A Pivot to Munitions at Ford and the return of the GT500 in 2026

[Sherminator98]

https://www.tipranks.com/news/a-pivot-to-munitions-at-ford-nysef

 

Quote

A page found at UAW Local 600’s website featured the lines: “This volume increase is for the 2026 Mustang Shelby GT 500. I can’t wait until we start building engines for such an iconic vehicle with an engine that will be named Legend.” The document also reportedly refers to the Dearborn Engine plant, and some new hires that have taken place therein. While this may not actually come to pass—especially now that the surprise may have been spoiled—the idea of the Shelby’s return is capturing imaginations already.

 

[Motorpsychology]

3 hours ago, Sherminator98 said:

https://www.tipranks.com/news/a-pivot-to-munitions-at-ford-nysef

 

 

What I found interesting in the tipranks link is that Farley may have a "Trump" card in  this munitions aspect. Farley may be able to soften the tariff blow to Ford through Feinberg if he is nominated S-DOD. Ford could negotiate a set aside of the tariffs on their Mexican and Canadian imports while building weapons systems and/or vehicles the US. If such a contract was awarded, the UAW could  potentially organize the workers if they weren't already, Trumps poll numbers go up amongst "blue" collar voters, and Ford's imports enjoy reduced or eliminated tariffs.

Edited February 27 by Chrisgb

[GearheadGrrrl]

Ford hasn't seriously pitched anything to militaries in years, and there's plenty of other competitors in that space. Heck, even GM is further along than Ford in military products!

[jpd80]

Quote

The call for Ford to make such a pivot came from Stephen Feinberg, who serves as CEO of Cerberus Capital Management. Feinberg is also currently being considered as Deputy Secretary of Defense in the Trump administration. And Feinberg is also looking to Ford to handle some domestic weapons production.

Since Cerebus did a bang up job of managing Chrysler all those years ago………not.

 

Clearly a play by a person desperate to be noticed by his future boss……

 

 

Edited February 28 by jpd80

[Captainp4]

Engine named Legend certainly sounds interesting

[Rick73]

1 hour ago, Captainp4 said:

Engine named Legend certainly sounds interesting

Perhaps a 7 liter (428) from original?

[mackinaw]

1 hour ago, Rick73 said:

Perhaps a 7 liter (428) from original?

 

The FE 428?  I doubt it.

[Captainp4]

3 hours ago, Rick73 said:

Perhaps a 7 liter (428) from original?

I'd bet on coyote based... maybe Godzilla, but doubt it. If you mean an actual FE 428, besides never happening, why would they want less power and more weight??

[Rick73]

3 hours ago, mackinaw said:

 

The FE 428?  I doubt it.

No, of course not.  I was referring to an aluminum 7L Godzilla since Coyote can’t go as high as 7L.  Just change  Godzilla stroke between 7.3 and 6.8 to yield 428 cubic inches (7 liters) and make block aluminum to save about 100 pounds, making it close enough in weight to Coyote.  Could also be legendary 427 or 429 displacement. 😀

[DeluxeStang]

3 hours ago, Rick73 said:

No, of course not.  I was referring to an aluminum 7L Godzilla since Coyote can’t go as high as 7L.  Just change  Godzilla stroke between 7.3 and 6.8 to yield 428 cubic inches (7 liters) and make block aluminum to save about 100 pounds, making it close enough in weight to Coyote.  Could also be legendary 427 or 429 displacement. 😀

My guess is "legend" is a detuned 5.2 from the GTD. 

[Sherminator98]

12 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

My guess is "legend" is a detuned 5.2 from the GTD. 

 

Why? 

 

The F-150 Raptor R is rated at 720/640 and the GTD is 815/664

 

I don't think Ford would put that much "effort" into renaming an engine with name like Legend with just a software tweak.

 

I'm guessing it is going to be something different. 

 

I'm guessing it might be a 7.3L with work done with it with 750HP or so

[DeluxeStang]

2 hours ago, Sherminator98 said:

 

Why? 

 

The F-150 Raptor R is rated at 720/640 and the GTD is 815/664

 

I don't think Ford would put that much "effort" into renaming an engine with name like Legend with just a software tweak.

 

I'm guessing it is going to be something different. 

 

I'm guessing it might be a 7.3L with work done with it with 750HP or so

IDK man, it really depends how much resources Ford wants to invest in s650. It's all over the place, you have really ambitious projects like GTD or a mustang sedan, but s650 itself was kinda half assed. So it really depends on if Ford wants to go all out or not on a new gt 500 or if it'll be a case of doing the bare minimum. 

[DeluxeStang]

2 hours ago, Sherminator98 said:

 

Why? 

 

The F-150 Raptor R is rated at 720/640 and the GTD is 815/664

 

I don't think Ford would put that much "effort" into renaming an engine with name like Legend with just a software tweak.

 

I'm guessing it is going to be something different. 

 

I'm guessing it might be a 7.3L with work done with it with 750HP or so

We know Ford wants to do mustang hybrids, what if legend is a GTD motor with electric assist? You could easily produce 1,000 hp for that setup, and it would be an absolute monster in a straight line. 

[Sherminator98]

23 minutes ago, DeluxeStang said:

We know Ford wants to do mustang hybrids, what if legend is a GTD motor with electric assist? You could easily produce 1,000 hp for that setup, and it would be an absolute monster in a straight line. 

 

Ford might want to, but I don't think the extra weight of a hybrid setup would be really welcome.

 

IMO Hybrids would be better for the Ranger and Bronco first, then maybe a AWD hybrid setup for the Mustang Sedan. 

[DeluxeStang]

7 minutes ago, Sherminator98 said:

 

Ford might want to, but I don't think the extra weight of a hybrid setup would be really welcome.

 

IMO Hybrids would be better for the Ranger and Bronco first, then maybe a AWD hybrid setup for the Mustang Sedan. 

Yeah, even as I was typing that, I knew weight would be an issue lol. IDK man, we'll see what they come up with. 

[Rick73]

18 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

My guess is "legend" is a detuned 5.2 from the GTD. 

Good point if thinking of a living legend versus a historical one which is what I assumed, and may not be the case.  Still think Ford should build aluminum variant of Godzilla if at all practical and offer in various vehicles including F-150, Expedition, and Mustang; as options of course and let buyers decide.  Efficiency and emissions regulations are the biggest drawbacks I see, so waiting to see what current administration does.

[DeluxeStang]

1 hour ago, Rick73 said:

Good point if thinking of a living legend versus a historical one which is what I assumed, and may not be the case.  Still think Ford should build aluminum variant of Godzilla if at all practical and offer in various vehicles including F-150, Expedition, and Mustang; as options of course and let buyers decide.  Efficiency and emissions regulations are the biggest drawbacks I see, so waiting to see what current administration does.

I believe there's this motor the 6.8 which is Godzilla based, but apparently lighter. A few years ago, high ranking credible sources said it was gonna be offered in the mustang and f-150, then nothing came of it. 

[Rick73]

10 minutes ago, DeluxeStang said:

I believe there's this motor the 6.8 which is Godzilla based, but apparently lighter. A few years ago, high ranking credible sources said it was gonna be offered in the mustang and f-150, then nothing came of it. 

I’m pretty sure the main difference between 7.3 and 6.8 liter Godzilla is stroke length.  It requires different crankshaft and probably rod length, unless pistons and or block are different which seems unlikely, so weight difference should be insignificant between 6.8 and 7.3 Godzilla variants  On the other hand reports suggest going to aluminum block could save as much as 100 pounds which would make weight in same range as Coyote and close to 3.5L EcoBoost.  For F-150 in particular I don’t see a little added engine weight being too critical from a performance or safety standpoint because diesel was heavier IIRC when it was available.  Wikipedia states stroke length was reduced from 101 to 93.5 mm.  For what it’s worth, a 428 Godzilla would require a 97.1 mm stroke which should be easy to accomplish.

[Rick73]

P.S. — Stroke length of 97.2 mm would also round off to a 428 cubic inch 7-liter engine using existing 107.2 mm Godzilla bore diameter.  However, if Ford creates an aluminum variant, they may use a slightly different bore diameter for various reasons; or not.  For example, they may want slightly thicker cylinder walls.  If that happens a different stroke length would be required anyway to match 428 displacement.
 

Honestly, I’m not sure how important matching a legendary engine displacement is to Ford to start with, except they seem to try with 5.0L V8 matching legendary 302, which was later called a 5.0L though exact dimensions were actually 4.9L when rounded.  And today’s 5.0 Coyote is not even close to 302 so maybe it doesn’t matter at all, or at least doesn’t have to be exact.

[rmc523]

On 3/9/2025 at 11:11 AM, DeluxeStang said:

IDK man, it really depends how much resources Ford wants to invest in s650. It's all over the place, you have really ambitious projects like GTD or a mustang sedan, but s650 itself was kinda half assed. So it really depends on if Ford wants to go all out or not on a new gt 500 or if it'll be a case of doing the bare minimum. 

 

Maybe S650 was half assed because budget went to this 4-door?

 

On 3/9/2025 at 11:38 AM, Sherminator98 said:

 

Ford might want to, but I don't think the extra weight of a hybrid setup would be really welcome.

 

IMO Hybrids would be better for the Ranger and Bronco first, then maybe a AWD hybrid setup for the Mustang Sedan. 

 

Yeah, I think they ought to work on a Bronco/Ranger hybrid.

[akirby]

What about S650 was “ half assed”?

[DeluxeStang]

9 minutes ago, akirby said:

What about S650 was “ half assed”?

Same chassis, same basic powertrains, exterior styling that's basically s550 with some additional edges, etc. It's not bad, but we know enthusiasts unlike conventional buyers tend to want significant changes in styling and performance with each generation. 

[akirby]

3 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

Same chassis, same basic powertrains, exterior styling that's basically s550 with some additional edges, etc. It's not bad, but we know enthusiasts unlike conventional buyers tend to want significant changes in styling and performance with each generation. 

They don’t sell enough to warrant a huge investment,  But they did do dark horse.  I just don’t subscribe to the change for the sake of change  when the vehicle is already best in class with 350-500 hp.  The exception for higher volume vehicles is to make enough visual changes to attract repeat buyers se who lease.  But on a low volume icon I don’t think it’s as important.

[DeluxeStang]

3 hours ago, akirby said:

They don’t sell enough to warrant a huge investment,  But they did do dark horse.  I just don’t subscribe to the change for the sake of change  when the vehicle is already best in class with 350-500 hp.  The exception for higher volume vehicles is to make enough visual changes to attract repeat buyers se who lease.  But on a low volume icon I don’t think it’s as important.

I understand as a lower volume model there isn't much of a business case for allocate the level of capital needed to develop an all new platform, especially if you want to keep the vehicle relatively affordable. 

 

I do wonder through, pricing was leaked for the GTD, not confirmed, but there are claims the starting price is around $325,000 and fully loaded models are around $425,000. 

 

Basic clean math here, but if you figure an average transaction price right down the middle of $370,000 per car, at 2,000 units, that's what? Around 750 million in revenue?

 

Maybe the plan is to use the substantial amount of revenue generated from very high end models like the GTD to fund some sort of newer mustang platform. Offering these expensive models with what I'd imagine are very substantial profit margins could be a way to justify making something like a new mustang platform economy feasible without making the base price absurdly expensive. 

[DeluxeStang]

3 hours ago, akirby said:

They don’t sell enough to warrant a huge investment,  But they did do dark horse.  I just don’t subscribe to the change for the sake of change  when the vehicle is already best in class with 350-500 hp.  The exception for higher volume vehicles is to make enough visual changes to attract repeat buyers se who lease.  But on a low volume icon I don’t think it’s as important.

I know what you're thinking, if the platform is halfway decent, what's the point in developing a new one, especially for such a niche product? I get you, I do. 

 

But we're seeing a world where the days of the 30 grand brand new V8 mustang are gone forever, by decades end, a gt is almost certainly gonna be starting in the 50s or even getting into the 60s. The best way to help mustang survive is to make it more evocative and seductive to warrant that sort of price point. 

 

The car I'm envisioning is like a 1967 gt 500 fastback with modern surfacing, and proportions between the current mustang and something like a lexus lc 500. Lower roofline, lower beltline, bigger wheels, longer wheelbase, longer hood, more extreme fastback, etc. Something that still looks like a mustang, but takes it to a whole nother level. 

 

That sort of radical change means significantly different hard points, which is something Ford can probably only achieve by developing a ground up platform.