Ford's answer to the Hellcat?

[snakeyes]

you cant take it with you so enjoy it why`ll you can :headbang:

 

[super-bee_ski]

FORD...they didnt borrow from the Government due to mis-management and poor business practice like GM

 

[Richard Cranium]

FORD...they didnt borrow from the Government due to mis-management and poor business practice like GM

We can all poke fun at & poo-poo the different manufacturers, but you do have to respect & give credit to Ford, especially by not taking government money.

 

[super-bee_ski]

We can all poke fun at & poo-poo the different manufacturers, but you do have to respect & give credit to Ford, especially by not taking government money.

At least Chrysler paid the Gvt off early and with FULL paymant.
If anyone here on the Forum ever get the chance to see the GM of FIAT/Chrysler interview on 60 minutes...be sure to watch it and pay attention.

Sergio Marchionne

 

[satman72]

I look at it this way. I like Mopars, but there is now way I won't respect what the other two are doing. Sure, I'll talk the piss about Ford or GM, but to me it's all good natured ribbing. Nothing more, nothing less.

As others have said, let the horsepower wars commence!

 

[super-bee_ski]

As I recently posted in another thread...
We are fortunate to witness this renaissance era.

I lived it through the 60s and 70s and I NEVER thought "we" would see it again.

 

[usaroadrunner]

one of my friends went to vegas and they have a test track out there, dont know the name of it. but he saw 3 HELLCATS parked way off the track one of them with a huge oil puddle under it. he asked what they were doing. there job was to push the limits and the boost of the hellcat. those 3 hellcats where all blown up. they 700hp is only the beginning. :beavisnbutthead:

 

[Budnicks]

the Horsepower wars have started again, yippie

Hasn't Ford/Shelby touted an over 700HP supercharged {IIRC 7 liter/427ci ?, in development, not sure the CI}
offering in the GT-500 S/C Super Snake or something IIRC,

I seem to remember seeing & hearing about the late Carol Shelby working on something,
an alleged all aluminum engine for a 1000hp Supercharged Shelby of some sort...

What a great era of automotive competition we are in right now,
it's a second coming of the new muscle/pony car era, BIG 3 battling it out again...

Unfortunately IMHFO it won't last, much longer, strike while the irons hot...
The Fed.'s/Govt./Eco-Nazi's will put such a high CO2, EPA or fuel MPG efficiency STD & reg.'s,
or insurance will be so damn overly expensive, you'll have to have deep pockets, just to own/drive one,
just like it was in 1972, then it will kill it, just like they did before...

Rock on Mopar, stir the pot...

- - - Updated - - -

As I recently posted in another thread...
We are fortunate to witness this renaissance era.

I lived it through the 60s and 70s and I NEVER thought "we" would see it again.

Amen to that,
my fellow Mopar Brethren

- - - Updated - - -

Now that's funny

 

[Richard Cranium]

As I recently posted in another thread...
We are fortunate to witness this renaissance era.

I lived it through the 60s and 70s and I NEVER thought "we" would see it again.

The first muclecar era lasted about 8 year (64-71). This time around it's lasted 20+ years & not only is power increasing to limits we never thought possible, but the cars themselves just keep getting better & better. Sure cars like this are expensive, but weren't hi-po cars always more money?

 

[satman72]

The first muclecar era lasted about 8 year (64-71). This time around it's lasted 20+ years & not only is power increasing to limits we never thought possible, but the cars themselves just keep getting better & better. Sure cars like this are expensive, but weren't hi-po cars always more money?

Yes! And that's what people tend to forget. The hot cars were expensive then, as they are now. Back in 1970, 1971 a good wage was 6-7K per year. Now 60-70K.

 

[Funship32]

I am reading where all you guys are bad mouthing the Fords. I am 66 years and have seen that any time FoMoCo has been challenged they have put their heads together to produce winning vehicles. You don't have to like them but you can't ignore their success.

Well put, Bill. As much as I'm an old Mopar guy I too have to give Ford props on their success. They produce a helluva product and they didn't take gov'ment $$$ for a bail out. As the owner of a '96 Ford Explorer with over 300K on the odometer and a rig where the only major failure was the need for a new tranny...at 250K and after hauling a horse trailer for many years, I'd be hard pressed to call their product crappy.

 

[bigmanjbmopar]

Here's a chebby one for the equal everything woosys

It's just not American to not own and drive a mopar! So sayeth me!

Chrysler till death!

 

[Hemi Rebel]

[QUOTsleepar;910104756]In a previous thread you mentioned the 7 liter hemi was junk for that intended purpose.... anyway the next generation should be needle bearing crank and rotary valve hemi head blueprinted to around 12,-14,000 red line pulling around 700hp/500tq at around 10grand to impress me... but it is good the factory has finally caught up to the power everyone on the street and strip have been doing the last 30+ years... LOL![/QUOTE]

In a previous thread I said compared to a modern hemi the second gen 426 was junk. What im talking about here is a gen 4 hemi that is 7 liters. Then they can put that 426 hemi emblem on the fender or shaker hood.

 

[Bruzilla]

I still think you need to go back to 2001 and look at the market. The Ford Mustang was a breath away from extinction for one well-defined reason: Ford had stopped making Mustangs that looked like Mustangs. They fixed this problem in a big way in 2005, but the 2015 cars are once again going back down the road of looking less and less like a Mustang, and body style drives Mustang buyers far more than HP. It's great that they sell 200 or 500 Super GT Wonder Snake Cobras or whatever they call their Super car, but if they can't sell 20,000 or so V-6 cars their super car won't last long.

 

[Herr_Poopschitz]

Ford started all this w/ the GT500 in '06...then upped the ante significantly in '13. The cars have been 150 mph in the quarter w/ stock longblocks, run over 200 mph, tested at Nurburgring, are used regularly on road courses across the nation, and are still efficient enough to not get charged the gas guzzler tax. I think these facts are deserving of some respect.

So far, performance-wise, all we know is the Challenger appears quick w/ an auto on a track prepped by Dodge. Curious to see objective testing of all performance aspects by a third party.

- - - Updated - - -

I still think you need to go back to 2001 and look at the market. The Ford Mustang was a breath away from extinction for one well-defined reason: Ford had stopped making Mustangs that looked like Mustangs. They fixed this problem in a big way in 2005, but the 2015 cars are once again going back down the road of looking less and less like a Mustang.

But the Mustang never did go away. Your point is moot.

The only people who talk about a 'Mustang looking like a Mustang' are old timers or kids that got their drivers licenses in 05 to present. The Fox platform is by far the most versatile chassis ever produced. Hell, the pairing of it w/ LS engines is common place....best chassis and engine available for the $. Chrysler is no where to be seen.

 

[satman72]

Honestly, I hope Ford and/or GM do something to kick the Hellcat's ***. And having said that, I hope Ma Mopar kicks *** right back. This is a great game that is being played. Honestly, we have a car that has 700+ HP that can be driven as a daily driver, AC on, full factory warranty. What is not to love.

 

[Hemi Rebel]

What is not to love.

The price. Might as well be a veyron. I cant afford it. May get lucky and get a chance to drive one at work. Long shot though

 

[satman72]

The price. Might as well be a veyron. I cant afford it. May get lucky and get a chance to drive one at work. Long shot though

That's fine! I can't either off hand. That isn't the point. I'm glad that Chrysler is making this car. It's about time that the American car companies are showing their stuff. I'd love to see Cadillac do the V16 concept, I'd love to see Chrysler do an Imperial with a big honkin' V8- V10, I'd love to see Ford do some big Lincoln. I wanna see our three show what they can do.

 

[Bruzilla]

But the Mustang never did go away. Your point is moot.

The only people who talk about a 'Mustang looking like a Mustang' are old timers or kids that got their drivers licenses in 05 to present. The Fox platform is by far the most versatile chassis ever produced. Hell, the pairing of it w/ LS engines is common place....best chassis and engine available for the $. Chrysler is no where to be seen.

The Mustang did not go away because Ford opted to go with the retro styling the customers wanted, so my point is perfectly valid. I was working for Ford back then, and this was a subject of much discussion. The same discussions were being had at GM at the same time regarding the Camaro.

What GM did was focus on internal consultants who said the performance car market was dead because of demand for SUVs, the recession, high gas prices, and the migration of the market to FWD, so in 1998/1999 they opted to kill off the Camaro and Firebird in 2001. The UAW tried to make this out to be a decision to undercut them to save face, but the reality was Camaro and Firebird sales had been steadily declining for years and based on the internal reviews the decision was made to end production.

Over at Ford, the same discussions were being held, for the same reasons, but FMC decided to look more at the customers than internal consultants, and what they found was owners had quit buying Mustangs because the cars had stopped looking like Mustangs. That's why the decision was made in 1998/1999 to get S197 rolling so the car would be ready for release in 2005, and the primary guidance to the engineers was to focus on the 1969/1970 design since that was considered the high-water mark for Mustang styling. The result was the 2005 Mustang, which brought all those "Old Timers" you refer to back to the ranch.

The S197 was also the driver for the Dodge Charger. When the buzz over the pre-production 2005 Mustangs started pegging the interest meters of car enthusiasts, Dodge decided there was gold in retro, and they moved to capitalize, and they did that by taking the next car in the design mill and slapping the Charger name on it, which is why the 2006 Charger was a four-door only model and had no Charger styling cues. Chrysler just rushed it out there to capitalize on the market forces the 2005 Mustang was pushing with the "Old Timers" and it wasn't until the first redesign in 2009/2010 that the Charger started looking like a Charger. And the best part of all of this was Chevy was caught completely flat footed by all of this. Instead of deciding to redesign the Camaro in 1999, they decided to end it and had nothing on the design table when the 2005 Mustang blitz started in 2004, which is why they couldn't get their retro car out until 2010.

And now the guys behind S197 got promoted and/or moved on to other jobs, and the new guys are reverting back to the design processes that failed the line in the 1990s, so I don't see much of a future for the Mustang as I think the Celica look is a bigger mistake than when they were going to make the Probe the Mustang back in the 1980s.

 

[Herr_Poopschitz]

The Mustang did not go away because Ford opted to go with the retro styling the customers wanted, so my point is perfectly valid.

Incorrect. You cannot logically conclude that. Ford very well might've opted to go w/ a different style that customers wanted, and been just as if not more successful.

Over at Ford, the same discussions were being held, for the same reasons, but FMC decided to look more at the customers than internal consultants, and what they found was owners had quit buying Mustangs because the cars had stopped looking like Mustangs.

This doesn't make any sense to me. What exactly does a Mustang look like? Based on your rationale, sales should've ceased in 1974. In fact, what, 1974 through 2004 would've not 'looked like a Mustang'. So...is it reasonable that most of the Mustang's history has been spent 'not looking like a Mustang'? Please explain...

The result was the 2005 Mustang, which brought all those "Old Timers" you refer to back to the ranch.

Yup, and 2015 is when the rest of us get to say 'good riddance to lazy marketing driven retro styling'.

And now the guys behind S197 got promoted and/or moved on to other jobs, and the new guys are reverting back to the design processes that failed the line in the 1990s, so I don't see much of a future for the Mustang as I think the Celica look is a bigger mistake than when they were going to make the Probe the Mustang back in the 1980s.

Yes, the design is appealing to a younger generation that now has $ to buy a new Mustang that grew up w/ cheap Fox bodies and whose friends were into hopped up Hondas. Is there something wrong w/ that?

As for the original point of the S197 'saving' the Mustang...the sales figures are actually much worse and lacked the staying power of the previous generation that 'didn't look like a Mustang'...

https://blog.cjponyparts.com/sites/default/files/u8/models-graph-03.jpg