danglin Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 6 hours ago, twintornados said: Would be nice if Ford did something along these design drawing concepts and called it Falcon... I had mentioned that before on here about making a 4 door sedan from the mustang platform. I do not think they should just add two more doors, change up the styling. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbone Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 sorry for multiple posts. The forum wouldn’t allow multiple quotes for me today for some reason. 3 hours ago, Chrisgb said: The pen is mightier than the Product Planning Group. CUVs, SUVs SAVs and probably UFOs are classified as "Trucks," for EPA purposes. If the EPA was to stick to its guns, all those up to D-size; Expedition, Suburban, Sequoia et al would be "Passenger Vehicles" and conform to those economy standards. We would see the return to lighter cheaper B- and C- sedans and coupes, or 70s style SUVs with 127hp. God forbid! 6 hours ago, twintornados said: Would be nice if Ford did something along these design drawing concepts and called it Falcon... Something like that would be pretty sweet. Im just not sure how I feel about calling it a Mustang. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeluxeStang Posted January 13 Author Share Posted January 13 10 hours ago, akirby said: Let’s not get carried away. Ford didn’t kill Fusion just because of competition. There is even more competition in trucks between Ford, GM, Ram and Toyota. Likewise with mid to large sized utilities. The difference is pricing and profitability. And remember they didn’t just walk away from Focus and Fusion - they replaced them with more profitable products. And Fusion was NOT bland. It was a great looking car. Still is. Styling wasn’t the problem. I do agree there is room in the market for a premium sedan of some kind at lower volume. But the question is this - is it a better investment than the other projects currently in queue? Well competition was certainly part of the equation, it forced brands to slash prices, and destroy profitability. The issue is we're seeing this now with compact and midsized utilities. Everyone and their cat copied Ford's strategy, exiting out of passenger cars to invest in crossovers. It worked for awhile, but the market is saturated with every segment of crossover now. I don't blame Ford, they made the right call, at that time, to exit out of the sedan segment. But consumer tastes, and trends are always fluid. While prioritizing utilities over car offerings was the correct decision 5 years ago, it won't always be the correct decision. I don't believe a Ford sedan should come at the expense of Ford's more profitable utilities, it's already been mentioned how flat rock is underutilized, and can only build lower vehicles. We could discuss the issues of allocating parts, and raw materials to various products, but in terms of plant capacity, there's no reason flat rock couldn't receive some investments to begin producing sedans again. Ford already has their trucks, vans, and crossovers. Making a new sedan on the mustang, or c2 architecture wouldn't blip the bronco sport or maverick out of existence. But it would give buyers something from Ford that wasn't six feet tall with a bed. There is no sufficient demand for Ford to bring back 3-4 different sedan offerings. But there should be at least one Ford sedan on sale. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeluxeStang Posted January 13 Author Share Posted January 13 10 hours ago, akirby said: Let’s not get carried away. Ford didn’t kill Fusion just because of competition. There is even more competition in trucks between Ford, GM, Ram and Toyota. Likewise with mid to large sized utilities. The difference is pricing and profitability. And remember they didn’t just walk away from Focus and Fusion - they replaced them with more profitable products. And Fusion was NOT bland. It was a great looking car. Still is. Styling wasn’t the problem. I do agree there is room in the market for a premium sedan of some kind at lower volume. But the question is this - is it a better investment than the other projects currently in queue? It would be foolish to make an attempt to reenter the affordable hatchback or sedan space with a new fusion, or focus. The profitability simply isn't there, and the owner loyalty with vehicle such as the Camry and accord is too high. A new fusion could be 10X better than a Camry in every regard, and it still wouldn't sway those buyers. There isn't much in the way of opportunity there. Where there is opportunity imo, is appealing to the charger crowd with a sporty ICE sedan from Ford right as the charger is going all electric. We know the charger sold reasonably well, we know they can command a higher price and sell as passion products, and we know a significant portion of that audience doesn't want to go all electric, at least not yet. A V8 mustang sedan starting in the 40s or 50s would be a huge hit with that crowd. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 32 minutes ago, DeluxeStang said: I don't believe a Ford sedan should come at the expense of Ford's more profitable utilities, it's already been mentioned how flat rock is underutilized, and can only build lower vehicles. We could discuss the issues of allocating parts, and raw materials to various products, but in terms of plant capacity, there's no reason flat rock couldn't receive some investments to begin producing sedans again. You’re forgetting all the engineering, testing, certification, design and marketing required to support a production vehicle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GearheadGrrrl Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 Hey, it ain't like they're developing an EV that shares next to nothing with any existing product and will only sell 50K a year... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeluxeStang Posted January 14 Author Share Posted January 14 3 hours ago, akirby said: You’re forgetting all the engineering, testing, certification, design and marketing required to support a production vehicle. If it repurposed mustang parts from the front doors forward, it wouldn't require a ton of development work. They'd have to lengthen the structure, not super easy to do with a unibody design, but not insanely difficult either. As for marketing, just throw it into ads being shot for the normal mustang and mach-e for little additional cost. Ford already groups the mach-e and coupe into most of their promotional material as is. Just make it a threesome. Nothing stopping them from doing a video shoot for three products instead of two. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 34 minutes ago, DeluxeStang said: If it repurposed mustang parts from the front doors forward, it wouldn't require a ton of development work. They'd have to lengthen the structure, not super easy to do with a unibody design, but not insanely difficult either. As for marketing, just throw it into ads being shot for the normal mustang and mach-e for little additional cost. Ford already groups the mach-e and coupe into most of their promotional material as is. Just make it a threesome. Nothing stopping them from doing a video shoot for three products instead of two. It’s far more complicated than you think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeluxeStang Posted January 14 Author Share Posted January 14 1 hour ago, akirby said: It’s far more complicated than you think. I'm not saying it would be easy. Beyond the engineering and design work, you'd obviously have to make changes to Flat Rock to make it capable of producing a second body style, you'd have to run the product through testing, and ensure it met emissions and safety requirements. Let's be generous, the s650 program had a budget of around 300 million. Ford would be able to repurpose a lot of components to keep costs down, the powertrain for instance could essentially carry over from the normal gt with minimal tweaks, it's already a fantastic motor, no need to change it too much for some sporty sedan. But, there are additional costs, like those adjustments to flat rock. So let's assume taking the s650, stretching it, making some tweaks to the plant, let's assume that could be done for the same 300 million. If the average transaction price was around 50 grand, you'd only need to move 6,000 units to recoup that initial investment. Again, this is all hypothetical, but it just goes to show it's not impossible to make a business case out of this. Anyways, we're getting off topic a little here, let's keep discussing this charger EV. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 8 hours ago, DeluxeStang said: I'm not saying it would be easy. Beyond the engineering and design work, you'd obviously have to make changes to Flat Rock to make it capable of producing a second body style, you'd have to run the product through testing, and ensure it met emissions and safety requirements. Let's be generous, the s650 program had a budget of around 300 million. Ford would be able to repurpose a lot of components to keep costs down, the powertrain for instance could essentially carry over from the normal gt with minimal tweaks, it's already a fantastic motor, no need to change it too much for some sporty sedan. But, there are additional costs, like those adjustments to flat rock. So let's assume taking the s650, stretching it, making some tweaks to the plant, let's assume that could be done for the same 300 million. If the average transaction price was around 50 grand, you'd only need to move 6,000 units to recoup that initial investment. Again, this is all hypothetical, but it just goes to show it's not impossible to make a business case out of this. Anyways, we're getting off topic a little here, let's keep discussing this charger EV. It’s not about hard or easy. You still have to dedicate people resources that are busy on other projects. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AGR Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 13 hours ago, akirby said: It’s far more complicated than you think. If they were going to do a sedan, it would far easier (and thus more likely) to have the new Mondeo manufactured at Flat Rock. A Mustang sedan is close to Fantasyland at this point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeluxeStang Posted January 14 Author Share Posted January 14 3 hours ago, akirby said: It’s not about hard or easy. You still have to dedicate people resources that are busy on other projects. I'm not denying that, but Ford engineers and designers bounce around from project to project all the time. The s650 is already out, it's already developed, the hard part is done. Sure, they have to come out with some trim packages, a new bullitt here, a gt 500 there. But that could be done by part of the mustang development team while another portion of the team explorers the idea of making a sedan. A small team putting together a feasibility study and crude proposals which wouldn't require much in the way of time or other resources. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 58 minutes ago, AGR said: If they were going to do a sedan, it would far easier (and thus more likely) to have the new Mondeo manufactured at Flat Rock. A Mustang sedan is close to Fantasyland at this point. Mondeo is a non starter. You need high ATPs and as many shared parts with Mustang to keep costs down to have a prayer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twintornados Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 5 hours ago, AGR said: If they were going to do a sedan, it would far easier (and thus more likely) to have the new Mondeo manufactured at Flat Rock. A Mustang sedan is close to Fantasyland at this point. Not necessarily a Mustang sedan, more a Falcon or Thunderbird with unique front and aft fascia to differentiate it from being "just a Mustang sedan" 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbone Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 It would also need to be all wheel drive capable for the cold weather states to be interested. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeluxeStang Posted January 15 Author Share Posted January 15 5 hours ago, twintornados said: Not necessarily a Mustang sedan, more a Falcon or Thunderbird with unique front and aft fascia to differentiate it from being "just a Mustang sedan" I just don't see the Thunderbird name making a comeback for any reason. It would probably be some crossover flagship that pissed off fans. But unlike using the mustang name on the mach-e, where it was worth the risk to create something sporty with a ton of brand recognition, most casual buyers don't have any idea what a Thunderbird is unless they were born in the 50s or 60s. It's just one of those names that's fallen out of the cultural mainstream. In terms of names Ford should revive, Galaxie, it's perfect for some sort of flagship EV, futuristic, not clunky sounding like Thunderbird. I'm stunned they haven't tried to apply it to some sort of EV over the last few years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mackinaw Posted January 15 Share Posted January 15 2 hours ago, DeluxeStang said: .....In terms of names Ford should revive, Galaxie, it's perfect for some sort of flagship EV, futuristic, not clunky sounding like Thunderbird. I'm stunned they haven't tried to apply it to some sort of EV over the last few years. Thunderbird name clunky? These guys don't agree with you. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeluxeStang Posted January 15 Author Share Posted January 15 1 hour ago, mackinaw said: Thunderbird name clunky? These guys don't agree with you. It sounds like the name of a superhero for a 80s kid cartoon. The original thunderbird is a classic, I've just never been in love with the name is all, it just reeks of cheese. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ice-capades Posted January 15 Share Posted January 15 3 hours ago, DeluxeStang said: I just don't see the Thunderbird name making a comeback for any reason. It would probably be some crossover flagship that pissed off fans. But unlike using the mustang name on the mach-e, where it was worth the risk to create something sporty with a ton of brand recognition, most casual buyers don't have any idea what a Thunderbird is unless they were born in the 50s or 60s. It's just one of those names that's fallen out of the cultural mainstream. In terms of names Ford should revive, Galaxie, it's perfect for some sort of flagship EV, futuristic, not clunky sounding like Thunderbird. I'm stunned they haven't tried to apply it to some sort of EV over the last few years. Maybe because there haven't been any new Ford EVs introduced since the Mustang Mach-E or the F-150 Lightning! And whatever is in the pipeline hasn't been revealed or named and EV introductions keep getting pushed back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chrisgb Posted January 15 Share Posted January 15 (edited) 14 hours ago, DeluxeStang said: I just don't see the Thunderbird name making a comeback for any reason. It would probably be some crossover flagship that pissed off fans. But unlike using the mustang name on the mach-e, where it was worth the risk to create something sporty with a ton of brand recognition, most casual buyers don't have any idea what a Thunderbird is unless they were born in the 50s or 60s. It's just one of those names that's fallen out of the cultural mainstream. In terms of names Ford should revive, Galaxie, it's perfect for some sort of flagship EV, futuristic, not clunky sounding like Thunderbird. I'm stunned they haven't tried to apply it to some sort of EV over the last few years. I wonder in this day and age of the Washington Commanders and Cleveland Guardians, if "Thunderbird" might be an awkward moniker. Ford Authority reports awhile back that Ford Copyrighted "Capri" again, a name that has been used on a few different body types over the years. I think it would be a good name for a Charger-type sedan or coupe. The Capri name has always graced Ford Motor's carefree and/or sporty cars throughout the years. Top to Bottom: 1954 Lincoln Capri, 1991 Mercury Capri (imported, Ford AUS), 1979 Mercury Capri II, 1970 Mercury Capri (imported, Ford Cologne) Edited January 15 by Chrisgb add photo details Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeluxeStang Posted January 15 Author Share Posted January 15 (edited) 11 hours ago, ice-capades said: Maybe because there haven't been any new Ford EVs introduced since the Mustang Mach-E or the F-150 Lightning! And whatever is in the pipeline hasn't been revealed or named and EV introductions keep getting pushed back. Except we know a lot of the upcoming evs will keep current names like explorer, and transit. 29 minutes ago, Chrisgb said: I wonder in this day and age of the Washington Commanders and Cleveland Guardians, if "Thunderbird" might be an awkward moniker. Ford Authority reports awhile back that Ford Copyrighted "Capri" again, a name that has been used on a few different body types over the years. I think it would be a good name for a Charger-type sedan or coupe. The Capri name has always graced Ford Motor's carefree and/or sporty cars throughout the years. Top to Bottom: 1954 Lincoln Capri, 1991 Mercury Capri (imported, Ford AUS), 1979 Mercury Capri II, 1970 Mercury Capri (imported, Ford Cologne) This is the new Capri unfortunately. Edited January 15 by DeluxeStang Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GearheadGrrrl Posted January 15 Share Posted January 15 I know Ford's target market is seniors, but they really need to let go of half century and older model names... Only us old car geeks know what a Capri was! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ice-capades Posted January 15 Share Posted January 15 15 minutes ago, DeluxeStang said: Except we know a lot of the upcoming evs will keep current names like explorer, and transit. Except that your reply doesn't address the point you made about resurrecting the Galaxie name. Not important. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mackinaw Posted January 15 Share Posted January 15 11 hours ago, DeluxeStang said: It sounds like the name of a superhero for a 80s kid cartoon. The original thunderbird is a classic, I've just never been in love with the name is all, it just reeks of cheese. There is a story about the name Thunderbird. One of their stylists, who was from New Mexico, suggested the name. GM apparently also liked the name Thunderbird, so Ford acted quick to lock it in. Later that year (1953?) GM came out with a concept car named the Firebird. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chrisgb Posted January 15 Share Posted January 15 3 hours ago, DeluxeStang said: Except we know a lot of the upcoming evs will keep current names like explorer, and transit. This is the new Capri unfortunately. Oh, that's right. Sure doesn't remind me of a sunny island of the Southern Italy coast. Maybe it's not too late to re-copyright Consul or Popular Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.3943b43a09de17b750ed378b4704279c.jpg)
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.