[13vertss]

Originally Posted by SpeedIsLife

Honestly I think Ford's attitude, and history is clear evidence of this, is they'd rather sell 3 Mustangs that the public wants yet may not be the absolute top of the game in performance than sell 1 Mustang that put performance over everything else.

See: 1994-2002, 2015-2018.

Mustang make up 3.5% in sales, so to think Ford is all about just sales with the Mustang has serious blinders on.

[FastCarFanBoy]

how does holding the GT back by not giving it the power of the Bullit and the handling of the GT350 make sense to Ford if it doesn't make financial sense? Ford sells how many GT's for every Shelby or Bullit? 10? 15? If Ford felt the Mustang would make more money for them with a 475hp PP1 base model that is exactly what they would be selling.

selling Mustangs isn't something new to Ford.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by FastCarFanBoy

how does holding the GT back by not giving it the power of the Bullit and the handling of the GT350 make sense to Ford if it doesn't make financial sense? Ford sells how many GT's for every Shelby or Bullit? 10? 15? If Ford felt the Mustang would make more money for them with a 475hp PP1 base model that is exactly what they would be selling.

selling Mustangs isn't something new to Ford.

An inferior car sells better, so an inferior car Ford builds.

You can't be content with that explanation...?

[ChevyRules]

Truth be told, I am glad Ford gave it a bit more power over the regular GT and just wasn't an appearance package given the rumored cost of the Bullitt.

[FastCarFanBoy]

Originally Posted by Mr. Wyndham

An inferior car sells better, so an inferior car Ford builds.

You can't be content with that explanation...?

you can have what ever lvl of performance you want in a Mustang

base model =cheaper than any SS= sufficient for the masses.

PP1= roughly equal to an SS

PP2= potentially an 1LE equivalent

Bullit= A PP1 GT for Steve McQueen wannabes

Shelby= cult classic


it worth adding that you can fix the performance shortcomings of the mustang through the aftermarket , but how do you fix the ergonomic issues of the Camaro?

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by FastCarFanBoy

you can have what ever lvl of performance you want in a Mustang

base model =cheaper than any SS= sufficient for the masses.

PP1= roughly equal to an SS

PP2= potentially an 1LE equivalent

Bullit= A PP1 GT for Steve McQueen wannabes

Shelby= cult classic


it worth adding that you can fix the performance shortcomings of the mustang through the aftermarket , but how do you fix the ergonomic issues of the Camaro?

There are none I've experienced? Ergonomic?

You shouldn't have to build a car the way it was supposed to be in the aftermarket. And therein lies my distaste for Ford and the Mustang. They have the ability and just aren't doing it....or maybe they don't....

The only truly worthwhile versions they've built since the Camaro came back was the Boss 302, and the GT350R. The rest have been half-baked attempts. And it's sad.

[ChevyRules]

I hate the aftermarket argument. So you have to spend more of your money to fix the issues with the car from the factory? That shouldn't be used as a defense for Ford.

[1295/SS]

Originally Posted by SSfriendly

This is where you're completely wrong. Ford knew what the 1LE ran. They chose to not compete with it on the PP1. They didn't fail, they are targeting a different audience. In other-words, they didn't care about beating the 1LE. That obviously pissed off some engineers, hence the reason they went ahead with the PP2.

As for tires overall, Ford is playing the game differently. Tires are expensive, and Ford knows a majority don't care about having expensive summer tires on their base GT package. Sure, it sucks for those that want a wider/better tire...but for those that truly care there is always the PP1.

These aren't failures, these are marketing decisions. As it stands, Ford offers (in V8 form) the GT, PP1, PP2, GT350, GT350R. They will soon offer the Bullitt as well as the GT500. That's a hell of a lineup if you ask me.

A hell of a lineup that loses to it's historical competitor at each level? Yeah, ok.

[hotlap]

IMO. Ford likes to build media buzz with cars like the GT350, Bullit, PP1, PP2...but there is always a catch or roadblock.

Base GT350...no coolers (originally)
GT350 tech pack, track pack, etc steering you away from a performance oriented combination.
GT350R...built in small numbers with high ADM
Bullit with 475 HP in small numbers and high cost but engine not shared with GTs
PP1 isn’t capable beyond being a road car but sounds good.
PP2...track car with no cooler and a warning that it will go into limp mode

Ford doesn’t release performance figures or Ring times but sets up third parties to create the hype for them while they take no responsibility that the cars can actually do what is being “suggested”.

It’s a lot of manipulation that in the end leads to a mediocre car for the majority of their buyers with limited warranty risk.

Chevy builds ever Camaro to perform and backs up their capabilities with a performance statement and warranty to run them

[FastCarFanBoy]

Originally Posted by Mr. Wyndham

There are none I've experienced? Ergonomic?

You shouldn't have to build a car the way it was supposed to be in the aftermarket. And therein lies my distaste for Ford and the Mustang. They have the ability and just aren't doing it....or maybe they don't....

The only truly worthwhile versions they've built since the Camaro came back was the Boss 302, and the GT350R. The rest have been half-baked attempts. And it's sad.

you drive a ZL1-1LE. you represent a fraction of a fraction of the typical buyer in this segment. If you want a track focused Mustang Ford offers the Shelby and soon the PP2.

Ford has proven thats its capable of building the kind of cars you want by building the R and the B302 , so saying "maybe they dont have the ability" is silly.

They dont have to build every Mustang to be a track weapon. It doesnt make financial sense.

[Jastone]

Originally Posted by FastCarFanBoy

you drive a ZL1-1LE. you represent a fraction of a fraction of the typical buyer in this segment. If you want a track focused Mustang Ford offers the Shelby and soon the PP2.

Ford has proven thats its capable of building the kind of cars you want by building the R and the B302 , so saying "maybe they dont have the ability" is silly.

They dont have to build every Mustang to be a track weapon. It doesnt make financial sense.

So what version does one purchase in order to compete with the ZL1 1le? I mean the GT350R is barely quicker than the SS 1le? What else is there. (Right now, not the possible coming of the GT500)

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by FastCarFanBoy

you drive a ZL1-1LE. you represent a fraction of a fraction of the typical buyer in this segment. If you want a track focused Mustang Ford offers the Shelby and soon the PP2.

Ford has proven thats its capable of building the kind of cars you want by building the R and the B302 , so saying "maybe they dont have the ability" is silly.

They dont have to build every Mustang to be a track weapon. It doesnt make financial sense.

I drive this car most of the week for daily duty in addition to track days. I drove an SS over 1000 miles in 36 hours, and have had several long-term run ins with V6s and turbo 4s...I'm well versed in what all of the models offer in their function and ergonomics. Furthermore, the ZL1 1LE not only features the fastest tech, but the highest levels of luxury the Camaro lineup has to offer...So what "I want", and my ZL1 1LE is irrelevant to this conversation. You're still defending this ridiculous thought process that Ford is intentionally building a $hitty car!

Not all Camaro models are "track weapons". Maybe "competent" is the better word. But they are the best they can be in each form, and the best in the segment in terms of performance. And that is what BOTH of these cars are for.

Each vehicle in the marketplace has a purpose, and every other aspect is secondary. Trucks are built for working. SUVs are built for moving a lot of people and stuff. Sedans are built for commuting with several passengers, and coupes are built to be sporty.

The Mustang's purpose is to be sporty. And it is playing second fiddle to the Camaro in that aspect. Is has most of its existence since 1967, and today, even with the move to IRS (which everyone thought would be a game-changer); they still aren't putting in the effort to excel that they should be. It just seems lazy.

I won't keep arguing because this thread is going in circles...but it doesn't do anyone any favors to defend mediocrity as intentional.

[FastCarFanBoy]

Originally Posted by Jastone

So what version does one purchase in order to compete with the ZL1 1le? I mean the GT350R is barely quicker than the SS 1le? What else is there. (Right now, not the possible coming of the GT500)

there is none right now. there will be a 500 though.

how many ZL1-1LE's have been sold?

the GT500 will be a quicker/faster straight line car than either ZL1. I'm skeptical Ford will bother to build a version to battle the ZL1-1LE on track. If it turns out to be quicker on a road course than a reg ZL1 who will care if its slower than the ZL1-1LE on track? Those few who own ZL1-1LE's and the forum and magazine bench racers? That's too small a slice of the pie to chase after imo.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by FastCarFanBoy

If it turns out to be quicker on a road course than a reg ZL1 who will care if its slower than the ZL1-1LE on track? Those few who own ZL1-1LE's and the forum and magazine bench racers? That's too small a slice of the pie to chase after imo.

You underestimate the power of publicity. There are several reasons any of the manufacturers push to make these low-volume cars.

1) Most importantly: To make a splash, prove their mettle in engineering, and say they did it.

2) To test new parts, materials, and technology.

3) The "Halo" effect in the show room.

They do it so the magazines can mark down the fastest time of the generation...to immortalize the achievement, and contribute to the car's reputation. Meanwhile, us keyboard-racers can argue that "Car X" had the fastest time around XX track, or down the ¼ mile. But today...the ¼-mile just doesn't have the same importance it used to...the focus is all on the road course.