Dave Pericak speaks a bit about the Mustang's future

[NoVaGT]

Not fast enough to scare me.
I'll worry about the future when the time comes. I'll enjoy the present until then.

We're discussing whether Ford should continue trying to sell Mustangs in Europe.

Doesn't look to me like it will be possible in 10-20 short years.

Sponsored

 

[Vlad Soare]

If they can continue selling Mustangs for twenty years, I see no reason why they shouldn't do it. Why give up twenty years' worth of revenue?

 

[Bikeman315]

The topic I've raised is whether or not Ford should even be concerned with Euro Mustang sales. I'm suggesting Ford ignore Europe as far as the Mustang goes.

Got it, understand. Although I do not know how you tell any manufacturer to ignore a third of their sales.

 

[NoVaGT]

If they can continue selling Mustangs for twenty years, I see no reason why they shouldn't do it. Why give up twenty years' worth of revenue?

Could be 10 years......

Or, the whole idea might die due to an injection of reality at some point.

 

[Vlad Soare]

OK, could be ten. Then why give up ten years' worth of revenue? Why not continue selling for as long as you can?
Indeed, that injection of reality will most probably come sooner or later. I'm sure it will. That's why I'm not so worried. Combustion engines will only be banned when a suitable alternative exists. And I doubt it will exist any time soon. Legislation can change either way.

 

[NoVaGT]

OK, could be ten. Then why give up ten years' worth of revenue? Why not continue selling for as long as you can?
Indeed, that injection of reality will most probably come sooner or later. So why worry? Why not keep selling and enjoying it while it lasts?

I'm thinking that there's serious development costs to get the car able to be sold in Europe. I'm thinking of the next generation Mustang, and whether they should invest that money.

 

[Vlad Soare]

Yes, but those development costs that are necessary to make the car salable in Europe ultimately reflect in the build quality of the finished product. So you'll benefit from it as well. It's a win for everybody.

 

[NoVaGT]

Yes, but those development costs that are necessary to make the car salable in Europe ultimately reflect in the build quality of the finished product. So you'll benefit from it as well. It's a win for everybody.

There's left-hand drive, tighter emissions, tighter MPGs.......dunno. Some development engineer would have to give us their ideas on the costs. Could be millions.

I remember some article about getting the 2015 Mustang able to be sold in Europe. There were substantial differences in the cars, and substantial development costs for those changes.

 

[Vlad Soare]

Apart from right-hand drive, the bulk of the costs for selling it in Europe came from improving it enough to appeal to the more exigent European clientele. Tighter emissions are no big deal; a small change in software, drop the power from 460 HP to 450 HP, and that's it. Emissions regulations will get tighter in the US as well, that's for sure, even if they may appear to move a bit slower right now. So investing in better emission control is not necessarily an indulgence for the sake of Europeans; it will also pay off in the US sooner or later.

 

[martinjlm]

20 years. And that's just with the current legislation recently proposed. That date may move forward. Hell, they wanted it to be 10 years from now.

Morons, thinking we're harming the environment with cars.......complete and utter morons. At least Britain got out of that EU non-sense. Good for them.

Understand my desire to tell the EU they're not getting any more Mustangs......

It's just a big middle finger to those fruit-loop moon-bats.

The original California Zero Emissions Mandate of 1990 required automakers selling in California to have 10% of their vehicles sold be zero emissions capable by 2003. Even though it was a “law”, 10% by 2003 didn’t happen. Even in the realm of Tesla-mania, California is still not at 10% and it’s 2020. Common sense prevailed (mostly) as it became evident that the requirement was illogical and unattainable. The ZEV rules and classifications have changed and stretched a lot since the original mandate, spawning such ridiculous and contradictory vehicle classifications as AT-PZEV (Advanced Technology Partial Zero Emissions Vehicle). How is something partially zero?

Any European or Asian country that chooses to “ban” ICE will wind up having to back-pedal, just like California did when the realization that automakers cannot and will not spin on a dime to completely shift their vehicle portfolios to comply with an arbitrary ban.

 

[Vlad Soare]

Exactly.

 

[Hack]

The original California Zero Emissions Mandate of 1990 required automakers selling in California to have 10% of their vehicles sold be zero emissions capable by 2003. Even though it was a “law”, 10% by 2003 didn’t happen. Even in the realm of Tesla-mania, California is still not at 10% and it’s 2020. Common sense prevailed (mostly) as it became evident that the requirement was illogical and unattainable. The ZEV rules and classifications have changed and stretched a lot since the original mandate, spawning such ridiculous and contradictory vehicle classifications as AT-PZEV (Advanced Technology Partial Zero Emissions Vehicle). How is something partially zero?

Any European or Asian country that chooses to “ban” ICE will wind up having to back-pedal, just like California did when the realization that automakers cannot and will not spin on a dime to completely shift their vehicle portfolios to comply with an arbitrary ban.

I hope you are right.

I worry about the stuff because certain lawmakers want to get rid of the ICE right now. And some of them really don't care whether businesses succeed or fail.

 

[Twin Turbo]

Not to mention, somehow the governments will want to get their tax revenue another way. Currently, a litre of fuel costs around £1.30..........almost 60p of that is fuel duty (tax).......in the UK at least.

That's worth over £27 BILLION a year to them.

 

[Vlad Soare]

I hope you are right.

I worry about the stuff because certain lawmakers want to get rid of the ICE right now. And some of them really don't care whether businesses succeed or fail.

It's not just about businesses. It's about hundreds of millions of people who will not be willing to give up on their ICE-powered cars. Any politician who is stupid enough to ignore them will not remain in politics for too long.
Actually, not even those businesses are so easy to ignore. We're not talking about Joe's and Jane's family business. We're talking enormous corporations that hire tens of thousands of people and pay huge amounts of money in taxes. No government can afford not to care if they fail, let alone to intentionally cause them to fail.

 

[Bikeman315]

I hope you are right.

I worry about the stuff because certain lawmakers want to get rid of the ICE right now. And some of them really don't care whether businesses succeed or fail.

Sponsored