2015 - 2023 MUSTANG Discuss everything 2015-2023 S550 Mustang

2015 Mustang Articles

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 8/25/13, 09:25 AM
  #541  
Mach 1 Member
 
wannabe's Avatar
 
Join Date: March 7, 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 992
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 1 Post
Originally Posted by Fenderaddict2
To me the "retro" period was a necessary reset. Now the car can correctly evolve on the future.
But it shouldn't look like a Fusion.
Old 8/25/13, 09:26 AM
  #542  
Shelby GT500 Member
 
2011 Kona Blue's Avatar
 
Join Date: November 26, 2011
Posts: 2,633
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
Originally Posted by wannabe

But it shouldn't look like a Fusion.
Lmao! Let's get ready to rummmmmmmmmmmble .
Old 8/25/13, 09:28 AM
  #543  
Shelby GT350 Member
 
RedCandy5.0's Avatar
 
Join Date: June 9, 2008
Location: Rochester NY
Posts: 2,061
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Will Ford's New-Look 2015 Mustang Top the Camaro?

http://www.fool.com/investing/genera...he-camaro.aspx
Old 8/25/13, 10:09 AM
  #544  
GT Member
 
67Drewstang's Avatar
 
Join Date: July 30, 2013
Location: Iowa
Posts: 138
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Ford CEO Alan Mulally has set forth a global strategy titled "One Ford" that has aimed to make sure any vehicle produced has the ability to sell globally.
I think the Mustang is an awesome concept.

But the above-quoted statement, if true, is a fine example of incompetent corporate leadership.

A company whose strategic goal is to become monolithic and unresponsive to local change is doomed to fail. It's as if that brain surgeon Mulally watched the collapse of the Soviet Union and decided, "Hey, wouldn't be cool if I did something like that to a car company?"

What a moron.

Last edited by tom281; 8/28/13 at 10:14 AM. Reason: Language / subject violation
Old 8/25/13, 10:15 AM
  #545  
GT Member
 
67Drewstang's Avatar
 
Join Date: July 30, 2013
Location: Iowa
Posts: 138
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
This article was moronic.

Nothing like misreading a simple line chart.

Here's a better way to read that chart: Mustangs are luxury items, not necessities. In 2005-present, the US went through hard times, so sales of Mustangs went down. Since wages have not recovered from 2008, sales of Mustangs have not recovered. And, obtw, now Mustangs have to share the market with the Camaro again.

The End.
Old 8/25/13, 10:19 AM
  #546  
Cobra R Member
 
Fenderaddict2's Avatar
 
Join Date: January 10, 2011
Location: Ontario
Posts: 1,752
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
The Fox body was conceptually closer to the '65-'66, just visually no where near as exciting.
Old 8/25/13, 10:30 AM
  #547  
Cobra R Member
 
Fenderaddict2's Avatar
 
Join Date: January 10, 2011
Location: Ontario
Posts: 1,752
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by wannabe

But it shouldn't look like a Fusion.
It doesn't. It and the Fusion look like the Evos concept.
Old 8/25/13, 10:47 AM
  #548  
GT Member
 
67Drewstang's Avatar
 
Join Date: July 30, 2013
Location: Iowa
Posts: 138
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Fenderaddict2
It doesn't. It and the Fusion look like the Evos concept.
And I thought the Evos concept borrowed good attributes from the Jag E-type and the Aston Martin.

I like the "mouth".
Old 8/25/13, 10:49 AM
  #549  
GT Member
 
67Drewstang's Avatar
 
Join Date: July 30, 2013
Location: Iowa
Posts: 138
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Oh, and this car. Whatever it is....

Old 8/25/13, 11:18 AM
  #550  
V6 Member
 
Number23's Avatar
 
Join Date: April 21, 2012
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
If the car performs well, is RWD, seats 4 and has a V8 it will do fine.

People who want a retro looking car have 50 years of cars to choose from.
Old 8/25/13, 11:24 AM
  #551  
bob
Legacy TMS Member
 
bob's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 16, 2004
Location: Bristol, TN
Posts: 5,197
Received 16 Likes on 11 Posts
Originally Posted by Wolfsburg
I think the bigger "danger" is losing folks that have a very narrow view of what a Mustang is. To read some people's say, you'd think the Mustang has been "retro" forever. Last I checked the post-"classic" era (1974+) Mustangs have all sold just fine, retro or not. I adored the retro look and still do, but even I am looking forward to the S550 and what it brings to the table. I am mystified by posts that almost seem to take a bizarre glee in claiming the Mustang is "ruined" and will die because it isn't retro. Why a supposed fan wouldn't give the Mustang the benefit of a doubt is beyond me. Personally, I think the S550 will have enough heritage design cues that I will like it just fine.
Most of the younger people I know, at least in their early 30's and below identify more with the SN95/New Edge cars. Don't really like the fox cars (the comment I hear most often is boxy and indistinguishable) and generally refer to earlier Mustangs in the same way my generation does pre-war classics which is to say they are appreciated but their is no reverence for them because they just aren't as accessible.

Since this is a site that pretty much caters to the S-197, I can where a lot of people wouldn't see the S550 in a positive light, its going to be a good departure from the current car, it also seems to me that the majority of people here are fans of the 1964-1970 Mustangs and don't really care for anything from 71-04 so I can see where the "sky is falling" message is coming from .
Old 8/25/13, 11:27 AM
  #552  
bob
Legacy TMS Member
 
bob's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 16, 2004
Location: Bristol, TN
Posts: 5,197
Received 16 Likes on 11 Posts
Originally Posted by 67Drewstang
This article was moronic.

Nothing like misreading a simple line chart.

Here's a better way to read that chart: Mustangs are luxury items, not necessities. In 2005-present, the US went through hard times, so sales of Mustangs went down. Since wages have not recovered from 2008, sales of Mustangs have not recovered. And, obtw, now Mustangs have to share the market with the Camaro again.

The End.
and Challenger (its a V8 RWD coupe as well even if its more of a monte carlo, regal, thunderbird type of coupe), your points are all spot on though.
Old 8/25/13, 11:35 AM
  #553  
bob
Legacy TMS Member
 
bob's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 16, 2004
Location: Bristol, TN
Posts: 5,197
Received 16 Likes on 11 Posts
So Carlos Ghosen and Martin Winterkorn are morons?
Old 8/25/13, 11:55 AM
  #554  
V6 Member
 
Number23's Avatar
 
Join Date: April 21, 2012
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by 67Drewstang
I think the Mustang is an awesome concept.

But the above-quoted statement, if true, is a fine example of incompetent corporate leadership.

A company whose strategic goal is to become monolithic and unresponsive to local change is doomed to fail. It's as if that brain surgeon Mulally watched the collapse of the Soviet Union and decided, "Hey, wouldn't be cool if I did something like that to a car company?"


What a moron.
I don't know how you could criticize Mulally, he successfully lead the company though some of the toughest economic times in most anybody's life time and Ford is building the best cars in its history.

Last edited by tom281; 8/28/13 at 10:15 AM.
Old 8/25/13, 12:24 PM
  #555  
GT Member
 
67Drewstang's Avatar
 
Join Date: July 30, 2013
Location: Iowa
Posts: 138
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by bob
So Carlos Ghosen and Martin Winterkorn are morons?
Originally Posted by Number23
I don't know how you could criticize Mulally, he successfully lead the company though some of the toughest economic times in most anybody's life time and Ford is building the best cars in its history.
Again, more slowly and for the not too bright among us.

Anyone whose goal is to make a company monolithic and unresponsive to local markets is an idiot and is making a huge mistake.

I don't know who these guys are from Adam, but in the 40 years I've been paying attention to business and the world, the above philosophy has led to monumental failure 100% of the time. 100%. No exceptions.

Do I really have to explain the reasons why this is? I mean, the Ford owner in Malaysia has EXACTLY the same tastes, needs and driving habits as the Ford driver in Idaho, right? Companies have the choice of a) abandoning one or the other customer or b) developing a compromise that almost makes both, but not either customer happy. And NO OTHER COMPANY will come in and steal that market share away, will they?

Any leader of any organization who actually believes that crap is a complete, sub-room temp IQ moron. Or, their ego has overcome their intelligence.

As far as leading a corporation through bad times and building the best cars in history, that is a highly subjective statement.

Most of these guys (CEOs of large companies) have next to zero impact on what the corporations actually do. At best, they are riding the tip of a rocket. Their propaganda then gives credit for any incidental/accidental success to their "brilliance".

At best, they were good at maybe one thing, and are promoted based on "experience". Much like NFL coaches, over half of them have losing records, but they continue to get jobs based on their "experience."

Of course, if "no one is criticizing Mulally" that may be why he'd become so arrogant to say something as stupid as that. Maybe he NEEDS someone to slap him in the face and tell him to quit being such an ignorant , hmmm?

Last edited by tom281; 8/28/13 at 10:15 AM.
Old 8/25/13, 12:46 PM
  #556  
V6 Member
 
Number23's Avatar
 
Join Date: April 21, 2012
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by 67Drewstang
Again, more slowly and for the not too bright among us.

Anyone whose goal is to make a company monolithic and unresponsive to local markets is an idiot and is making a huge mistake.

I don't know who these guys are from Adam, but in the 40 years I've been paying attention to business and the world, the above philosophy has led to monumental failure 100% of the time. 100%. No exceptions.

Do I really have to explain the reasons why this is? I mean, the Ford owner in Malaysia has EXACTLY the same tastes, needs and driving habits as the Ford driver in Idaho, right? Companies have the choice of a) abandoning one or the other customer or b) developing a compromise that almost makes both, but not either customer happy. And NO OTHER COMPANY will come in and steal that market share away, will they?

Any leader of any organization who actually believes that crap is a complete, sub-room temp IQ moron. Or, their ego has overcome their intelligence.

As far as leading a corporation through bad times and building the best cars in history, that is a highly subjective statement.

Most of these guys (CEOs of large companies) have next to zero impact on what the corporations actually do. At best, they are riding the tip of a rocket. Their propaganda then gives credit for any incidental/accidental success to their "brilliance".

At best, they were good at maybe one thing, and are promoted based on "experience". Much like NFL coaches, over half of them have losing records, but they continue to get jobs based on their "experience."

Of course, if "no one is criticizing Mulally" that may be why he'd become so arrogant to say something as stupid as that. Maybe he NEEDS someone to slap him in the face and tell him to quit being such an ignorant, hmmm?

What? Did Mulally bang your wife? Shoot your dog?

Ford is focusing on global platforms because is saves money. Economies of scale allow car makers to incorporate lightweight materials like aluminium or high strength alloys.

A Focus platform that works in the EU will work here. Specific models can be tailored to specific markets, for example the rest of world gets a Focus wagon. We don't because American's like their wagons on stilts. However, thanks to platform sharing we get a wagon in the form of an Escape. Would it make more sense for Ford to develop a entire car platform just to suit US tastes?

A mustang that can be sold in the EU will result in a better, cheaper mustang for me and more good paying jobs for Americans.

Last edited by tom281; 8/28/13 at 10:16 AM.
Old 8/25/13, 12:51 PM
  #557  
bob
Legacy TMS Member
 
bob's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 16, 2004
Location: Bristol, TN
Posts: 5,197
Received 16 Likes on 11 Posts
Originally Posted by 67Drewstang
I don't know who these guys are from Adam
Carlos Ghosen is head of Nissan and Martin Winterkorn is head of Volkswagon, both companies that have been very successful in implementing the sort of strategy your denouncing by reducing the overall number of vehicle platforms with a global design.

Further, Volkswagen is on the verge of implementing a modular design that will further reduce the number of platforms in its inventory.

Bespoke engineering for market's sake might have been fine a decade or more ago but with mounting regulatory issues and a decline in the average person's wealth there isn't enough money available to make specialized platforms for a particular market.
Old 8/25/13, 12:52 PM
  #558  
Mach 1 Member
 
newpony's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 24, 2010
Location: MA
Posts: 873
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by Number23

What? Did Mulally bang your wife? Shoot your dog?

Ford is focusing on global platforms because is saves money. Economies of scale allow car makers to incorporate lightweight materials like aluminium or high strength alloys.

A Focus platform that works in the EU will work here. Specific models can be tailored to specific markets, for example the rest of world gets a Focus wagon. We don't because American's like their wagons on stilts. However, thanks to platform sharing we get a wagon in the form of an Escape. Would it make more sense for Ford to develop a entire car platform just to suit US tastes?

A mustang that can be sold in the EU will result in a better, cheaper mustang for me and more good paying jobs for Americans.
He must be a current or ex UAW member.
Old 8/25/13, 01:00 PM
  #559  
GTR Member
 
Twin Turbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: October 18, 2006
Location: England
Posts: 5,552
Received 11 Likes on 8 Posts
Good grief...........can we PLEASE get back on topic?
Old 8/25/13, 01:21 PM
  #560  
Spam Connoisseur
I got هَبوب‎ed
 
Flagstang's Avatar
 
Join Date: September 8, 2009
Location: Sun City AZ
Posts: 9,705
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Originally Posted by 67Drewstang
Again, more slowly and for the not too bright among us.

Anyone whose goal is to make a company monolithic and unresponsive to local markets is an idiot and is making a huge mistake.

I don't know who these guys are from Adam, but in the 40 years I've been paying attention to business and the world, the above philosophy has led to monumental failure 100% of the time. 100%. No exceptions.

Do I really have to explain the reasons why this is? I mean, the Ford owner in Malaysia has EXACTLY the same tastes, needs and driving habits as the Ford driver in Idaho, right? Companies have the choice of a) abandoning one or the other customer or b) developing a compromise that almost makes both, but not either customer happy. And NO OTHER COMPANY will come in and steal that market share away, will they?

Any leader of any organization who actually believes that crap is a complete, sub-room temp IQ moron. Or, their ego has overcome their intelligence.

As far as leading a corporation through bad times and building the best cars in history, that is a highly subjective statement.

Most of these guys (CEOs of large companies) have next to zero impact on what the corporations actually do. At best, they are riding the tip of a rocket. Their propaganda then gives credit for any incidental/accidental success to their "brilliance".

At best, they were good at maybe one thing, and are promoted based on "experience". Much like NFL coaches, over half of them have losing records, but they continue to get jobs based on their "experience."

Of course, if "no one is criticizing Mulally" that may be why he'd become so arrogant to say something as stupid as that. Maybe he NEEDS someone to slap him in the face and tell him to quit being such an ignorant , hmmm?
I think you are off base here.

Last edited by tom281; 8/28/13 at 10:16 AM.


Quick Reply: 2015 Mustang Articles



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:38 PM.