tbone

Perhaps because a keyed ignition is mechanical and would be left in the on position upon shutdown, which would drain the battery?

Another lovely headline, and not from some auto rag… Ford Breaks Annual Record for Safety Recalls Within First Six Months of Year https://www.wsj.com/business/autos/ford-safety-recall-record-df03416d

True, but based on Ford’s past actions and terrible supplier relations scores, it isn’t an unreasonable assumption.

I don’t mind standardization, but just make the damn parts better. That nickel Ford saved per pump is now likely costing them hundreds of millions of dollars.

The number of recalls at this point is beyond ridiculous. Our 22 Explorer is included in the fuel pump recall.

Yeah, that’s not working for me either.

Aside from the exclusion list, I don’t think this program is particularly incentivizing. Most people are not going to be able to handle a 48 month loan based on today’s vehicle pricing.

Though I liked that Mustang back in the day, I just don’t think that style has aged particularly well. I don’t know what elements would be drawn from it. As for the Bronco, it is one model I think should always remain evolutionary as the Jeep has been, until the sales suggest otherwise. It’s iconic like the Jeep as far as I’m concerned.

Clearly, these pumps would’ve been supplied by a supplier. Is this another instance of Ford browbeating their supplier to save the penny and contributing to their low supplier relations score?

Is Ford going to lower the price now that it’s a fixed piece of glass? They used to use the pano as a selling point, and it is one of the best on the market. But what if they don’t lower the price? What kind of selling point is that? Pay more get less? The pano is an option. If you want a lower price point reduce the number of vehicles you install it on or give people all three options. If the take rate suggest only 10% or less opt for the pano over time, then I get it. But to eliminate a great feature that people were clearly paying for makes no sense to me.

I agree with you the 90’s styling wasn’t notable and I think it pays to evolve the retro styling. Hopefully Ford reverses course on the screens control everything trend. Though they needed to incorporate a bigger screen into the s650, they didn’t need to be that drastic.

A fair question, but it’s not as if every buyer of those vehicles or those considering buying them evaporated. Though the market may be smaller, there’s still a market for this vehicle type. What is the answer if they aren’t buying Mustangs? Dodge must think there is a market since they are basically rebooting their game.

I think you make valid points, as I think one and three are most likely the biggest culprits. Though the front fascia is acceptable I don’t think it is particularly good looking. I personally think it is bad enough that it should be redesigned for 2026. The current design does not feel cohesive to me and the leading edge of the hood is too flat. With the discontinuation of the Camaro and the Charger/Challenger, the Mustang should have seen a sales increase, not a decline. Not every person in that segment is brand loyal, and since you are the only kid on the block now there really isn’t an excuse.

I like your line of thinking here. The image you provided is very appealing.

I understand your point, that it is 171 units, but it is yet another headline and not good for business.