GT350 Mustang Pricing [Update: rumored $52,995 starting price]

[ohtobbad]

I am thinking base 52 up to 60 fully optioned, with tech and track pack.

Sponsored

 

[Patio208]

The thought process that makes this car 50-55k is not there guys.

So your saying this gt350 doesn't have more than 10-15k worth of technology and costs over the 2013 boss LS? Total bs. Heck the base GT now has the same brakes as the 2013 Boss LS. That should tell you something there.

Your own logic can be used against you. The once pricier tech from the Boss has become cheaper and trickled down to the base GT at a lower price. Exotic, luxurious and or high performance technology tends to become cheaper over time. So, the tech that will now occupy the Boss performance territory will be that much more upscale than the last generation for nearly the same price.

 

[chopsui]

I don't get all the comparisons to the Boss. Yes, it has a similar mission as the Boss - being a track weapon. But, the Boss was a fairly mildly massaged GT. The only really expensive parts were the new heads and intake. The GT350 is a completely different proposition. It has far more changes than a GT500, let alone a Boss. New engine, new trans, magnetic shocks (and the electronics and development effort that goes with them), MUCH better brakes, trick electronically adjustable exhaust, wider front track, etc. Not to mention all the body work. I don't see this being cheaper than a GT500 and we'll be lucky if it's not more.

 

[nametoshowothers]

I don't get all the comparisons to the Boss. Yes, it has a similar mission as the Boss - being a track weapon. But, the Boss was a fairly mildly massaged GT. The only really expensive parts were the new heads and intake. The GT350 is a completely different proposition. It has far more changes than a GT500, let alone a Boss. New engine, new trans, magnetic shocks (and the electronics and development effort that goes with them), MUCH better brakes, trick electronically adjustable exhaust, wider front track, etc. Not to mention all the body work. I don't see this being cheaper than a GT500 and we'll be lucky if it's not more.

It will be cheaper if the rumours of the R model are true. It will be significantly cheaper than z28

 

[scottpe]

I don't get all the comparisons to the Boss. Yes, it has a similar mission as the Boss - being a track weapon. But, the Boss was a fairly mildly massaged GT. The only really expensive parts were the new heads and intake.

I think you're understating the differences a bit there. The Boss Roadrunner motor had special CNC'd heads, unique intake, lightweight internals and valve train components, forged pistons, different cams, etc. etc.

The GT350 is a completely different proposition. It has far more changes than a GT500, let alone a Boss. New engine, new trans, magnetic shocks (and the electronics and development effort that goes with them), MUCH better brakes, trick electronically adjustable exhaust, wider front track, etc. Not to mention all the body work. I don't see this being cheaper than a GT500 and we'll be lucky if it's not more.

You forget that the GT500 has plenty of unique parts too. Upgraded suspension, brakes, wheels/tires and body components/aero to achieve 200MPH top speed. It has unique transmission/clutch/drive train parts capable of withstanding its incredibly massive torque. Not to mention a very expensive supercharger system on top of its very expensive hand-built engine. You think maybe they spent some time/money on R&D for that thing?

...Yet the 2014 GT500 had a starting base price of $55K.

I can pretty much guarantee you that the GT-350 engine is cheaper, if for no other reason than the lack of all the expensive supercharger equipment. Indications are that the magnetic ride suspension is an OPTION on the GT-350.

So where does that leave us? It's got better brakes....and it handles better?

I'm sticking to my guns. Base will be below $55K.

 

[2112]

The thought process that makes this car 50-55k is not there guys.

If I used the same logic you guys are using, the Boss mustang laguna seca would be 40k. In reality, the base LS was 50k.

People saying ford is stating it is affordable to own... key word own. Meaning to maintain the cheaper calibers and brakes, oils, compared to other track type cars offered in the market.

So your saying this gt350 doesn't have more than 10-15k worth of technology and costs over the 2013 boss LS? Total bs. Heck the base GT now has the same brakes as the 2013 Boss LS. That should tell you something there.

This is of course is just using the crazy math people are using in here.

If this car is under 60k, I will be in total shock!

^^^This

I would expect it to be every bit as much as the GT 500. Add the requisite ADM and I expect it to be well over $70 out the door.

 

[Viperbluecobra]

Your own logic can be used against you. The once pricier tech from the Boss has become cheaper and trickled down to the base GT at a lower price. Exotic, luxurious and or high performance technology tends to become cheaper over time. So, the tech that will now occupy the Boss performance territory will be that much more upscale than the last generation for nearly the same price.

Wrong logic. I didn't say that, I was just giving reference to the brakes as an example that the LS wasn't that great of an improvement and was still 50k. This GT350 takes the mustang to a completely different level then the boss LS did for the standard GT. Technology to make the boss better was not as advanced or costly as the GT350 technology is. Carbon fiber composite, larger wheels and tires, completely new body panels and hood, magnetic suspension, oh and the flat crank motor, etc. The boss LS was just a stripped down base mustang with a few parts on it. Brakes, motor (not worldly different), exhaust, same body panels, deleted interior, and simi adjustiable standard suspension for 50k. Not nearly the same level as the GT350.

 

[Kodyray72]

Wrong logic. I didn't say that, I was just giving reference to the brakes as an example that the LS wasn't that great of an improvement and was still 50k. This GT350 takes the mustang to a completely different level then the boss LS did for the standard GT. Technology to make the boss better was not as advanced or costly as the GT350 technology is. Carbon fiber composite, larger wheels and tires, completely new body panels and hood, magnetic suspension, oh and the flat crank motor, etc. The boss LS was just a stripped down base mustang with a few parts on it. Brakes, motor (not worldly different), exhaust, same body panels, deleted interior, and simi adjustiable standard suspension for 50k. Not nearly the same level as the GT350.

It's still not gunna cost over 55k for a base gt350, nobody would be surprised at that price point, they said we'd be surprised by the price and affordability of the car.

 

[scottpe]

The thought process that makes this car 50-55k is not there guys.

If I used the same logic you guys are using, the Boss mustang laguna seca would be 40k. In reality, the base LS was 50k.

Not apples to apples. For one, only 750 units per year of the LS were built (1500 total). They have already stated that they will make thousands of the GT-350 per year.

Secondly, there's a thing called progress. The new GT performs on par with the outgoing Boss in most ways, and even outperforms it in others. It has a majority of the engine components from the Boss. It has better brakes. It's more refined and has more features. Yet base price for it is, what, almost $10K below the Boss?

People saying ford is stating it is affordable to own... key word own. Meaning to maintain the cheaper calibers and brakes, oils, compared to other track type cars offered in the market.

Funny thing about that key word "own" is that it's not what Ford said.

Here's exactly what Ford said:

Q: Why no carbon ceramic brakes?
A: I think you’ll find out later that affordability was a big part of this car.

Q: So keeping price down was a big part of that?
A: Yes. That was a priority with this car.

Yes, one could argue that it's still *slightly* open to interpretation. But I'm pretty sure he's talking about entry price, not cost of ownership. Let's be real, it's a Mustang. Since when has cost of ownership EVER been an issue?

So your saying this gt350 doesn't have more than 10-15k worth of technology and costs over the 2013 boss LS? Total bs. Heck the base GT now has the same brakes as the 2013 Boss LS. That should tell you something there.

This is of course is just using the crazy math people are using in here.

See my post above comparing it to the GT500. The math isn't that crazy. I am almost 100% confident that the GT500 is more expensive to produce than this car will be. Yet the 2014 MSRP for that car was ~$55K.

If this car is under 60k, I will be in total shock!

Well, then be prepared to be pleasantly surprised. ;)

 

[91z28350]

^^^This

I would expect it to be every bit as much as the GT 500. Add the requisite ADM and I expect it to be well over $70 out the door.

Ok, I just have to rant here for a minute. I am not picking on 2112 in particular, his post was just the latest to refer to the "ADM" factor.

ADM is simple to take out of the equation. Don't fucking pay it!!! It is that damn simple. If your local dealership is a douche bag and wants to add 5, 10, 15K to the sticker, walk out and do some damn research. I guarantee there is a dealership down the road, in another town/county/state etc. that will be glad to sell you one for MSRP or less. All the drones who absolutely HAVE to have the very first one in their area may be stupid enough to give the dealerships extra money (their choice. For some people the joy of owning the "first one" in their area is worth it, and for some of the more wealthy members, the extra coin is chump change, to me it is just dumb, YMMV), but any member who really wants one WILL be able to get it at MSRP or less with a little leg/phone/internet work.

So, for the love of GOD and high performance cars, quit bringing "ADM" into every !@# $%$#@<, *&^%$# #$@!%^& discussion on what ford is going to price this at.

*whew, I feel better now*

And for the record, I believe that this car will start in the high 40's/low 50's(say 49,995-52,995) and be able to be optioned up to the high 50's with everything.

 

[Viperbluecobra]

Not apples to apples. For one, only 750 units per year of the LS were built (1500 total). They have already stated that they will make thousands of the GT-350 per year.

I was making the point that the technology offered in the Boss was not as advanced or costly as the GT350. They didn't change the fenders on the boss, they didn't change the complete motor design, magnetic suspension, much upgraded interior, etc. The boss ls had the same transmission, little more motor, less weight, barely upgraded brakes, and manually adjustable shocks. If you compare to the standard gt at that time, you can't tell me that there is 20k worth of go fast in the LS compared to the base GT.

Secondly, there's a thing called progress. The new GT performs on par with the outgoing Boss in most ways, and even outperforms it in others. It has a majority of the engine components from the Boss. It has better brakes. It's more refined and has more features. Yet base price for it is, what, almost $10K below the Boss?

This is debatable. There is progress, I get it, but there is also the extent of modifications done to make the gt350 that stand way above anything the boss offerings had.

Boss didn't have fenders or reworking of that nature. That's a huge costs to completely change these things for a specific model. Carbon fiber composite materials and development. Boss had nothing like that. That's just two examples... there are a few more.. the motor is not even the same motor type!

Funny thing about that key word "own" is that it's not what Ford said.

Here's exactly what Ford said:

Yes, one could argue that it's still *slightly* open to interpretation. But I'm pretty sure he's talking about entry price, not cost of ownership. Let's be real, it's a Mustang. Since when has cost of ownership EVER been an issue?

Actually anything with a Shelby name kind of blows away that "Mustang" name and price association. You know this.

See my post above comparing it to the GT500. The math isn't that crazy. I am almost 100% confident that the GT500 is more expensive to produce than this car will be. Yet the 2014 MSRP for that car was ~$55K.

yes, but once you actually add the track pack, recaros everything like the GT350, your in the 65k range. With an under developed 5.8 supercharged motor and last years body that was shared with every mustang on the road.

Well, then be prepared to be pleasantly surprised. ;)

Man I really hope so. :eyebulge:

 

[ohtobbad]

Well, regardless of the price, I want one, and I already put in my order LOL
No price, no order sheet, but talked to my dealership and said, I will let them know when it is available, as I was the one who showed them the release from this site
So I hope price is decent.

 

[osu13]

Fyi, if anyone followed the development of the latest gm masterpiece the c7 comparing both the base corvette and the base z06 what prices are you observing. 51k is the base price of a vette, it also can get a variable exhaust for 1k magnetic ride for 1.2k after adding the z51 package. It also has a complete redesign lt1 motor, which noted having torque at a given rpm on par with last gen ls7. Taking that into consideration and then observing the mustang. Ford would not create a middle tier car (i.e not gt500) to cost more than a packaged c7 vette. Just doesn't make sense. Secondly I have a feeling the gt500 will share the same 5.2 engine as well. No way they will be doing a complete redesign for the 500 in a few years. With that said the range is anywhere from 48-52k base to not step all over the toes of a c7 and or zl1.

 

[Viperbluecobra]

Fyi, if anyone followed the development of the latest gm masterpiece the c7 comparing both the base corvette and the base z06 what prices are you observing. 51k is the base price of a vette, it also can get a variable exhaust for 1k magnetic ride for 1.2k after adding the z51 package. It also has a complete redesign lt1 motor, which noted having torque at a given rpm on par with last gen ls7. Taking that into consideration and then observing the mustang. Ford would not create a middle tier car (i.e not gt500) to cost more than a packaged c7 vette. Just doesn't make sense. Secondly I have a feeling the gt500 will share the same 5.2 engine as well. No way they will be doing a complete redesign for the 500 in a few years. With that said the range is anywhere from 48-52k base to not step all over the toes of a c7 and or zl1.

then why does GM have a z/28 that costs more than c7?

 

[Tony Alonso]

I'm an automotive design engineer myself and know exactly what type of time goes into development. I also understand how packaging and economies of scale works. As well as how R&D is spread out across future projected development to consume some of the cost it takes to develop such vehicles. I never said the car wouldn't go up in price but people are acting as if the technological advances aren't going to happen. They are also assuming these advances have not become easier to develop. Not all but sum, Magneride for example is newish tech but development and research has been done and tested for awhile. So product cost for that shouldn't be more than 1-2k per vehicle add on as a standalone in its given market. I could go on but its not needed. 54 isn't a far stretch but id still say just a bit too high considering cost projections over their past vehicles over the years.

May you be right and I be wrong. :-)

Sponsored