[shaffe]

Originally Posted by hotlap

Its not just the 1LE ~ Z/28. The SS is on par with the gen5 ZL1.

To answer your question, Mark Reuss said it in 2014. One year before the first cars hit the streetFord can control supply and that would wipe out the ability for dealerships to gouge after the honeymoon. IMO, Ford likes things exactly as they are because it creates the "special" aspect.

While he did say that, I don't think anyone interpreted it as gospel/literal. I know I didn't. That to me at the time was nothing more than propping up the product. Now we can look back at it and go damn he was right.

See you would think that wouldn't you, but looking at the 2017 production numbers that are available on this site and 6G, there was MORE 350's built than ZL1's. 5848 2017 GT350's to 3048 2017 ZL1

So why was it that the 350's in some instances were still commanding a premium vs the technically more rare ZL1?

[NW-99SS]

Originally Posted by shaffe

While he did say that, I don't think anyone interpreted it as gospel/literal. I know I didn't. That to me at the time was nothing more than propping up the product. Now we can look back at it and go damn he was right.

See you would think that wouldn't you, but looking at the 2017 production numbers that are available on this site and 6G, there was MORE 350's built than ZL1's. 5848 2017 GT350's to 3048 2017 ZL1

So why was it that the 350's in some instances were still commanding a premium vs the technically more rare ZL1?

As I have said before - aside from 500K cars which you can only apply to own, the Mustang has a much broader fan/ownership base than the Camaro due to being the only halo car from Ford within reach...whereas GM has 2, the Camaro and the Corvette. Imagine the ZL1 sales if there were no Corvettes.

[ST1LE]

Originally Posted by newmoon

The same reason the 5th Gen 1LE put squared 285s on the car as compared to the 255s for the GT, and the 6th Gen with 285/305s, as compared to the 255/275 on the GT, an Advantage.

Is this practice only accepted if it is a GM product?

Oh, it is completely acceptable dont get me wrong. Just pointing out the extra rubber needed to compete.

[newmoon]

Originally Posted by ST1LE

Oh, it is completely acceptable dont get me wrong. Just pointing out the extra rubber needed to compete.

I understand. Ford and Dodge have been terrible about putting undersized tires on their vehicles for a long time, it's good to see both at least offer options to correct this.

[BlaqWhole]

Originally Posted by shaffe

So why was it that the 350's in some instances were still commanding a premium vs the technically more rare ZL1?

That says more about the customers than anything else. But it's probably for the same reason people paid premiums for Hellcats. They thought it was gonna retain value or increase in value. People thought they were gonna see Ford GT type increases in value. Same with the Demon. One guy was bragging that he got his with "only" a $40K markup, lol!! He said they were gonna triple in value. We all know that ain't happening. At least not for another 20 years. And even then inflation will make sure you're not profiting anyway. But I digress. Ford guys all thought the Shelby would retain value and it isn't. Us ZL1 guys, we learned from the Dodge guy's mistakes and refused to pay markups. Now get this...if the ZL1 was $75K MSRP, I would still have bought one. But I was not going to give a dealership an extra $5K to sell it to me. That is just stupid as hell. If I was a Ford guy I would not have paid a markup for the Shelby. Not on your life. And if I was a Dodge guy I would not have paid a markup for a Hellcat.

Cool story is that I actually considered buying a ZR1. The dealership I got my ZL1 from had a ZR1 come in at $120K MSRP. They wanted $5K markup. I asked the guy who sold me the ZL1 if there was any way they would drop the markup. I got a solid "no". So I said thanks but I'll pass. It isn't about what the car is worth. Based on the performance and standard options alone in comparison to the competition we all know the ZL1 is a hell of a deal and is worth much more than we're getting them for. But none of us will give money to a greedy dealership to buy one. It's a GM mentality kinda thing I guess.

BTW a good friend of mine bought a non-R GT350 after arguing them down to just a $5K markup. He said it was the stupidest car buying decision he ever made. Traded it in a year later for a 3LZ Z06. LOL!!

[FastCarFanBoy]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

But none of us will give money to a greedy dealership to buy one. It's a GM mentality kinda thing I guess.

Is this the same GM mentality that had people paying ADM's on an already absurdly high priced Z28? Are you saying you have seen the purchase agreement on all ZL1's, Z06's and ZR1's and nobody has paid ADM on those or are you simply full of shit as usual?

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

....... The GT350/350R were most likely planned to exit after 2017, with the GT500 coming in to wrap up the S550 story, but with the delays, keeping GT350/350R around makes sense, because they are awesome cars. Problem is, it handcuffed what Ford could really accomplish with Bullit and PP2 without tarnishing GT350’s crown. They, especially PP2, got dumbed down to protect the still-on-the-lot GT350.

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

Keeping the GT350 around makes no sense. It is slower than the A10 GT in a straight line. I'd be willing to put money on the PP2 beating it around a track...that is until the PP2 overheats or the GT350 catches on fire. It can't beat the ZL1 at anything. I'd bet the SS 1LE could whup the non-R. So what is it's purpose at this point? To cost money while losing at everything but sounding and looking good while being behind the competition and holding the rest of the Mustang lineup hostage? I doubt anyone could seriously buy a non-R GT350 and NOT get laughed at.....

It absolutely made sense for Ford to keep the GT350 going. Every one they sell adds $$ to the bottom line and also adds another brick to the wall of brand equity for Mustang. Numbers are important for cars like Mustang and Camaro. Numbers like 0-60, 1/4 mile, 100-0, max G, price. But numbers aren’t everything. Because Car A can’t match Car B’s numbers doesn’t mean that Car A should just cease production. These cars bring significant emotional content with them. That’s why these forums are so entertaining. And so heated. Despite the fact that a PP1 A10 is faster in a straight line and a PP2 properly tricked out might beat it on the track, if I were in the market for a Mustang, it would be a GT350, non-R. I like the look. I like the sound. I like that it can kick ass on the strip, on the track, and still do daily duty and it’s the best looking Mustang available (in my opinion). Sure there are other cars that can do better on the strip and some that can do better on the track. But as a total package it still delivers.

Same with ZL1 btw. Awesome cars. I considered buying a ZL1 convertible when I bought my Fifty SS convertible. So, even though the ZL1 is the better strip car and the better track car, for the way I use my car, I made the right choice. It’s more than just the numbers.

[newmoon]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

That says more about the customers than anything else. But it's probably for the same reason people paid premiums for Hellcats. They thought it was gonna retain value or increase in value. People thought they were gonna see Ford GT type increases in value. Same with the Demon. One guy was bragging that he got his with "only" a $40K markup, lol!! He said they were gonna triple in value. We all know that ain't happening. At least not for another 20 years. And even then inflation will make sure you're not profiting anyway. But I digress. Ford guys all thought the Shelby would retain value and it isn't. Us ZL1 guys, we learned from the Dodge guy's mistakes and refused to pay markups. Now get this...if the ZL1 was $75K MSRP, I would still have bought one. But I was not going to give a dealership an extra $5K to sell it to me. That is just stupid as hell. If I was a Ford guy I would not have paid a markup for the Shelby. Not on your life. And if I was a Dodge guy I would not have paid a markup for a Hellcat.

Cool story is that I actually considered buying a ZR1. The dealership I got my ZL1 from had a ZR1 come in at $120K MSRP. They wanted $5K markup. I asked the guy who sold me the ZL1 if there was any way they would drop the markup. I got a solid "no". So I said thanks but I'll pass. It isn't about what the car is worth. Based on the performance and standard options alone in comparison to the competition we all know the ZL1 is a hell of a deal and is worth much more than we're getting them for. But none of us will give money to a greedy dealership to buy one. It's a GM mentality kinda thing I guess.

BTW a good friend of mine bought a non-R GT350 after arguing them down to just a $5K markup. He said it was the stupidest car buying decision he ever made. Traded it in a year later for a 3LZ Z06. LOL!!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You just don't get it do you. These people paid the price they did for the GT350Rs because they wanted the car, why is this such a problem for you? Now nearly 3 years after the intro the pricing is falling slightly. This is the same reason they paid markup on the Z28, only a year later to have prices slashed by $15,000 off of msrp, and now ZR1.

And please stop with your 30k GT350s nonsense, you are looking like a fool. A quick search on Autotrader for used GT350R on the 1st page average price is $75,793.00, Ebay average is around $74,200.00, that is asking price but you get the idea. Not bad for a car that had a MSRP of about $70,000.00. Are there models priced lower, maybe due to accident history, or high mileage, yes. Can deals be found absolutely you never know what kind of financial constraints an individual has forcing them to sell quick at much less than present value. But if you want a quality low mileage vehicle you are still going to pay.

On the flip side folks didn't believe the ZL1 was worth the msrp thus forcing Chevy or dealers to discount the vehicles. Which is great if you are in the market for a ZL1.

[BlaqWhole]

Originally Posted by newmoon

you are looking like a fool.

At least I'm not foolish enough to pay a markup on a GT350. Or any car for that matter. Hell I'm not foolish enough to buy a GT350 at all...

BTW, where are all these discounts at? I'd rather get a heavily discounted ZL1 that will smoke the competition than pay the same amount for a Shelby that can't even do better than the SS 1LE on a track. With the markups some of these guys paid, they spent ZL1 prices on a non-R GT350. And Z06 prices on the GT350R. and in each case neither car could match the performance. So what's better? Getting a heavily discounted car that is fast or paying huge markups for a (you know what) Mustang that can't beat anything it is compared to??

[BlaqWhole]

Originally Posted by newmoon

You just don't get it do you. These people paid the price they did for the GT350Rs because they wanted the car, why is this such a problem for you? Now nearly 3 years after the intro the pricing is falling slightly. This is the same reason they paid markup on the Z28, only a year later to have prices slashed by $15,000 off of msrp, and now ZR1.

They didn't pay those prices because they wanted the car. They paid those prices because they thought it was going to be a very limited production run and that it would fetch them money. A lot of them were talking about how it would be worth more than what they paid for in just a few years. And we all know that is not gonna happen. They didn't learn from the lessons that happened to the Hellcat crowd and now they're sitting here with cars that are only worth $30K-high $40K range. And it will drop even more soon. They're laced with issues, they do not perform on the level of what their price tag would suggest, and the GT500 will be arriving soon. All that will mean an end to the abysmal performance and value of the GT350. And if they are going to increase in value, then I could buy a 30K mile example now for $39K, let it sit for 20 years, by which time 30K miles will be nothing, and then sell it for a profit. That is the only way I can see it returning a decent value. Otherwise it was a foolish endeavor. And there is no way to defend paying those kinds of markups for a car that dropped in value by that much.

[newmoon]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

They didn't pay those prices because they wanted the car. They paid those prices because they thought it was going to be a very limited production run and that it would fetch them money. A lot of them were talking about how it would be worth more than what they paid for in just a few years. And we all know that is not gonna happen. They didn't learn from the lessons that happened to the Hellcat crowd and now they're sitting here with cars that are only worth $30K-high $40K range. And it will drop even more soon. They're laced with issues, they do not perform on the level of what their price tag would suggest, and the GT500 will be arriving soon. All that will mean an end to the abysmal performance and value of the GT350. And if they are going to increase in value, then I could buy a 30K mile example now for $39K, let it sit for 20 years, by which time 30K miles will be nothing, and then sell it for a profit. That is the only way I can see it returning a decent value. Otherwise it was a foolish endeavor. And there is no way to defend paying those kinds of markups for a car that dropped in value by that much.

Ok lets look at it this way.

Buyer 1 pays a $5,000 premium on a $70,000 car in 2017, the car is now worth on average $70,000 to $75,000, assuming it is low mileage and great condition

Buyer 2 pays $65,000 for a car with no premium in 2017, the car is now worth $55,000, assuming it is low mileage and great condition.

Based on used value history with specialty models, who made the better investment? Which car is likely to depreciate quicker after this point?

[BlaqWhole]

Originally Posted by newmoon

Ok lets look at it this way.

Buyer 1 pays a $5,000 premium on a $70,000 car in 2017, the car is now worth on average $70,000 to $75,000, assuming it is low mileage and great condition

Buyer 2 pays $65,000 for a car with no premium in 2017, the car is now worth $55,000, assuming it is low mileage and great condition.

Based on used value history with specialty models, who made the better investment? Which car is likely to depreciate quicker after this point?

I'm going to choose my words very carefully.

First off, how you think a used GT350R is worth $70K is beyond me. Now before you and your friend start saying I'm talking out my ass or I'm full of shit again (and get away with it) here are some links.

2017 R with 4600 miles.
https://www.cargurus.com/Cars/invent...ting=215785122

2016 R with 30,000 miles.
https://www.cargurus.com/Cars/invent...631_isFeatured

Those are just 2 examples. If you notice, these cars are marked WAY below what they are supposedly valued at. Why is that? Because now, people are not willing to pay those prices for the R in used condition even with low miles. With 30K miles they are selling for mid $40Ks. And the non R with similar miles are in the high $30Ks. So looking at the price of one of them, $54K for a 17 with 4500 miles on it, if that person paid a markup, which he did, then he got that car a year ago for approx $75K on the low end. Probably much more than that. Which means that he traded it in or sold it to the dealership for less than the $54K that they're currently asking for it. So in 1 year, with a $5K markup, he lost $21K. Which is right in line with what a ZL1, Hellcat, etc loses in their first year. They only argument you have is that markup is not MSRP. But that does not matter because the buyer still paid X amount of money for the car. So he lost the exact same amount of money.

Now to ask you a question, which car would someone buy...a used GT350R with low miles that costs $75K or one that costs $54K with low miles? Because if you scroll down on the page they are there listed way below their "value". They are not fetching the money you wanna think they are.

[ST1LE]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

I'm going to choose my words very carefully.

First off, how you think a used GT350R is worth $70K is beyond me. Now before you and your friend start saying I'm talking out my ass or I'm full of shit again (and get away with it) here are some links.

2017 R with 4600 miles.
https://www.cargurus.com/Cars/invent...ting=215785122

2016 R with 30,000 miles.
https://www.cargurus.com/Cars/invent...631_isFeatured

Those are just 2 examples. If you notice, these cars are marked WAY below what they are supposedly valued at. Why is that? Because now, people are not willing to pay those prices for the R in used condition even with low miles. With 30K miles they are selling for mid $40Ks. And the non R with similar miles are in the high $30Ks. So looking at the price of one of them, $54K for a 17 with 4500 miles on it, if that person paid a markup, which he did, then he got that car a year ago for approx $75K on the low end. Probably much more than that. Which means that he traded it in or sold it to the dealership for less than the $54K that they're currently asking for it. So in 1 year, with a $5K markup, he lost $21K. Which is right in line with what a ZL1, Hellcat, etc loses in their first year. They only argument you have is that markup is not MSRP. But that does not matter because the buyer still paid X amount of money for the car. So he lost the exact same amount of money.

Now to ask you a question, which car would someone buy...a used GT350R with low miles that costs $75K or one that costs $54K with low miles? Because if you scroll down on the page they are there listed way below their "value". They are not fetching the money you wanna think they are.

That 2017 is no R.

Edit: Neither are R's.

[newmoon]

Originally Posted by ST1LE

That 2017 is no R.

Edit: Neither are R's.

Good catch!