss engine.
Considering originally they were going to use the 6.2L in the stang to fight the 6.2 in the Camaro. But that changed and we are getting the 5.8L in the Mustang GT in 2011.
UNLESS... the 5.0 would be the base motor, and the 5.8L as an option or SE

I could see a 370HP base Mustang GT 5.0 with option to get a 400+hp option
Or if the BOSS is late to the party, the 5.0 would be a stopgap till its ready for prime time. (ie: 2009/2010 model)

 

Sorry, that was my mistake:the article which claimed the 5.8L was being killed turned out to be bull. What I get for reading too much BON. The 5.0L Jag info from AW print is correct, however.

Related link:
http://forums.focaljet.com/team-pit-...d-engines.html

 

Sounds promising. Of course, what Ford chooses to do with the results remains to be seen...

 

IIRC wasn't the 2k figure you cited what Ford/SVT said it would cost to implement IRS as a stand alone option in the GT500? I was thinking that HTT had stated that as an across the board S197 feature IRS was going to be four to five-hundred dollars. That is higher than the two-hundred dollar figure cited in the survey but not grossly out of line with it.

And I too asked for a telescoping steering wheel, improved brakes (especially on the GT) and optional HID headlamps. I also asked for the option of a sunroof.

I may have actually set a record for waffling on this issue, but there does exist the possibility that the 5.0L V8 in question could be a member of the upcoming Boss family. As we all know the Boss V8 and TT Duratec V6 engine will eventually replace the existing Modular V8 and V10 engine family across the board. The question is will there be any overlap and which new engine replaces what?

Will the 4.6L V8 be replaced altogether by the new Duratec V6 in TT and large displacement (~4.0L) formats, or will we get a Boss V8 smaller than 5.8L which will serve alongside the TT V6 as a small V8 replacement? The latter scenario sounds more plausible since not everybody will be enamored by the TT V6. And to forego the availability of a small V8 altogether seems likely to alienate some customers Ford cannot afford to lose at the moment, especially when discussing the F150. IMO the logical answer is that both have appeal, so offer both and let the customer decide.

As this relates to the Mustang....if this is strictly an either or scenario for Ford I think they're missing the point. I think the best of all possible scenarios would be to offer

1: A base, n/a V6 making something like 265-305hp. This would offer the economy and low price of entry V6 owners want, but would make the base Mustang a true perfromance car as well which is no bad thing.

2: A budget-minded, ~350-360hp 5.0L Boss V8-powered LX to slot in above that which saves the buyer money by using low cost items like a 5-speed manual tranny, 16" wheels, and a 5.0L V8 borrowed as is from the pickup lineup. Think of the cost-cutting Mitsubishi performed to create the Evo RS and you will get something like the idea here.

3: A TT V6 making ~370-380hp TT V6 that doesn't focus quite so seriously on low cost, or low base content, but that still represents a bargain and which likewise slots in below the GT, if only just below. Such a car would likely serve as a greater attraction to the import oriented and certainly to FI junkies. Lots of great potential names to revive here too.

Such a car could creep pretty close to Mustang GT level pricing without providing much drama IMO since this would likely appeal primarily to a different crowd. No doubt some cannibilization is likely to occur between this, the LX above, and a GT model Mustangs; but the added overall sales such a mixed lineup would bring to the table, not to mention the greater exclusivity such a move would create among individual Mustang performance models, would seem almost certain to offset this problem.

4: A 5.8L Boss-V8 powered GT making 400+hp ( 425hp sounds like a good number) which takes the current GT concept and improves upon it. This could be the 911S of the Mustang lineup performance-wise and should represent the ultimate in Mustang options availability and budget Mustang performance. And I would like to see Ford do it for no more than 28k max in todays money.

 

What gives? $200 for an IRS... $100 for a 6 speed? GM is trying real hard to match the pricing on the Camaro with the V-6 Mustang and can't get close because of the IRS they say. This is a joke. For those 2 options alone I would trade my stang in tomorrow. And with my 0% financing that would cost me much more. I think someone is overly optimistic to say the least. And a twin turbo engine for just $2000 more than base? They are on drugs! The 2003-2004 Cobra was way more than that with 6 speed-IRS-supercharged engine. Yeah... Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight!

 

The IRS and 6-speed cost as much as they did on the 03-04 Cobra because they were strictly limited to the Cobra. The cost of implementing a 6-speed and an IRS on a 10-15k unit per year vehicle, and to do so alongside a 5-speed manual and SRA in other Mustang models no less, is far more expensive than employing the same across the majority of the Mustang lineup. Simple economies of scale, and a bit of assembly line simplicity as well, making a huge difference in cost here.

None of their cost estimations seem out of line to me, with the exception of the TT V6 that is. I'd be surprised if that TT V6 cost Ford anything like 1k U.S. more per engine to build than the 4.6L V8 does given the volume they intend to produce it in even though V6's aren't an inherently cheap engine design to produce.

 

Don't count on it.
The 5.0L V8 may be a Jaguar engine. Jag is rumored to be coming out with a new 5.0L V8 that is essentually a scaled up version of the AJ 4.0 / 4.2.

Note the question on the following page of the survey that asked if you were more or less likely to buy based on who made the engine. Jaguar was one of the choices.

Also, the $1,000 price they are throwing around is not the manufacturing cost, it's MSRP.

 

I am well aware of that, but one proportionately affects the other (more often than not) which is why I made the statement that I did. I would be very surprised if a TT Duratec V6 cost Ford more than two to three hundred dollars per unit to build when compared to the existing 4.6L V8. And that much extra cost doesn't translate into a 1k higher sticker on it's own merit.

I also think any assumption that the 5.0L V8 mentioned is a Jaguar unit is premature. Yes, there is some evidence to suggest the same, but it isn't clear cut at best and is superfical at worst. First, the survey inquired about engines from Volvo, Mazda, and Land Rover as well. Since there are arguably no engines from any of those manufacturers in the survey it is a stretch to say that this means the 5.0L V8 must be the upcoming Jag simply based on a common displacement.

The other problem issue here is that if Ford does plan to make a small cube Boss V8 that motors ~4-inch bore makes a 5.0L displacement relatively likely when considering potentially beneficial bore/stroke relationships. And Ford's fondness for that displacement, as well as the history surrounding it, are impossible to ignore when considering this possiblity as well. Put simply if there is to be a small cube Boss V8 a displacement of 5.0L seems the most likely choice by far for several reasons, so this is hardly cut and dried. heck, this could even be the on-again, off-again 5.0L Modular V8 we keep hearing about as well for that matter.

But the killer blow for the notion that this is the Jaguar V8 is the identical theoretical pricing to the TT Duratec V6 mentioned in the survey. Unless the markup on these two engines is drastically different, which seems unlikely, this poses a serious problem since there is virtually no way the TT Duratec V6 costs anywhere near as much to manufacture as does Jaguar's AJ V8. Especially not when you consider that a large portion of the argument for turbo V6 engine designs is their cost savings relative to even mainstream V8 engines like the Mod motor. This makes the argument that an updated AJ V8 would cost the customer no more than a TT Duratec V6 a difficult pill to swallow to be sure.

IMO there is more hard evidence that the mentioned 5.0L V8 isn't the upcoming Jag unit than there exists evidence in favor of that argument. In fact, this reminds me a bit of the old, pre-production argument that the 05 Mustang's V8 would in fact be the same 3.9L AJ-based unit the Lincoln LS employed since the Mustang was to be DEW98 derived and the Mod motor won't fit in that chassis. What these two scenarios have in common too many unknowns for a solid argument....and a Jaguar-derived V8 of course.