Total Mustang sales 2019 figure

[Bikeman315]

The 7.3 that they are already selling will never happen? Come on man.

The 7.3 is a purpose built truck engine. Nothing for the Mustang. There is absolutely no need for an additional V8 in our cars. What’s wrong with the Coyote? Do you really need more?

Hybrid V8 = power, economy, & sound. You have a much better chance of seeing this than a 7.3 in the Mustang. If we are discussing Mustang sales and the future we need to be realistic.

Sponsored

 

[Norm Peterson]

I don't know about loosing the turbo, but we are on the same page here. Something between the 4 cylinder EcoBoost and the Coyote is needed, especially if you want to attract younger buyers.

As an alternative to a NA V6, why not a short-stroke version of the Coyote? At only 85 HP/L (the previous Coyote was 435/5 = 87), you'd have plenty of performance from around 4.4L. 375-ish HP, 340-ish torque, higher rpm capability than the 5.0. Plus that all-important V8 sound.


Norm

 

[Bikeman315]

As an alternative to a NA V6, why not a short-stroke version of the Coyote? At only 85 HP/L (the previous Coyote was 435/5 = 87), you'd have plenty of performance from around 4.4L. 375-ish HP, 340-ish torque, higher rpm capability than the 5.0. Plus that all-important V8 sound.
Norm

So you want Ford to build a smaller V8, with power that can already be had with a tuned EB. And you want an engine that will turn more than 7500 rpm for the street.
Maybe the Mach-E team can help you with that.

 

[Norm Peterson]

The 7.3 is a purpose built truck engine. Nothing for the Mustang. There is absolutely no need for an additional V8 in our cars. What’s wrong with the Coyote? Do you really need more?

You might be able to build an argument for "less". As in less displacement with an eye toward the future when even 5.0 liters may well be seen as excessive (just like 429 and 460 probably sounds to many of today's younger enthusiasts).

Hybrid V8 = power, economy, & sound. You have a much better chance of seeing this than a 7.3 in the Mustang. If we are discussing Mustang sales and the future we need to be realistic.

Don't forget things like complexity and weight that would be more clearly 'negatives' in a sporty coupe than in an SUV, CUV, or even a proper 4-door sedan.


Norm

 

[13GetThere]

Yes, I certainly remember those days but they’re ancient history. Ford could put more engines in the Mustang but not sell any more of them. So why would they do it?
The future is alternative fuel sources not ICE. No manufacturer is going to spend big bucks going forward to develop new ICE’s. It is what it is.

Bikeman315, please don't take this as a mean insult or anything like that, because I do respect you, but take your alternative fuel whatever it may be and go sun yourself under a solar panel We are talking about the ICE here and it's going to be around longer than you think.

Ford is putting the 3.5EB in the Expedition and the 2.7 V6 EB in the Edge, and either of these engines would be a good in between engine for the Mustang. There is something to be said for performance that falls between economy and big performance.
When I was in my late teens, early twenties I wanted a balls to the wall muscle/pony car but I realized I couldn't afford it. I didn't want a economy car like a Pinto, or Vega. I wanted performance balanced with affordability. I ended up with a nice 1970 dodge Challenger with a 340 4bbl, 4 speed manual. My insurance Co. said okey dokey, and I could afford to operate the car and have fun at the drag strip, and on the road. Now if it was just me, I'd say I was unusual, but just about all my friends were the same way. Except for the guy with the 67 T-Bird, and the guy with the 64 Chevy II with 230 6cyl, built with a cam, 3 one barrel carbs, headers, and Corvair mufflers.
Younger car buyers can't afford the latest zero point module powered car, and are going have to buy cars with ICE until they can afford the feel good car. Many of them will want that in between car, especially if they're smart enough to realize that climate change is a farce. Just kidding you Bikeman! Lets not go down that rabbit hole again.

 

[Bikeman315]

Bikeman315, please don't take this as a mean insult or anything like that, because I do respect you, but take your alternative fuel whatever it may be and go sun yourself under a solar panel We are talking about the ICE here and it's going to be around longer than you think.

Ford is putting the 3.5EB in the Expedition and the 2.7 V6 EB in the Edge, and either of these engines would be a good in between engine for the Mustang. There is something to be said for performance that falls between economy and big performance.
When I was in my late teens, early twenties I wanted a balls to the wall muscle/pony car but I realized I couldn't afford it. I didn't want a economy car like a Pinto, or Vega. I wanted performance balanced with affordability. I ended up with a nice 1970 dodge Challenger with a 340 4bbl, 4 speed manual. My insurance Co. said okey dokey, and I could afford to operate the car and have fun at the drag strip, and on the road. Now if it was just me, I'd say I was unusual, but just about all my friends were the same way. Except for the guy with the 67 T-Bird, and the guy with the 64 Chevy II with 230 6cyl, built with a cam, 3 one barrel carbs, headers, and Corvair mufflers.
Younger car buyers can't afford the latest zero point module powered car, and are going have to buy cars with ICE until they can afford the feel good car. Many of them will want that in between car, especially if they're smart enough to realize that climate change is a farce. Just kidding you Bikeman! Lets not go down that rabbit hole again.

No, absolutely not. I do not take any of your thoughts and opinions as mean. You are entitled to them, as am I. I also understand how you feel about alternative fuels.

I thought this thread was about 2019 sales. The topic turned into what can we do to increase sales. And of course that turned into a conversation about engines. Now i know pure ICE engines are not going anywhere soon. I would also like to see our Mustang's engine assortment increase. Both the 3.5 & 2.7 could work but I wouldn't call the EB HPP an economy choice. My question is with one of these going to increase sales to the point where Ford would actually consider them? They did put the HP engine into the EB so never say never.

But, all that being said the industry is just not going in that direction long term. To be brutally honest, I believe that unless the Mach-E is a success Ford will no longer see the need for a V8 powered 2door coupe that sells under 100k units a year. If that happens we will see the 2021 refresh and the S650 will die. None of us want that to happen regardless of the way we fell about EV's.

So is there an alternative to this, maybe a way out? Make the S650 a hybrid. These will please the eco folks and we still get a rip roaring V8 even more powerful than today's. I see this as something Ford will consider and if they do we all win.

By the way my first car was a 1966 Fairlane GTA with a 390 police interceptor engine in it. A little Sunoco 260 and away we go...............

 

[Bikeman315]

You might be able to build an argument for "less". As in less displacement with an eye toward the future when even 5.0 liters may well be seen as excessive (just like 429 and 460 probably sounds to many of today's younger enthusiasts).

Don't forget things like complexity and weight that would be more clearly 'negatives' in a sporty coupe than in an SUV, CUV, or even a proper 4-door sedan.

Norm

That's an excellent couple of points. Hybrids are more complex put they have been around long enough to have proven their reliability. How about we keep the weight down, by going with a smaller displacement V8 and making it a hybrid? Not sure Ford would go for the expense but you never know. Now you could do this with the 2.7 of 3.5 but you would lose the V8 sound so why bother.

 

[Norm Peterson]

So you want Ford to build a smaller V8, with power that can already be had with a tuned EB. And you want an engine that will turn more than 7500 rpm for the street.

Why not? You wouldn't use them all, all the time, any more than you use more than 7000 from the 5.0 or all of its 460/480 HP all the time. All of those things are just there for the times that you would. Though it's very likely that a 4.4L "Coyote" would run more smoothly than in its current 5.0L form all of the time, which would be a 'plus' in its own right.

A "tuned" amount of power is only there when there's enough boost to provide it. Response from a tuned EB is still going to feel 'soft' until the revs are up high enough to create significant boost, which still takes some time (we're somewhere over 10,000 miles into our second turbocharged car, so I do have some direct experience here). Down below where any boost exists - and you will find yourself with the engine rpms down there from time to time in street situations - a 2.3 EB will feel 'weaker' than a NA 2.3L engine (let alone a NA 4.4).

I got to drive a Ferrari F430 (very briefly). Yes, I could easily picture driving a car with a V8 engine of 4.3 - 4.5-ish liters and 7500+ rpm capability. Hell, my 4.6 3-valve isn't much bigger than that, and I've owned a couple of cars whose engines were genuinely capable of at least 7500. Daily driven by both me and my wife.

Maybe the Mach-E team can help you with that.

I have absolutely no idea where you're trying to go with that. Any EV is a hard 'no' here.


Norm

 

[Bikeman315]

I have absolutely no idea where you're trying to go with that. Any EV is a hard 'no' here.

I'm not sure either, I was kidding.

I rethought my stance on a smaller V8 in my last post. If done right you could be on to something.

 

[Hack]

The 7.3 is a purpose built truck engine. Nothing for the Mustang. There is absolutely no need for an additional V8 in our cars. What’s wrong with the Coyote? Do you really need more?

Hybrid V8 = power, economy, & sound. You have a much better chance of seeing this than a 7.3 in the Mustang. If we are discussing Mustang sales and the future we need to be realistic.

Why are you getting so far and wide off topic? It's tough talking to you. Did I ever say anything about putting a 7.3 in a Mustang? Absolutely not. So why are you even talking about it? Ugghh.

Coyote is good but needs more power. And I want it to be relatively inexpensive and not become more complicated. If we want more Mustang sales we want the car to stay similar in cost (hence price). We don't want overly complex and heavy hybrid systems added to the car. Just a waste of money and it would be a huge expense to add to the car. Compared to a slightly larger engine - cost to build a 6.0 would be very very similar to the cost of the Coyote.

If you want something realistic that would actually help the Mustang sell more - think simple. Do you want Ford to build La Ferraris or Porsche 918s and call it a Mustang? I sure don't. I want a simpler, less expensive machine that is good. Bigger hammer engineering rather than some super complex Rube Goldberg device.

 

[Bikeman315]

It would be cheaper for Ford to develop than the 7.3.

OK, my bad. I way responding to this. You were not saying to put the 7.3 in the Mustang. Moving on.

Coyote is good but needs more power. And I want it to be relatively inexpensive and not become more complicated. If we want more Mustang sales we want the car to stay similar in cost (hence price). We don't want overly complex and heavy hybrid systems added to the car. Just a waste of money and it would be a huge expense to add to the car. Compared to a slightly larger engine - cost to build a 6.0 would be very very similar to the cost of the Coyote.

More power and less expensive. I'm with you. Its' just not going to happen. I'm not sure the current block could be built out to 6.0. If it can't we would need an entirely new engine. Not cheap and certainly not something I think Ford has in its long term planning. Not all hybrids are not overly complex or costly. Which is why you can a get a Prius for under 25K. Now not saying that would be the price of a Mustang but I believe it can be done within a reasonable price range.

I want a simpler, less expensive machine that is good. Bigger hammer engineering rather than some super complex Rube Goldberg device.

Again, i'm with you, but this is 2020, not 1980. It's just not going to go down that way. Just trying to be realistic in discussing ways to improve Mustang sales so that Ford doesn't drop the hammer on it.

 

[Hack]

OK, my bad. I way responding to this. You were not saying to put the 7.3 in the Mustang. Moving on.


More power and less expensive. I'm with you. Its' just not going to happen. I'm not sure the current block could be built out to 6.0. If it can't we would need an entirely new engine. Not cheap and certainly not something I think Ford has in its long term planning. Not all hybrids are not overly complex or costly. Which is why you can a get a Prius for under 25K. Now not saying that would be the price of a Mustang but I believe it can be done within a reasonable price range.


Again, i'm with you, but this is 2020, not 1980. It's just not going to go down that way. Just trying to be realistic in discussing ways to improve Mustang sales so that Ford doesn't drop the hammer on it.

Thanks for reading and responding positively.

There is a percentage of the population that doesn't want a bigger engine and they want this complex crap that costs lots of bucks just to save a few gallons of gas. I agree with you on that. I don't agree that adding a bunch of extra components to the Mustang is likely to keep Mustang prices low or the same as they are now.

And there are lots of people that don't care much about whether a vehicle sips fuel. Ford sells upwards of 900,000 F150s per year. Those people aren't trying to save every thimbleful of gas. They like big vehicles and they enjoy power in those vehicles.

If Ford builds it - lots of people will buy it. Right now with the path Ford is on - I might never buy another new Mustang. I will probably be around at least another 20 years. Maybe 30 or more. I could be buying a lot of new cars in that time. If Ford makes a $70,000 hybrid AWD monstrosity... I'm not going to buy it no matter how quick it is or what fuel economy it gets. I think there are lots and lots of other people out there who think similarly.

If Ford builds a 6.0 V8 with high winding characteristics and it makes close to 600 hp, assuming the price of the Mustang doesn't go up more than inflation - I will 100% buy it. It doesn't have to have any new features. A car like that would sell just for the engine.

Yes some people don't want 6.0 liter V8s produced any more. However I think at least 1/2 of the population of the US either doesn't care or likes them. And if Ford listens they could make a lot of money. Whether it might realistically happen or not, I believe it's true.

 

[shogun32]

Ford sells upwards of 900,000 F150s per year. Those people aren't trying to save every thimbleful of gas.

sure they are. They buy the 2.7EB like it's going out of style. That engine does a surprisingly prompt job of getting the truck moving. The way Ford upcharges on the 5.0 option ($2000) means they WANT it to hurt. The upcharge on the 3.5EB is $2600. Only an 'idiot' would go for the 5.0.

 

[thill444]

I see several options going forward. Hybrid electric (likely 4cylinder+electric), full EV, and a revision of the current V8 to offer better MPG.

For the non full EV, I would love to see the Mustang get lighter which will improve everything (acceleration, braking, handling, MPG, etc).

 

[Norm Peterson]

sure they are. They buy the 2.7EB like it's going out of style. That engine does a surprisingly prompt job of getting the truck moving. The way Ford upcharges on the 5.0 option means they WANT it to hurt.

Ummmm, don't think so.

If they were all that serious they wouldn't be buying an 80" wide, 75" tall truck that sits on a 122" wheelbase. The crew cabs are on a 141" wheelbase.


Norm

Sponsored