Total Mustang sales 2019 figure

[13GetThere]

They do this in the 21st century too. It’s called the EB & GT.
As far as the CV I’d rather have a Marauder but neither are ever going to happen.

This isn't the same as the multiple engines of the 60s and 70s. Almost every thing had several engine options. Most started with a 6 cylinder or two for the economy or fleet use. Then there was a small V8 like a 302, 307, or 318 with 2 bbl carbs for more power and highway cruising. Then came the economy sport class with the 351, 350, and 340 cu. in. small block V8s. These could be anything from family cars to muscle/pony cars. Then there were the big blocks ranging from 383, 390, and 396 and going up to 427, 429, 440, and 426, 454, and 460 that also fit in most of the same cars. Of course there were exceptions, but you generally had a wide selection of engines, trims, and packages.
Chevy, and Dodge still offer a decent selection of engines for their line of cars, but Ford has 2 basically. While Ford makes some really good engines that could work in the Mustang and other cars (if they would build them), they only offer 2. Yeah the Shelby's have a 5.2, but those are modified 5.0 basically. Right now you can get an economy Mustang with the ecoboost, or a performance Mustang with the 5.0.
A Mustang with one of the new V6 ecoboost engines could fill the niche of a sporty car with decent economy like the 340 to 351 did in the 70s, and they were big sellers.

Sponsored

 

[Erik427]

Ford had a Cobra Jet offering for 2019..

Not for the street.......something like the Red Eye but in Mustang form would be just the ticket.
1320 competitor would be great too.

 

[Hack]

except they sell vanishingly few 5.0 in the F150 and even the 3.5EB is not exactly common. (I haven't looked at the pure XL work truck segment however - the 5.0 might dominate there)

The 3.5EB in a Mustang would be logical. A 6.0 would just be pointless. A sports car is supposed to rev, not trundle around at 4500 RPM. If you want that kind of engine output I suggest going back to the 450 big block motors from 40 years ago.

I think Ford could do a Panamera treatment on the Mustang by giving it "extended cab" rear-hinged half doors and changing the roof line a bit to move the rear seats back 4 maybe 5 inches. It won't be spacious but at least you won't have to be a double amputeee it occupy the seat. A stylized hatch-back trunk would make the trunk space considerably more accessible even if you lost volume from the seat move. Now you'd have a legitimate family friendly sports "coupe+".

The Charger sells because it handily accommodates 4 passengers and can thus be "justified" as a family-use vehicle even if the SUV is the one that gets the lion share of the miles and only dad drives it to work. But you can pile everyone in for a run to Denny's, ice cream stand or casual outing and nobody is gong to bitch about getting in/out or the ergonomics of the experience.

So out of roughly 900,000 F-150s sold - you are saying that "vanishingly few" were 5.0 V8s. I find that tough to believe, unless your definition of vanishingly few is a number with 5 or 6 digits in it.

3.5EB is a terrible engine for a performance car in my opinion. Might as well do a turbo 4 and a hybrid powerplant. Our Mustangs need an engine that sounds good. Most driving is on the street and has to obey traffic laws - the enjoyment of the car comes from listening to the engine.

The entire point of 6.0 liters is to get to ~600 hp. Right now the 5.0 achieves about 500 NA hp, but especially if the car gets a little bigger it would be nice to have more hp. I have no idea why you think it would be a 4500 rpm engine. It would never make enough NA hp to be an improvement over the 5.0 if it didn't rev out. I would want it to be a 7,500-8,000 rpm engine.

 

[Norm Peterson]

This isn't the same as the multiple engines of the 60s and 70s. Almost every thing had several engine options. Most started with a 6 cylinder or two for the economy or fleet use. Then there was a small V8 like a 302, 307, or 318 with 2 bbl carbs for more power and highway cruising. Then came the economy sport class with the 351, 350, and 340 cu. in. small block V8s. These could be anything from family cars to muscle/pony cars. Then there were the big blocks ranging from 383, 390, and 396 and going up to 427, 429, 440, and 426, 454, and 460 that also fit in most of the same cars. Of course there were exceptions, but you generally had a wide selection of engines, trims, and packages.
Chevy, and Dodge still offer a decent selection of engines for their line of cars, but Ford has 2 basically. While Ford makes some really good engines that could work in the Mustang and other cars (if they would build them), they only offer 2. Yeah the Shelby's have a 5.2, but those are modified 5.0 basically. Right now you can get an economy Mustang with the ecoboost, or a performance Mustang with the 5.0.

I think it's fair to say that the variety of engine availability in the 1960's amounted to overkill. Not just in the number of different displacements but also different power levels within the same displacement in many cases (Chevy's 327 probably had the greatest variety in power numbers, as it was built in 275, 300, 325, and 350 HP variants in the same year despite there being four other V8 displacements).

A Mustang with one of the new V6 ecoboost engines could fill the niche of a sporty car with decent economy like the 340 to 351 did in the 70s, and they were big sellers.

Lose the turbocharging and tune a Cyclone-family V6 of 3.5 - 3.7L up into the 325 - 350 HP neighborhood (about where the current Nissan 370Z's engines fall). Plenty sporty, especially when paired with a good 6MT, and not subject to unexpectedly poor real-world fuel economy like so many turbocharged engines tend to be.


Norm

 

[thill444]

The numbers are certainly good, but sales were still under 100k and only 40% of them had a V8. This for a car that essentially had the market segment to themselves.
It’s certainly fun to discuss the what ifs and why nots but the reality is none of this is ever going to happen.

With Ford all but abandoning the sedan market, and GM also focusing more on trucks and SUV's it has opened the door for Dodge to sell more 4 door Chargers. With all the different options (engine choice, AWD, etc) FCA is smart. I am guessing they had some really good incentives too

 

[shogun32]

So out of roughly 900,000 F-150s sold - you are saying that "vanishingly few" were 5.0 V8s. I find that tough to believe, unless your definition of vanishingly few is a number with 5 or 6 digits in it.

percentage points. I wish I had sales data by engine but I'm making that observation based on 2019 dealer lot mix around here.

It would never make enough NA hp to be an improvement over the 5.0 if it didn't rev out. I would want it to be a 7,500-8,000 rpm engine.

the cost of that would be astronomical.

 

[shogun32]

FCA is smart. I am guessing they had some really good incentives too

they've been advertised at 20% off for a few months now. Even the Hellcats are 15% off.

 

[Hack]

the cost of that would be astronomical.

It would be cheaper for Ford to develop than the 7.3.

 

[Bikeman315]

This isn't the same as the multiple engines of the 60s and 70s. Almost every thing had several engine options. Most started with a 6 cylinder or two for the economy or fleet use. Then there was a small V8 like a 302, 307, or 318 with 2 bbl carbs for more power and highway cruising. Then came the economy sport class with the 351, 350, and 340 cu. in. small block V8s. These could be anything from family cars to muscle/pony cars. Then there were the big blocks ranging from 383, 390, and 396 and going up to 427, 429, 440, and 426, 454, and 460 that also fit in most of the same cars. Of course there were exceptions, but you generally had a wide selection of engines, trims, and packages.
Chevy, and Dodge still offer a decent selection of engines for their line of cars, but Ford has 2 basically. While Ford makes some really good engines that could work in the Mustang and other cars (if they would build them), they only offer 2. Yeah the Shelby's have a 5.2, but those are modified 5.0 basically. Right now you can get an economy Mustang with the ecoboost, or a performance Mustang with the 5.0.
A Mustang with one of the new V6 ecoboost engines could fill the niche of a sporty car with decent economy like the 340 to 351 did in the 70s, and they were big sellers.

Yes, I certainly remember those days but they’re ancient history. Ford could put more engines in the Mustang but not sell any more of them. So why would they do it?
The future is alternative fuel sources not ICE. No manufacturer is going to spend big bucks going forward to develop new ICE’s. It is what it is.

 

[13GetThere]

I think it's fair to say that the variety of engine availability in the 1960's amounted to overkill. Not just in the number of different displacements but also different power levels within the same displacement in many cases (Chevy's 327 probably had the greatest variety in power numbers, as it was built in 275, 300, 325, and 350 HP variants in the same year despite there being four other V8 displacements).


I don't think it was overkill.It was the technology of the day for the intended application. That 275 horse 327 probably went in a pickup, the 300 in an Impala, the 325 in an Impala SS, and the 350 in a Corvette. Not saying it was a perfect system, but it worked in the day.
Ford does the same with the Coyote; the 5.0 that goes in the F150 isn't the same as the Coyote that goes in the GT. Probably the same block, but other parts are designed for the application.

Lose the turbocharging and tune a Cyclone-family V6 of 3.5 - 3.7L up into the 325 - 350 HP neighborhood (about where the current Nissan 370Z's engines fall). Plenty sporty, especially when paired with a good 6MT, and not subject to unexpectedly poor real-world fuel economy like so many turbocharged engines tend to be.


Norm

I don't know about loosing the turbo, but we are on the same page here. Something between the 4 cylinder EcoBoost and the Coyote is needed, especially if you want to attract younger buyers.

 

[Bikeman315]

It would be cheaper for Ford to develop than the 7.3.

Neither of which is ever going to happen. If you want to discuss something that could actually happen, let’s discuss Hybrids. A Coyote Hybrid could easily get you to 600 HP. Better gas mileage and the sound we all want. A EB Hybrid could be 435HP, same as the 15-17’ GT.

This is the future, let get our heads out of the sand and acknowledge it.

 

[Bikeman315]

Something between the 4 cylinder EcoBoost and the Coyote is needed, especially if you want to attract younger buyers.

Please define younger. And how many younger buyers would actually buy a Mustang if it had a third engine choice? 5000? 10000? 20000? Total sales would still be less than 100k. Why would Ford bother?

 

[Hack]

Neither of which is ever going to happen. If you want to discuss something that could actually happen, let’s discuss Hybrids. A Coyote Hybrid could easily get you to 600 HP. Better gas mileage and the sound we all want. A EB Hybrid could be 435HP, same as the 15-17’ GT.

This is the future, let get our heads out of the sand and acknowledge it.

The 7.3 that they are already selling will never happen? Come on man.

 

[shogun32]

younger buyers can only afford the EB2.3. Hell even "older" ones are shooting for MPG numbers. Not to mention the you'tes are buying 1.6 and 2.0 turbo cars if they buy anything at all. I think it was a disgrace how Ford treated the 3.7v6 but even if they hadn't botched the fueling it still wouldn't have sold.

 

[shogun32]

The 7.3 that they are already selling will never happen?

in a Mustang? Geezus, big-inch was dead 40 years ago. And with performance profile like this: push rod 430 horsepower at 5,500 rpm and torque of 475 ft.-lb. at 4,000 even more so. If you want the old-timey power delivery grab GM's Camaro/Corvette engine.

I wouldn't mind a DOHC 4.5l V8 (92x85) that rev'd to 9000 RPM (see COPO motors) with optional FI to fill in the torque down low. The piston speeds even at 9000 are less than the Voodoo.

Sponsored