Bias doesn’t necessarily mean unfair.  Turbos do fail and can be slightly expensive to fix, but it’s no worse than the water pump failures on the transverse cyclone V6s.  Ford offered the 3.3Lv6 on F150 and nobody bought them outside fleets.  Most opted for ecoboosts over the coyote v8.   When Ford still offered the 3.5 v6 and 2.0eb in the Edge the ecoboost was 3-4 mpg better with the same performance and better low end torque.   Same difference for the Mustang with the 3.7 vs 2.3eb.  Those are objective benefits.   Don’t confuse people who just want the cheapest option with people who want simplicity.   Most of those buyers would buy an ecoboost if it was cheaper.    

I'm guessing BMW sells more 4 series coupe and convertible than Ford sells Mustang but I bet the numbers are close.    I think one way for Ford to keep the Mustang name relevant but at low volumes is to keep pushing the average MSRP higher and make people chase special performance edition / limited production variants. Basically what Porsche does with 911. Ford is kind of headed that way with GTD but I think there is an untapped opportunity to make Mustang variants that can be certified as EPA trucks which will partially solve the CAFE problem.   Mustang Rally - take the GT 5.0 add AWD and lift the suspension by 2". Re-certify this as a "truck" with EPA like Subaru did with Crosstrek and Outback since it should have enough ground clearance to qualify. Since it is a truck, it has lower CAFE target which means Ford can sell more of them. Think of it as a 911 Dakar competitor for 1/3 of the price.   Mustang Ranchero - hear me out... if Mustang Rally 5.0 is already certified as a "truck", how hard would it be to chop the roof off, yank out the back seat, install a bulkhead and a cargo bed where the backseat and the trunk used to be?    These won't be huge sellers. Ford just need to make enough to keep the Mustang name alive. And more importantly keep Flat Rock in business. If Flat Rock is shut down, Mustang will go with it. Ford is not going to invest in another plant to build it.     

I have a brand new Bronco sport that only has 3000 miles in it that is now going in for a fourth time for service. Keep getting messages for different cylinders not firing or failures. It loses all power when driving. I have to pull over and restart the car and it just gets worse when it’s starts that problem to the point I can’t make it home. It’s stalls and slams in park or brake. I opened a case with Ford by calling them after the third time.  Anyone else ever had this problem?   

Probably not, and if it was just once or twice that it had been spied, I wouldn't even have brought it up. But the fact that it's been seen so often, even if it doesn't confirm anything, is at least somewhat interesting.    Leaving flat rock underutilized isn't the best strategy, but it doesn't seem like it's gonna receive substantial renovations anytime soon. So building taller vehicles is out of the question. I'd personally love that RS 200 concept I posted awhile back, the same one that's in my profile pic. Something that only consumed a small amount of resources, yet could be sold for c8 money wouldn't be the worst financial decision.   But I understand why you guys don't think it's likely. I only bring it up a lot because I genuinely believe that's one of the biggest holes Ford has in their product lineup if they want to focus on passion products more. Ford has all manner of truck and crossover variants, there really isn't a ton of new variants they can add that aren't already covered by their existing offerings. 

Yea, kinda. Mainly the comparison highlights the fact that Ford's big shots made the right decision to make Mach-E part of the Mustang family, and that the "it's not a real Mustang" naysayer crowd can be ignored   When the Ford Mustang Mach-E was first unveiled in late 2019, the traditional Mustang faithful—and even a lot of casual car fans—went apoplectic.   How, they wondered, could Ford turn an American icon of gas-powered performance into an electric car? And an electric crossover, at that? But while the "it's not a real Mustang" voices are still out there, they're now far less vocal than they used to be. The Mach-E quickly proved itself as a sharp everyday performer with excellent range and a growing list of advanced software features, so much so that it was often the second-best-selling EV in America behind the Tesla Model Y—no small feat.

Hmnn..given Hackett's background, IMO I can understand why a marketer would win out over a guy who  understood the complexity of the manufacturing world.  And as for the Explorer launch fiasco, perhaps Hinrichs took the rap as the deck was stacked  against him as opposed to a Toyota hire who was going to fix everything.? Wonder if the quality issues would have continued to build if Hinrichs had won the battle???  Last 5 yrs my CSX is up 30%, my Ford went up 7.2% Yes I know, apples and oranges.

Even though I could not care less what others buy, I disagree that it is a very small group.  People with lots of money and buying more expensive cars likely don’t worry or fear repair costs once warranty expires as those on tight budgets purchasing more affordable vehicles.  Honda is a good example where they offered 1.5L turbo or 2.0L NA on entry level cars and buyer choice was clear.  Difference in gas savings isn’t much, and won’t pay for additional repairs if that day comes.  Now with electrified hybrids, why even bother.  Newest NA Civic is both faster and more economical.  So yeah, I think cost-conscious informed people do care sometimes.  Question is whether to ignore that group of buyers.  Also see what happened to RAM pickup sales.  Twin turbo 3.0L hasn’t gone over well as replacement for Hemi.  Granted, both have issues.

Preferences can also be based on knowledge.  Bias is defined as unfair prejudice.  Some preferences as is the case with liking red over blue are a different matter altogether.  That’s why I avoid subjective arguments.   I don’t claim to be an engine expert, though I know far more than most people after studying them in college, and certainly not telling anyone what to buy.  It is obvious Ford was working on an I-6 a few years back, probably to reduce costs compared to a similar V6; so at least the perceived need was also seen by Ford.   Had Ford proceeded with I-6 project, I would have hoped they offered it in both EB and NA variants like they do present 3.5L V6.  Not holding my breath for either though since every manufacturer that has introduced a new straight six in last few years has made them turbo AFAIK.  Some are good, others having their share of issues.

I'm also guessing it made no sense to keep the Camaro either because the new Vette had similar sales numbers to the Mustang this past year.    Plus isn't the Mustang the Worlds best selling performance coupe anyways?

I think it might be a better fit if they ever came out with a Mustang Sedan-hopefully it would make having AWD easier, since the motors would be in the front wheels.    I don't think a hybrid Mustang would appeal to people who are looking as it as a performance option-Ford will add it when they are forced to.