Sponsored

S650 2023 Mustang Chief Engineer / Program Director is Michael Celetino

Status
Not open for further replies.

MustangorCamaro

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2020
Threads
1
Messages
118
Reaction score
44
Location
DMV
Vehicle(s)
Honda Accord
When they switch to hybrid or all electric sooner than later, I wonder if the same people will still be in charge. Or even have a hand in things. Seems easier to swap the vehicle over to the Mustang Mach E and eliminate the Mach E name. Poof. You have an Electric Mustang.
Sponsored

 

DCShelby

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2019
Threads
17
Messages
1,131
Reaction score
839
Location
DC
First Name
Robert
Vehicle(s)
2018 GT350 Lighting Blue and 2017 Ducati 1299S
How about a Ford Performance version of the Bronco?
 
OP
OP
amk91

amk91

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Threads
20
Messages
225
Reaction score
173
Location
USA
Vehicle(s)
17 GTP PP and 2014 SVT Raptor SE
Good info, yet again Sir!

I'd assumed Carl Widmann would have still been the Chief Engineer for S650. As most will know, Dave Pericak was Chief Engineer for S550 through development to production. He was then promoted to head up Ford Performance and is now head of "Icons". Carl Widmann took over from him at lead the team for the '18 refresh up until now.

However, I guess there would be an overlap over responsibilities as development of S650 would have been underway at the same time as new S550 derivatives (such as Mach 1 and the Ecoboost HPP). Perhaps it doesn't make sense for the same person to be responsible for both.

In the film "A Faster Horse", Hau Thai-Tang (Chief Engineer for S197) said something along the lines of " if you're a successful Mustang Chief Engineer you get asked to do something better, if not, you're asked to do something else". I expect (hope) Mr Widmann is moving onto bigger things. That being said, working on Mustang IS the pinnacle in my opinion!
Certainly, much thanks LOL. I'm always fishing for info.

My concerns are his previous responsibilities lying way too much in the front wheel drive segment. This seems to be his first RWD unibody vehicle in a long time.
Maybe responsibilities are divided between S650 and S550?
 
OP
OP
amk91

amk91

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Threads
20
Messages
225
Reaction score
173
Location
USA
Vehicle(s)
17 GTP PP and 2014 SVT Raptor SE
How about a Ford Performance version of the Bronco?
You are a little bit too on the money, because that's definitely coming and the best way to describe it. I hate the name Warthog and hope it comes as a Raptor. I'm guessing that the Wildtrak is a diet Raptor. Have seen some stuff that says a new Mustang and Bronco performance version come out the same year.

Hoping we get to see some S650 mules in the next few months and the Real McCoy by the winter. If not for COVID-19, we would have seen spy shots by now.
 

DCShelby

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2019
Threads
17
Messages
1,131
Reaction score
839
Location
DC
First Name
Robert
Vehicle(s)
2018 GT350 Lighting Blue and 2017 Ducati 1299S
Call it the Falcon, Ford already has that name trademarked for vehicles. Granted in the 60’s it was the predecessor to the Mustang but only old guys like me remember that.
 

Sponsored

9secondko

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2014
Threads
4
Messages
1,986
Reaction score
1,030
Location
Irvine, ca
Vehicle(s)
2003 cobra
The new boss is Hackett approved.

Meaning - the future of the mustang is in the hands of people who don’t understand what the Mustang is.

Period.

The new team is all about doing what they want while spinning it out both sides of their mouths so that you and I will be ok with it.

The bit about needing a Mach e for the Mustang to survive? Total nonsense.

A cool suv that isn’t called mustang would actually be more helpful, since any shared tech would be viable without abusing the mustang name.

They are putting themselves before the mustang. Rather than use their positions and fight for the Mustang, they are using the mustang as a platform to make names for themselves - not to Create a better Mustang.

S650 is not longer what it was originally. It is now based on a CUV platform. At LEAST we get AWD out of it...

And the 1400 hp electric suv wearing a pony on the grille is just a slap in the face as well as a striking proof of what the intentions are - pigs, lipstick, and all of that.

Can you imagine if the same effort was put into the real mustang...
 
Last edited:
OP
OP
amk91

amk91

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Threads
20
Messages
225
Reaction score
173
Location
USA
Vehicle(s)
17 GTP PP and 2014 SVT Raptor SE
Call it the Falcon, Ford already has that name trademarked for vehicles. Granted in the 60’s it was the predecessor to the Mustang but only old guys like me remember that.
I wouldn't call it that exactly. Falcon would only be a good name for a very high-end version or special edition down the road.

I have a major bone to pick with the name Warthog, because all I can think of is some ugly animal or Pumbaa from Lion King.

I can only wonder which good ol' boy came up with such a classless name, that might polarize people, other than maybe Jim himself?

The new Bronco's too much of a beautiful thing to be stained with such a trashy name and a misuse of the clout and prestige built with the name Raptor.

The Raptor name has been so great, it hasn't been opposed for a good 11 years. Jamal Hameedi who came up with the SVT Raptor back in 2006, left because he didn't like Jim Hackett and went straight to Land Rover in a leading responsibility.

That's how much clout he had for creating the SVT Raptor.

I'm definitely trading in my 2014 Raptor for the 2023 hi-po Bronco and will skip 2021 and 2022 model years.

The new boss is Hackett approved.

Meaning - the future of the mustang is in the hands of people who don’t understand what the Mustang is.

Period.

The new team is all about doing what they want while spinning it out both sides of their mouths so that you and I will be ok with it.

The bit about needing a Mach e for the Mustang to survive? Total nonsense.

A cool suv that isn’t called mustang would actually be more helpful, since any shared tech would be viable without abusing the mustang name.

They are putting themselves before the mustang. Rather than use their positions and fight for the Mustang, they are using the mustang as a platform to make names for themselves - not to Create a better Mustang.

S650 is not longer what it was originally. It is now based on a CUV platform. At LEAST we get AWD out of it...

And the 1400 hp electric suv wearing a pony on the grille is just a slap in the face as well as a striking proof of what the intentions are - pigs, lipstick, and all of that.

Can you imagine if the same effort was put into the real mustang...
I agree with your post up until the point you mentioned CUV platform. I think you only have to worry about S750 regarding that and not S650.

S650 still rides on what is called D2C or D5, an offshoot of 90s DEW-98 for Jag S-Type, Lincoln LS, and retro Ford Thunderbird.

A fully CD6 Mustang may not even arrive until 2027, but that's of course if they don't cancel the nameplate for 2-door coupes after S650 or delay it beyond 2030. S650 = SN-95 vs S550 = Fox.

My biggest issue with Celentino, is that most of his experience the past 20 years has been with front-wheel drive platforms, associated with late 90s Volvos.

What RWD engineering experience does he even have from this century? Yes an engineer is an engineer, but experience matters a great deal.

Also listening closer to your post, the biggest issue I have with a lot of modern corporations nowadays in the automotive industry, is how the average white collar employee only cares about making themselves look good to the big boss by cutting costs and will sell a vehicle/nameplate down the river to do so. And of course, bonuses.

I cringe and shake my head at the resumes of engineers on LinkedIn from both Ford and other companies, who BRAG about MILLIONS in cost cutting they achieve!

My only question to them is, what is a consequence of those cost savings they created?

Recalls? MT-82? Poor perceived quality? I'm already seeing the effects of Hackett on Bronco. If Mark Fields was still there, all the money in the world would have gone into it with nothing spared.
 
Last edited:

S550Boss

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2013
Threads
15
Messages
563
Reaction score
72
Location
USA
Vehicle(s)
2016 GT350; 2018 Focus RS
CD6 is not a "CUV" or "SUV", it's a flexible platform that was designed to be used for a variety or purposes. It's Ford's version of the Alpha or FM platforms, both very successful platforms that enabled sports cars that would not have existed otherwise (Camaro and Z) while hosting far higher volume cars and SUVs that are state of the art, generate far higher profits, enabling the use and continued development of the platforms for the lower volume cars.
In the FM case, the 350Z/370Z and the upcoming new Z are the result (and the GT-R), while the highly successful G35/G37/G50/G60 share the platform, engines, big brakes, and now the all-new twin turbo 3.0 V-6.
In the Alpha case, the Camaro solely owes it's existence to Alpha, which supplied a state-of-the-platform that is superior to S550 (and lighter) while supplying a wide variety of engine, transmission and brakes, and also yielding the ATS-V and CTS-V.
The FM and Alpha platforms owed nothing to previous designs, and neither does CD6. They were clean-sheet, which is very rare in this industry.
And the fact that the CD6 first yielded the Explorer and Aviator is a very good thing because those are high volume and high margin platforms. It's unfortunate that the Lincoln sedan was cancelled but that's the existing market reality. And the fact that CD6 was designed for longer/shorter, wider/narrower variants (like any modern platform) means the resulting S750 Mustang can be the same size it is now or even smaller - but also lighter and more structurally up to date. So the Explorer/Aviator pays the bill for a sophisticated chassis that the Mustang would never have been given in any reality. The S750 will have a highly aluminum intensive structure and suspension, front SLA (thanks Aviator), and a rear suspension that is architecturally similar to the current and very successful suspension. Without CD6, the Mustang would have been relegated again to the current S550/650 platform, which is simply an evolved S197, which itself was a de-volved and dumbed-down DEW-98. It's currently after all these hacks and years an orphan platform that has just gotten heavier, cannot support hybridization without-less-than-optimal hacks, and which cannot go any further in this reality. I may be wrong, and we'll see, but I believe that S650 is just an update to S550.
The Mach-E is a bold move, and Dave Pericak's explanation of how he came to accept it and indeed embrace it is the best. He is a hero who has done great work for us, unprecedented work, with lots more coming. He is also the person responsible for the Mach-E 1400 (a phenomenal drivetrain, one that is impossible with ICE) and also the Mustang Lithium (another Mustang that is impossible with ICE). Neither are production or even prototypes (despite how they are labelled), both are experiments, neither are something that we'll be able to buy in that form - but they are milestones in the very long term development of a purely electric 2-door Mustang. That is post-S750 at least, maybe even longer out. But both show the all-around superiority of their electric powertrains, both enable a Mustang sports car to exist in 15 years from now, one that will leave the current car as obsolete as the FOX is to the S550, and one that will again be able to be sold worldwide. That's the key here, it was a critical key in the financial success of the S550, especially in countries which have outlawing ICE drivetrains (coming as soon as 2030 in many countries). Like everything else Ford is doing, Ford can either be at the leading edge around the world, or it can be left behind technologically.
Not everybody likes Hackett... I think his initial focus on all this "self driving autonomy" and city "connected architecture" - were presented very poorly and even naively. Those are technologies every manufacturer is developing, Ford had to come up to speed, but they are not the leading technologies in the industry yet. The leading technology is electrification and it's accelerating worldwide. Ford is determined to be a leader here, they have to be, but they dlo not have the ability to be *the* leader (not with all of their baggage and their legacy overhead, and not when Tesla is 5-10 years ahead in every way). So Ford had to move faster to catch up and be in a leading position and he and his team recognized that. You don't even see the other stuff mentioned anymore, although the new F-150 has a small advancement in autonomy (well behind GM and Nissan) and the Mustang Mach-E supposedly will have some element of it "later". Instead it's hybrids as a bridging solution to full electric in a 10-15 year plan. Ford knows how to build a good hybrid, and Ford is learning how to build a good electric. The Mach-E is first out of the gate, it's not at all perfect, the battery technology is not state-of-the art and the range is already dated, but it's a very very necessary first step. It's a bold move making it part of the Mustang family, but it's also an investment in the very long term future of the Mustang.
And kudos for Ford for the also all-new C2 platform, which has given us the excellent Focus ST (unfortunately not imported here), the Kuga/Escape/Corsair (all significant improvements over their predecessors, and all selling well) the upcoming Bronco Sport and Bronco Maverick, and the next level of hybrids. C2 is another platform which adapts widely in use and size, and we will see further variants including apparently a Mondeo/Fusion replacement as a slightly larger and longer "Focus Active" type vehicle that will compete with the extremely successful Subaru Outback. That's a very hot product for Subaru, maybe the only reason they exist in any size at all, and Ford can play well there IF they execute well. The Focus Active was supposed to compete here, but it's too small for the North American market and nobody wants it imported from China (a prescient move considering how that government is finally being exposed).
These new platforms are terrific, let's just hope that Ford has the personnel and drive to make them into the competitors and volume they need to be. Dave Pericak, Raj Nair and Joe Hinrichs (who was a real class act in the industry, and who was treated very shabbily by Hackett) together as a team made the S550 the unprecedented success that it has been. We owe them a lot, they made a dull and out-dated predessor with little promise into a world-class sports car and they did it with a carefully calculated strategy and very limited budget budget. And while unfortunately the CD6-based Mustang will be delayed, again likely due to the huge investment on longer term technologies and programs, the S650 will hopefully rectify some of the shortcomings of the current Mustang, introduce a necessary hybrid, and demonstrate that hybrids can be fun too. And because S650 is almost certainly built on the same bones underneath as S550 (not that Ford will admit it when it comes out), we'll certainly see Shelby and Mach-1 variants very quickly because they will be easier to do over the familiar base. Same for the aftermarket which may even find that most of their parts already fit and immediately work.
(yes, I am mixing platform and program names for convenience)
 

S550Boss

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2013
Threads
15
Messages
563
Reaction score
72
Location
USA
Vehicle(s)
2016 GT350; 2018 Focus RS
Call it the Falcon, Ford already has that name trademarked for vehicles.
What value does the Falcon brand have in the market anymore? Here in North America Falcon was a creative program 60 years ago, purposefully modest in execution, then fell behind and the up-market Torino took it's place. Nobody wanted "modest" anymore by the late 60s or nowadays. People who bought a brand new one originally are either in their last brand new car, or dead. The Mercury syndrome.
In South America the Falcon was a car that the death squad showed up in and you joined all the "disappeared". There remains a very hostile view of that name.
And in Australia it continued... in a declining and now dead market; it's a dated chassis receiving continuous but small updates due to a heroic product team, but not competing well in that market as it evolved (and GM's equivalent offerings, on a much better platform, didn't fare any better either) and finally dragging Ford down and contributing to the end of Ford production there (same for GM). Fortunately some of the Aussie creativity has survived and contributes to the Ranger.
 

Linkster1666

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2019
Threads
5
Messages
734
Reaction score
611
Location
AZ
First Name
Link
Vehicle(s)
2019 Mustang GT Premium Orange Fury PP1 A10 401A 3:55
Vehicle Showcase
1
Engineers and Millions of dollars in cost cutting?

Leaving a quart of oil and a pint of transmission fluid out of every car they ship, millions in shipping costs not to mention the cost of fluids, costs go down.
 

Sponsored

DarthMalice

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 27, 2016
Threads
26
Messages
570
Reaction score
646
Location
Huntsville, AL
Vehicle(s)
2021 Mustang Mach 1 M0960; AT; Fighter Jet Gray
Not hopeful for the mustang future reading about this Celetino guy. Ford sold mustang down the river when they green-lighted that battery powered Mazda wannabe though. I will get a 2021 GT and enjoy what will probably be the last, good traditional mustang. I have zero hope for The next gen mustang tbh...you can keep the hybrid/electric shit. If that is the future, I guess I will buy a Nissan leaf when it becomes too expensive to put gas in my GT.
 

Erik427

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2014
Threads
2
Messages
1,421
Reaction score
287
Location
Huntington
Vehicle(s)
1979 Mustang
Call it the Falcon, Ford already has that name trademarked for vehicles. Granted in the 60’s it was the predecessor to the Mustang but only old guys like me remember that.
......and me.
Heck.......I've owned every model of the Falcon.
 

likeaboss

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2013
Threads
42
Messages
2,412
Reaction score
983
Location
Baltimore, MD
Vehicle(s)
2020 Corvette Z51
As a Lincoln Continental owner he did a great job with that he had to work with. I’m excited to see what he could do with a dedicated platform.
 

Twin Turbo

Super Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Aug 2, 2012
Threads
479
Messages
9,835
Reaction score
7,402
Location
England
First Name
Paul
Vehicle(s)
Mustang '05 GT
Let's give the new guy a chance. Sure, he may have only been involved in FWD application on his resume, but who's to say he's not a Mustang enthusiast and/or has knowledge of what makes a good RWD platform? Besides, its more Tom Barnes that will be responsible for how it drives and it's Mr Barnes' job to oversee and implement the engineers plans. If Mr Celetino doesn't have experience of RWD platforms, it may make convincing him of some decisions a little tougher, but if he's a good manager he'll listen to his experts working for him.

Besides, with S650 being heavily based on S550, I see this as more polishing the existing platform, rather than starting from new, so there will be less need for Mr Celetino to have that specific RWD experience.

Everything in life is a compromise, and a new generation of Mustang is no exception. The trick is to create the best with what you're given and, so far, I think the various members of Team Mustang have done a stand up job. I have no reason to doubt the team working on S650 :)
 

Twin Turbo

Super Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Aug 2, 2012
Threads
479
Messages
9,835
Reaction score
7,402
Location
England
First Name
Paul
Vehicle(s)
Mustang '05 GT
CD6 is not a "CUV" or "SUV", it's a flexible platform that was designed to be used for a variety or purposes. It's Ford's version of the Alpha or FM platforms, both very successful platforms that enabled sports cars that would not have existed otherwise (Camaro and Z) while hosting far higher volume cars and SUVs that are state of the art, generate far higher profits, enabling the use and continued development of the platforms for the lower volume cars.
In the FM case, the 350Z/370Z and the upcoming new Z are the result (and the GT-R), while the highly successful G35/G37/G50/G60 share the platform, engines, big brakes, and now the all-new twin turbo 3.0 V-6.
In the Alpha case, the Camaro solely owes it's existence to Alpha, which supplied a state-of-the-platform that is superior to S550 (and lighter) while supplying a wide variety of engine, transmission and brakes, and also yielding the ATS-V and CTS-V.
The FM and Alpha platforms owed nothing to previous designs, and neither does CD6. They were clean-sheet, which is very rare in this industry.
And the fact that the CD6 first yielded the Explorer and Aviator is a very good thing because those are high volume and high margin platforms. It's unfortunate that the Lincoln sedan was cancelled but that's the existing market reality. And the fact that CD6 was designed for longer/shorter, wider/narrower variants (like any modern platform) means the resulting S750 Mustang can be the same size it is now or even smaller - but also lighter and more structurally up to date. So the Explorer/Aviator pays the bill for a sophisticated chassis that the Mustang would never have been given in any reality. The S750 will have a highly aluminum intensive structure and suspension, front SLA (thanks Aviator), and a rear suspension that is architecturally similar to the current and very successful suspension. Without CD6, the Mustang would have been relegated again to the current S550/650 platform, which is simply an evolved S197, which itself was a de-volved and dumbed-down DEW-98. It's currently after all these hacks and years an orphan platform that has just gotten heavier, cannot support hybridization without-less-than-optimal hacks, and which cannot go any further in this reality. I may be wrong, and we'll see, but I believe that S650 is just an update to S550.
The Mach-E is a bold move, and Dave Pericak's explanation of how he came to accept it and indeed embrace it is the best. He is a hero who has done great work for us, unprecedented work, with lots more coming. He is also the person responsible for the Mach-E 1400 (a phenomenal drivetrain, one that is impossible with ICE) and also the Mustang Lithium (another Mustang that is impossible with ICE). Neither are production or even prototypes (despite how they are labelled), both are experiments, neither are something that we'll be able to buy in that form - but they are milestones in the very long term development of a purely electric 2-door Mustang. That is post-S750 at least, maybe even longer out. But both show the all-around superiority of their electric powertrains, both enable a Mustang sports car to exist in 15 years from now, one that will leave the current car as obsolete as the FOX is to the S550, and one that will again be able to be sold worldwide. That's the key here, it was a critical key in the financial success of the S550, especially in countries which have outlawing ICE drivetrains (coming as soon as 2030 in many countries). Like everything else Ford is doing, Ford can either be at the leading edge around the world, or it can be left behind technologically.
Not everybody likes Hackett... I think his initial focus on all this "self driving autonomy" and city "connected architecture" - were presented very poorly and even naively. Those are technologies every manufacturer is developing, Ford had to come up to speed, but they are not the leading technologies in the industry yet. The leading technology is electrification and it's accelerating worldwide. Ford is determined to be a leader here, they have to be, but they dlo not have the ability to be *the* leader (not with all of their baggage and their legacy overhead, and not when Tesla is 5-10 years ahead in every way). So Ford had to move faster to catch up and be in a leading position and he and his team recognized that. You don't even see the other stuff mentioned anymore, although the new F-150 has a small advancement in autonomy (well behind GM and Nissan) and the Mustang Mach-E supposedly will have some element of it "later". Instead it's hybrids as a bridging solution to full electric in a 10-15 year plan. Ford knows how to build a good hybrid, and Ford is learning how to build a good electric. The Mach-E is first out of the gate, it's not at all perfect, the battery technology is not state-of-the art and the range is already dated, but it's a very very necessary first step. It's a bold move making it part of the Mustang family, but it's also an investment in the very long term future of the Mustang.
And kudos for Ford for the also all-new C2 platform, which has given us the excellent Focus ST (unfortunately not imported here), the Kuga/Escape/Corsair (all significant improvements over their predecessors, and all selling well) the upcoming Bronco Sport and Bronco Maverick, and the next level of hybrids. C2 is another platform which adapts widely in use and size, and we will see further variants including apparently a Mondeo/Fusion replacement as a slightly larger and longer "Focus Active" type vehicle that will compete with the extremely successful Subaru Outback. That's a very hot product for Subaru, maybe the only reason they exist in any size at all, and Ford can play well there IF they execute well. The Focus Active was supposed to compete here, but it's too small for the North American market and nobody wants it imported from China (a prescient move considering how that government is finally being exposed).
These new platforms are terrific, let's just hope that Ford has the personnel and drive to make them into the competitors and volume they need to be. Dave Pericak, Raj Nair and Joe Hinrichs (who was a real class act in the industry, and who was treated very shabbily by Hackett) together as a team made the S550 the unprecedented success that it has been. We owe them a lot, they made a dull and out-dated predessor with little promise into a world-class sports car and they did it with a carefully calculated strategy and very limited budget budget. And while unfortunately the CD6-based Mustang will be delayed, again likely due to the huge investment on longer term technologies and programs, the S650 will hopefully rectify some of the shortcomings of the current Mustang, introduce a necessary hybrid, and demonstrate that hybrids can be fun too. And because S650 is almost certainly built on the same bones underneath as S550 (not that Ford will admit it when it comes out), we'll certainly see Shelby and Mach-1 variants very quickly because they will be easier to do over the familiar base. Same for the aftermarket which may even find that most of their parts already fit and immediately work.
(yes, I am mixing platform and program names for convenience)

That, Sir, is a cracking post and I don't think I could have written it better :like:
Sponsored

 
Status
Not open for further replies.
 




Top