Jump to content

The Ford Order Tracking System Is No Longer Available.  THANKS Cyberdman For Making Available All Of These Past Years.  More Here.

Sign in to follow this  
NickF1011

SVT is Dead

Recommended Posts

HOW STUPID CAN YOU BE FORD???

 

Wait. Don't answer that. You'll do something even dumber like make the Mustang front-wheel-drive or something.

 

SVT was basically the only thing keeping me loyal to the Ford brand. You offered nothing for me my last go-around car shopping and was forced into a Mazda6 instead.

 

I still LOVE my '97 Cobra, but you now offer me NOTHING to upgrade it. GT500? Sure. But it costs TWICE what I paid for my Cobra. Mustang GT? Sure, it performs just about as well, but you see them at every intersection now. SVT products were about performance and uniqueness.

 

I was genuinely interested in the Adrenalin. Will you build it? Nope.

 

I'm not the only one with these sentiments either. I know several Cobra and Lightning owners who never would have considered a Ford product unless it had an "SVT" logo on it. These were cars tweaked and designed by people with PASSION for cars. The passion is all but gone now at the Ford Division. Sorry Ford, but without SVT or some comparable performance division, you've lost me as a customer.

Edited by NickF1011

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"But wouldn't it be better to just build cars that you didn't have to pay someone to be excited about?" -- John Colletti

 

-Full Story-

 

 

HOW IS IT THAT THE DIMWITS IN THE GLASS HOUSE ARE SO COMPLETELY CLUELESS? Ford seem to be in a free-fall from a total lack of common sense and ability to identify the most significant niches in the marketplace.

 

Ford was first among the Detroit 3 to adopt the SVT concept . . . and now it will be the first (and only) major manufacturer to abandon it. HOW STUPID CAN YOU GET?

 

Ford has too many "marketing" types rearranging the nameplates and not enough product experts (such as our dearly departed SVT friends) demanding excellence.

 

Hopefully, among the 30,000 being fired are the absolutely clueless hacks who:

 

1. Denied the modular DOHC from the Crown Victoria, Town Car and Grand Marquis;

2. Thought the Tempo/Topaz and the 2.3 HSC were good ideas;

3. Prevented the Aussie Falcons from coming to the U.S. market;

4. Designed the 2-seat "new" Thunderbird as a weak boulevard poser instead of a world-class Corvette beater;

5. Failed to make the DOHC 4.6 and the '03 Cobra 4.6 options for the Lincoln LS;

6. Permitted the SN-95 Mustang GT to be sold for years with only 215 horsepower (while the competition had at least 60 more);

7. Killed the SVT Focus instead of turbocharging it;

8. Killed the SVT Lightning;

9. Failed to redesign the Ranger and add V8, crew cab, and reliable turbodiesel options;

10. Allowed the 6.0 PowerStroke to market before it was ready;

11. Didn't see the potential for an SVT F-250 PowerStroke, or for SVT versions of the Explorer, Escape and Expedition, or a Shelby G.T. 350, or for a turbodiesel F-150;

12. Decided there was no need for a DOHC V8 with 4"+ bore potential, a modern 5.0/5.8, or a DOHC Modular V10;

13. Decided that cylinder deactivation, variable length intake runners, and variable cam timing were too expensive when these features are many of their competitors' vehicles;

14. Thought the Marauder would sell for over $32,000 with only 300 horsepower, fewer than a handfull of colors, insane dealer markups, and less performance than a $20,000 Camry;

15. Decided fragile hypereutectic pistons, two valves per cylinder, weak plastic manifolds, cast cranks and spindly cracked cap rods were sufficent for high performance duty (and preventing Ford from at least making the H.D. stuff optional);

16. Sent the boring Five Hundred/Montego out without a V8 or forced induction option to do battle with a score of stylish 260+ horsepower sedans (not to mention the DCX Hemis);

17. Hoarded cash during the "good times" in the 1980s and 1990s instead of developing import killers, competitive small cars and segment busters;

18. Can't see Ford's failure to build cheap, tunable, stylish and insurable subcompact performance cars prevents them from being a "playa" in the youth market;

19. Thinks a "Ford Racing" crate engine will sell in sufficient numbers with hypereutectic pistons, cast cranks and two bolt mains (failing to understand the psychology of racers and "Super Rodders");

20. Didn't fix the "second generation" Taurus when it was obvious that Accord and Camry were killing it.

21. Spec'd the MN-12 with the odd-ball 5x4.25 wheel bolt pattern instead of the "standard" 5 x 4.5;

22. Killed the Mustang SVO instead of fixing it (ISN'T THIS A FAMILIAR PATTERN NOW);

23. Changed the bellhousing bolt pattern on the Modular V8s from the "standard" 5.0/Windsor bolt pattern;

24. Keeps approving development of wholly incompatible four cylinder engines on a regular basis (Kent, EAO, Lima OHC, CVH, HSC, Zetec, Duratec) instead of picking a "universal" set of design parameters (e.g. bore spacing, bolt patterns) and continuously improving it with new technologies;

25. Couldn't figure out how to put intercooled turbos and Eaton superchargers in vehicles with real back seats and more than two doors.

 

There's plenty more dead wood that should go at Ford, but firing these clueless employees would be a good start!

 

OF COURSE, NOBODY AT FORD (EXCEPT SOME DIMWITTED LAWYER LOOKING FOR ACTIONABLE MATERIAL) ACTUALLY READS ANY OF THIS! THE FORD ELITES ARE TOO BUSY MAKING THE NEXT DUMB MOVE (e.g. Fusion fails crash test--let's respond with some empty "we're committed to safety" commercials; Killing SVT, etc.)

 

I THINK IT MAY BE TIME FOR A STOCKHOLDER RESOLUTION ON THE GROSS MISMANAGEMENT OCCURRING AT FORD . . . .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

killing svt outright is shaping up to be a huge mistake for ford. If "FP" still produces true hot ford family vehicles I can live with the name switch. Its happened before (svo) so its not the end of the world.

 

If they get out of the hi-po game though, they might as well shut the doors because they are as good as dead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the Shelby Mustang is the start of a Shelby version of most Ford's, then that's okay with me. A Shelby F150 or Shelby Sport Trac would be very cool!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If they get out of the hi-po game though, they might as well shut the doors because they are as good as dead.

 

TRUE!

 

Mark my words: This is shaping up to be a debacle on the scale of Ford's disasterous November 1970 retreat from all racing, "Muscle Parts" and high performance products. If Bill Ford and his increasingly hapless cronies make the same mistakes as Iacocca and the Deuce did back then in order to placate the never-satisfied environmentalists, regulators and the Naderistas, it really will be all over for Ford.

 

EVERY AUTO MARQUE THAT'S PASSED AWAY SINCE WWII HAS TURNED ITS BACK ON RACING AND COMPETITIVE HIGH PERFORMANCE PRODUCTS FIRST! The vast majority of Ford's absolutely loyal, hard-core enthusiast customer base (not to be confused with the shoppers who have to be resold on every purchase) are interested racing, street performance or both. (In contrast, how many folks cared about the Oldsmobile or Buick Centennials?) If Ford abandons them AGAIN, millions of "automobile experts" will quit talking up the Ford brands!

 

One wonders whether Edsel II would have produced more competitive results . . . .

 

 

Ford's mainstream product development track record give us NO COMFORT that the mainstream bureaucracy can develop or market a remotely competitive or interesting car, much less one that has the "street cred," statistics and performance necessary to dominate any high performance or "halo" segment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TRUE!

 

EVERY AUTO MARQUE THAT'S PASSED AWAY SINCE WWII HAS TURNED ITS BACK ON RACING AND COMPETITIVE HIGH PERFORMANCE PRODUCTS FIRST! The

 

 

 

 

how do you explain Toyota and Honda?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfucking believable.

 

Chrysler sits over there pumping out Hemis as fast as they can produce them and Ford kills SVT. :angry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
how do you explain Toyota and Honda?

 

 

UH . . . the last time I noticed, neither Honda nor Toyota have passed away and both are spending millions on racing and high performance projects internationally.

 

Honda is the "Small block Chevy" or rather the "Ford Flathead" of grassroots import performance (even if the "tuner" kids are lusting after expensive EVOs, twin-turbo Supras, and WRXs). This produces a synergy of market and aftermarket interest in Hondas. While Honda often loses its way with product, it just about has the affordable "tuner" market cornered, because its high quality Civics are amenable to aftermarket modification. Furthermore, Honda's relatively powerful Accords (at least in comparison to competing Ford products) enhances Honda's low-key performance image (a V6 Accord is more powerful than a legendary Buick Grand National or 5.0 Mustang!) Honda's low-key approach (excluding its high-profile F1 and IRL adventures) is somewhat similar to Chevrolet's approach during Ford's disastrous 1970-1981 US "Racing Ban."

 

(Note that Focus hasn't come close to unseating Honda because it's not a significantly better out-of-the-box platform for tuning modifications and Ford's USA mainstream managers haven't successfully tied any street car models to the model's WRC or other competition successes. Remember, to take marketshare (or sometimes to even hold it), your product has got to be perceived as being better and/or a better value to overtake the inertia and brand equity of the market leader)

 

Toyota is probably going to take over NASCAR & IRL in the next 10 years (maybe even F1, too), has invested billions in making Scions a valid threat in the cheap "tuner" and youth markets, and builds a full line of luxury-performance cars (Lexus) which spank Ford's luxury marques in the showroom . . . and often in objective performance measures, too. TRD is aggressively courting the performance market for each of TMs brands.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see lots of cost problems with them using the Shelby name on all things Hi-po. First its gonna cost more just by having the Shelby name stamped on it. Second is gonna be dealer markup. You know they're gonna stick on a nice hefty increase for themselves. I'm sure they haven't learned their lessons from the last Thunderbird.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

heh I was just posting about this elsewhere.

 

I don't think Ford needs SVT regardless. The SVTF and SVT Contour were just rebadges of the standard ST170 Focus and ST200 Mondeo in the UK/Euro market. Search for the reviews and 'development histories' on google and tell me where SVT falls in... Pull up a 2002 ST170 if you're an SVTF owner and tell me other then the plastic bumpers and badging whats different(other then the Euro version got HIDS and other goodies first). Hell the best of them all, the RS never even got here. If SVT has stopped 'making' them, whos designing and building them now in their current(and vastly improved) versions in the UK? Funny thing is too, in the old Mondeo/Contour, the UK version gave up on its AWD version early in line after only a couple years(before the ST) because they didn't think it would sell because it was an 'SUV thing'. So even the Euro teams make dumb decisions too.

 

The Mustang team can surely develop all the future SE's on thier own as well. You don't need SVT to take the old Navi 32V 5.4 and retune it and make a Mach 1. I really think each model line team can take over whatever peformance versions they want to build. Do we need 'SVT' to dump the Mazdaspeed driveline in the Fusion?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I agree with you Kevin, I just don't see Ford doing any of that on their own. Ford is the company that brought the 500/Montego to market with just 200hp and no improvement until at least '08.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
UH . . . the last time I noticed, neither Honda nor Toyota have passed away and both are spending millions on racing and high performance projects internationally.

 

 

 

 

thats great.

 

now how does this translate into HIPO, SVT like vehicles at the showroom? Where is the 400hp rwd coupe from either?

 

 

I really dont give a flying fuck how much racing they do.... the strongest automakers in the world do NOT have SVT type cars in their lineups.

 

 

The fact that Ford kills SVT doesnt mean that they will now go under because of it.

 

And Chrysler with the Hemi? That isnt a HiPo division. Those are regular production cars with big engines.

 

So Chrylser likes big engines in big cars. Hey, guess what drove Chrylser to bankruptcy 30 years ago? Anyone? Bueller? Big cars with big engines when everyone else wen small BECAUSE... anyone? Bueller? fuel crisis and excessive gas costs. ANyone want to take bets on history repeating itself?

Edited by J-150

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the strongest automakers in the world do NOT have SVT type cars in their lineups.

The fact that Ford kills SVT doesnt mean that they will now go under because of it.

 

And Chrysler with the Hemi? That isnt a HiPo division. Those are regular production cars with big engines.

 

So Chrylser likes big engines in big cars. Hey, guess what drove Chrylser to bankruptcy 30 years ago? Anyone? Bueller? Big cars with big engines when everyone else wen small BECAUSE... anyone? Bueller? fuel crisis and excessive gas costs. ANyone want to take bets on history repeating itself?

 

 

I guess it depends on how one defines "strongest automakers in the world." The last MY2006 auto show I attended featured scores of M-series BMWs, AMG Mercedes-Benzes, V-Series Cadillacs, SRT-series Dodges, Chryslers and Jeeps, Mazdaspeed Mazdas, STI Subarus, Staturn Redlines, Z06 Corvettes & SS Chevrolets, TRD Toyotas . . . . Now while the developement of each of these performance models was most certainly out of different OEM structures than SVT (e.g. GM Performance Division handling the development of most of GM's hot machinery), most of the successful programs use dedicated staffs of engineers and marketers to cut through the corporate red tape and bring exciting high performance variants to market.

 

The problem is that once development and marketing is sent back to the bean-counting hacks who believe a tepid 203-h.p. Five Hundred is a worthwhile competitor to 240 h.p. Hondas, 260 h.p. Nissans, 303 h.p. Chevrolets and 340-425 h.p. Dodges, it's more likely than not "game over." Other than "Team Mustang," mainstream has shown only a hamfisted ability to get a handle on performance models (anyone remember the grossly underpowered Marauder debacle? Or how about the fat, slow MN-12 Thunderbird SuperCoupe? (all they had to do was just COPY the Buick Grand National and package it in an aero Ford body, but they couldn't do it!) Or the "new" geriatric boulevard poser 2-seat Thunderbird? (was it really any better than Iacocca's Maserati TC, Buick's Reatta, Cadillac's Allante? Zzzzzzz . . . . ) Or the languishing Lincoln LS (bringing a 3.9L 280-horse knife to a 400+ horsepower gunfight)) And even the venerable "Team Mustang" forces us to soldier along with glass-jawed hypereutectic pistions, cast cranks and spindly "cracked cap rods" in the 3V GT--hardly the quality of hardware that established the 5.0 legend and market leadership in the 1980s.

 

Let's say that "Team Mustang" and the Brits (and maybe someday the Aussies and Mazdaspeed) do sufficient "tuning" to make up for SVT. Who's going to bring those products to market (and not let them die like L-M did with the Marauder and the LS)? Who's going develop other "breakout" products, such as the next Lightning or Adrenalin? I submit, it won't be the bean-counter obsessed cost cutters in Mainstream!

 

Sure, Ford can become the 21st century Studebaker or American Motors by chasing only boring, lo-po niches. But the rabidly loyal Ford fans who are pumping up the brand word-of-mouth are overwhelmingly performance enthusiasts. If Ford neglects them, a vast, unpaid sales force will gradually dissipate to other brands.

 

Ford's commitment has been dwindling for several years now . . . . Formula One--Gone. Cosworth--sold. NASCAR--cut to the minimum (Ford had 2/3s of the starting field in 1992. Now less than 1/3). SVT--no product for two years, then killed. Performance sedans--Only Jaguar left in the U.S. Anybody see a pattern here?

 

"Win on Sunday, Sell on Monday" only works when you have something exciting to sell. It works a lot better when the products raced have some reasonable tie-in to the products sold.

 

As to the Old Chrysler Corporations 1970s brush with the brink--it wasn't just a lack of economy cars that killed them (although they wasted time developing the Omni/Horizon). Among the reasons was Chrysler's use of sales banks to absorb unordered units and their inability to track market demand.

 

Certainly the modern DCX has the engineering expertise and resources to identify, develop and build anything the market demands -- from Smart microcars, to Unimogs, turbodiesel sedans and Class 8 Freightliners. And even Chrysler's current "big cars" are available with a 2.7L V6 for the penny-pinching geldings in their customer base. Therefore, I doubt history will repeat itself as a result of Hemi-mania.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If the Shelby Mustang is the start of a Shelby version of most Ford's, then that's okay with me. A Shelby F150 or Shelby Sport Trac would be very cool!

sorry but the Shelby name is ugly. It doesnt work from a marketing standpoint and comes off as gaudy when applied to any vehicle other than the mustang. Even then .....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It really doesn't surprise me, Ford seems to want to become the 4th largest automobile manufacturer in NA in a three company field. FORD has many issues and in the words of one other author "they wouldn't dare come to us faithful for any advice." I wrote to a VP of Marketing about the First on Race Day Sell on MONDAY and Iam sure he got a great chuckle. Does anyone know what the first two comercials were yesterday after Jimmy Johnsons win in Las Vegas, oh ya 'Chevrolet continues its winning ways winning the manufacturers title 25 of the last 34 years" "Putting you first uts us first". Hmm what do we hear when the Rousch boys finish 4 of the top 5 places including first, ya right a Chrysler commercial. Get with the program boys I have not bought a ford other than my 04 Mustang toy since 1985 does anyone care nope. Ford doesn't even offer a two door model and by the way I will be getting my sixth two door GM next month when the lease runs out on my 02. Prior to the elimination of two doors models I remained faihtful to only Fords all six of them.

My guess if they don't care in Marketing where do they care, oh ya the shareholders, by the way what direction are the shares going anyway, anyone care to guess !! :angry:

This company is really headed for the dumps. :idea: oh ya a better idea from Ford alright, dump our best products we might have some success. What ever happened to the initiative that made the old Ford such a great company, wouldn't Henry be proud of Bill today.

Edited by 04GT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My guess if they don't care in Marketing where do they care, oh ya the shareholders, by the way what direction are the shares going anyway, anyone care to guess !! :angry:

This company is really headed for the dumps. :idea: oh ya a better idea from Ford alright, dump our best products we might have some success. What ever happened to the initiative that made the old Ford such a great company, wouldn't Henry be proud of Bill today.

 

 

FoMoCo has periodically turned hyperconservative with product and marketing.

 

For example, in the '20s, it stuck with the obsolete Model T too long while Henry Ford went off on a shameful anti-Semitic jihad.

 

In the late '30s, Ford stuck with antique beam front axles, transverse leaf springs and weak mechanical brakes, as Henry was preoccupied with stopping the UAW and toughening up his aesthete son Edsel Ford, instead of advancing the art of the affordable automobile.

 

After betting the nearly bankrupt company on the '49 Ford, the Deuce became obsessed with copying GM, ending in the Edsel debacle, the AMA Racing Ban, and the premature deaths of the two-seat Thunderbird and the Continental Division (arguably Ford's last attempt at a truly premium luxury car until it acquired Jaguar and Aston-Martin).

 

In 1970, after a legendary eight-year run of "Total Performance," the Deuce and Iacocca abruptly killed all racing and high performance programs, instantly turning a whole generation of hot rodders, racers and racing fans to GM.

 

In the doldrums of the 1970s, conservative old Ford believed all U.S. subcompacts had to be cramped, poor handling two-doors (Pinto/Bobcat/Mustang II) and most other models had to be anti-aerodynamic bricks festooned with gaudy opera windows, padded tops and chromed plastic stand-up grilles. This conceded any hint of design leadership to the form-determines-function Europeans (who never gave up on motorsports).

 

Even in the post-Taurus 1980s--when Ford was making more profits than any rival--Ford arguably coasted on its successes instead of going for the market share "kill" as Toyota appears to be doing now.

 

In light of this cyclical history, it's not too surprising that Ford is turning its back on SVT.

 

The problem is that Ford is too happy with taking a little slice of market share . . . with phoning it in from the golf links . . . taking the path of least resistance . . . too many squishy bureaucrats and beancounters asleep at the helm . . . not enough visionary "car guys" who fight to build segment-busting, market-leading, standard-setting milestone vehicles which advance the art and science of the automobile in objective, measurable ways.

 

It will be their failure to compete that will lead to disaster. The death of SVT is "just another brick in the wall."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FoMoCo has periodically turned hyperconservative with product and marketing.

 

For example, in the '20s, it stuck with the obsolete Model T too long while Henry Ford went off on a shameful anti-Semitic jihad.

 

In the late '30s, Ford stuck with antique beam front axles, transverse leaf springs and weak mechanical brakes, as Henry was preoccupied with stopping the UAW and toughening up his aesthete son Edsel Ford, instead of advancing the art of the affordable automobile.

 

After betting the nearly bankrupt company on the '49 Ford, the Deuce became obsessed with copying GM, ending in the Edsel debacle, the AMA Racing Ban, and the premature deaths of the two-seat Thunderbird and the Continental Division (arguably Ford's last attempt at a truly premium luxury car until it acquired Jaguar and Aston-Martin).

 

In 1970, after a legendary eight-year run of "Total Performance," the Deuce and Iacocca abruptly killed all racing and high performance programs, instantly turning a whole generation of hot rodders, racers and racing fans to GM.

 

In the doldrums of the 1970s, conservative old Ford believed all U.S. subcompacts had to be cramped, poor handling two-doors (Pinto/Bobcat/Mustang II) and most other models had to be anti-aerodynamic bricks festooned with gaudy opera windows, padded tops and chromed plastic stand-up grilles. This conceded any hint of design leadership to the form-determines-function Europeans (who never gave up on motorsports).

 

Even in the post-Taurus 1980s--when Ford was making more profits than any rival--Ford arguably coasted on its successes instead of going for the market share "kill" as Toyota appears to be doing now.

 

In light of this cyclical history, it's not too surprising that Ford is turning its back on SVT.

 

The problem is that Ford is too happy with taking a little slice of market share . . . with phoning it in from the golf links . . . taking the path of least resistance . . . too many squishy bureaucrats and beancounters asleep at the helm . . . not enough visionary "car guys" who fight to build segment-busting, market-leading, standard-setting milestone vehicles which advance the art and science of the automobile in objective, measurable ways.

 

It will be their failure to compete that will lead to disaster. The death of SVT is "just another brick in the wall."

All I can say to that is BRAVO, you hit the nail on the head, I hope those jerk-offs read this!

 

QUOTE(NLPRacing @ Mar 9 2006, 07:22 PM)

 

If the Shelby Mustang is the start of a Shelby version of most Ford's, then that's okay with me. A Shelby F150 or Shelby Sport Trac would be very cool!

 

Why do we want more overpriced vehicles with that old farts name on it. One reason the new cobra will be overpriced is because they have to pay that dinasaur to put his stupid name on it. Call it a friggin SVT Cobra and it would cost less, probably under $40,000. Instead of $55-60,000, which is how much it will go for after the dealer blood sucking....Take that stupid name off the car please.

Edited by yamahaR1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why do we want more overpriced vehicles with that old farts name on it.

 

 

 

the same reason people rush in to Chrysler dealers to buy a "Hemi" They wouldnt sell nearly as many if it was just a Magnum 5.7.

 

 

The general publi like historic names. Look at the current Mustang. Thats the same name that graced a lot of crap in the 80s. Same with the TBird. Yet those names on the proper execution is a thing of magic.

 

Dont get me wrong, Shelby is a money grubbing whore that would put his name on a loaf of bread if it would make money. But the general public just see "the name"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the same reason people rush in to Chrysler dealers to buy a "Hemi" They wouldnt sell nearly as many if it was just a Magnum 5.7.

 

The VAST majority of Hemi owners I've spoken with could care less about the name. They like the RWD (or AWD) and the GOBS of horsepower and torque they are getting. They would sell just fine without a "Hemi" under the hood.

 

The general publi like historic names. Look at the current Mustang. Thats the same name that graced a lot of crap in the 80s. Same with the TBird. Yet those names on the proper execution is a thing of magic.

The "crap" that the Mustang name graced in the 80's outsold the "thing of magic" called the Mustang today.

 

Dont get me wrong, Shelby is a money grubbing whore that would put his name on a loaf of bread if it would make money. But the general public just see "the name"

 

The general public is more interested in a value for their dollar. Sure, you have your Gucci-wearing, Prada-bag shouldering "hipsters" who need a high end name on everything they touch, but typically, that's NOT a Ford customer to begin with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sorry but the Shelby name is ugly. It doesnt work from a marketing standpoint and comes off as gaudy when applied to any vehicle other than the mustang. Even then .....

 

 

Then should they use a computer to make up some meaningless alpha-numberic jiberish? The Shelby name sounds like "Brahms" or "Bach" to those who know racing history!

 

Given the fact that nearly any 1960s Shelby is a six-figure sled in restored condition, his Cobra is the single most reproduced car designed since 1940 and that he was a central inspiration for not only nearly all of Ford's late 1960s performance cars but also for the DCX Viper and the SVT skunkworks concept, Ford owes Shelby the honor of a car named for him. It's the least they can do.

 

Too bad SVT won't be around to develop any more Shelbys.

 

But then maybe the hapless goofs who designed the CV fuel tank, the deathtrap Fusion and the flaccid Five Hundred can be retasked to build "exciting & unique" "performance" vehicles . . . .

 

I'll be you think Ferrari is a "gaudy" moniker, too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×