Why the Mach1 is a rip off

[shogun32]

Can you cite where Ford claims the Mach 1 is an attempt to match the ss/1le?
... please explain why Ford should give a damn what the camaro does.

Oh I don't know 50 years of them going at it hammer and tongs? I'm no car enthusiast and even this moron knows enough history about the 2 lines to know this.

The first rule of marketing is when your competition has a better product, you don't talk about your competition. It's marketing 101. 1st day of class right after they teach you "marketing is lying your ass off, but with insufficient specificity to get hauled into court." Of course, Ford isn't going to come out and say the Camaro did all the track stuff right back in '16 and we are finally getting around to putting a performance GT together because we're embarrassed by our half-assed efforts to date.

Nope, they're releasing it only now because having killed off the GT350 they see a ripe opportunity to gouge the hell out of people who wear Mustang blinders for the same spec/capabilities Camaro has been offering for 5 years running. I commend Ford for successfully conditioning their customers into expecting and accepting grossly inflated prices for the optioned Mustang lineup.

They outsell the competition and for some models buyers line up to pay over msrp. You think this is because buyers are stupid.

yup, stupidity adequately explains it. It's amazing how much of human endeavor is dominated by stupidity.

If the point of this thread is to bitch about the Mach 1 being overpriced I’d like to see some evidence to support that claim.

How about you actually read what is in a SS/1LE? Better yet read all the fascinating things the Camaro has in it's ECU logic that Ford didn't even provide in the GT350. Ford Drive Modes are a joke. There are 4 different levels to "Track" mode on the Camaro and 2 in Sport mode. Really useful type things for running around on a track to cover the span of driver skills and tire setups.

I paid 37k for the SS/1LE new. It has partial leather Recaro's, eDiff, TR6060, and Magneride that doesn't SUCK ASS, for $17,000 less than a cloth-trim Mach1 which took 5 years to get here. If you really think Ford Magneride is good, you should try what the GM boys offer.

So yes, it's plainly obvious the Mach1's direct competition is the SS/1LE which comes in at 47 or 52k MSRP. The Ford badge is not worth another 5 grand. Aggregate unit sales is not necessarily an indication of technical excellence - only consumer preference, aggressive pricing, or other factors like brand loyalty. And furthermore nobody cares how many EB Mustang sells. What we care about are PP2 vs SS/1LE sales or if you want to take it further, GT350 vs SS/1LE. Nobody has published their numbers that I know of. Who knows the units may well be neigh equivalent. How does your premise hold up if say MY21 the SS/1LE and the Mach1 have same sales?

The reason both GM and Ford are offering the A10 in their respective "track" trims is because they saw what happened to manual-only trims and decided they didn't want to suffer that same fate again.

I have no beef with Ford finally getting around to releasing the Mach 1. It's about bloody time. I object to the pricing. I had some (admittedly small) interest in trading in the GT for the Mach but not when I already own the superior car for a fraction of the ask.

If Ford had priced the 600A+Recaro+HP for say 47k and with 7% below MSRP from Grainger I wouldn't have thought too hard or long at all.

Sponsored

 

[jake_zx2]

I'm no car enthusiast

Whaaaaaaaat? Really? I was just starting to think you knew what you were talking about!

\S

 

[jake_zx2]

I guarantee he’s never even touched a track in either of the 2 cars lmao

 

[RocketGuy3]

You can debate all day about which is a "better" car, and therefore worth more money... but I think it is just about undeniable that Ford's margins are going to be MUCH higher on the Mach 1 than Chevy's are on the 1LE Camaro. Ford (and its dealerships) is definitely charging more for a very comparable product. It may be worth it to some, but there is no question the Camaro is objectively priced better on paper... It's also understandable given how poorly it sells in comparison.

 

[Atlas1]

Oh I don't know 50 years of them going at it hammer and tongs? I'm no car enthusiast and even this moron knows enough history about the 2 lines to know this.

those days are over. while they are comparable cars, i highly doubt anyone at ford is losing sleep over what chevy is going to do next with the camaro lineup. unless the camaro can significantly close the gap on sales ford is going to continue marching on with the chevy way back in the rear view mirror.

The first rule of marketing is when your competition has a better product, you don't talk about your competition. It's marketing 101. 1st day of class right after they teach you "marketing is lying your ass off, but with insufficient specificity to get hauled into court." Of course, Ford isn't going to come out and say the Camaro did all the track stuff right back in '16 and we are finally getting around to putting a performance GT together because we're embarrassed by our half-assed efforts to date.

Nope, they're releasing it only now because having killed off the GT350 they see a ripe opportunity to gouge the hell out of people who wear Mustang blinders for the same spec/capabilities Camaro has been offering for 5 years running. I commend Ford for successfully conditioning their customers into expecting and accepting grossly inflated prices for the optioned Mustang lineup.

its all about balance and you're still not getting it. these are not purpose built race cars. they have to do many things well. ford doesn't care that the camaro did "track stuff right in '16". do you think if they set out to build a car as capable or more on a track they couldn't pull it off? of course they could. instead they offer a car that does well on a track and offers a better package for the street. which is why mustangs sell more than camaros. its not that complicated. you're trying to view the mustang through the lense you grade out the camaro. it is a different car with a different mission. when you accept that, you might be able to view its value in a different light.

yup, stupidity adequately explains it. It's amazing how much of human endeavor is dominated by stupidity.

everyone that doesn't like the same car as me for the same reasons is stupid. not a great argument.............

How about you actually read what is in a SS/1LE? Better yet read all the fascinating things the Camaro has in it's ECU logic that Ford didn't even provide in the GT350. Ford Drive Modes are a joke. There are 4 different levels to "Track" mode on the Camaro and 2 in Sport mode. Really useful type things for running around on a track to cover the span of driver skills and tire setups.

I paid 37k for the SS/1LE new. It has partial leather Recaro's, eDiff, TR6060, and Magneride that doesn't SUCK ASS, for $17,000 less than a cloth-trim Mach1 which took 5 years to get here. If you really think Ford Magneride is good, you should try what the GM boys offer.

thats really great the camaro offers all of that. I'm sure those features come in very handy for the vast majority of miles put on these cars.

So yes, it's plainly obvious the Mach1's direct competition is the SS/1LE which comes in at 47 or 52k MSRP. The Ford badge is not worth another 5 grand. Aggregate unit sales is not necessarily an indication of technical excellence - only consumer preference, aggressive pricing, or other factors like brand loyalty.

I have no beef with Ford finally getting around to releasing the Mach 1. It's about bloody time. I object to the pricing. I had some (admittedly small) interest in trading in the GT for the Mach but not when I already own the superior car for a fraction of the ask.

you only object to the pricing because you had unrealistic expectations of what the mach 1 was going to be.

If Ford had priced the 600A+Recaro+HP for say 47k and with 7% below MSRP from Grainger I wouldn't have thought too hard or long at all.

oh is that all it would take for ford to convince you to buy? lol why stop there. for that price it probably should have included the gt350 brakes dont you think? for technical excellence and all.

you keep waiting for THAT mustang to appear. any day now i'm sure

 

[shogun32]

oh is that all it would take for ford to convince you to buy? lol why stop there. for that price it probably should have included the gt350 brakes dont you think? for technical excellence and all.

absolutely. These parts are CHEAP. Or is it the implicit admission that Ford's purchasing department is incapable of signing the same deals as GM can? Hey, Ford ought to have even more leverage than GM since they sell 2x as many Mustangs as Camaros right?

If the GT350 was 63k we can back into a Mach1 price by subtracting out the brakes (3100-1700=1.5k, GTkit - Brembo 6) and the engine (22-8=14k, Aluminator crate - Coyote3 crate). Is the Mach1 15.5k less expensive than the GT350? Nope, not even close! It's 7 grand more than it should be. That alone seals the "rip off" label. And again that assumes the 63k ask for a GT350 was in any way rational in the first place - which it wasn't.

63-15.5=47.5K, hell I'll even give you 49k for the stated config is easily attainable. Or otherwise Ford's financials are REALLY fucked up and they deserve the shellacking in their stock price.

I buy based on price to value. Brand matters not. Cosmetics and interior have to not be unlivable, mind but I'll gladly overlook such stupid things as no sunglasses storage or a retarded console storage setup for a car that is designed to be serious on the track and yet remains every bit comfortable to drive daily. If you haven't driven a SS/1LE for real, you have no idea what you're missing. But ignorance is bliss to the tune of >5 grand I guess.

you keep waiting for THAT mustang to appear. any day now i'm sure

I fully anticipate the Mach1 will take the same massive nose dive in prices offered just like the Bullitt did.

 

[ChitownStang]

absolutely. These parts are CHEAP. Or is it the implicit admission that Ford's purchasing department is incapable of signing the same deals as GM can? Hey, Ford ought to have even more leverage than GM since they sell 2x as many Mustangs as Camaros right?

If the GT350 was 63k we can back into a Mach1 price by subtracting out the brakes (3100-1700=1.5k, GTkit - Brembo 6) and the engine (22-8=14k, Aluminator crate - Coyote3 crate). Is the Mach1 15.5k less expensive than the GT350? Nope, not even close! That alone seals the "rip off" label. And again that assumes the 63k ask for a GT350 was in any way rational in the first place - which it wasn't.

63-15.5=47.5K, hell I'll even give you 49k for the stated config is easily attainable. Or otherwise Ford's financials are REALLY fucked up and they deserve the shellacking in their stock price.

I buy based on price to value. Brand matters not. Cosmetics and interior have to not be unlivable, mind but I'll gladly overlook such stupid things as no sunglasses storage or a retarded console storage setup for a car that is designed to be serious on the track and yet remains every bit comfortable to drive daily. If you haven't driven a SS/1LE for real, you have no idea what you're missing. But ignorance is bliss to the tune of >5 grand I guess.


I fully anticipate the Mach1 will take the same massive nose dive in prices offered just like the Bullitt did.

You buy based on value alone? Sorry to hear that.
I buy what makes me happy. Mustangs make me happy.
Camaro is not even an option in its current state for me.

 

[Charlemagne]

Every local review of S550 GT I saw mentioned one very interesting thing, how they got a lesson and made them closer to European cars and what European customers want and expect on their curved roads, selling them directly helped it a lot for sure. Can't say I have a comparison of those cars since I only had 2016 Ecoboost for 24h, but the reviewers said these other muscle cars lack comfort/handling properties of 2018+ S550 (could be more aimed at Challanger than Camaro, though).


Seems like the money is the biggest problem here, not the product. It's not entirely possible to compare 2018-2019 prices with current ones, with current market situation, and obviously a limited edition cars will always be overpriced. But just so that the sale quotas are met. Bullitt wasn't made for everyone, so a lot of people could be hungry now, unless they're waiting for S650.

 

[0wen]

absolutely. These parts are CHEAP. Or is it the implicit admission that Ford's purchasing department is incapable of signing the same deals as GM can? Hey, Ford ought to have even more leverage than GM since they sell 2x as many Mustangs as Camaros right?

If the GT350 was 63k we can back into a Mach1 price by subtracting out the brakes (3100-1700=1.5k, GTkit - Brembo 6) and the engine (22-8=14k, Aluminator crate - Coyote3 crate). Is the Mach1 15.5k less expensive than the GT350? Nope, not even close! That alone seals the "rip off" label. And again that assumes the 63k ask for a GT350 was in any way rational in the first place - which it wasn't.

63-15.5=47.5K, hell I'll even give you 49k for the stated config is easily attainable.

I was a buyer for Ford Automotive Operations Europe and Premier Automotive Group (which clearly dates me) and I can happily say we were just as good - or bad! - as our GM counterparts back in the day.

While it might be the only data we have as individual customers, comparing the price of parts supplied through manufacturer parts sales vs the cost of those delivered to the production line isn't necessarily going to give you an accurate view of the relative cost of those parts when fitted at the factory.

The gap in actual production costs could be a lot lower, as there were a lot of factors that influenced what the resale cost of the parts would be, and that could be a solid multiple of the production purchase price. This could even lead to big differences for parts in the same 'family'!
Naturally things could have changed since I filed my last PO on WIPS but I'd guess not so much.

There's undoubtedly a cost difference, no dispute, but it's likely to be very different to what we experience as customers.
Now could that mean the markups on the GT350 and / or Mach 1 are even bigger? Possibly..!
But they could also be a lot less and so is the production cost difference is lower.

I think the only meaningful measure we have is whether we think the car is worth it when compared to other cars or how we feel about it.
For me, it's good enough value it but I completely understand if anyone doesn't think so!

-O.

 

[shogun32]

You buy based on value alone? Sorry to hear that.
I buy what makes me happy.

I do too. Kia Stinger, wide-body Challenger, Mustang GT, Camaro SS, and Audi RS5 (NA v8 version) were all in the running. The Audi and Kia were out as being VERY fun to drive but auto only. The Stinger really is impressive. The Challenger is just too damn big/heavy with crap seats and even the best suspension on offer was clearly inadequate. That left Mustang and Camaro. So that's why I own 1 of each.

 

[Atlas1]

absolutely. These parts are CHEAP. Or is it the implicit admission that Ford's purchasing department is incapable of signing the same deals as GM can? Hey, Ford ought to have even more leverage than GM since they sell 2x as many Mustangs as Camaros right?

why stop there? the ecoboost should also have the gt350 brakes because as you say they are cheap. ford should definitely add them across the entire lineup of mustangs. but they better not raise the price of the car!
have you ever considered taking your wisdom to ford and helping to get their purchasing dept squared away?

If the GT350 was 63k we can back into a Mach1 price by subtracting out the brakes (3100-1700=1.5k, GTkit - Brembo 6) and the engine (22-8=14k, Aluminator crate - Coyote3 crate). Is the Mach1 15.5k less expensive than the GT350? Nope, not even close! That alone seals the "rip off" label. And again that assumes the 63k ask for a GT350 was in any way rational in the first place - which it wasn't.

do you honestly think ford comes up with the pricing using this type of equation? flipping through the ford racing catalog and adding/subtracting like they are modding a car at home?

63-15.5=47.5K, hell I'll even give you 49k for the stated config is easily attainable. Or otherwise Ford's financials are REALLY fucked up and they deserve the shellacking in their stock price.

ford's financials/stock price have nothing to do with what is being discussed here

I buy based on price to value. Brand matters not. Cosmetics and interior have to not be unlivable, mind but I'll gladly overlook such stupid things as no sunglasses storage or a retarded console storage setup for a car that is designed to be serious on the track and yet remains every bit comfortable to drive daily. If you haven't driven a SS/1LE for real, you have no idea what you're missing. But ignorance is bliss to the tune of >5 grand I guess.

again, your expectations were not grounded in reality. the mach 1 was not designed for you. you started out wanting a track car that you can drive on the street........and found what you were looking for in the camaro. the mach 1 is a car that can go to the track and do well but it does not make sacrifices to do so. this could be why it appeals to those you label as stupid buyers. speaking for myself i am not willing to overlook or compromise on features to lower my lap time.

I fully anticipate the Mach1 will take the same massive nose dive in prices offered just like the Bullitt did.

ok? and this proves what exactly? camaros are discounted all day long. the longer into production we go, the price will drop. how insightful what do you think would happen to price of the gt500 if they were to take the limits off the number produced? would that be some kind of indictment on the car? no

 

[shogun32]

do you honestly think ford comes up with the pricing using this type of equation? flipping through the ford racing catalog and adding/subtracting like they are modding a car at home?

no, but it's the only reference point we have. Yes hte SS/1LE fit the ticket because Ford had it's thumb up it's butt and half-assed the PP2. And the GT350 price was beyond rediculous. Ford even managed to Fk that up by not putting a trans cooler on the car on day one. Exactly what kind of "testing" did those jokers do, anyway?

Finally the equivalent to the SS/1LE is here but whereas GM can put the GT350 brakes on the SS, Ford can't. And Ford can't come even remotely close to the SS/1LE price for the same comparable equipment. GM isn't pricing the SS to lose money or to desperately buttress their unit sales numbers as a loss leader. They set the price they can still comfortably make a profit doing so.

So why can GM make the same car for 47k and Ford can't do it for less than 56? Either Ford sucks ass in business execution/parts acquisition, or Ford is greedy beyond all imaginable levels but rests secure in the knowledge they will find enough suckers (say 10,000 persons/yr) to pay 56K for 47K of value. Maybe every Mach1 should come with 700 shares of Ford stock as a thank you for supporting earnings.

 

[sigintel]

Why did you buy 2018 GT and not Camaro then?

I screwed up?
Was offered 100k warranty on 2018.
Already had a GT350 suspension, and 3 sets of track wheels and tires.
2018 was cheap with crazy trade in they gave me on 2015. (2015+$9k OTD).
Was endurance racing an Audi wheel to wheel at the time and figured when we binned the Audi I'd go back to tracking the GT with TT or FI. Was really looking forward to TT Direct Injection E85.
Decided to wait for GT500 to see if it would be cheaper than spending $20k on the GT.
GT500 became the answer.
While waiting I got distracted with an X5M (daily).

For the cost of my time, it just doesn't make sense to mod S550 for FI track work at the current starting prices for cheaper V8 models (Ford is counting on this). Hoped Mach1 might be a better starting point than 2018.

2018 Mustang will be kept NA, and when I run thru the current track tire stash, will be sold, maybe sooner. GT350 suspension and track wheels will all be sold too.

GT500 is the only performance mustang bargain left (perf/$).

Keep in mind, I spent a lot of time getting the Whippled 2015 to be reliable on track in 2016/17 (half decade ago). GT500 is OEM version.

If the camaro is such a better value in comparison to the mustang why doesn’t it sell very well?

Camaro = better "track value".
Mustang = better "general consumer value": especially if aesthetics count.
general consumers aren't interested in tracking their daily driver due to costs, insurance, stress, track day costs, etc.

...PP2 answered the 1LE in 2018, and was faster while costing the same.
...you can’t even fit a helmet through...

pics of helmet? How big is your head?
PP2 did not answer the 1LE with its diff and trans coolers...
Clearly you have never changed the diff oil on your car from cooking it. It smells like satan death new, burnt satan death when overheated... I bought a pallet of 3 diffs for $800 from junkyard in Coleman just to avoid futzing with cooked diffs. I'm sure someone can confirm the wretch inducing odor...

I am doing the 10 hour advanced race training day at Area 27 and I chose to rent the 1LE for the day, in part to see how the car really is compared to my PP2. I will give you my impression afterwards.

take @jake_zx2 with you?

 

[ChitownStang]

I do too. Kia Stinger, wide-body Challenger, Mustang GT, Camaro SS, and Audi RS5 (NA v8 version) were all in the running. The Audi and Kia were out as being VERY fun to drive but auto only. The Stinger really is impressive. The Challenger is just too damn big/heavy with crap seats and even the best suspension on offer was clearly inadequate. That left Mustang and Camaro. So that's why I own 1 of each.

Wide Body 392 is a badass car, great retro look! I just need better handling
Kia Stinger is ugly imo, one step down from Camaro just because its not american.
RS5 is definitely my favorite car under $100k, It is a beast and beautiful! Too rich for my blood though.
Mustang checks all the boxes..thats why it's #1 in sales
My new Mach will go 0-60 in 3.8 sec and 1/4 mile in 11.5 stock and sound like the Muscle car I want for under $60k The Mach 1 is different, limited and it comes with all the goodies stock! I put $10k into my 15gt and it won't be close to this car...
This is why the Mach is not a Rip..

 

[Atlas1]

no, but it's the only reference point we have.

correction: we don't have any reference points. none of us know the inner workings on pricing for these items. you don't get to substitute numbers from the parts catalog and pretend its the basis for an argument

Yes hte SS/1LE fit the ticket because Ford had it's thumb up it's butt and half-assed the PP2.

"half-assed"
translation: made a car to specifications differently than i would have had anyone cared about my opinions.....which they don't

And the GT350 price was beyond rediculous. Ford even managed to Fk that up by not putting a trans cooler on the car on day one. Exactly what kind of "testing" did those jokers do, anyway?

how much did the gt350 program cost? how much did profit did it make?
until you can answer these questions, which you can't, your claim is without any merit.

Finally the equivalent to the SS/1LE is here but whereas GM can put the GT350 brakes on the SS, Ford can't.

you're doing it again pretending the mach 1 is somehow related to the camaro, despite a lack of evidence. did you ever find a citation that the mach 1 was targeting the ss/1le?

And Ford can't come even remotely close to the SS/1LE price for the same comparable equipment. GM isn't pricing the SS to lose money or to desperately buttress their unit sales numbers as a loss leader. They set the price they can still comfortably make a profit doing so.

you have no idea why pricing is structured the way it is. that goes for both ford and gm.
based on all available evidence, if anything the camaro is overpriced in that it struggles to move off the dealer lots. thats not an opinion btw, thats the market speaking

So why can GM make the same car for 47k and Ford can't do it for less than 56? Either Ford sucks ass in business execution/parts acquisition, or Ford is greedy beyond all imaginable levels but rests secure in the knowledge they will find enough suckers (say 10,000 persons/yr) to pay 56K for 47K of value. Maybe every Mach1 should come with 700 shares of Ford stock as a thank you for supporting earnings.

we've already established they are not the same car.
ford has many billions in revenue and a couple hundred thousand employees. what comparable business do you run that allows you speak with such matter of fact statements on their mismanagement of products and financials? just curious

Sponsored