The Complicated Calculus - Selling Your Car For The GT500

[REDLINE]

Personally I think the 350R is one of the best looking mustangs to date. I love it’s clean lines. It’s aggressive looking but not over the top. I’m not a fan of the GT500s looks. It’s a stout performer no doubt but has a boy racer look and aesthetically is too busy for me. I’m also not a fan of the seat inserts being white either. I actually just added another R to my collection, I like it that much.

^THIS!^

I remember reading an interview with one of the designers. One of the goals was to keep it classy, subtle and tasteful. Hence the rectangular badges. He said the gt500 was where they would go full on balls to the wall.

Sponsored

 

[5.2 liters of democracy]

What makes the electricity, again?

Isn't it obvious? Lightning, duh.

 

[oldbmwfan]

What makes the electricity, again?

Turns out that answer is highly dependent on where you live. Where I live, it's 50% nuclear, <40% coal, 10% renewables, and a couple percent natural gas. Edit; in the last 2 years since I looked this up, coal has dropped to 32% and natural gas up to 10%, nuclear and wind both up also. If we're getting political, looks like Trump is doing a bang-up job of "saving coal." As if that's a valuable thing to do.

I find it interesting when people try to be provocative by asking questions that only highlight how little they know.

 

[DCShelby]

Not to mention electricity is traded or sold around the country all the time by the various suppliers. They are all linked up and one may sell units of power to another if it’s cheaper to buy than generate. It’s loads and cost management.

 

[activeGT]

Turns out that answer is highly dependent on where you live. Where I live, it's 50% nuclear, <40% coal, 10% renewables, and a couple percent natural gas. Edit; in the last 2 years since I looked this up, coal has dropped to 32% and natural gas up to 10%, nuclear and wind both up also. If we're getting political, looks like Trump is doing a bang-up job of "saving coal." As if that's a valuable thing to do.

I find it interesting when people try to be provocative by asking questions that only highlight how little they know.

Down here we using almost no coal. Natural gas rules. Nice jab, though. The point was only that the juice isn't natural. View attachment 408484

 

[Scoobs]

The electricity grid in North America is international in scope

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_power_transmission_grid

 

[VoodooPower]

I think ford should release a manual GT 500 in 2021 to steal some corvette sales away since C8 will not offer a manual either. There are many sports car fans out there that love rowing their own gears.

 

[Hack]

I usually agree with most of what you say, but I don't see any value in bringing politics into this. It's not just the left, it's the entire world - when carmakers are saying they are going electric, some promising to do it almost exclusively (e.g., Volvo - for whom the US is not the majority market), it's an indication that that is where the demand is going. And I'm pretty sure that as electrics become common, there will be fun variants developed.

Maybe there are some areas where electric is in high demand. Not here. I feel as though car makers are pushing an agenda. Gas engines are too reliable, long lasting and inexpensive so they want to go to a platform with built in obsolescence. Just like your cell phone, they want to make you replace your car every few years. And if you don't, they will send you a new "upgraded" operating system that sucks the battery down super fast.

 

[thill444]

I think ford should release a manual GT 500 in 2021 to steal some corvette sales away since C8 will not offer a manual either. There are many sports car fans out there that love rowing their own gears.

I 100% agree with you. I am a Corvette guy but just cannot get on board with the C8 and no manual. Ford would be really wise to offer one in the GT500. But at least we have the 350/350R!

 

[Epiphany]

Please leave political opinions out of this thread.

Fair enough. We can play the "so guess which side wants this but you aren't allowed to respond with Left or Right game."

...increasing acceleration performance and vehicle weight have stifled increases in fuel economy for light-duty vehicles and these trends must be stopped if substantial progress is to be made in fleet efficiency.

...estimated fuel economy values are attainable only if trends towards ever-increasing vehicle performance are stifled; this may be difficult to achieve.

The above quotes are from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. As globalist as it gets. Regardless of party or affiliation I will fight this with every car enthusiast drop of blood I have in my system.

 

[btown93]

https://jalopnik.com/chuck-schumers-plan-to-bring-back-cash-for-clunkers-ign-1839393861

Of course the OEM's are on board with electric cars. They won't have to pay all those pesky employees it takes to design, engineer, and produce everything related to the ICEs...and they won't need to do any EPA certifications.

 

[Epiphany]

https://jalopnik.com/chuck-schumers-plan-to-bring-back-cash-for-clunkers-ign-1839393861

Well shit. The truth finally trumped ideology over at Jalopnik. Bravo.

To sum up, rather than regulate, these programs tax consumers and use that money to pay manufacturers to develop cars they should be developing already while incentivizing people to destroy perfectly good cars.

 

[oldbmwfan]

Well shit. The truth finally trumped ideology over at Jalopnik. Bravo.

See, once again you're making this about ideology when you can have the discussion objectively. Maybe if that's the way you see the world, it's your ideology that is clouding your thinking, not everyone else's.

I happen to agree that C4C was stupid and that taking existing cars off the road, save for gross polluters (think coal rollers who stripped all emissions equipment off their diesels in violation of existing laws), is net harmful and, just as importantly, is socially regressive (reduces access of poorer people to reliable transportation). I especially agree with the points around industrial transport (shipping and trucking) and air travel being far wrse than cars. None of that is inconsistent with supporting cleaner tech in the future, unless you see the world as "all change is bad." The unfortunate result of your mindset here is that you will never even try to find common ground and understand specifically what opinions differ and why. Kind of a shame and kills what could be a valuable conversation pretty quickly.

Re. OEMs pushing electric for the revenue model ... maybe. It's worth considering. On the other hand, dealer revenue streams go way down and dealer business models basically blow up, when the cars don't require much maintenance beyond brakes and suspension and modular battery pack replacement. OEMs probably like that angle of it, too, frankly. However, OEMs would have to do something about the revenue model regardless of gas or electric, because the rise of ride sharing and the lower rates of vehicle ownership among people under 30 means that their market is shrinking in the US regardless. I don't think companies like Ford would make the scale of investment required to get into electrification just for that shift, especially because BEVs are so far still unprofitable. It would make far more sense for them to keep cranking out Navigators where they make $40k per truck as fast and as long as they can. The NPV on that today vs. shifting toward a model where they are mostly-electric in order to sell a few more units at some lower margin 15 years in the future is not in doubt.

 

[Epiphany]

If you don't recognize where Jalopnik sits in terms of politics, I can't help you.

The rest of us see the urban bubble for what it is. Failure.

 

[Hack]

See, once again you're making this about ideology when you can have the discussion objectively. Maybe if that's the way you see the world, it's your ideology that is clouding your thinking, not everyone else's.

I happen to agree that C4C was stupid and that taking existing cars off the road, save for gross polluters (think coal rollers who stripped all emissions equipment off their diesels in violation of existing laws), is net harmful and, just as importantly, is socially regressive (reduces access of poorer people to reliable transportation). I especially agree with the points around industrial transport (shipping and trucking) and air travel being far wrse than cars. None of that is inconsistent with supporting cleaner tech in the future, unless you see the world as "all change is bad." The unfortunate result of your mindset here is that you will never even try to find common ground and understand specifically what opinions differ and why. Kind of a shame and kills what could be a valuable conversation pretty quickly.

Re. OEMs pushing electric for the revenue model ... maybe. It's worth considering. On the other hand, dealer revenue streams go way down and dealer business models basically blow up, when the cars don't require much maintenance beyond brakes and suspension and modular battery pack replacement. OEMs probably like that angle of it, too, frankly. However, OEMs would have to do something about the revenue model regardless of gas or electric, because the rise of ride sharing and the lower rates of vehicle ownership among people under 30 means that their market is shrinking in the US regardless. I don't think companies like Ford would make the scale of investment required to get into electrification just for that shift, especially because BEVs are so far still unprofitable. It would make far more sense for them to keep cranking out Navigators where they make $40k per truck as fast and as long as they can. The NPV on that today vs. shifting toward a model where they are mostly-electric in order to sell a few more units at some lower margin 15 years in the future is not in doubt.

First you say "no politics" and then you make a post like this. My opinion is that if you think ICEs are bad, you should give your GT350 to me. Don't worry, I will dispose of it properly.

Thanks.

Sponsored