Discussion in '2010 - 2014 Specific Tech' started by v8only, Nov 19, 2008.
I am aware, and those numbers are the updated ones for both cars.
hey, we've got the CEO of ford here!!!
Ford is best situated american company at the moment. They're the ONLY company who has said that they probably can go it alone without any loans at all, but they want the loans to be there for emergency reserve.
Ford is fine. Gm said they're screwed before end of year without money, and chrysler is no better.
Agreed, but if one goes, it makes it much more difficult for the others to survive. Prices of parts/services will go up to maintain profitability due to the loss in sales for GM or Chrysler related stuff.
How does that make it more difficult, exactly? Wouldn't that mean a bigger market share for Ford?
No that would mean even more people thinking that American companies are not worth investing in be it on the stock side of it or on the consumer side.
Possibly, but nowhere near enough of an increase to make up for the increase in price that the suppliers would require to stay in business with such a huge loss in sales (that one of the big three going under would cause).
"Even though Ford isn’t experiencing a “cash crisis,” a GM or Chrysler bankruptcy could take a substantial toll on Ford because suppliers would suffer. Asian markets, which are “financially healthy,” would also experience production difficulties, CNN Money reports."
"Although the Big Three may not get the loans they desire, they have demonstrated that the economy would suffer in their absence. For example, the Ann Arbor-based Center for Automotive Research indicates that “that 1 in every 10 jobs is directly or indirectly affected by the automobile industry and the failure of the three Detroit automakers could result in the loss of 3 million jobs in the first year,” according to the Detroit Free Press."
Economics is sort-of a hobby of mine. I had to take some classes in college, including a global economics one, and I've been following money news every since. I was actually against the financial (Wall St) bailout at first, until some people convinced me that it was necessary. Unfortunately, they didn't stick with the original plan (to buy up toxic assets), and instead decided to "recapitalize banks." I have a lot of issues with the new plan, but that's for another time and place.
However, bailing out Detroit it SO much more important than bailing out Wall Street was! For every job lost on Wall St, another 1-2 might be lost. For every job lost at Ford, GM, or Chrysler, TEN jobs will be lost. In addition, prices of vehicles will go up at least 5-15%, parts suppliers would go under--making it very costly/difficult to find replacement parts for your vehicle, and when the auto market does eventually regain its footing, the money would eventually end up in Japan, Germany, etc.; and not Detroit.
The are other things that frustrate me, too. One is that everyone wants to blame the Big Three for their current issues. However, past government actions--in part--put them in the position they are in today! Here is a good article about that: Commentary: Can the Big Three survive a bailout? - CNN.com Don't disagree with me unless you've read that article first. :smile:
In addition, the Big Three were planning on flex fuel being the next step in getting (at least partly) away from gasoline. I'm not 100% sure, but I think the government gave some indications that an infrastructure would arise to support this, but nothing ever did. The goal is energy independence and increased fuel economy/affordability, and in the U.S. we have many sources of "flex fuels." However, in Japan, they do not have those resources, so they went with electric hybrids. Oil and gas prices skyrocketed, and without a real flex fuel push, the Japanese companies were holding a golden goose, and the U.S. companies were left holding the bag, so to speak. R&D is expensive and time-consuming, so when you spend years going in one direction it's very hard to just make a 90 degree turn and compete with people who have years of experience, development, and re-tooled factories.
The American public generally lives ten years in the past when it comes to cars (among other products). They still think that American cars are crap and get horrible gas mileage, which is simply not true anymore. GM has over 30 cars that get over 30 highway mpg on the new (lower) EPA estimates. The Ford Focus and Chevy Cobalt get the same mpg as a Civic/Camry. Warranties are very similar, and the quality of the cars has just simply improved since the 90s. But the general public refuses to see it. Ironically, it's the same as when the Japanese started putting out good cars...but because they were junk in the past, it took about a decade for the public to accept them.
The public also screams about how the Big Three don't provide fuel efficient cars (which I addressed above) or hybrids (also addressed above, in addition to that there ARE American hybrids, but a lot of people don't seem to know that). However, who will have the first mass produced electric car? Chevy, with the Volt. Ford has a hydrogen fuel cell F-250 that is supposedly coming out soon. These companies are headed in the right direction, and have honestly been held back by past government decisions. I'm not saying they aren't to blame at ALL, but they're totally worth saving, and we honestly need to save them.
Lastly, another thing that people LOVE to ignore, is that until oil spiked over the last few years, they were providing vehicles that the American public wanted and demanded. Now that we don't want them anymore, we're trying to yell at them for not anticipating such a quick change in our wants/needs. If we were very mpg conscious before it started hurting our checking account, we'd be in a much better position today.
well yeah ford is better off then gm and dodge. I personaly think there all in a world of hurt and i dont wanna see any of them go down, i mean if chevy goes i wont have any new camaro's to hate cause they have more hp then the new mustang and i wont have any reson to build up my car anymore my 89 fox or my GT lol . Back on topic the 315hp dissapoints me i would have loved to see 380-400hp but just like normal guys the compition will have more out of the box thats what mods are for, im also not gonna complain about the supercharger package on the GT. dont forget the new v8 camaro from what ive heard is gonna be way more expensive than the GT, also dont forget that the r/t challenger is the GT's compition and 345hp in a 4,000lb car vs 315hp in a 3,400lb nimble mustang im stickin with the stang. Plus we dont know when the new mach or bullit or anything will be in play, i mean you got a 400hp camaro you also got the 425srt that all sounds like GT500 teritory and im betting that the GT500 or KR will tear the camaro a new a$$hole and molest the srt, if they come out with an ss camaro then great thats what the KR is for....all im sayin is we know nothing about the GT500 or The KR500 but they have spy photos of them so we all need to calm down about that i think im not sayin im happy with 315hp just sayin like always there is more to come.....and what i was readin earlier 5.0 vs 4.6...first of guys they are both mustang power plants neither one sucks i have a 89 5.0 and a 02 GT LOVE THEM BOTH, both have their goods and bads saying either one sucks it is just stupid.....:Track: lol
The new Mustangs weigh quite a bit more than 3,400 pounds.
oh 3,600-3,800lbs still my point is valid dude. but the rest is a good way to look at it think.....
Some of you mustang owners act like you have sand in the vagina. Enjoy your old rustangs and I will enjoy my new one. Ford doesn't just build cars for internet fanboys. They have to thing about cost, market, profitability, emissions, and safety. Want to cry about only having a 15hp increase? Go buy your heavy ass chevy or dodge. Whatever makes you shut the hell up.
Raver, I agree with what you're saying. Why are people crying so much about the Mustang being an underdog? It always has been, like it or not. Now, with the current financial situation Ford has been in and the lack of a properly tested new power plant for the Mustang, Ford cannot afford a recall because of under tested hardware. So why is it a bad thing Ford used a series of modifications that really make the Mustang so much more well rounded and have been tested in the real world (2008/2009 Bullitt) with out problems? I work at a Ford dealer and have driven a Bullitt many times, the car is great. It's a definite step in the right direction in power over a stock GT and the driving experience feels better too. So Ford gets to save a few dollars by using parts they already have an abundance of and have been a proven reliable setup, and they can use that money to bring us an even better Mustang in 2011. Where is the problem in that? Now before you boy racers out there start crying about the Camaro and Challenger being rated with higher horse power and bigger engines, we've all heard the rumors about the 5.0L coming as soon as 2011.
If you think Ford is going to disappoint with this engine too then, the option is simple, jump ship! Go buy a V6 Camaro or whatever you feel is a fast enough car for you. After all, that's what keeps the world turning, diversity. Just remember the Mustang has been around longer than all the competition and all those years the Camaro and Challenger were out of the game, Ford was still engineering and still selling the crap out of the Mustang. If you think that means nothing I guess we'll just see when the "competition" really hits the streets (or track) haha.
Let's also remember Ford is still able to sell an eight cylinder car. 315hp may not sound like much but the current mustangs are running zero to sixty in about 5.2 seconds, get 25+mpg, run on regular unleaded, put out next to zero emissions, etc.
Back in the mid 80's the turbocharged SVO ran zero to sixty in 7.5 seconds and was heralded by Road and Track as being one of the best car's America has ever produced. Yes that was 20 years ago but I think we are getting a great deal in the current car and the new one will only be better, minus the price hike.
Does anybody really care what another car has? I buy my car for me. When I am driving through the desert on a warm summer evening the last thing I think about is that my car only has 300ish hp but a competitor has 400.
Having said that, I still HOPE to buy a 2009 in the next couple weeks.
I love my car. That is coming from someone that always hated fords. The new mustangs are damn comfy, loaded with features, powerful, and nice to look at. The modular 4.6 is also very reliable. I believe it was one of the top 10 engines of the year for a few years in a row. Mustangs are the most affordable V8 fun out there. Sure, you can get 300hp in a V6 camaro. That really means nothing. I can buy a Subaru STi and get 300+hp and tq in a car that only weighs 3200 lbs. People need to lay off Ford for not putting out a 400hp V8 as their standard mustang engine. Power comes at a cost.
I agree, keep cost down on base V8's so us normal people can get one.
yeah i agree thats what i was trying to say when i said models such as the bullet and the if there gonne make one the mach 1 and shelby GT's havnt even come into play. mabey even a BOSS???
If they do in fact bring a 5.0 mod motor to the table I'd bet the Boss nameplate will be revived also. I myself would love to see a stripper model, bare bones.....cloth, no stereo, no fancy color changing dash lights, power nothing, with a set of lightweight rims, big brakes with a V8 in it. A track edition I guess you would say. Cars in general have gotten way to porky IMO other than a few select ones. On top of that there are a good number of standard equipment options that I simply could do with out. I dont have a IPOD, I dont need sat radio, in all reality I could do without a rear seat. Kinda like what GM did with the Pontiac Formula. I had a 94 with a M6 and LT1 but other than that it appearence wise was a V6 fireturd. Only the exhaust note and a look at the gauges/shift pattern/and engine bay would let you know other wise.
Agree 100% and with a simple 93 oct tune you can get the car close to 350 crank hp. The 4.6 is a great motor. The mustang has been around for all these years because it is affordable and has one of if not the largest after markets.
I would like to see a car made without AC and power windows.
You guys wanting to see a "stripper" Mustang built in this day and age are dreaming. Those cars don't exist anymore and haven't for over 15-years. Besides, if Ford offered these cars in stipped trim, the first thing a bunch of you would whine about is what a POS they are that in 2010, they don't come standard with power windows or locks.
The general public wants the bells and whistles included as standard equipment.....and Ford is certainly not going to revamp its production line up to satisfy the whim of about .00001% of the boy racer poplulation, because they want to drop another 1/10 off of their quarter mile time.
We are boy racers because we buy a performance car for the performance features? I think that is a unfair statement. I myself am 27 years old and if I wanted "all the bells and whistles" I'd buy a SUV or luxory car. I am not saying revamp the whole line but like 2500 to 5000 of these models would serve a huge pupose for the established race teams, aspiring race teams, weekend racers, and guys that want the car to be uncomfortable enough that their wife dont want to drive it lol.
I guess I am more of a "car has a certain pupose" kind of guy. I like the idea of a well rounded car and all but I also see the need for companies to lend support to the raceing culture in this country. Look how well Dodge did with the SRT4. Them cars sold off the lot faster than they could restock them. If I recall, maybe wrong but the older Cobra R's were like that to. There is a market for it, I know it's not as big as the one for the V6 cars or even the top teir GT based cars but it is there. And why would they need to retool anything in the factory to do this?