2015 Mustang Articles
8/26/13, 06:01 AM
#581
Member
Join Date: July 29, 2013
Location: Switzerland (not Florida)
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
someone posted this over at M6G ... sourced from: http://www.freep.com/article/2013082...Phelan-purists
Mark Phelan: 'Vette, Mustang, Cherokee fans, stop complaining already
As new versions of the Chevrolet Corvette, Ford Mustang and Jeep Cherokee draw near, I’ve got a request for the vehicles’ purists: Stop complaining that they’re different from the old cars you revere. Close your eyes, count to 10 and get back to me after they’ve been on the road for six months. Your whining makes my head hurt, and it’s not helping the cars you claim to love. Honestly.
“If you’re passionate about a car, you tend to see anything that’s different as a retrograde step,” said Jim Hall, managing director of 2953 Analytics. “Owners of the previous model will always prefer the one they know.”
That explains why many ’Vette fans recoiled in horror when they saw the 2014 Corvette Stingray has — wait for it — square taillights! Never mind that the new ’Vette is faster, more fuel-efficient and more advanced — their Corvette has round taillights, the way God intended. Anything else is an abomination.
The same goes for the 2014 Jeep Cherokee. The mechanical specs suggest it could drive up the side of a building, using about half as much fuel as the old one and keeping its passengers safe when it fell off the other side of the building. All some fans can see is that it’s sleek while the old one was boxy, though. They think that makes it a traitor to the brand.
I have no idea what the all-new 2015 Mustang will look like, but I am certain lots of people will despise it. The fact that it’ll probably be lighter, nimbler and more technically sophisticated and fuel-efficient than any Mustang before it is irrelevant. It’ll be different. That guarantees some folks will hate it.
People can’t tell you they want something they’ve never seen before. It’s a truism designers bemoan as they drink alone, late at night in fabulous bars decorated in white leather, chrome and black wood. But nobody knew the world wanted 250 different paintings of water lilies until Claude Monet did it and changed art forever. That’s why artists drink alone, late at night, in far cheaper and less fashionable dives.
Cars, like art, must evolve or die. The alternative is the Model T. The world’s best-selling car, Ford barely changed it from 1908 to 1927. Other vehicles evolved and surpassed it. Ford lost the No. 1 spot and never regained it.
Porsche is the other side of that coin, Edmunds senior analyst Michelle Krebs said. “The purists loudly objected to the idea of Porsche building an SUV and a sedan, but Porsche wouldn’t be around today if it hadn’t built the Cayenne,” the SUV that’s its top seller, she said. The combination of the Cayenne and Panamera sedan — another departure that was anathema to brand purists — led Porsche to record sales.
The idea that people can’t ask for what they can’t imagine collides with the salesman’s maxim of “Give the customer what he wants” at the intersection of art and commerce.
“The most important thing is to create a car that people see and immediately recognize as the new Corvette or Mustang or Jeep,” Hall said.
That requires an understanding of the vehicle’s core appeal and identity. Too often, the self-appointed guardians of brand heritage obsess over minutiae like round versus square taillights.
I’m looking at you, Corvette purists.
It’s the automotive equivalent of medieval theological debates about how many angels could fit on the head of a pin. The correct answer, then and now, is: Drop dead, I have a life.
The new models may be great. They may stink. We’ll know soon enough. I’ll guarantee one thing, though. The deciding factor won’t be the shape of a taillight lens.
** I tend to mostly agree with that POV
Mark Phelan: 'Vette, Mustang, Cherokee fans, stop complaining already
As new versions of the Chevrolet Corvette, Ford Mustang and Jeep Cherokee draw near, I’ve got a request for the vehicles’ purists: Stop complaining that they’re different from the old cars you revere. Close your eyes, count to 10 and get back to me after they’ve been on the road for six months. Your whining makes my head hurt, and it’s not helping the cars you claim to love. Honestly.
“If you’re passionate about a car, you tend to see anything that’s different as a retrograde step,” said Jim Hall, managing director of 2953 Analytics. “Owners of the previous model will always prefer the one they know.”
That explains why many ’Vette fans recoiled in horror when they saw the 2014 Corvette Stingray has — wait for it — square taillights! Never mind that the new ’Vette is faster, more fuel-efficient and more advanced — their Corvette has round taillights, the way God intended. Anything else is an abomination.
The same goes for the 2014 Jeep Cherokee. The mechanical specs suggest it could drive up the side of a building, using about half as much fuel as the old one and keeping its passengers safe when it fell off the other side of the building. All some fans can see is that it’s sleek while the old one was boxy, though. They think that makes it a traitor to the brand.
I have no idea what the all-new 2015 Mustang will look like, but I am certain lots of people will despise it. The fact that it’ll probably be lighter, nimbler and more technically sophisticated and fuel-efficient than any Mustang before it is irrelevant. It’ll be different. That guarantees some folks will hate it.
People can’t tell you they want something they’ve never seen before. It’s a truism designers bemoan as they drink alone, late at night in fabulous bars decorated in white leather, chrome and black wood. But nobody knew the world wanted 250 different paintings of water lilies until Claude Monet did it and changed art forever. That’s why artists drink alone, late at night, in far cheaper and less fashionable dives.
Cars, like art, must evolve or die. The alternative is the Model T. The world’s best-selling car, Ford barely changed it from 1908 to 1927. Other vehicles evolved and surpassed it. Ford lost the No. 1 spot and never regained it.
Porsche is the other side of that coin, Edmunds senior analyst Michelle Krebs said. “The purists loudly objected to the idea of Porsche building an SUV and a sedan, but Porsche wouldn’t be around today if it hadn’t built the Cayenne,” the SUV that’s its top seller, she said. The combination of the Cayenne and Panamera sedan — another departure that was anathema to brand purists — led Porsche to record sales.
The idea that people can’t ask for what they can’t imagine collides with the salesman’s maxim of “Give the customer what he wants” at the intersection of art and commerce.
“The most important thing is to create a car that people see and immediately recognize as the new Corvette or Mustang or Jeep,” Hall said.
That requires an understanding of the vehicle’s core appeal and identity. Too often, the self-appointed guardians of brand heritage obsess over minutiae like round versus square taillights.
I’m looking at you, Corvette purists.
It’s the automotive equivalent of medieval theological debates about how many angels could fit on the head of a pin. The correct answer, then and now, is: Drop dead, I have a life.
The new models may be great. They may stink. We’ll know soon enough. I’ll guarantee one thing, though. The deciding factor won’t be the shape of a taillight lens.
** I tend to mostly agree with that POV
8/26/13, 08:01 AM
#583
Corvettes should have round taillights and that's just it.
The guy doesn't get it. Even if they are squarish like the 90's ZR1 they should still have rounded corners.
But that's fine let them be square but that doesn't changed opinion that they are fugly for any taillight.
The guy doesn't get it. Even if they are squarish like the 90's ZR1 they should still have rounded corners.
But that's fine let them be square but that doesn't changed opinion that they are fugly for any taillight.
8/26/13, 10:31 AM
#584
Member
Join Date: July 29, 2013
Location: Switzerland (not Florida)
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Corvettes should have round taillights and that's just it.
The guy doesn't get it. Even if they are squarish like the 90's ZR1 they should still have rounded corners.
But that's fine let them be square but that doesn't changed opinion that they are fugly for any taillight.
The guy doesn't get it. Even if they are squarish like the 90's ZR1 they should still have rounded corners.
But that's fine let them be square but that doesn't changed opinion that they are fugly for any taillight.
Personally I don't really get why you would spend money on a new model that is basically just like the old - especially for 911 money.
When rumors came up, that were later confirmed, that the Mustang was going global it was somewhat clear that the design would go into something that would appeal to people around the globe. Now, I like the Mustang the way it is now - but smarter people over at Ford thought a change is necessary to make it an international success. They took (or will take) a risk and only time will tell if they will be rewarded.
Sure you could say that you'd rather see the brand go away instead of having it changed that much but imagine people would have acted the same with the first style change. Therefore I'm sure the Corvette crowd will get used to the new lights just as we are getting used to the new Mustang and if not - well, you can always buy an older model and hold on to that.
8/26/13, 12:03 PM
#585
Shelby GT500 Member
There are good changes and there are bad changes. *****ing at people for liking something (which is essentially what the author of the article copied into this thread was doing) is an utter waste of time. No one will ever please everyone all the time. That said, not all of the complaints about newer models are without merit. If the guy doesn't like people complaining about new things, he's in the wrong industry. Car people are attached to their vehicles, and they're going to complain when things look like crap to them. They have that right. They also have the right to not buy what looks like crap to them, even if it's faster, more fuel-efficient (as though that should somehow justify designing a car to look like a turd in the process), etc. The fact is, there are still a TON of people who are in love with the first generation of Mustangs. If those people are too turned off by the new design, it will cost Ford in sales. This is not just another car; this is Ford's most prominent vehicle since the Model T. This is Ford's "fun" car. This isn't the Fusion, it's not the F150, it's the Mustang. People don't *need* Mustangs. If you don't make something people want, it's not going to sell. Period.
8/26/13, 12:18 PM
#586
Shelby GT500 Member
Pretty sure Ford is not going to walk into every single market and tell people that they have the best car, take it as it is. Unifying platforms is not a "monolithic" practice, it's a cost-cutting practice. It's also a survival tactic in this current market. To the dimwit claiming Ford is walking down a path of doom and destruction, do you honestly think Mulally and co. don't have plans to tailor their vehicles for specific markets? Are you that ignorant? Methinks you have a personal grudge and it's made you look the fool in this thread. Go talk to your cat. Maybe you'll make more sense to him.
8/26/13, 12:24 PM
#588
Pretty sure Ford is not going to walk into every single market and tell people that they have the best car, take it as it is. Unifying platforms is not a "monolithic" practice, it's a cost-cutting practice. It's also a survival tactic in this current market. To the dimwit claiming Ford is walking down a path of doom and destruction, do you honestly think Mulally and co. don't have plans to tailor their vehicles for specific markets? Are you that ignorant? Methinks you have a personal grudge and it's made you look the fool in this thread. Go talk to your cat. Maybe you'll make more sense to him.
8/26/13, 12:41 PM
#589
GTR Member
8/26/13, 03:59 PM
#590
Join Date: January 30, 2004
Location: DMV
Posts: 2,980
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mulally's "One Ford" strategy isn't some simple, linear all-or-none rigid implementation soon leading the the Stalinization of Ford and its quick demise.
Yes, shared platforms and integrated design schemes can be badly implemented, as pretty much any business strategy can be badly implemented. It can also be well implemented, too, as many aforementioned companies amply demonstrate. Given Mulally's sterling track record with Ford, and with Ford's overall excellent lineup (with perhaps the exception of languishing Lincoln), I would not be terribly alarmed at this approach.
Regarding the Mustang, from what I've seen so far, it looks to be yet another deft and competent implementation of this strategic with looks that are at once both iconically American Mustang yet also readily identifyable as a modern Ford world product.
Seems Mulally, Ford and the 2015 Mustang might be able to walk and chew gum at the same time
Yes, shared platforms and integrated design schemes can be badly implemented, as pretty much any business strategy can be badly implemented. It can also be well implemented, too, as many aforementioned companies amply demonstrate. Given Mulally's sterling track record with Ford, and with Ford's overall excellent lineup (with perhaps the exception of languishing Lincoln), I would not be terribly alarmed at this approach.
Regarding the Mustang, from what I've seen so far, it looks to be yet another deft and competent implementation of this strategic with looks that are at once both iconically American Mustang yet also readily identifyable as a modern Ford world product.
Seems Mulally, Ford and the 2015 Mustang might be able to walk and chew gum at the same time
8/26/13, 04:04 PM
#591
Join Date: January 30, 2004
Location: DMV
Posts: 2,980
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Alienate some stuck in the past Mustang fans, undoubtedly, especially those who see the Mustang as rigidly anchored, stylistically, in some particular year/era.
However, I see a reinvigorated new Mustang, fully of the here and now, and tomorrow, will not only refresh the original spirit of the '65 Mustang, even if not so slavishly regurgitating its every period design element, and bring in far more new buyers who, with some justification, have steered away from the Mustang as some ossified retro relic for aging baby boomers pining over long gone youth.
In spirit, I think the '15 will much more closely reflect the very forward looking '65 Stang than the rather backwards looking current Stang does.
However, I see a reinvigorated new Mustang, fully of the here and now, and tomorrow, will not only refresh the original spirit of the '65 Mustang, even if not so slavishly regurgitating its every period design element, and bring in far more new buyers who, with some justification, have steered away from the Mustang as some ossified retro relic for aging baby boomers pining over long gone youth.
In spirit, I think the '15 will much more closely reflect the very forward looking '65 Stang than the rather backwards looking current Stang does.
Last edited by rhumb; 8/26/13 at 06:47 PM.
8/26/13, 05:13 PM
#592
Cobra R Member
Mulally's "One Ford" strategy isn't some simple, linear all-or-none rigid implementation soon leading the the Stalinization of Ford and its quick demise.
Yes, shared platforms and integrated design schemes can be badly implemented, as pretty much any business strategy can be badly implemented. It can also be well implemented, too, as many aforementioned companies amply demonstrate. Given Mulally's sterling track record with Ford, and with Ford's overall excellent lineup (with perhaps the exception of languishing Lincoln), I would not be terribly alarmed at this approach.
Regarding the Mustang, from what I've seen so far, it looks to be yet another deft and competent implementation of this strategic with looks that are at once both iconically American Mustang yet also readily identifyable as a modern Ford world product.
Seems Mulally, Ford and the 2015 Mustang might be able to walk and chew gum at the same time
Yes, shared platforms and integrated design schemes can be badly implemented, as pretty much any business strategy can be badly implemented. It can also be well implemented, too, as many aforementioned companies amply demonstrate. Given Mulally's sterling track record with Ford, and with Ford's overall excellent lineup (with perhaps the exception of languishing Lincoln), I would not be terribly alarmed at this approach.
Regarding the Mustang, from what I've seen so far, it looks to be yet another deft and competent implementation of this strategic with looks that are at once both iconically American Mustang yet also readily identifyable as a modern Ford world product.
Seems Mulally, Ford and the 2015 Mustang might be able to walk and chew gum at the same time
8/26/13, 06:08 PM
#593
Bullitt Member
Join Date: January 14, 2012
Posts: 212
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is time to look ahead, especially at the milestone of the 50th. I think many more would be disappointed with just a refresh than a redesign.
We all want a pony car, that looks to its roots for inspiration, even if the looks are radically different. If Ford breaks radical new ground like the did in '64, I'll be shocked. Is there any styling class yet undone?
At some point we will see the 15 and it will be a 2 + 2 ish with a long hood and short trunk and be sporty but not a sports car. Visual appeal will be in the eyes of many new beholders. So many hated the 05, then they hated the '10's then the '13's. They'll hate, then ultimately buy, the SN550.
So, candy cane or rice tail lights?
Last edited by KC3333; 8/26/13 at 06:11 PM.
8/26/13, 07:14 PM
#594
Mach 1 Member
someone posted this over at M6G ... sourced from: http://www.freep.com/article/2013082...Phelan-purists
Mark Phelan: 'Vette, Mustang, Cherokee fans, stop complaining already
As new versions of the Chevrolet Corvette, Ford Mustang and Jeep Cherokee draw near, I’ve got a request for the vehicles’ purists: Stop complaining that they’re different from the old cars you revere. Close your eyes, count to 10 and get back to me after they’ve been on the road for six months. Your whining makes my head hurt, and it’s not helping the cars you claim to love. Honestly.
“If you’re passionate about a car, you tend to see anything that’s different as a retrograde step,” said Jim Hall, managing director of 2953 Analytics. “Owners of the previous model will always prefer the one they know.”
That explains why many ’Vette fans recoiled in horror when they saw the 2014 Corvette Stingray has — wait for it — square taillights! Never mind that the new ’Vette is faster, more fuel-efficient and more advanced — their Corvette has round taillights, the way God intended. Anything else is an abomination.
The same goes for the 2014 Jeep Cherokee. The mechanical specs suggest it could drive up the side of a building, using about half as much fuel as the old one and keeping its passengers safe when it fell off the other side of the building. All some fans can see is that it’s sleek while the old one was boxy, though. They think that makes it a traitor to the brand.
I have no idea what the all-new 2015 Mustang will look like, but I am certain lots of people will despise it. The fact that it’ll probably be lighter, nimbler and more technically sophisticated and fuel-efficient than any Mustang before it is irrelevant. It’ll be different. That guarantees some folks will hate it.
People can’t tell you they want something they’ve never seen before. It’s a truism designers bemoan as they drink alone, late at night in fabulous bars decorated in white leather, chrome and black wood. But nobody knew the world wanted 250 different paintings of water lilies until Claude Monet did it and changed art forever. That’s why artists drink alone, late at night, in far cheaper and less fashionable dives.
Cars, like art, must evolve or die. The alternative is the Model T. The world’s best-selling car, Ford barely changed it from 1908 to 1927. Other vehicles evolved and surpassed it. Ford lost the No. 1 spot and never regained it.
Porsche is the other side of that coin, Edmunds senior analyst Michelle Krebs said. “The purists loudly objected to the idea of Porsche building an SUV and a sedan, but Porsche wouldn’t be around today if it hadn’t built the Cayenne,” the SUV that’s its top seller, she said. The combination of the Cayenne and Panamera sedan — another departure that was anathema to brand purists — led Porsche to record sales.
The idea that people can’t ask for what they can’t imagine collides with the salesman’s maxim of “Give the customer what he wants” at the intersection of art and commerce.
“The most important thing is to create a car that people see and immediately recognize as the new Corvette or Mustang or Jeep,” Hall said.
That requires an understanding of the vehicle’s core appeal and identity. Too often, the self-appointed guardians of brand heritage obsess over minutiae like round versus square taillights.
I’m looking at you, Corvette purists.
It’s the automotive equivalent of medieval theological debates about how many angels could fit on the head of a pin. The correct answer, then and now, is: Drop dead, I have a life.
The new models may be great. They may stink. We’ll know soon enough. I’ll guarantee one thing, though. The deciding factor won’t be the shape of a taillight lens.
** I tend to mostly agree with that POV
Mark Phelan: 'Vette, Mustang, Cherokee fans, stop complaining already
As new versions of the Chevrolet Corvette, Ford Mustang and Jeep Cherokee draw near, I’ve got a request for the vehicles’ purists: Stop complaining that they’re different from the old cars you revere. Close your eyes, count to 10 and get back to me after they’ve been on the road for six months. Your whining makes my head hurt, and it’s not helping the cars you claim to love. Honestly.
“If you’re passionate about a car, you tend to see anything that’s different as a retrograde step,” said Jim Hall, managing director of 2953 Analytics. “Owners of the previous model will always prefer the one they know.”
That explains why many ’Vette fans recoiled in horror when they saw the 2014 Corvette Stingray has — wait for it — square taillights! Never mind that the new ’Vette is faster, more fuel-efficient and more advanced — their Corvette has round taillights, the way God intended. Anything else is an abomination.
The same goes for the 2014 Jeep Cherokee. The mechanical specs suggest it could drive up the side of a building, using about half as much fuel as the old one and keeping its passengers safe when it fell off the other side of the building. All some fans can see is that it’s sleek while the old one was boxy, though. They think that makes it a traitor to the brand.
I have no idea what the all-new 2015 Mustang will look like, but I am certain lots of people will despise it. The fact that it’ll probably be lighter, nimbler and more technically sophisticated and fuel-efficient than any Mustang before it is irrelevant. It’ll be different. That guarantees some folks will hate it.
People can’t tell you they want something they’ve never seen before. It’s a truism designers bemoan as they drink alone, late at night in fabulous bars decorated in white leather, chrome and black wood. But nobody knew the world wanted 250 different paintings of water lilies until Claude Monet did it and changed art forever. That’s why artists drink alone, late at night, in far cheaper and less fashionable dives.
Cars, like art, must evolve or die. The alternative is the Model T. The world’s best-selling car, Ford barely changed it from 1908 to 1927. Other vehicles evolved and surpassed it. Ford lost the No. 1 spot and never regained it.
Porsche is the other side of that coin, Edmunds senior analyst Michelle Krebs said. “The purists loudly objected to the idea of Porsche building an SUV and a sedan, but Porsche wouldn’t be around today if it hadn’t built the Cayenne,” the SUV that’s its top seller, she said. The combination of the Cayenne and Panamera sedan — another departure that was anathema to brand purists — led Porsche to record sales.
The idea that people can’t ask for what they can’t imagine collides with the salesman’s maxim of “Give the customer what he wants” at the intersection of art and commerce.
“The most important thing is to create a car that people see and immediately recognize as the new Corvette or Mustang or Jeep,” Hall said.
That requires an understanding of the vehicle’s core appeal and identity. Too often, the self-appointed guardians of brand heritage obsess over minutiae like round versus square taillights.
I’m looking at you, Corvette purists.
It’s the automotive equivalent of medieval theological debates about how many angels could fit on the head of a pin. The correct answer, then and now, is: Drop dead, I have a life.
The new models may be great. They may stink. We’ll know soon enough. I’ll guarantee one thing, though. The deciding factor won’t be the shape of a taillight lens.
** I tend to mostly agree with that POV
Bravo!
8/26/13, 09:01 PM
#596
legacy Tms Member
I think the biggest risk with the mustangs future is in its base price...used to be if you had a job, you could probably afford one- read a thing last week the 2015 would be 'well under 50k'. the base model should be around 20 in my mind. if folks want a DI V8 with IRS and active suspension, fine, make it a option- but if someone wants a basic car for a college kid, why does it have to be a hyundai or some other generic looking sedan...it dont cost any more to make a pretty car than a ugly one.
I personally thing they do not care squat about volume any more, just unit profit- business wise, guess thats fine, but the more volume/the more workers/the more potential customers...they want to sell cars, they have to remember that requires would-be buyers to have jobs... unless obamacars or some other silliness comes along, they gotta get the country producing...not a handful of 'perfect' products, but a boatload of 'just great' products that are still affordable.
I personally thing they do not care squat about volume any more, just unit profit- business wise, guess thats fine, but the more volume/the more workers/the more potential customers...they want to sell cars, they have to remember that requires would-be buyers to have jobs... unless obamacars or some other silliness comes along, they gotta get the country producing...not a handful of 'perfect' products, but a boatload of 'just great' products that are still affordable.
8/26/13, 10:21 PM
#597
I think the biggest risk with the mustangs future is in its base price...used to be if you had a job, you could probably afford one- read a thing last week the 2015 would be 'well under 50k'. the base model should be around 20 in my mind. if folks want a DI V8 with IRS and active suspension, fine, make it a option- but if someone wants a basic car for a college kid, why does it have to be a hyundai or some other generic looking sedan...it dont cost any more to make a pretty car than a ugly one.
I personally thing they do not care squat about volume any more, just unit profit- business wise, guess thats fine, but the more volume/the more workers/the more potential customers...they want to sell cars, they have to remember that requires would-be buyers to have jobs... unless obamacars or some other silliness comes along, they gotta get the country producing...not a handful of 'perfect' products, but a boatload of 'just great' products that are still affordable.
I personally thing they do not care squat about volume any more, just unit profit- business wise, guess thats fine, but the more volume/the more workers/the more potential customers...they want to sell cars, they have to remember that requires would-be buyers to have jobs... unless obamacars or some other silliness comes along, they gotta get the country producing...not a handful of 'perfect' products, but a boatload of 'just great' products that are still affordable.
8/26/13, 11:48 PM
#598
FR500 Member
Join Date: August 15, 2005
Location: Honolulu
Posts: 3,083
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How about using S550 chassis as the basis for your suggestions for Lincoln's future lineup? I could see a Continental Mark X version of it being produced as an answer to Cadillac's recent 2-door coupe concept. It would make a nice halo car for Lincoln and seems to work within the "One Ford (and Lincoln)" philosophy.
8/27/13, 03:12 AM
#599
Member
Join Date: July 29, 2013
Location: Switzerland (not Florida)
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anyway, I do not agree with the whole article fully - I do however think that they (Ford) have to take a certain risk in terms of design if they want to hit the international market.
Risk can pay out handsomely or it can backfire quite badly. Standing still however has rarely been a recipe for success - I guess that is the theme the author wishes to convey with the Model T comparison.
8/27/13, 04:00 AM
#600
Depends on who's reporting it. Toyota tried to claim that all vehicles built on the Corolla platform were part of the numbers, where Ford was counting only Focus models.
Cars are continuing to go up in price, but take a second to step back and think about it. You're getting a lot of standard features in them now, more safety tech, better build quality, and overall more material (steel, plastic, etc.) going into the vehicle. That all adds cost. Balancing standard equipment and keeping costs low is a challenge. That's why we don't see a myriad of interior color options, manual and auto windows, and a variety of stereo options. Lean manufacturing and economies of scale play into this.
Cars are continuing to go up in price, but take a second to step back and think about it. You're getting a lot of standard features in them now, more safety tech, better build quality, and overall more material (steel, plastic, etc.) going into the vehicle. That all adds cost. Balancing standard equipment and keeping costs low is a challenge. That's why we don't see a myriad of interior color options, manual and auto windows, and a variety of stereo options. Lean manufacturing and economies of scale play into this.