2013 GT500 Full Pricing & Order Banks Open 3/21/12
Thread Starter
Team Mustang Source
Joined: October 13, 2004
Posts: 2,842
Likes: 0
From: MD
2013 GT500 Full Pricing & Order Banks Open 3/21/12
Hopefully we will have invoice pricing and pricing for options such as the track pack not included on the Ford.com site. See attached document.
Last edited by bpmurr; Mar 16, 2012 at 12:06 PM.
Thread Starter
Team Mustang Source
Joined: October 13, 2004
Posts: 2,842
Likes: 0
From: MD
Ford is becoming the EA of cars. Oh you want something that should have probably been on the car in the first place....well that will cost you extra. Just like all the DLC for games now of days.
Last edited by bpmurr; Mar 18, 2012 at 12:18 PM.
Shelby GT500 Member
Joined: December 20, 2011
Posts: 4,326
Likes: 53
From: CenTex...sort of
Where does this come from?
Nevermind, posted before reading carefully. With that pricing, I have mine coming in at just under $65k. It's high, but it's hard to argue with the car they have put together.
Nevermind, posted before reading carefully. With that pricing, I have mine coming in at just under $65k. It's high, but it's hard to argue with the car they have put together.
Last edited by kcoTiger; Mar 16, 2012 at 04:44 PM.
Bullitt Member
Joined: December 22, 2011
Posts: 393
Likes: 0
Joined: November 25, 2009
Posts: 1,519
Likes: 0
From: Metro Detroit
~$3K is CHEAP for what you are getting. You will spend more the that on comparable aftermarket systems and the quality will not be as high.
Why add all the cost to EVERY CAR (and raise the price accordingly) on a car that more often then not sits more than any other Mustang model?
If the TP was just added and the price was that much higher the boards would have been on fire with people complainingn how expensive the car is.
Its better to give the customer the choice.
Cobra Member
Joined: March 29, 2011
Posts: 1,265
Likes: 6
From: Minnesota
I agree 100 % with keeping the initial cost of the GT500 as low as possible. The buyer should have the option to select what additional performace equipment he wants on the car. Why get something you may not have a need or desire for ? Let the buyer select the options and then pay the additional cost . If I could have the option to save money by eliminating the cruise control and air conditioning, I would. I never use cruise control and have driven cars for years without air conditioning.
Last edited by 2 Go Snake; Mar 20, 2012 at 10:08 PM.
Legacy TMS Member
Joined: May 16, 2004
Posts: 5,206
Likes: 18
From: Bristol, TN
The track pack does not delete the fog lights thats an error on the build and price site.
~$3K is CHEAP for what you are getting. You will spend more the that on comparable aftermarket systems and the quality will not be as high.
Why add all the cost to EVERY CAR (and raise the price accordingly) on a car that more often then not sits more than any other Mustang model?
If the TP was just added and the price was that much higher the boards would have been on fire with people complaining how expensive the car is.
Its better to give the customer the choice.
~$3K is CHEAP for what you are getting. You will spend more the that on comparable aftermarket systems and the quality will not be as high.
Why add all the cost to EVERY CAR (and raise the price accordingly) on a car that more often then not sits more than any other Mustang model?
If the TP was just added and the price was that much higher the boards would have been on fire with people complaining how expensive the car is.
Its better to give the customer the choice.
can't say if GM is losing money on every ZL1 (the car bases at 54.1k) they make but they do come comprehinsively equipped at 56k (including GG tax) and optioning up a comparable GT500 puts it right over 61k. However I dont think anybody would have complained if Ford rolled the perf pack and track pack into one and charged maybe 3 or 4 grand less.
And speaking of the ZL1 and profit (I'm betting GM does make money on every one unless they have some sort of introductory pricing) it boggles me why Ford has trouble meeting the ZL1's price as equipped? The amortized costs on the S-197 are most likely gone or all but paid for since the car is nearly 8 years old yet in base trim the GT500 is more expensive. The engine is certainly more expensive but I doubt the rest of the powertrain is with the exception of the CF driveshaft. Front brakes are a wash as well but due to the c-clip arrangement on the rear axle Ford cannot employ anything better than the single puck sliding caliper they have now which is cheaper than the 4 pot rear Brembo's the ZL-1 has now.
The interior may be more expensive? But I've read several comments here how the Focus and Fiesta interiors trump the current Mustang interior.
Frankly when I get down to it other than Fords higher overhead (worker costs and loans), the engine and the driveshaft, I really cant see where the extra money is coming in at since just about every other area should be equal to or cheaper than what it cost GM to do in related components.
Last edited by bob; Mar 23, 2012 at 01:13 AM.
Mach 1 Member
Joined: September 10, 2009
Posts: 956
Likes: 0
From: Boston
Having the choice on what equipment you want in the car is great and I
can't say if GM is losing money on every ZL1 (the car bases at 54.1k) they make but they do come comprehinsively equipped at 56k (including GG tax) and optioning up a comparable GT500 puts it right over 61k. However I dont think anybody would have complained if Ford rolled the perf pack and track pack into one and charged maybe 3 or 4 grand less.
And speaking of the ZL1 and profit (I'm betting GM does make money on every one unless they have some sort of introductory pricing) it boggles me why Ford has trouble meeting the ZL1's price as equipped? The amortized costs on the S-197 are most likely gone or all but paid for since the car is nearly 8 years old yet in base trim the GT500 is more expensive. The engine is certainly more expensive but I doubt the rest of the powertrain is with the exception of the CF driveshaft. Front brakes are a wash as well but due to the c-clip arrangement on the rear axle Ford cannot employ anything better than the single puck sliding caliper they have now which is cheaper than the 4 pot rear Brembo's the ZL-1 has now.
The interior may be more expensive? But I've read several comments here how the Focus and Fiesta interiors trump the current Mustang interior.
Frankly when I get down to it other than Fords higher overhead (worker costs and loans), the engine and the driveshaft, I really cant see where the extra money is coming in at since just about every other area should be equal to or cheaper than what it cost GM to do in related components.
can't say if GM is losing money on every ZL1 (the car bases at 54.1k) they make but they do come comprehinsively equipped at 56k (including GG tax) and optioning up a comparable GT500 puts it right over 61k. However I dont think anybody would have complained if Ford rolled the perf pack and track pack into one and charged maybe 3 or 4 grand less.
And speaking of the ZL1 and profit (I'm betting GM does make money on every one unless they have some sort of introductory pricing) it boggles me why Ford has trouble meeting the ZL1's price as equipped? The amortized costs on the S-197 are most likely gone or all but paid for since the car is nearly 8 years old yet in base trim the GT500 is more expensive. The engine is certainly more expensive but I doubt the rest of the powertrain is with the exception of the CF driveshaft. Front brakes are a wash as well but due to the c-clip arrangement on the rear axle Ford cannot employ anything better than the single puck sliding caliper they have now which is cheaper than the 4 pot rear Brembo's the ZL-1 has now.
The interior may be more expensive? But I've read several comments here how the Focus and Fiesta interiors trump the current Mustang interior.
Frankly when I get down to it other than Fords higher overhead (worker costs and loans), the engine and the driveshaft, I really cant see where the extra money is coming in at since just about every other area should be equal to or cheaper than what it cost GM to do in related components.
Team Mustang Source
Joined: June 19, 2004
Posts: 6,840
Likes: 2
From: Phoenixville, PA
Cobra R Member
Joined: January 10, 2011
Posts: 1,752
Likes: 1
From: Ontario
Originally Posted by bob
Having the choice on what equipment you want in the car is great and I
can't say if GM is losing money on every ZL1 (the car bases at 54.1k) they make but they do come comprehinsively equipped at 56k (including GG tax) and optioning up a comparable GT500 puts it right over 61k. However I dont think anybody would have complained if Ford rolled the perf pack and track pack into one and charged maybe 3 or 4 grand less.
And speaking of the ZL1 and profit (I'm betting GM does make money on every one unless they have some sort of introductory pricing) it boggles me why Ford has trouble meeting the ZL1's price as equipped? The amortized costs on the S-197 are most likely gone or all but paid for since the car is nearly 8 years old yet in base trim the GT500 is more expensive. The engine is certainly more expensive but I doubt the rest of the powertrain is with the exception of the CF driveshaft. Front brakes are a wash as well but due to the c-clip arrangement on the rear axle Ford cannot employ anything better than the single puck sliding caliper they have now which is cheaper than the 4 pot rear Brembo's the ZL-1 has now.
The interior may be more expensive? But I've read several comments here how the Focus and Fiesta interiors trump the current Mustang interior.
Frankly when I get down to it other than Fords higher overhead (worker costs and loans), the engine and the driveshaft, I really cant see where the extra money is coming in at since just about every other area should be equal to or cheaper than what it cost GM to do in related components.
GT Member
Joined: October 11, 2004
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
From: Destin Florida
The track pack does not delete the fog lights thats an error on the build and price site.
~$3K is CHEAP for what you are getting. You will spend more the that on comparable aftermarket systems and the quality will not be as high.
Why add all the cost to EVERY CAR (and raise the price accordingly) on a car that more often then not sits more than any other Mustang model?
If the TP was just added and the price was that much higher the boards would have been on fire with people complainingn how expensive the car is.
Its better to give the customer the choice.
~$3K is CHEAP for what you are getting. You will spend more the that on comparable aftermarket systems and the quality will not be as high.
Why add all the cost to EVERY CAR (and raise the price accordingly) on a car that more often then not sits more than any other Mustang model?
If the TP was just added and the price was that much higher the boards would have been on fire with people complainingn how expensive the car is.
Its better to give the customer the choice.
Where do the brake ducts pull air from then...something
KR-ish with bezels etc, or simply behind the lower grill..??
Team Mustang Source
Joined: June 19, 2004
Posts: 6,840
Likes: 2
From: Phoenixville, PA
I can tell you with all honesty, that the margins are NOT better!! They shrunk AGAIN on the 2013 model. I just did a comparison of a '12 and a '13.. A '12 Coupe with SVT,Elec Pkg, Recaros, minus the glass roof and car cover (MSRP of $57,800). the invoice is $52,308). For a margin of $5,117.
A new '13 Coupe, with SVT, Elec, TP and Recaros, MSRP is $65,420. Invoice is $60,581. A margin of $4,839. The margins have gone down AGAIN!! I personally would have thought, with the car getting a bit more expensive, that the margin would have grew, but nope!! The people at Ford who ammertize the total and make up the pricing, shrunk the margins again. It is what it is. Just wanted to let that be known with the post I quoted above.
A new '13 Coupe, with SVT, Elec, TP and Recaros, MSRP is $65,420. Invoice is $60,581. A margin of $4,839. The margins have gone down AGAIN!! I personally would have thought, with the car getting a bit more expensive, that the margin would have grew, but nope!! The people at Ford who ammertize the total and make up the pricing, shrunk the margins again. It is what it is. Just wanted to let that be known with the post I quoted above.
Banned
Joined: March 9, 2011
Posts: 16,242
Likes: 6
Originally Posted by 05fordgt
I can tell you with all honesty, that the margins are NOT better!! They shrunk AGAIN on the 2013 model. I just did a comparison of a '12 and a '13.. A '12 Coupe with SVT,Elec Pkg, Recaros, minus the glass roof and car cover (MSRP of $57,800). the invoice is $52,308). For a margin of $5,117.
A new '13 Coupe, with SVT, Elec, TP and Recaros, MSRP is $65,420. Invoice is $60,581. A margin of $4,839. The margins have gone down AGAIN!! I personally would have thought, with the car getting a bit more expensive, that the margin would have grew, but nope!! The people at Ford who ammertize the total and make up the pricing, shrunk the margins again. It is what it is. Just wanted to let that be known with the post I quoted above.
