ray101988 Posted January 17, 2008 Share Posted January 17, 2008 OH NO! That's way worse them Mustangs 15 mpg. LOL the mustangs mpg should be going up on the next redesign shouldnt it? Isnt it getting the new 6 speed? Well it could get less than 14? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted January 17, 2008 Author Share Posted January 17, 2008 I think it's hideous, as if they used the same old stampings from long ago. Please don't think this is the Home Run that Dodge needs, this isn't the segment, nor the vehicle to bring them back sales wise... I think it looks good. That said, I don't believe it'll be a home run sales-wise. It'll be a home run as a halo car, however. As you said, a vehicle like this wont bring in too many sales. It will however draw attention to the brand and possibly bring in new customers to other products in the lineup (unless of course they see the lineup and say no thanks). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted January 17, 2008 Author Share Posted January 17, 2008 Ive been getting them the last few days. Idk why. Do you? I'm not sure. Today was the worst I've ever seen it. Hopefully the moderators/whoever's running the forums will be able to fix it or at least limit how many times it happens. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
retro-man Posted January 17, 2008 Share Posted January 17, 2008 Nice job Chrysler. Really nice job. I don't have particularly fond memories of High School, yet those photos connect up with fond memories that I don't even have. Antaus, what the hell'd you have for breakfast? Oh yeah.... you're the one that liked the catfish Taurus.... May not bring Chrysler back sales-wise, but it just might help them go out with a bang. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ebritt Posted January 17, 2008 Share Posted January 17, 2008 Nice ride. I see lower Mustang production numbers in the future. Not really. The Challenger will cost to much to take too many sales from Mustang. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ebritt Posted January 17, 2008 Share Posted January 17, 2008 I like the concept's taillight combo better (full width red lights, with reverse lights down near the license plate area) Exactly. The neon surround was pretty cool too, but probably against some law or safety reg or something.....too bad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snooter Posted January 17, 2008 Share Posted January 17, 2008 camaro has a huge following and i believe it will seriously dent mustang sales...challenger, although not as popular as camaro or mustang will also dent mustang sales...mustang has been uncontested since 2003...these 2 new models will cause a downturn in mustang sales...id like a new gt500 and if slower sales gets the stupid adm fees gone then so be it...yes ford has to respond and damn quick Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snooter Posted January 17, 2008 Share Posted January 17, 2008 camaro has a huge following and i believe it will seriously dent mustang sales...challenger, although not as popular as camaro or mustang will also dent mustang sales...mustang has been uncontested since 2003...these 2 new models will cause a downturn in mustang sales...id like a new gt500 and if slower sales gets the stupid adm fees gone then so be it...yes ford has to respond and damn quick Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Traveler Posted January 17, 2008 Share Posted January 17, 2008 Not really. The Challenger will cost to much to take too many sales from Mustang. Probably not. The mark-ups will likely disappear as more Challengers hit the streets in the second year and the pricing will level out. Besides, the initial production run will be SRT-8s only. Certainly, the 425 horsepower (perhaps more) engine and the suspension tweaks will put it at a higher costs anyway than a Mustang GT. However, you're comparing 425 horsepower to 300 horsepower. I read somewhere that the Challenger R/T would be priced around a premium GT at around $28k-$30k. Dodge ain't going to sit back and not be competitive. They've got an assembly line that right now can make four different models, so the Challenger can likely get competitively priced. As for the fuel economy, the SRT probably won't get above 14 mpg average. That's big engine and tuned for maximum natural aspirated performance. No blowers there. Keep in mind, though that the current SRT doesn't have MDS. Its running all eight all the time. The 5.7 is the MDS equipped Hemi and consider that in the upcoming Ram, the engine will get 4% better fuel mileage. Isn't the LX sedans with the MDS 5.7 Hemi arlready getting about the same as the 4.6 Ford? If so, the Challenger R/T could possibly get better gas mileage than the Mustang GT and make a lot more power. I see a Boss engine in Mustang's future. Whether by accident or purpose, I think Dodge is poised in a good position. They are just about ready to begin their first year with Challenger. They are targeting first those that want maxium firepower and those that want to be the first in town to own one. If the '09 Mustang's styling is a turn off to people, Dodge will be ready to deliver the 5.7 in the Challenger the same year...and its hard to not like the Challenger. Its got those classic muscle car lines that beckon. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see Dodge take a sizeable hunk out of Mustang and Camaro. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ray101988 Posted January 17, 2008 Share Posted January 17, 2008 camaro has a huge following and i believe it will seriously dent mustang sales...challenger, although not as popular as camaro or mustang will also dent mustang sales...mustang has been uncontested since 2003...these 2 new models will cause a downturn in mustang sales...id like a new gt500 and if slower sales gets the stupid adm fees gone then so be it...yes ford has to respond and damn quick I think you would be surprised at just how popular the challenger is and just how big of a followig it probably has lol. Its pretty much a legend... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snooter Posted January 17, 2008 Share Posted January 17, 2008 never said challenger did not have a following..it is not as big as camaro following.....for the record....1970 and 1971 challengers were as low as you could go...quality was beyond crap...30 years ago we avoided challengers like the plague and bought chargers..we shall see if challenger quality has improved..the old muscle cars everybody must have were atrocious quality..i was there and the stuff was beyond junk...wanted a nice powerful muscle car that actually started....you had to reach for the olds 442 and nothing on the street touched an olds 442..my boss 302 would not hang with an olds 442..neither would my buddies 69 mach 1 428 cobra jet....there are so many games being played today about how powerful these cars were it is comical...one of the rag magazines dynoed a 70boss 302 about 10 years ago and it had 180rear wheel horsepower....no nobody had hemi's (i knew of one as a kid) or copo camaeros..they were as rare as hens teeth even when new....dont get me wrong..challenger looks great and i will be at my dealership to look at one in person...then im plucking down the cash on the new 2009 dodge ram Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timmm55 Posted January 17, 2008 Share Posted January 17, 2008 (edited) never said challenger did not have a following..it is not as big as camaro following.....for the record....1970 and 1971 challengers were as low as you could go...quality was beyond crap...30 years ago we avoided challengers like the plague and bought chargers..we shall see if challenger quality has improved..the old muscle cars everybody must have were atrocious quality..i was there and the stuff was beyond junk...wanted a nice powerful muscle car that actually started....you had to reach for the olds 442 and nothing on the street touched an olds 442..my boss 302 would not hang with an olds 442..neither would my buddies 69 mach 1 428 cobra jet....there are so many games being played today about how powerful these cars were it is comical...one of the rag magazines dynoed a 70boss 302 about 10 years ago and it had 180rear wheel horsepower....no nobody had hemi's (i knew of one as a kid) or copo camaeros..they were as rare as hens teeth even when new....dont get me wrong..challenger looks great and i will be at my dealership to look at one in person...then im plucking down the cash on the new 2009 dodge ram http://musclecarfacts.net/ I wouldn't expect a small block BOSS 302 to "hang" with a (I assume) big block 455 442. But a 69-70 428CJ Mustang should without much effort (all things being equal: axle ratio, mods, etc) as they were both high 13/ low 14 second cars. The lighter 68 1/2 Mustang CJ was a mid 13 second car (13.2 to 13.6) while a 68 442 (400) was 15.3 second in the quarter. I graduated HS in 1974, we all had some pretty nice used muscle cars: I had a 71 Demon 340 (headers, strip gears, shift kit :happy feet:), my buddy had a 69 428CJ Torino Cobra (his brother had a 69 442, nice, but not remarkably fast), another friend had a 69 351 Mach1, another guy had a 69 440 GTX....another aquaintance bought my brother-in-law's special order 67 GTO that he bought new....and wrapped it around a telephone pole No Hemi's, BOSS 429s, COPOs, Balwin Motion, or other limited/ultra rare cars. As for the Challenger, they only made about 170,000 in 5 years.... a bad single year for Mustangs. But it makes them more rare! There can't be much of a Challenger following....but a big MoPar base I'd imagine. I think the new Challenger looks too blocky. It lacks any side detail/sculpture, where the similar profile 09 Camaro looks sleeker (but the interior is horrible). Edited January 17, 2008 by timmm55 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moby Vic Posted January 17, 2008 Share Posted January 17, 2008 I think it looks great. It's a really cool car. The design is much more unified than the Camaro design. The wheels are lame, though. Anyway, this car has to take away from Mustang sales, but Ford should know that in advance. They should know they've had the only car in the class since the F Bodies went out of production. As others have said, the first batch of SRTs will have an insane markup. Pony cars used to be youth cars, but youth can't afford them now. The Challenger will be bought by a bunch of fat middle-aged Craig Jackson wannabes. For that reason alone the lack of a manual transmission won't hurt sales much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted January 17, 2008 Share Posted January 17, 2008 OH NO! That's way worse them Mustangs 15 mpg. LOL What are you talking about? at GT500? I get about 19.5 with my GT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
351cid Posted January 17, 2008 Share Posted January 17, 2008 What are you talking about? at GT500? I get about 19.5 with my GT Please do not insert facts into this discussion... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony Posted January 17, 2008 Share Posted January 17, 2008 Remember, the "next" model year starts a mere 3 months after the initial batch of SRT's. Those V6 models and 5.7L R/T's are coming much sooner then many think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ralph Greene Posted January 17, 2008 Share Posted January 17, 2008 (edited) I've got a feeling big V8 HP in these cars isn't as important as it once was. You don't need a big heavy space consuming V8 to make 400 HP anymore. If this niche is to survive, for any of the pony car makers, they are going to have to make modern cars, not remakes of the late 60's. As Moby Vic says, us fat middle to older aged buyers are the market for these expensive cars, and I for one want a much more balanced car than the older models. I have a fairly loaded V8 Premium Coupe coming for my family to use for Mustang stuff. We could just as easily afforded a GT 500 or Bulllitt (didn't like Shelby GT), but we felt (we had a family meeting and discussed this) the standard small engine 4.6 V8 Mustang is a much more balanced all around car for our use, considering handling, power, and fuel economy. As a family that enjoys performance cars, we are interested in using less fossil fuel for our street car needs (it's not all about fuel costs), and still enjoy a Muscle car. Are we the only ones thinking this? Edited January 17, 2008 by Ralph Greene Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tim kakouris Posted January 17, 2008 Share Posted January 17, 2008 ralph, as much as i have loved playing with the bigger engines, i have to say i wouldn't mind at all if the mustang ended up with a turbo 6 or even a turbo 4 if the weight was trimmed and dynamics improved. i can't have a sub 20mpg car anymore (money, and the principle of the matter), and regardless of what the epa says, getting on the throttle in a v8 mustang means you're not getting 20mpgs. (i doubt that getting on the throttle too much in a turbo six would net 20mpg's, either, but the difference would probably be made up when you're not.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ralph Greene Posted January 17, 2008 Share Posted January 17, 2008 (edited) ralph, as much as i have loved playing with the bigger engines, i have to say i wouldn't mind at all if the mustang ended up with a turbo 6 or even a turbo 4 if the weight was trimmed and dynamics improved. i can't have a sub 20mpg car anymore (money, and the principle of the matter), and regardless of what the epa says, getting on the throttle in a v8 mustang means you're not getting 20mpgs. (i doubt that getting on the throttle too much in a turbo six would net 20mpg's, either, but the difference would probably be made up when you're not.) That's how I see it also. if I wanted a race car, I would partner with someone and build one (or have it built). But times are " a changing" and the days of the big V8 muscle car are ending. Any muscle car maker who doesn't see this is doomed. This does not mean cars like the Mustang won't survive and even have better overall performance in the future. But I believe the market is ready for balanced fuel sensible performance, and if I were FMC, I would stop listening to the drag racers for my engineering and styling ideas. And I enjoy drag racing as a sport. A more aero 350 HP Ecoboost IRS Mustang sounds nice to me for my use. Edited January 17, 2008 by Ralph Greene Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moby Vic Posted January 17, 2008 Share Posted January 17, 2008 Ralph, you're not fat enough to be a Craig Jackson wannabe! I'd like to see V8 power continue, but I'd like to see efficiency trump displacement for power production. And low-end torque is what I care about, anyway. If gas prices keep spiraling upward, Dodge will find itself exactly where it found itself in the early '70s with a Challenger--the right car at the wrong time. Ford lucked out by having the only car in the class on the market, just as it did in 1964. I suspect the Challenger is too big ever to be a very fuel-efficient car. Ford seems to have no problem doing whatever it needs to for the Mustang to have it fit the times. Maybe the next generation will be a downsized "Mustang III." Who knows? It's fun to watch, though, and if you don't like the new ones you've got more than 40 years' worth from which to pick your ride. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old_fairmont_wagon Posted January 17, 2008 Share Posted January 17, 2008 Just remember, the 4.0L v6 in the base mustang has more hp and torque at the rear wheel than most of the mid-level V8s had in the 70s. It turns in performance numbers that are very good for that day. If the 09-10 comes with a 3.5L-3.7L v6 that makes 260+ hp and 250+ lbs of torque, it will out perform most anything that wasn't a rarity or very expensive "back in the day". As for competing with the Challenger (and camaro) the Mustang will certainly loose a few sales just due to the fact that there will be more choice in the segment. That much is a certainty. It doesn't speak ill of the stang so much as to the realities of the situation. I have the following expectations: The base mustang will have a v6 that will be competitive with the offerings in the Camaro and Challenger (D35 family with 250+ hp and 250+ tq) vs. GM 3.6L DOHC v6 and Chrysler 3.5L-4.0L DOHC v6. It will also be about as efficient. The regular GT model will have a 4.6L 3V v8 that puts out betwen 320 and 340 advertised hp. Due to the fact that the challenger and camaro will likely weigh more than the mustang, this will be sufficient for the GT level of performance for the first few years. It may not do as well with mpg as the competition, though. Given the fact that there are SE versions of the mustang that currently have freaking 600+ hp available, I don't see any issues with the rare air on the top end. Given that GT and v6 sales DWARF BY A LARGE MARGIN the SE sales, they are unimportant to the commercial success of the vehicle and I don't give them a lot of thought. I do expect that the 4.6L 3V v8 will eventually be replaced by either an evolved MOD v8 in the 4.9-5.0L range, or a low 5.0L range BOSS v8. It will make mid to upper 300's in hp at launch and will be able to reach 400 if needed. I do expect to eventually see an EcoBoost v6 in the mustang at some point. It may even replace the GT's v8 is MPG constraints start to affect things more heavily than we expect. Remember, an Ecoboost 3.5L with the advertised HP and Torque of the launch example already outpowers the GT motor and delivers better mpg in the real world. I would always expect that the mustang will always offer at least an SE with a v8, but the GT may move to a turboed v6. That's the real world. You want power and efficiency, that's going to be the path that ford takes. Something else I think that may eventually appear, the 4.4L Lion v8 diesel might wind up in a mustang one day as well. Granted, it may only be a Ford prototype like the short deck V-10 was, but it will be seen in at least one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ralph Greene Posted January 17, 2008 Share Posted January 17, 2008 (edited) I agree. The folks at Ford understand. I think a V8 will remain for a long time. But maybe Ford isn't interested in anything larger than a 4.6-5.0 in a regular Mustang, except for the "Halo" cars like GT 500. And somewhere along the way, I expect an Ecoboost 6 with IRS for the crowd shopping G 35 Coupes (or whatever they are this year) and BMW 335 Coupe type cars. Look how nice the Bullitt is as a balanced performance car....for the money. Sure they could have added more content like a better rear suspension, but look at what they did with that. Impressive I think. I would rather have a car like that than a Hemi Challenger. Edited January 17, 2008 by Ralph Greene Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted January 17, 2008 Share Posted January 17, 2008 Just remember, the 4.0L v6 in the base mustang has more hp and torque at the rear wheel than most of the mid-level V8s had in the 70s. It turns in performance numbers that are very good for that day. If the 09-10 comes with a 3.5L-3.7L v6 that makes 260+ hp and 250+ lbs of torque, it will out perform most anything that wasn't a rarity or very expensive "back in the day". As for competing with the Challenger (and camaro) the Mustang will certainly loose a few sales just due to the fact that there will be more choice in the segment. That much is a certainty. It doesn't speak ill of the stang so much as to the realities of the situation. I have the following expectations: The base mustang will have a v6 that will be competitive with the offerings in the Camaro and Challenger (D35 family with 250+ hp and 250+ tq) vs. GM 3.6L DOHC v6 and Chrysler 3.5L-4.0L DOHC v6. It will also be about as efficient. The regular GT model will have a 4.6L 3V v8 that puts out betwen 320 and 340 advertised hp. Due to the fact that the challenger and camaro will likely weigh more than the mustang, this will be sufficient for the GT level of performance for the first few years. It may not do as well with mpg as the competition, though. Given the fact that there are SE versions of the mustang that currently have freaking 600+ hp available, I don't see any issues with the rare air on the top end. Given that GT and v6 sales DWARF BY A LARGE MARGIN the SE sales, they are unimportant to the commercial success of the vehicle and I don't give them a lot of thought. I do expect that the 4.6L 3V v8 will eventually be replaced by either an evolved MOD v8 in the 4.9-5.0L range, or a low 5.0L range BOSS v8. It will make mid to upper 300's in hp at launch and will be able to reach 400 if needed. I do expect to eventually see an EcoBoost v6 in the mustang at some point. It may even replace the GT's v8 is MPG constraints start to affect things more heavily than we expect. Remember, an Ecoboost 3.5L with the advertised HP and Torque of the launch example already outpowers the GT motor and delivers better mpg in the real world. I would always expect that the mustang will always offer at least an SE with a v8, but the GT may move to a turboed v6. That's the real world. You want power and efficiency, that's going to be the path that ford takes. Something else I think that may eventually appear, the 4.4L Lion v8 diesel might wind up in a mustang one day as well. Granted, it may only be a Ford prototype like the short deck V-10 was, but it will be seen in at least one. my two cents....6 speed manuals and autos, tweek current engines, no need for massive cubic inches....and trim fat with use of lightweight material...imagine the current Mustang with 325 hp ( avail NOW ) with a 3000 lb curb weight....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moby Vic Posted January 17, 2008 Share Posted January 17, 2008 No cars are that light anymore. Airbags and sound deadener seem to be the main culprit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted January 17, 2008 Share Posted January 17, 2008 No cars are that light anymore. Airbags and sound deadener seem to be the main culprit. one can dream...i wonder which is more cost effective...developing a new drivetrain or utilizing lighter weight materials........ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.