2021 Mustang on CD6

[akirby]

Almost everything in engineering is to compromise. CD6 is no different. You can’t mix and match modules without compromising something.

 

The best possible platform will always be a dedicated one. But the time for a dedicated platform may be in the past

Modularity, if done correctly, can minimize those compromises.

 

A lot of components can be shared regardless. E.g. I believe both Fusion and Mustang already use McPherson strut front suspensions.

[jpd80]

That's part of my concern. The CD6 program started with very different scope and intentions long ago, and these additions are relatively recent. My sources seem positive and confident, but the late-stage changes are giving me pause. The most important CD6 products are launching first, so we'll know early if things were compromised.

Perhaps becoming as much a project cost centre / engineering catch all?

This definitely has to do with moving vehicle costs around as much as physically

changing vehicles, a daughter/ subset of vehicles now protected by a new platform

definition?

[Twin Turbo]

 

Explorer, Aviator, Mustang, Lincoln stuff

 

Just so long as they get Mustang right......

 

Whilst I say that in jest, Mustang is obviously the enthusiasts car out of that lot and owners a vocal in the extreme. Ford messes with Mustang at their peril. I appreciate in terms of sales, Mustang is less important, but its still an important vehicle in terms of the halo-effect.

 

Out of interest, when would you say development of the Mustang/CD6 started? And I'm still hoping it arrives for the '21MY.....

[sullynd]

I know people hate me for it, but a Mustang sedan would be awesome. Purists hate(d) the four door Wrangler but Id argue it saved the Wrangler in its entirety.

[Sevensecondsuv]

Personally I don't get the obsession with 4 doors on a car. On any sedan smaller than a Grand Marquis (which is literally pretty much every sedan nowadays), the back seat is so cramped that it's useless for anything beyond kids who don't realize they're crammed in. In that case, why the need for 4 doors? Kids aren't going to complain about climbing into thru a two door. The back seat is cramped with or without the extra doors....

 

I get it for SUVs and full size trucks where the back seat is actually roomy enough to deserve it own doors. I just don't see the point for the focus/fusion sized cars.

Edited February 24, 2018 by Sevensecondsuv

[akirby]

Fusion backseat is not cramped at all. And you’ve obviously never used a car seat in a focus sized vehicle.

[ice-capades]

Personally I don't get the obsession with 4 doors on a car. On any sedan smaller than a Grand Marquis (which is literally pretty much every sedan nowadays), the back seat is so cramped that it's useless for anything beyond kids who don't realize they're crammed in. In that case, why the need for 4 doors? Kids aren't going to complain about climbing into thru a two door. The back seat is cramped with or without the extra doors....

 

I get it for SUVs and full size trucks where the back seat is actually roomy enough to deserve it own doors. I just don't see the point for the focus/fusion sized cars.

 

I can agree with you regarding people's obsession with 4-door cars but understand that much of it depends on the driver's life style and needs. I'm single, don't have any kids and have little use for access to a rear seat. Even before I had company cars (Demo's) my vehicles were personal... 1967 Ford Fairlane Convertible, 1971 Ford Torino 2-Door, 1974 Mercury Cougar XR-7, 1976 Mercury Cougar XR-7, 1980 Pontiac Firebird (Oh no! Big mistake!), 1974 Ford Thunderbird, 1983 Dodge Charger 2+2 (Fun basic, stick).

 

When I left the entertainment business and went to work for the dealership I started out driving a 1986 Escort, then a 1986 Escort GT, 1986 Mustang, etc. until I became Merchandising Manager 6 months later and started driving a 1986 Thunderbird. FYI... Our dealership was know throughout the Northeast as "Birdland" and was one of the top selling Thunderbird dealerships thanks in part to Don Imus doing live commercials for the dealership every day for 48 weeks per year. When the traditional Thunderbird was discontinued after the 1997MY, I drove several Taurus sedans and then switched to Probe GT's until finally switching to Mustangs with a 2004 Mustang GT. I have the benefit of driving any vehicle I want thanks to my seniority (32 years now!) and managing the new vehicle order bank. And even though many or most of our Mustang customers park/garage their cars during the winter, I drive the Mustang ever day unless we're going to get a foot of snow. I'm only .9 miles from the office but open the dealership early each morning and have a difficult hill to navigate.

 

Customers today love the practical aspects of SUV's with the higher, driver command seating and the 4WD/AWD capability along with the utility benefits that have basically become the replacement for what was once what we called a station wagon. And along the way, the SUV's (CUV's included) have attracted customers that once bought minivans. The Market has changed but even so, there will continue to be a Market for 2-door vehicles like the Mustang. Yes, the Mustang is both a niche vehicle as well as a halo vehicle. Fortunately, Ford has been very smart in taking the Mustang global and continues to develop/enhance the Mustang to meet both domestic and foreign market demands, etc.

[Sevensecondsuv]

Fusion backseat is not cramped at all. And youve obviously never used a car seat in a focus sized vehicle.

Not in a focus, but I drive around with two kids in a regular cab Ranger all the time. Carseat in the passenger seat and the five year old in the middle. State law doesn't require a booster seat for the five year if there's no shoulder belt. Lap bet only ftw! Also done 2 kids in carseats and two adults in an extended cab Ranger and a two door Explorer. It's no worse than a 4 door midsize sedan; doors on a two door are much larger to allow access to the back seat.

 

And Fusion back seat is very cramped. I just looked at one the other day (trying to figure out what to replace my wife's LS with). Trying to cram kids into the cramped back seat of a focus or fusion ain't my cup of tea.

 

By the time you have three kids and actually need 4 doors, you either need something the size of a Grand Marquis or a full size SUV. Nothing else is really wide enough for three car seats across.

Edited February 25, 2018 by Sevensecondsuv

[02MustangGT]

Umm Fusion backseat feels less cramped than the LS backseat. I have owned both and feel the Fusion offers more leg/knee room. Check the dimensions.

[fuzzymoomoo]

Not in a focus, but I drive around with two kids in a regular cab Ranger all the time. Car seat in the passenger seat and the five year old in the middle. State law doesn't require a booster seat for the five year if there's no shoulder belt. Lap bet only ftw!

 

And Fusion back seat is very cramped. I just looked at one the other day (trying to figure out what to replace my wife's LS with). Trying to cram kids into the cramped back seat of a focus or fusion ain't my cup of tea.

 

By the time you have three kids and need a back seat you either need something the size of a Grand Marquis or a full size SUV. Nothing else is really wide enough for three car seats across.

The back seat of the Fusion is almost double the size of the Focus. Thats why were trading the Focus for a Fusion soon. Im tired of having a car seat on my ear.

[jpd80]

Compared to Fusion, the Falcon was just few inches wider giving it the interior room of a Grand Marquis / Crown Vic.

It and Commodore (SS) achieve a roominess that seems to escape claustrophobic US interior cockpit styling,

the sheer joy of not having trims hug around you as closely.

 

 

Edited February 25, 2018 by jpd80

[Sevensecondsuv]

Umm Fusion backseat feels less cramped than the LS backseat. I have owned both and feel the Fusion offers more leg/knee room. Check the dimensions.

I never said the LS wasn't cramped. It is very cramped. I hate the back seat in that car. We bought it back before kids so we didn't care about the back seat. I was trying to talk her into a mustang at the time but she wouldn't have any of it. She wanted a 4 door Focus. Fortunately I was able to talk her out of that disaster on wheels and the LS was the compromise.

Edited February 25, 2018 by Sevensecondsuv

[2b2]

I know people hate me for it, but a Mustang sedan would be awesome. Purists hate(d) the four door Wrangler but Id argue it saved the Wrangler in its entirety.

just like with the electrocuted Stang, imho they just need to acclimate/test consumers with Lincoln versions FIRST

 

edit/in addition to other reasons, at least if they sell-low-slow, they'll be bringing in an extra $10k per

Edited February 24, 2018 by 2b2

[sullynd]

Lincoln doesnt have the brand cachet Mustang does. Which do you think would sell better, a Camaro sedan or an ATS?

[jpd80]

Lincoln doesnt have the brand cachet Mustang does. Which do you think would sell better, a Camaro sedan or an ATS?

Camaro of course but if a LincStang was a closer incremental product to Mustang than say ATS is to Camaro

then that would be a good thing for increased revenue at a shared production resource, yes?

 

It also depends whether the car is a coupe like Mustang or a RWD graft applied to say the MKZ.

GM spent a fortune on RWD sedans right before the market receded and then delivered vehicles

that were seen as the incorrect sizes, so it's hardly a fitting template for comparison

Edited February 24, 2018 by jpd80

[blazerdude20]

Its an internal document that discusses oil specifications and testing parameters.

 

A BEV does not have an engine - it has an electric motor. It does not use oil.

Oil in the traditional sense of cars, no. But electric motors still have couplings for drive shafts and bearings that need to be lubricated periodically.

 

Large mechanical systems in buildings can have auto lubrication systems to cut down on maintenance time and cost. A small reserve tank could appear for BEVs if theyre to last long term.

 

Doubtful but you never know.

Edited February 25, 2018 by blazerdude20

[2b2]

Lincoln doesnt have the brand cachet Mustang does. Which do you think would sell better, a Camaro sedan or an ATS?

 

 

Camaro of course but if a LincStang was a closer incremental product to Mustang than say ATS is to Camaro

then that would be a good thing for increased revenue at a shared production resource, yes?

 

It also depends whether the car is a coupe like Mustang or a RWD graft applied to say the MKZ.

GM spent a fortune on RWD sedans right before the market receded and then delivered vehicles

that were seen as the incorrect sizes, so it's hardly a fitting template for comparison

also (naturally) GM went the opposite direction

making a Camaro out of an ATS ... afaik to try making a losing proposition profitable / afaik²: hasn't worked

[jpd80]

also (naturally) GM went the opposite direction

making a Camaro out of an ATS ... afaik to try making a losing proposition profitable / afaik²: hasn't worked

With the advantage of hindsight it now looks like a pants on backward situation but for all the expense,

I'm betting that the returns are enough to stop Alpha being loss, probably smaller profits than expected...

 

Equally, I expect that if Ford looks at RWD vehicles, it will start form a position of certainty / safety and

extend from there...now, how far it is prepared to reach remains to be seen.. Clearly, we are now beyond

the days where products viability is evaluated in isolation, now being grouped for engineering synergy and

manufacturing scales of economy. could we see the impossible made possible by being very clever?

A phrase i would not normally associate with Ford.....

Edited February 25, 2018 by jpd80

[SoonerLS]

Oil in the traditional sense of cars, no. But electric motors still have couplings for drive shafts and bearings that need to be lubricated periodically.

Yeah, but in cars, those are generally lubricated with grease, not engine oil, which wouldn't be in an engine oil specification table. The transmission would probably need some sort of liquid lubricant, but, again, wouldn't be in that table.

[akirby]

Oil in the traditional sense of cars, no. But electric motors still have couplings for drive shafts and bearings that need to be lubricated periodically.

Large mechanical systems in buildings can have auto lubrication systems to cut down on maintenance time and cost. A small reserve tank could appear for BEVs if theyre to last long term.

Doubtful but you never know.

As SoonerLS points out - that chart was specifically for engine oil testing.

[meyeste]

Found it and saved a copy. No 5.0 (or any supercharged V8 other than the GT500 5.2L).

 

Are you sure there isn't another page? also missing from this is the confirmed 7.0L. What happened to the 4.8L V8? If the current Mustang's 5.0, the GT350's 5.2L prove anything it's that NA engines have an allure with people willing to shell out money that other engines have yet to match in a sports car. With turbo's replacing NA cars almost everywhere, there are going to be those that simply want an NA performance engine. Fact is GM is about to set their OHV V8's out to pasture and are replacing them with non-other than a DOHC NA V8. Their up coming 5.5L DOHC which will either debut in the Zora or the Z28 no doubt will eclipse the power of the 5.0L, however this is just my guess. Looking at history GM approach is foolish and while Ford took time to start with modest DOHC engines to learn how to make them powerful and reliable, GM is looking to skip that critical step. As such, I doubt the result will be much different than their first foray into DOHC V8's in the 90's.

 

Once the 6.2L is put out to pasture; and the realization GM is so far behind Ford on the DOHC V8, Ford's DOHC V8's are going to resonate. Think about it being GM they will stick with the OHV 8 in their trucks and SUV's. However truck buyers aren't dumb and like to have the latest stuff in their vehicles too, knowing it's only a matter of time before GM drops the OHV V8 in their SUV's and trucks - despite what GM will be telling them, will have an impact as likely the OHV will be replaced with a combination of turbo six's and DOHC V8's. Trucks and SUV's are beasts of burden, that are necessary - i.e. must be dependable. Objective buyers aren't going to ignore Ford has a ten and twenty year head start on turbo six's and DOHC V8's, I wouldn't and I'd buy a GM if I thought it was truly a better product. I gave the Camaro a far evaluation for me, they are too small and GM compromised the 2+2 seating for the performance. Heck I take my car with my kids and all the necessary stuff to the beach, to the movies it can handle it the Camaro could not. I didn't buy the Mustang because it's a Mustang, the S550 is the first Mustang I have owned since my '68. IMO if someone resold the current Mustang as something else entirely it'd be a strong seller, simply because it's a true sporty 2+2 that can still serve as transportation for three for four.

Edited February 25, 2018 by meyeste

[spudz64]

Are you sure there isn't another page, also missing from this is the confirmed 7.0L. If the current Mustang's 5.0, the GT350's 5.2L prove anything it's that NA engines have an allure with people willing to shell out money that other engines have yet to match. It's not just the V8 or the 5.0, I'm a techie and while I'll acknowledge the power of the LT1, to me that is a low tech engine that simply isn't interesting, keep in mind most go-kart racers could leave me in the dust at any track. On the other hand those go-kart racers aren't making well in to six digits, while with a truck I may well choose a 3.5L EB over the 5.0 (still a hard decision) not in the Mustang. The Mustang sits in my garage next to a Honda Odyssey with an F150 parked outside. The Mustang is for me, not really a daily driver though it could be my family will no longer need the Odyssey soon and likely I'll replace both the F150 and the Odyssey with another F150 or perhaps that new Bronco... I do think it's time Ford develop and market a turbo V8, perhaps that would replace the NA 5.0, however if Ford discontinues the 5.0. I'll buy one of the last and park it in a garage somewhere.. because the last of the 5.0 Mustangs will be worth a lot of cash someday.

The third row from bottom shows the new 7x aka the new 7.3 V8.

[Fgts]

Fact is GM is about to set their OHV V8's out to pasture and are replacing them with non-other than a DOHC NA V8. Their up coming 5.5L DOHC which will either debut in the Zora or the Z28 no doubt will eclipse the power of the 5.0L, however this is just my guess.

GM is not abandoning ohv anytime soon if anything the 5.3/6.2 will get an increase in power also a new rumored 7.x big-block to appear, FCA is doing the same with the Hemi.

 

Once the 6.2L is put out to pasture; and the realization GM is so far behind Ford on the DOHC V8, Ford's DOHC V8's are going to resonate. Think about it being GM they will stick with the OHV 8 in their trucks and SUV's.However truck buyers aren't dumb and like to have the latest stuff in their vehicles too, knowing it's only a matter of time before GM drops the OHV V8 in their SUV's and trucks

You really think GM will discontinue an engine in the SUVs/trucks without an replacement?, most of the ohc competition took years to catch GM ohv V8s for reliability, fuel economy, power, and others just to see GM again leave them again with another ohv motor, The Ford 5.0 V8 is still based on a 1990 design, so much for "latest stuff". Not an accident GM sells over a million trucks/SUVs.

I gave the Camaro a far evaluation for me, they are too small and GM compromised the 2+2 seating for the performance. Heck I take my car with my kids and all the necessary stuff to the beach, to the movies it can handle it the Camaro could not. I didn't buy the Mustang because it's a Mustang, the S550 is the first Mustang I have owned since my '68. IMO if someone resold the current Mustang as something else entirely it'd be a strong seller, simply because it's a true sporty 2+2 that can still serve as transportation for three for four.

Get a Challenger...?

[silvrsvt]

You really think GM will discontinue an engine in the SUVs/trucks without an replacement?, most of the ohc competition took years to catch GM ohv V8s for reliability, fuel economy, power, and others just to see GM again leave them again with another ohv motor, The Ford 5.0 V8 is still based on a 1990 design, so much for "latest stuff". Not an accident GM sells over a million trucks/SUVs.

 

 

 

But yet if it was that important to have a V8-they should be handley outselling Ford with their two Turbo V6s they offer in the F-150 and the "boat ankors" V8 they have in the Super Duty-but they aren't

[Sevensecondsuv]

I have to question Ford's decision to make the 6.2L an overhead cam design. I'll agree that having the cams up top opens up some significant possibilities but Ford didn't take advantage of them. As it is, they did only what was necessary to barely eclipse the much older GM 6.0L pushrod motor. So I have to ask myself, what is the point in paying for all the extra overhead cam parts on each engine? Especially since it's only used in superduty where it plays second fiddle to the powerstroke. Most gasser buyers are probably more interested in the ease of maintenance that comes with the more compact pushrod engine than they are in the technical advantages of ohc (which Ford isn't even taking advantage with the 6.2).

 

Now if Ford was using the 6.2 in a special edition of the mustang or even supporting it via Ford Racing Performance Parts, I would completely understand the case for OHV. But other than a short stint in F150 (where it was only a placeholder for the ecoboost), it's been relegated work truck duty.