How do you solve a problem like the Mustang?

[PREMiERdrum]

 

The Ford Mustang is an American icon. Ever since it hit the streets in 1964, we've had a love affair with the sporty little notchback that has come to embody the spirit of fun, care free youth.

 

At no point in the car's nearly 50 year history have they stopped innovating. Mustang has always seemed to be exactly what it needed to be for the time. It maintained a balance of every-day livability and performance that others couldn't match.

 

I'll say this up front: The 2011 Mustang, in either V6 or GT guise, is the finest example ever to wear the running horse badge. The V6 puts out performance numbers that could make a GT from just a few years ago blush, and the 5.0-equipped GT has been spanking BMW's around the track.

 

Despite the car's general awesomeness, it is selling at its lowest rate in years. In February, just under 3,700 units were purchased, down 27% from the same month last year. Many are quick to blame the sales slide on some new competitors: Namely, the revived Chevrolet Camaro and Dodge Challenger. I'm about to tell you that they're right. Kind of.

 

Continued at LINK

[Deanh]

 

 

 

Continued at LINK

I think the blame lies firmly at the feet of the economy...lets face it FUN cars like the Mustang, Camaro and Challenger...not to mention Corvetes i suppose, arent going to fly off the shelves. Such cars arent exactly "functional" as such they are more about self indulgence...when the economy turns expect a sales rise....

[Stentgraft95]

I think the blame lies firmly at the feet of the economy...lets face it FUN cars like the Mustang, Camaro and Challenger...not to mention Corvetes i suppose, arent going to fly off the shelves. Such cars arent exactly "functional" as such they are more about self indulgence...when the economy turns expect a sales rise....

 

 

Correct, plus:

The infatuation with the prevous body style soaked up a lot of the retro muscle car buyers, then comes the "johnny-come lately's" of the Challenger and Camaro" and the fact that it's different and new is grabbing a lot of others right now. The muscle cars are not practical during winter months and are in fact about self indulgence. It will pick back up once the economy turns. Given that I have a 4-wheel drive F-250 for the winter, I'd consider the stang as my next daily driver as I'm old fashioned and prefer RWD. My 03 Lincoln LS shows no signs of letting up which is preventing me from a new aquisition right now though.

[PREMiERdrum]

Given that I have a 4-wheel drive F-250 for the winter, I'd consider the stang as my next daily driver as I'm old fashioned and prefer RWD. My 03 Lincoln LS shows no signs of letting up which is preventing me from a new aquisition right now though.

 

At this point, I'd try to wait until the 2014 model debuts (just 2 short years away). I hear it will be worth it. :shades:

[F250]

Mustang sales peaked at over 600,000 in 1966 but just 2 years later after Camaro an Firebird hit the market sales were down to 317,000 in 1968. By 1972 it was down to 125k.

 

If you want to get a perspective on what this economy has done to "indulgent" purchases go ask a boat dealer.

Edited March 12, 2011 by F250

[timmm55]

Mustang sales peaked at over 600,000 in 1966 but just 2 years later after Camaro an Firebird hit the market sales were down to 317,000 in 1968. By 1972 it was down to 125k.

 

If you want to get a perspective on what this economy has done to "indulgent" purchases go ask a boat dealer.

 

A friend of mine does work on boats, upholstery mostly. Along with other vendors nearby who do repairs and hull cleaning, he said he's never seen it this bad, He's been doing this for 20+ years.

[Sevensecondsuv]

My guess is that part of the Mustang's current sales problem is its price - $29K to get a V8 with no options. The V6 isn't bad at $22K with no options, but it isn't the bargain that the small-engine Mustang has been for the last 25 years. I looked at them, along with the Focus, before I bought my Ranger. The Ranger was the same price as a Focus, only it had more options and a heck of lot more utility, without giving up much gas mileage. The V6 mustang was 5 grand more after applying incentives, and had even less utility than the Focus. I could buy 2 of my Ranger for the price of a nicely optioned GT Mustang. A V8 muscle car is all sorts of fun, but $30-35K for something with almost no utility it pretty hard to justify these days...

[timmm55]

My guess is that part of the Mustang's current sales problem is its price - $29K to get a V8 with no options. The V6 isn't bad at $22K with no options, but it isn't the bargain that the small-engine Mustang has been for the last 25 years. I looked at them, along with the Focus, before I bought my Ranger. The Ranger was the same price as a Focus, only it had more options and a heck of lot more utility, without giving up much gas mileage. The V6 mustang was 5 grand more after applying incentives, and had even less utility than the Focus. I could buy 2 of my Ranger for the price of a nicely optioned GT Mustang. A V8 muscle car is all sorts of fun, but $30-35K for something with almost no utility it pretty hard to justify these days...

 

It looks like you've owned mostly trucks. A Mustang isn't about utility, never has been. That's not it's problem. I think it's mostly the styling (lukewarm (at best) refresh of 2010) and as mentioned you can get a nice used Mustang all day long anywhere.

[PREMiERdrum]

It looks like you've owned mostly trucks. A Mustang isn't about utility, never has been. That's not it's problem. I think it's mostly the styling (lukewarm (at best) refresh of 2010) and as mentioned you can get a nice used Mustang all day long anywhere.

 

This is the conclusion I landed on too... It's not one major thing that is affecting Mustang sales, rather there are several small issues that have formed a "perfect storm."

 

For those of you who haven't read the blog post, I recommend it and appreciate your thoughts!

[silvrsvt]

My guess is that part of the Mustang's current sales problem is its price - $29K to get a V8 with no options.

 

It comes with everything that was optional on the 2005-2009 GT models had standard now...IE the 05-09 where cheaper, but had no options on them. For the same money, it wasn't an option anymore.

[BlackHorse]

It looks like you've owned mostly trucks. A Mustang isn't about utility, never has been. That's not it's problem. I think it's mostly the styling (lukewarm (at best) refresh of 2010) and as mentioned you can get a nice used Mustang all day long anywhere.

 

That might be perception, but its not reality. The 2010 and later Mustang had significant improvements over the 05 to 09 models, especially with respect to the interior. But along with that came an increase in price. Mustang is basically a niche car now, not a big seller as it once was. The notion that it's a youth oriented car as the blog post asserts is also a perception and not reality. The average age of a new Mustang buyer is well above 30 years old and has been for a long time now. The reality is you just aren't going to sell a lot of new Mustang GT's when the base price is north of 30K and it has a 5 liter V8 that doesn't get the greatest gas mileage. That's just the reality of the market now. Mustang has never been perceived as a "fuel efficient" car even when they were putting 4 bangers under the hood. It still isn't even when they advertise the V6 at getting 31 mpg highway. Again, perception, not reality. People perceive the Mustang to be somewhat less than fuel efficient, it has a fairly high price tag now even with the V6 in it and when gas is 3.50 a gallon that's just not going to help your sales much.

[2b2]

My guess is that part of the Mustang's current sales problem is its price - $29K to get a V8 with no options. The V6 isn't bad at $22K with no options, but it isn't the bargain that the small-engine Mustang has been for the last 25 years....

since I've been ranting all over the web about this...

 

based on the premise that a 2.7ish v6 will be the promised Lincoln engine and could bend it's exclusivity rule for the Mustang (& only the Mustang)

& a non-EB v6 could be cheaper than a 4cyl EB

 

230hp = 2.7v6 ......... $19k?

305hp = 3.7v6

350hp = 2.7v6-EB

412hp = 5.0v8

 

&re: the 2.7-EB, marketing could go one of 2 ways imho

- as an intermediate ST

- throw in some aluminum/carbon fiber parts to make it even lighter & more upscale = SVT

 

 

ps

curse you, PREMiERdrum!

I haven't gotten that song out of my head all evening

Edited March 12, 2011 by 2b2

[jpd80]

Meh, two months where nothing much happening, still coming out of winter.

I don't believe Ford should be giving away Mustang, they should hold out for good prices and

resist the temptation to do anything below $22,000 - keep that spot for a two door Focus ST.

 

I suspect that the retro look has run its course and it feels like people are getting bored with it

so hopefully Ford will take us back to the future with the next Mustang in two years time.

 

We've got similar lower sales conditions with Falcon and Mustang at the moment and i think

both are driven in up markets but go into their shells when times are a bit quieter.

 

Best thing that can be done is FoA developing RWD I-4 Ecoboost and hand back to USA for Mustang,

let FNA finish developing their next Mustang, FoA then looks over the design and available parts bin

and then develops a Mustang bred Falcon with sedan floor pan and top hat to suit.

 

That synergy will save both projects a whole lot of cash and allow both to be viable at much lower levels.

Edited March 12, 2011 by jpd80

[Sevensecondsuv]

It looks like you've owned mostly trucks. A Mustang isn't about utility, never has been.

Yes - I've primarily driven trucks throughout the years. But that's not to say that I can't appreciate something like the Mustang. In fact, I've been using Mustang parts to build suped-up trucks (and even one Crown Vic) for a while now. All I'm saying is that a low-slung 2 seater (the back seats in a Mustang aren't much more usable than the jump seats in my Ranger) is fine for commuting to work and joy riding on the weekends, but pretty useless for much else. As such, it tends to be an "indulgence car", that ends up occupying the extra stall in the garage and not getting driven all that regularly. $35 grand is a lot of money for a toy, especially if one is taking a loan to buy it.

Edited March 12, 2011 by Sevensecondsuv

[Blue II]

Meh, two months where nothing much happening, still coming out of winter.

I don't believe Ford should be giving away Mustang, they should hold out for good prices and

resist the temptation to do anything below $22,000 - keep that spot for a two door Focus ST.

 

I suspect that the retro look has run its course and it feels like people are getting bored with it

so hopefully Ford will take us back to the future with the next Mustang in two years time.

 

We've got similar lower sales conditions with Falcon and Mustang at the moment and i think

both are driven in up markets but go into their shells when times are a bit quieter.

 

Best thing that can be done is FoA developing RWD I-4 Ecoboost and hand back to USA for Mustang,

let FNA finish developing their next Mustang, FoA then looks over the design and available parts bin

and then develops a Mustang bred Falcon with sedan floor pan and top hat to suit.

 

That synergy will save both projects a whole lot of cash and allow both to be viable at much lower levels.

 

FoA is working on an OZ platform and tophat. Would you like a 2.5 EB with 8 spd?

[FordBuyer]

Hmmmm, it could be that the sport coupe segment is a very stagnant or dying one just like the minivan. Time will tell. And of course during these economic times, sport coupes and sport cars will have tougher sledding. Most of the guys I know including myself that want a sports car have gone the used route. Used sports car market is a very good one. Most clean sports cars don't stay on the market very long, especially now with warmer weather ahead. Good bang for the buck in very uncertain economic times. No warranty, but not that hard to buy one if you have doubts about vehicle.

[ice-capades]

Interesting thread and opinions. I think that to a certain extent Mustang is a victim of its own success over the years but being hurt by the economy, pricing and styling. No question from my experience that the Mustang has been marketed as youthful oriented audience but the reality is that the typical Mustang buyer is much older. In our Market the typical new Mustang buyer is closer to 40+ years old. Our dealership has seen a rebound in new Mustang sales since the 2011MY changes but although the 2010MY introduced an all-new Mustang, I think that much of the Market doesn't realize or recognize how much the car has evolved and improved since the 2010MY introduction.

 

As of a few weeks ago I started driving a 2011 Mustang GT Convertible that was originally ordered by a charity that was going to raffle it off as part of their annual fundraising event. They kept pushing back the event and finally cancelled it because they couldn't sell enough tickets to even pay for the vehicle, let alone make a profit for the charity. The car is a base GT Convertible... #100A Rapid Spec, Black w/Black Cloth, Automatic... STOP... yet the MSRP is $36,885! A loaded 2012 GT Premium Coupe can run up to $40,000 and a 2012 GT Premium Convertible over $46,000!

 

I doubt very much that Ford is satisfied with Mustang's sales the past 2 years. Case in point is that Ford has been extremely conservative with its advertising budget in recent years and relying more on Dealers to advertise. In addition, Ford is actually running a lot of TV commercials promoting the Mustang which is not the norm. Plus... at some point they've got to deal with the issue of Mazda possibly pulling out of the Flat Rock plant which could mean the expense of Ford having to move Mustang production if Ford isn't willing to take over the plant. As for the next generation Mustang, I expect that Ford is much further along in development than they're admitting regardless of their recent statements about seking global input. Time will tell!

[jpd80]

FoA is working on an OZ platform and tophat. Would you like a 2.5 EB with 8 spd?

August / September is decision time.

[2b2]

^ & ^^ BlueII

I've never known you to make stuff up

but you're the only source I've seen mention a 2.5 EB

(not that I don't think it's needed badly!)

ANYthing else you can say about it??????

 

 

...As for the next generation Mustang, I expect that Ford is much further along in development than they're admitting regardless of their recent statements about seking global input. Time will tell!

me too!!

 

imho it's more about either

-- the next-next Mustang or MCE for the next

or

-- exploring how to visually relate the next Mustang with the next Falcon (& possibly other global RWD cars)

OR

-- regional distinctions

-- short-lead parts like fasicas or other things that still can be tweaked

OR

-- getting it optimized for platform sharing with a couple hot sport LINCOLNS!!!

-- could this just mostly be a team/cohesiveness exercise...

 

...or some/most/all of the above

 

 

re-ps

it's hopless - every time I come to this thread, I start humming that song...

...and I don't even like it!!

Edited March 12, 2011 by 2b2

[jpd80]

Not heard anything about 2.5 Ecoboost.

 

AFAIK, EB 2.0 is it and GEN 2 & 3 are promising much more power and torque.

[jpd80]

As for the next generation Mustang, I expect that Ford is much further along in development than they're admitting regardless of their recent statements about seking global input. Time will tell!

Final lock in is around 12-18 months before release so count back 18 months from September 2013 and you get the end of 2011 or early 2012.

[robot_trainer]

What problem is there to solve? It not like Challengers and Camaros are selling 150,000 copies a year. They are all pretty much around the same sales figures. Maybe its how the manufacturers define a sale. Ford counts a sale when the customer drives it off the dealer lot. Chebby....when its shipped from the factory. You also have to remember that the pie is being split 3 ways, plus Camaro has just release there first convertible in years so the intrigue factor is there. As far as price.......comparing apples to apples, the Mustang is the least expensive of the 3.

 

What drives us to buy what we buy? As mentioned, the average Mustang buyer is no kid. A kid can't afford any modern muscle car (that's why most kids drive a 10 year old Honda Civic with a fart can on the back). When I bought my first Mustang back in 89, I was sort of a kid, but you could buy a stripped down 5.0 LX for peanuts. Even if you could get a stripped down Mustang for peanuts now, you still have to deal with the exorbitant fuel, Insurance, and maintenance cost. Since a kid can't afford this and us old geezers can, why not make a bit more luxurious?

 

So what about the intangibles? Let's take the average joe buyer (namely me). I'm 47. I already own an old muscle car (69 Road Runner). i currently drive a Chrysler 300 V6...a semi luxury sedan. Why buy this type of car? I wanted rear wheel drive. With all the enhancements (stability control, anti lock brakes, etc) why not have a car with the drive where it should be and the steering where it should be. I also wanted something built in North America, so that narrows the field. My kids don't go out with us much any more and I plan to keep the 300, so I dont need a big boat of a car. I wanted something fun to drive that's comfortable, has some decent electronic goodies, handles well and brakes well and does something when you mash the pedal. So I have narrowed it down to 3 choices, Mustang, Camaro, or Challenger. Does the economy play into this? Maybe to some extent, but lets face it. People buy these cars for a reason and not the fuel economy (although a fun car like this that gets 26 miles a gallon on the highway is pretty good!)

 

I'm an old Mopar guy. So why not just buy a Challenger? Most people will take the brand loyalty thing too far to the point of being brainwashed so that if one were to quote Tommy Boy, "Take a dump in a box and put the right name on it, I'll buy it", and we could just call it a day. The Mustang simply outclasses the Challenger on all fronts. Sure the Challenger may have a slight styling edge, but the Mustang is a nice looking car. When I'm spending 40K on a car, there better be a reason for it so i bought a Mustang. Camaro was completely out of the question. In my opinion its just too ugly, and too heavy.

 

Now it could be all of the delays with this years launch that could cause the number to be kind of skew to the low side. There are retail orders (people that have put an order in) that are backed up since November 2010. They are just starting to get scheduled. With all of the snow storms, parts delay, etc. plus the fact that AAI only runs one shift, it's understandable that there would be a back up. I ordered mine back in January and just got the VIN and build week this week. Take away the snow storms and delays, add some summer weather, and get a few more out on the road so that others can see for them selves what a fantastic car this is and the numbers just might be considerably higher.

 

Again, I don't think there is a problem to solve. Once production gets to a steady pace, the weather gets nicer.

 

And oh yeah.....Consumers Guide top 10 (actually number 1) Pick......Mustang!

Edited March 12, 2011 by robot_trainer

[probowler]

Ewww, challenger > Mustang

[StevenCaylor]

One problem is that we expect new cars to have nearly everything standard what used to be considered fully loaded. I'll give my 2000 V6 Mustang as an example. When I ordered it in late 1999, I optioned it with every available option with the exception of leather, automatic and smoker's package. IIRC, that was optionally the Mach 460 with optional CD player, ABS, Traction Control, Sports Appearance Group and 16 inch wheels (and whatever package included cruise control and power driver's seat). The MSRP was $19100. For the 2011 Mustang, that's the base Mustang with the 201A package (Sports Appearance Group). The only thing missing would be the Shaker 500 option (n/a with the base Mustang). The MSRP came out to $23685. Now that's comparing a car with 190 hp/5-speed vs 305 hp/6-speed, dual exhaust, limited slip differential, 17 inch vs 16 inch inch wheels and tires and an EPA rating of 17/26 for my car vs 19/29 for the new Mustang. According to one of the online inflation calculators, 1999's $19100 would be 2011's $25248.

 

Compare my first Mustang, which we ordered in late 1964. A fairly loaded hardtop with the 289-2V, automatic, P/S, factory A/C, tinted glass, AM radio, rocker panel moldings, backup lights, deluxe seat belts, console, knock-off wheel covers, white sidewall tires, heavy duty battery, padded sun visors and California emissions. MSRP of $3267. Corrected for inflation, $23209.

Edited March 14, 2011 by StevenCaylor

[SVT_MAN]

One problem is that we expect new cars to have nearly everything standard what used to be considered fully loaded. I'll give my 2000 V6 Mustang as an example. When I ordered it in late 1999, I optioned it with every available option with the exception of leather, automatic and smoker's package. IIRC, that was optionally Mach 460 with optional CD player, ABS, Traction Control, Sports Appearance Group and 16 inch wheels (and whatever package included cruise control and power driver's seat). The MSRP was $19100. For the 2011 Mustang, that's the base Mustang with the 201A package (Sports Appearance Group). The only thing missing would be the Shaker 500 option (n/a with the base Mustang). The MSRP came out to $23685. Now that's comparing a car with 190 hp/5-speed vs a 305 hp/6-speed, dual exhaust, limited slip differential, 16 inch vs 17 inch inch wheels and tires and an EPA rating of 17/26 for my car vs 19/29 for the new Mustang. According to one of the online inflation calculators, 1999's $19100 would be 2011's $25248.

 

Compare my first Mustang, which we ordered in late 1964. Fully loaded with the 289-2V, automatic, P/S, factory A/C, tinted glass, A/m radio, heater, rocker panel moldings, backup lights, deluxe seat belts, console, knock-off wheel covers and white sidewall tires. MSRP of $3284. Corrected for inflation, $23074.

 

I think you bring up an interesting perspective on this. Maybe the Mustang isn't getting more expensive. Maybe people just aren't making as much money in relation to inflation ... and affording a Mustang just isn't as easy for the typical American anymore. It's a definite possibility. There are many studies out there that support the notion of the shrinking middle class - the heart and soul of the Mustang demographic (at one time, at least). I know that with most people losing pensions and defined benefits these days that overall compensation on a yearly basis, for most of us, isn't as good as it once was. Many of us are putting possibly what might have been a monthly payment towards a Mustang into funding our own retirement. (I graduated into the 2008 recession, so I never saw any of that pension stuff anyway.) People are having to pear down, and it is, at times, painful ...

Edited March 13, 2011 by SVT_MAN