ford4v429

I got the 'int sport appearance pkg' (leather wheel/shift ****) as the only option when I ordered the 06 gt...the 09 gt has zero options (ISAP was not offered) so bought the leather wheel/**** off ebay...its in the trunk

the 06 was 26,030(paid sticker), the 09 just over 24k plus shipping(emp pricing/rebates was a nice surprise when I called the dealer after seeing the '10 reveal) - not a bad price for a base v8, but about my limit- now base gt is 30k, next year who knows... I do think Ford could still offer the base gt for 25-ish, with similar equipment to the base 06 gt...about the same as the old lx- 5 speed, cloth, no frills stereo...
I didnt want nav, 1000 watts, automatic- I just wanted a fun to drive/great sounding v8 with a stick, no regrets at all, maybe I'm the minority, but dont think so... anyway, can say at 30k, I wouldnt/couldnt have bought one.

guess flipside of the coin is my wife was content with the 07 V6, but got leather/auto/mycolor/500watts/pony grille...and she loves hers too


does seem to me that these days concentration is all about unit profit, which 'pushes' more high content sales... the old volume or 'hooking' buyers to build brand loyalty seems a thing of the past- seems to me they grew more selling a couple million 65/66 cheap mustangs than .1~.2 million expensive ones last year...maybe not.

2 Go Snake

Randy, I think most of what you suggested could be left off a less expensive Mustang. However, ABS and dual exhaust are still a big part of a V8 Mustang and would still need to be on a lower priced Mustang. I am sure the engineers who work on the Mustang GT know what could be eliminated or replaced with less expensive parts.
When I ordered my 1985 5.0 LX, I had the air conditionig deleted.Ford put different taillights on the LX than what the GT had and offered the car as a notchback. Essentially, Ford offered two entirelly different Mustangs with V8s. One was a notch back and one was a hatchback. Now they could save cost by using only one body style with fewer of the costly electronic parts.

watchdevil

It cost Ford absolutely nothing to offer the 1985-93 Mustang LX with a 5.0 V8 in the three already existant body styles which included the notchback, hatchback and convertible.

The 1979 Mustang was planned from the get go to be sold as both a notchback and hatchback with four, six and eight cylinder engine choices. In 1979, buyer preferences between the two bodystyles were still split almost half as they had been since 1965. That justified the additional tooling costs. In 1983 the convertible was brought back into the lineup. When the Mustang notchback bodystyle reached later model years and declined in popularity, that bodystyle was never dropped since the tooling was paid for years before and it cost Ford nothing to keep it in production.

Also, Mustang GT's did not have different taillamps than the LX until 1987 when the styling was refreshed on all Mustangs. The 1987 GT was visually more distinguished from LX models than previous years with the integral front airdam with fog lamps, bodyside skirts, lower rear bumper valance, specific rear wing spoiler and cheese grater taillamps. The additional new cosmetic parts and GT sports seats were among the things that made the GT cost a premium over 5.0 LX models.

watchdevil

There is really nothing that can be done to reduce costs. Look at the numbers:

2012 Mustang Coupe Base Prices

V6 Base $22,310
V6 Premium $26,310 ($4000 over base V6)
GT Base $29,710 ($7400 over the base V6)
GT Premium $33,710 ($4000 over base GT, $7400 over the V6 Premium)

So in order to get V8 performance you have to pay a premium of $7400 over the base V6 price of $22,310. The cost differential of the GT is basically the 5.0 engine, drivetrain, upgraded suspension and tires all required to handle the 400+ HP. Aside from that the Base V6 and Base GT share the same basic interior and standard creature and comfort features. There is nothing left to cut to make the V8 Mustang more affordable. The 305 HP V6 Mustang already exceeds the standard performance of the 1993 Mustang 5.0 LX and GT. It would also be stupid to suggest that Ford detune a 5.0 V8 to V6 power just so someone could brag about having a V8 Mustang. If you cannot afford the GT then you buy the V6. If you cannot afford the V6 then you have no business buying a new Mustang in the first place.

2011 Kona Blue

Can the v6 's engine not handle an upgrade of hp by adding a super charger?

2011 Kona Blue

Giving it 400 plus hp

RandyW

I'm with you, Watchdevil. The V6 offers performance that is on par with or better than the pre-2005 GT. If I couldn't afford a brand new Mustang GT and wouldn't settle for a V6, I'd rather buy a GT that's a couple of years old and decently equipped than get a brand new V8 Mustang that has a Yugo-level of comfort and convenience features. I understand that there are some people who do want such a Mustang but I seriously doubt there are enough of them for Ford to make a profit on such a model.

GTJOHN

At this stage of the game, I think we are fortunate that the Mustang GT is still in the $30k range. I'm certain $35k is on the horizon.

IMO, Ford needs to create a Mustang under $30k with some prestige. As great as the new V6 Mustang is, it still lacks something. I'm thinking a Eco 4 SVO Type car or a V6 that offers something different. Remember, this has to be under $30k, so I am not thinking 365hp Eco 6.

2011 Kona Blue

What are the 2011 and up v6 stangs missing

2011 Kona Blue

What do they lack? I bought my 11 sixer back in October 2010 for 22,500 OTD

GTJOHN

^Like I said, I think the new V6 is a great car, but there needs to be a model that stands out. An eco 4 or V6 that has unique styling and minor engine/handling package.

2 Go Snake

I think a less expensive v8 powered Mustang would appeal to a younger group of first time buyers. It would not cost Ford much to develope a V8 powered Mustang without things like air conditioning and some of the electronic pieces in the GT. Ford would not have to detune the V8 engine for a less expensive model. During the eighties and nineties, the LX V8 had the same horespower as the GT. I bought a 1985 and 1991 LX with the V8 and never regretted the purchases. In this day and age, the time is right for a roadrunner type vehicle.

AlsCobra

I remember those fox days. Walk past a line of gt's and special order a cloth seat manual window completely stripped LX. Just a 5.0 and a T5. Because nothing else was gonna stay stock in the car anyways. As cheap as you could get it out of the dealership. And those were preferred over the nicer optioned cars. Gt's sat on the lot for over a year. Those were great times.

Mustangs

The fox body was good times. You could get into a mustang and it was fun and affordable. I regret to this day selling my '93 notch T-5 with the black interior. Than again I also had a 82 Capri RS, 84 gt-350, 86 gt, 95 cobra, 01 cobra, 03 gt, another 86 gt, and current '11 gt. So I guess I like all mustangs. Lol

Tony Alonso

I suspect there would be few 20-somethings wanting to get a car without air conditioning, especially if you are going to spend $22,000 for it.

GTJOHN

Stacey David Gearz TV Show asked the Big 3 if they would consider making a stripped down version of their Muscle cars, and all three said "No". They do not want to cheapen their cars.

Although, Dodge did come out with the Ram 1500 Express - $23k, 5.7L 390hp Hemi.

2 Go Snake

A car can be made less expensive without appearing to be cheap. Ford could offer a V8 powered Mustang with no air conditioning and no center console. They could have some inexpensive trim piece to secure the shifter boot to the floor.Maybe they could get a bench seat from the Ranger pickup and thus replace the bucket seats. Who knows how many more Mustangs Ford could sell with some unique features that could appeal to younger buyers. When I bought my LX Mustangs, I wanted a GT but could just not afford to get a GT that I was only going to drive in the Summer and Fall in Minnesota. With the millions of people in America, there should be at least 20000 who would purchase an inexpensive V8 Mustang.

Overboost

You guys think stripping things makes it cheaper, when in fact it adds complexity and more variables into the equation. The fewer variations of seats, door panels, bumpers, etc. a car has makes things cheaper to produce. You need to stop living in the 60s and 70s and realize with modern manufacturing techniques how this all works.

rhumb

True dat^. Why not have the sport coupe class leader, the M3, serve as the performance benchmark, yet keep it affordable. For quite some time, Ford had a "good enough" ethos which did produce Stangs that were, good enough but rarely truly excelled in a broader sense. In the past few years, that rather middling target has been steamrolled by a drive for world class excellence that I have been extremely impressed by.

The current Stang, even hobbled a bit by some "good enough" constraints (live axle) that diluted the final S197 chassis, is currently right up there with the current M3 on most performance aspects yet for an immense $30K less. I am eager to see how Ford's higher, world-class aspirations will translate into the NextStang in 2014/15. Of course, the next M3 will be out around then and the bar will be raised even higher, but I am pretty confident that the NextStang will be even more of a match for that M3 than is currently the case, and at the same basic level of affordability.

Tony Alonso

I don't think anyone who is in their late teens and early 20s in this day and age would accept a bench seat, no center console, or A/C. These things are on low cost cars today. Plus, as mentioned, the manufacturing variations to build something like this now would likely add cost.