LS1 forum folks droolin over 05 stang
- Thread starter Edbert
- Start date
-
Sponsors (?)
4point6
New Member
skywarp said:
Just because it is a concept doesn't mean it is going into production. That is why it is called a "concept". Less than 10% of concepts go into production, and even then they get changed a lot too meet safty, crash, and emission standard. A lot more goes into building a car than you may think.
The Viper is the current king of the street, but the Vette is just catching up. I wouldn't be supprised if the C6 Z06 is faster than the Viper and Ford GT, it will have the same power but be a few hundred pounds lighter than both. I think the Viper has a lot of room to grow, who knows, by next year it could be 550HP or 600HP.
One of the reasons you show people a concept is to gauge public reaction. The public has reacted very favorably to the cobra concept.
I really don't see what the discussion is about. It's a good looking car, it doesn't break a ton of new ground technologically and market is big enough to accomodate it. Last I heard, GM and DC are still selling vipers and Z06's faster than they can build them.
After seeing recent F150, GT and mustang concepts and seeing where the production vehicles ended up, I don't see a production version of the cobra concept as being much of a stretch. The production car will probably grow a few inches in the front and back to make it crashworthy, and it'll end up with side windows and a top. Aside from that, I hope you like what you see.
I really don't see what the discussion is about. It's a good looking car, it doesn't break a ton of new ground technologically and market is big enough to accomodate it. Last I heard, GM and DC are still selling vipers and Z06's faster than they can build them.
After seeing recent F150, GT and mustang concepts and seeing where the production vehicles ended up, I don't see a production version of the cobra concept as being much of a stretch. The production car will probably grow a few inches in the front and back to make it crashworthy, and it'll end up with side windows and a top. Aside from that, I hope you like what you see.
shatner saves said:
I remember reading that the only reason the Ford GT was built is b/c Bill Ford liked it so much, and pushed for it hard. The business case for the car wasn't that good. It used up a lot of resorces for a car that isn't really going to make the company much money. Cars like that are more of a PR booster or Marketing tool than a real money maker. The SSR is the same way at Chevy. They are only making about 10,000 a year of those, but before the truck was even out, it set the record for most toy/model versions sold. That is a great image booster for the brand.
The Ford GT already used up 2 years worth of SVT resources, that its why the new lightning is coming in 06 not 04. Plus Ford is really strapped for cash, They need to put all the money/resources they can into their aging car line to fight off the Imports. There are a lot more cars that need the attention, like the whole Lincoln and Mercury line up. Toyota stole Fords spot as #2 car maker in the world this year. Ford isn't going to win that back by building limited edition, 1000 copies a year cars.
Z28x said:
No, toyota just spends triple what ford does in racing. In terms of resources, a car like the GT and the Cobra is not a huge deal.
Ford isn't quite so hard up right now. In 2002 they posted a net loss of around $950,000,000. In 2003, they posted a net profit of just under $500,000,000. On autoline detroit, I heard one auto anylyst say that number could increase to $2 billion by the time 2004 is over. Ford's immediate future is looking pretty good right now.
shatner saves said:
Ford lost $5.5 Billion in 2001 and $1 Billion in 2002 and made a profit of $495mil in 2003. In the same time Toyota has been making $6 billion + a year.
Cars like the Cobra and GT(40) are a big deal because they cost over half a billion to engineer and build and make almost no profit. From a business standpoint it is more important to sell 300,000 family cars than 1000 supercars. Volume is were the money is.
http://www.courier-journal.com/business/news2004/01/23/biz-front-ford23-5649.html
http://www.freep.com/money/autonews/ford23_20040123.htm
http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/2002/01/08/ford.htm
Well Ford *is* building the GT...
If Chevrolet can do well with the Corvette, and DC can build a few thousand Vipers a year, I see no logical reason why Ford couldn't make a go of the Shelby Cobra. And if it can use components already developed from the GT, even better.
Also consider that the GT was developed in a time ford was having some really bad years (as you cited). If ford is really going to be flush with cash over the next few years, doesn't it make the possibility of a Cobra more realistic?
If Chevrolet can do well with the Corvette, and DC can build a few thousand Vipers a year, I see no logical reason why Ford couldn't make a go of the Shelby Cobra. And if it can use components already developed from the GT, even better.
Also consider that the GT was developed in a time ford was having some really bad years (as you cited). If ford is really going to be flush with cash over the next few years, doesn't it make the possibility of a Cobra more realistic?
XtorT'r
New Member
Z28x said:
Sorry I have to do this when ever I see a mention of the SSR.
I AM GOING TO FIND ALL THE FREEKS THAT DESIGNED THE SSR AND "FEMALE DOG" SLAP THEM ALL.
I freeeeeking hate all PT cruisers and anything that looks like one..
I hope that Fugly car cost GM lots of money cuz they arn't gonna break sales records... The 10 year olds that buy the models can't afford the car... truck.. cartrucky thing... BLEH
To be honest, I liked that truck from what I saw in the commercial... but as with all GM products it's over priced and lacks a little bit of “this and that” ALL OVER the place and a whole lot in three really big aspects IMO.
A Supercharger or Turbo like they make it sound in the commercial (I assume it's the rig it's chasing that sounds cool and not the SSR) but I was sold on it becasue of the front end and turbo sound when the driver hit the gas.
A bit more 50's styling on the side view with a lower box line and a real box to break it up a bit. This would make it look like a 50’s truck from the side instead of a battery powered kiddy car that seats one.
A reasonable freakin price tag!!!! or again! a 10K gold plated Eaton Supercharger & 400HP! to justify the damn price tag *lol*
Just like GM to put out another over priced, bloated vehicle that is almost 1/3 too much to ask for what it is. In fact, 25K base almost seems to much, so 30K loaded? I know it's more than likely a short run and they need to try to make the R&D money back, but more than 40K is going to make it an even shorter run with only a 300HP Engine built on what does resemble a copy of the Chrysler PT/Neon platform. (I'm sure it's not of course)
I love the idea of this 50's era hot rod truck but the execution leave so much to be desired is almost appalling. The least they could have done here was start with a real freakin truck design.
Will GM ever get it that volume sales really does make more sense and money than over priced 30-40K unit per year runs?
Z.
A Supercharger or Turbo like they make it sound in the commercial (I assume it's the rig it's chasing that sounds cool and not the SSR) but I was sold on it becasue of the front end and turbo sound when the driver hit the gas.
A bit more 50's styling on the side view with a lower box line and a real box to break it up a bit. This would make it look like a 50’s truck from the side instead of a battery powered kiddy car that seats one.
A reasonable freakin price tag!!!! or again! a 10K gold plated Eaton Supercharger & 400HP! to justify the damn price tag *lol*
Just like GM to put out another over priced, bloated vehicle that is almost 1/3 too much to ask for what it is. In fact, 25K base almost seems to much, so 30K loaded? I know it's more than likely a short run and they need to try to make the R&D money back, but more than 40K is going to make it an even shorter run with only a 300HP Engine built on what does resemble a copy of the Chrysler PT/Neon platform. (I'm sure it's not of course)
I love the idea of this 50's era hot rod truck but the execution leave so much to be desired is almost appalling. The least they could have done here was start with a real freakin truck design.
Will GM ever get it that volume sales really does make more sense and money than over priced 30-40K unit per year runs?
Z.
The MT magazine with the blue/white GT on the cover has a truck comparison that includes the SSR. The impressions were really not that favorable. The convertible top is very cool though. The fact that it's the only truck out there right now available with one should help them move a few units.
I'm not a total fan of how it turned out, or the price, but I will say I like it because it's different. I remember when the big rig styling first came out on the dodge pick-ups ('92 I think). I honestly couldn't remember any other time a new vehicle polarized people that much with it's styling (I was 20 at the time). Considering what Dodge truck sales were like before that thing came out, they ended up with a winner.
I'm not a total fan of how it turned out, or the price, but I will say I like it because it's different. I remember when the big rig styling first came out on the dodge pick-ups ('92 I think). I honestly couldn't remember any other time a new vehicle polarized people that much with it's styling (I was 20 at the time). Considering what Dodge truck sales were like before that thing came out, they ended up with a winner.
SSR is no different than the Prowler, it is a cool looking low volume vehicle built to draw attention to the Chevy brand, its called the "Halo" effect. It isn't built to be a cash cow, it is a rolling advertisment for the brand. The Ford GT is the same way. Ford GT isn't going to steal Vette, Viper or Ferarri sales. It's just made for braging rights, Ford can now say their GT is faster than the Ferarri 360. It makes the Ford brand look cooler, and if people start to think they are cooler they are more likely to buy a Focus or Taurus over a Civic or Accord.
From a money making stand point it would be smarter to spend the development money on replacing the extremly old Ranger then building the Shelby Cobra.
From a money making stand point it would be smarter to spend the development money on replacing the extremly old Ranger then building the Shelby Cobra.
RiceEating5.0
Founding Member
- Mar 14, 2001
- 270
- 0
- 0
RiceEating5.0 said:
I agree, but for the truck line some would say it is the SSR. I guess you could say that brand has 2 halo vehicles now.
If I was running Ford, I would keep making the Ford GT an extra 3 years and spend the Shelby development money on a car like the 427 Sedan concept.
The GT was one of the coolest things Ford has ever done, I'm glad to see them beet Ferarri at their own game once again.
CatmanJJ said:
Well, when you jump from 260 to 300hp, then it may look positive. HOWEVER, I was expecting to see a similar combo to the cobra motor (03'), or atleast a SOHC version. They could have made a 330-360hp 5.4L N/A motor. To me its disappointing. I never said it should be a drag car, just that it should have more power.
For all those people that think GM killed the fbodies becausde they were cheap, you need to get your heads examined. Bad GM advertising + V6 mustang sales caused the demise of the fbody, not the GT's or Cobras.
RealQuick said:
Looks like you’re the one who has no idea why GM killed the F-bodies. GM cared more about SUVs and trucks than the Camaro in the late 90's. Unfortunately the bean counters had more say than the Enthusiast inside of GM at the time, If Bob Lutz was working at GM in the late 90's, the Camaro would probably still be around. From what I have read the 4th gen couldn't be built past 2002 because 2003 crash standard changed and the Camaro would have needed to be changed and GM didn't want to invest the cash into a platform that was already 10 years old. The reason no Camaro can be built now is because there is no RWD platform to put it on. The CTS and C6 Vette platforms are too expensive. The next Gen Camaro will be built in 2006 on the new RWD Zeta platform a long with the next Gen GTO.
The Mustang had nothing to do with GM killing off the Camaro. In fact the F-body was the second best selling coupe in the country. If anything the Mustang probably kept the Camaro around longer due to the Mustang vs. Camaro rivalry. Originally the Camaro was going to be axed in 2000 not 2002.
Interesting Fact: Chevy turned down using the Holden Monaro as Stop-gap Camaro because they felt it didn't fit the Camaro image. It was too heavy and not low-slung enough. Pontiac later decided to import the Monaro and name it GTO and signed a deal for 3 years @ 18,000 units a year.
65conv50
New Member
Xaranthu said:
I agree - the SSR is one slick looking truck. And it's about d**n time somebody did a roadster pickup again. BUT: it's way overpriced and only comes with an automatic transmission (which would blow up if they really tried to do what the commercial looks like!!). No power and no transmission.
What I would REALLY REALLY like to see is a production version of the Ford Forty-Niner! What a good lookin' retro!!
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
