2015 Prices and getting older...

[derieuz]

Inflation almost entirely, you are paying barely any more.

In 2003, my dad bought a Yukon Denali, Fully Loaded for about $48,000

A Yukon Denali Fully loaded now is in the 90,000's.

Sponsored

 

[S550_Magnetic]

Exactly. Show me one new vehicle with 435 (or more) horsepower that you can buy for around $33K MSRP besides the Mustang.

It doesn't exist.

Mustang GT is the rock bottom on "bang for your buck". And now on top of that value we are getting a wonderful new chassis and updated and upgraded materials. This new Mustang is a BARGAIN!!!

My brother has an Altima coupe and has been looking at getting a G37 which is now called the Q60. Its fairly comparable in price but still doesn't have the power the Mustang has. The Challenger and Camaro are also similarly priced.

 

[S550_Magnetic]

Inflation almost entirely, you are paying barely any more.

In 2003, my dad bought a Yukon Denali, Fully Loaded for about $48,000

A Yukon Denali Fully loaded now is in the 90,000's.

My wife has owned 2 Ford Explorers since 2001. In 2001 a new Ford explorer was around $21k, now that same vehicle is around $30k.

 

[Free Agent]

Inflation almost entirely, you are paying barely any more.

In 2003, my dad bought a Yukon Denali, Fully Loaded for about $48,000

A Yukon Denali Fully loaded now is in the 90,000's.

You are correct, its mostly inflation. Google any inflation calculator online and its easy to see what prices would be then and vice versa.

10 years ago I bought my GTO new. MSRP was around $33K. (I paid $250 over invoice, about 2000 less) Now it did come with leather standard but when it comes down to it I could buy a 2015 Mustang GT for the same price with 435 HP/400 TQ over a 350 HP/365 TQ AND with tons more safety features and electronic features.

Plug that $33K value into an inflation calculator and then compare it to todays Mustang GT pricing and you will be RUSHING to your dealer to order.

 

[Free Agent]

My brother has an Altima coupe and has been looking at getting a G37 which is now called the Q60. Its fairly comparable in price but still doesn't have the power the Mustang has. The Challenger and Camaro are also similarly priced.

Right, similarly priced but they don't BEAT the price. There is not a single car out there with 435 HP for $33K other than the Mustang GT. Ford offers the best "bang for the buck" vehicle on the market with the Mustang GT.

 

[Aipaloovik]

Sea,
what I think you are missing is that the Mustang is (IMHO) meant to be targeted at an aging audience and is priced accordingly. I don't think this is pricing is causing the death of car culture among kids, I just think that culture has drastically changed. American muscle cars are not a youth culture thing, hot hatch backs and subcompacts are. If you want to find youth car culture, look to the Fiesta and Focus ST. Those are the cars targeted at the emerging car culture with the young. American muscle is targeted squarely at those that came of age, or are at least old enough to remember the heyday of the genera. They are no longer, and are not meant to be, the 1964 affordable sports car for the masses. That niche has been replaced with smaller, high boost, i4 hatch backs and subcompacts. I think Ford priced this car exactly where they wanted it to appeal to exactly their target audience.

 

[SeaStang]

You are correct, its mostly inflation. Google any inflation calculator online and its easy to see what prices would be then and vice versa.

10 years ago I bought my GTO new. MSRP was around $33K. (I paid $250 over invoice, about 2000 less) Now it did come with leather standard but when it comes down to it I could buy a 2015 Mustang GT for the same price with 435 HP/400 TQ over a 350 HP/365 TQ AND with tons more safety features and electronic features.

Plug that $33K value into an inflation calculator and then compare it to todays Mustang GT pricing and you will be RUSHING to your dealer to order.

In all fairness, the GTO in 05 was outrageously expensive THEN. The 05 stang gt was 24.9 compared to the GTO at 5K more and it still came in second to the Mustang in compos. So thats not a good example. Run 25K in your inflation calculator.

 

[Free Agent]

Sea,
what I think you are missing is that the Mustang is (IMHO) meant to be targeted at an aging audience and is priced accordingly. I don't think this is pricing is causing the death of car culture among kids, I just think that culture has drastically changed. American muscle cars are not a youth culture thing, hot hatch backs and subcompacts are. If you want to find youth car culture, look to the Fiesta and Focus ST. Those are the cars targeted at the emerging car culture with the young. American muscle is targeted squarely at those that came of age, or are at least old enough to remember the heyday of the genera. They are no longer, and are not meant to be, the 1964 affordable sports car for the masses. That niche has been replaced with smaller, high boost, i4 hatch backs and subcompacts. I think Ford priced this car exactly where they wanted it to appeal to exactly their target audience.

Excellent points.

And I will add that Ford IS trying to tap into that small youth car culture niche by offering the EB 2.3 engine. Very savvy by Ford to do so and I guarantee GM will follow suit with the 2016 alpha Camaro. Car culture is being replaced by tech culture. Smart phones/tablets etc are the new "cars" of the 60's. Gotta have the new model every year, trade it in to upgrade etc.

What I hope is that the youngest generation doesn't lose that desire for the open road. Nothing beats the real thing. Googling something or watching it on YouTube isn't the same as going and doing it. Lets hope Ford keeps this in mind and offers a Mustang that can cover both ends.

 

[Free Agent]

In all fairness, the GTO in 05 was outrageously expensive THEN. The 05 stang gt was 24.9 compared to the GTO at 5K more and it still came in second to the Mustang in compos. So thats not a good example. Run 25K in your inflation calculator.

When you look at dollars per horsepower no it wasn't.

2005 GT had 300 HP. 50 short of 2004GTO and 100 short of 2005 GTO. And for those comparisons I remember them well, especially Car and Drivers "gotta have it" factor that skewed the points totals to give the GT the "win" when GTO beat it in most all of the performance categories. I kept the magazines. ;)

2002 Trans Ams would MSRP sticker for low $30's as well.

And 25K in 2004 has a buying power of 31.5K today. Look at 2015 Mustang GT priced right at $32K, dead on.

 

[mr.aqua]

I feel the opposite of the OP. My mustang spec'd out will be right around 35k with x-plan. Base GT with pp and Cloth recaro's. Back in 2001 when I bought my S2000 it was 32k new. For 3k more I'm getting ALOT more for the money. Take inflation into account and it's cheaper.

 

[GrabberBlue5.0]

I agree that the car is worth the price. People want vehicles to have certain features and XXX hp and XX mpg's... That stuff isn't free, or easy to design, that's the price we pay to have nice things. If you want a 300ish hp car for 26k go buy a focus st or EB mustang, if you want a 400+ hp car for 35k go buy a mustang GT or a Camaro SS

 

[Free Agent]

I see 2005 Mustang GT(no option manual) at $25,145 plus $675 destination for $25,820 sticker.
I see 2015 Mustang GT(no option manual) at $32,100 plus $825 destination for $32,925 sticker.

For comparisons sake my 2004 GTO stickered at $33,495 w/destination (limited slip standard, leather & automatic)

Just going to plug these into an inflation calculator.

2005 GT in 2014 = $32,517
2015 GT in 2004 = $26,143
2004 GTO in 2014 = $42,183

In my book, "bang for the buck" which means horsepower per dollar the Mustang has maintained its value for the last decade AND added increased safety and comfort content. It is a screaming deal and nobody out there beats it as far as I can tell.

 

[Free Agent]

Yeah, see, this thought actually flitted across my mind for a half-second when I was initially responding to your post -- you and I are roughly the same age, and so for us it's easy to think of "features go up while prices stabilize or go down" because it's always been that way with computers and electronics... but it's JUST been that way with computers and electronics, because electronics is a nascent industry. All nascent industries see price declines in real terms as production methodologies improve and materials sourcing improves and product design improves.

Automobiles, on the other hand, are a mature industry -- while certain components in the electronics system are still in their early stages, most of the manufacturing processes are already where they're going to be. Once a product / manufacturing process is mature, price inflation happens even in stagnant product offerings, let alone advancing product portfolios. That's just basic economics.

I also find it very interesting that many in the Gen Y and Millenial age groups find smartphones and cars as almost a direct comparison. They are close in many regards but not all of course.

Just for kicks, what do you think your phone from 2004 would be worth today? I know I probably couldn't pay someone to take mine (some sad outdated flip phone with a goofy antennae sticking out the top). Would a phone from 2004 even connect to a network any more? As for a decent vehicle from 2004 you may be able to get 1/3 of its original value still. And it will ALWAYS be user ready. (Albeit outdated) ;)

Just some points to ponder. Not trying to cause any trouble.

 

[MikeAZ]

And I will add that Ford IS trying to tap into that small youth car culture niche by offering the EB 2.3 engine.

My perspective on the EB 2.3L is that Ford is pretty much forced into offering it due to the significant increase in the CAFE standards for 2016. To meet it, Ford will have to sell many more high mileage vehicles than performance vehicles.

If they don't sell enough EB 2.3 Mustangs (or the various Focus/Edge/Fusion/Fiesta high mileage models) they will have to limit the number of low mileage vehicles they can sell. They can do this is many ways, most which affect the enthusiast market negatively. The most likely method is to move the high performance engines into limit edition models.

I suspect that in the near future we will see a 1.5ish L I4 DI TB EB as the base Mustang, the 2.3L I4 DI TB EB as the mid point, and the GT will become a higher volume I4 DI TB or even some variant of a DI TB V4, flat 4, I6, or V6 (although an I6 would be hard to fit on this chassis). And I wouldn't expect the HP numbers on the GT to incrementally increase every few models years.

Also there is political pressure to add even more alcohol to gasoline (above today's 10%) or convert to E85 type fuels. This results in lower energy content per gallon which translates to lower mileage, making it harder to meet CAFE standards.

Prediction - if the EB Mustang doesn't sell well THIS year, the Coyote or its offshoot will only be available in a $60,000+ limited edition in the future.

 

[Fox9350]

In all fairness, the GTO in 05 was outrageously expensive THEN. The 05 stang gt was 24.9 compared to the GTO at 5K more and it still came in second to the Mustang in compos. So thats not a good example. Run 25K in your inflation calculator.

Yeah I wouldn't go comparing different cars. Compare a 1995 GT to a 2005 GT to a 2015 GT. That's apples to apples. No question the new Mustang will be the most technologically advanced ever and light years ahead of the one from 10 years ago, as you'd hope. With the massive power and handling it offers, it's definitely a bargain compared to almost anything else out there. There's also no question that as the car has become more powerful, the price of a Mustang GT has escalated beyond inflation for awhile now.

I bought a 1993 GT in 1998 my sr year of HS for around 9-10k, leather, power, 5 speed, excellent condition, 50-60k miles. I punched it into an inflation calc, that 10k in today's dollars is about 16,400. So just now I looked at 5 year old GTs used online and they range from 15-25k generally with avg around 20k.

Sponsored