[Norm Peterson]

Originally Posted by SSfriendly

Except, Ford offered a track package...it's in the name.

Except that any GT350 package isn't about the "regular GT's" PP1 package either (in spite of having deficiencies of its own).


Norm

[1295/SS]

Originally Posted by SSfriendly

I'm not defending Ford per say, just not defending ignorant buyers. I'm sorry, if I wanted to track a vehicle and a manufacturer offered a track option and non track option....I'm not going to buy the non-track option and bitch when it doesn't hold up at the track.

If it weren't for the markup, I likely would have picked up a tech pack optioned MY16 GT350. I most certainly wouldn't want to pay the extra cash on the track pack when I would never had tracked the car.

Different strokes I suppose.

"Per Say?"

[Chadicus]

Originally Posted by SSfriendly

I'm not defending Ford per say, just not defending ignorant buyers. I'm sorry, if I wanted to track a vehicle and a manufacturer offered a track option and non track option....I'm not going to buy the non-track option and bitch when it doesn't hold up at the track.

If it weren't for the markup, I likely would have picked up a tech pack optioned MY16 GT350. I most certainly wouldn't want to pay the extra cash on the track pack when I would never had tracked the car.

Different strokes I suppose.

You keep forgetting that the car wasn't just overheating on the track. It was overheating on Main Street. This is a class-action lawsuit that prompted Ford to go ahead and put the "track pack" on every GT 350 before the lawsuit is even decided or settled.

It is also funny that you call tech pack buyers "cheap" when it was the more expensive option by being 1000 more than the track pack. The 350 was a colossal blunder in my book. Hell the entire S550 platform has been one blunder after another.

[Quinten_33]

Originally Posted by newmoon

Spin it anyway you like the Z06s issues are still out there and you know it. Chevy got beat up brutally over it in the press and continues to do so. The car was an embarrassment.

Example: Taken directly from MT's recent ZR1 review:
First and foremost: is it gonna overheat? In case you’re not up to speed, when pushed hard pre-2017 Corvette Z06s heat soaked/overheated.

Road and Track ZR1 Review.
Remember the Z06's overheating issues? GM does too.
Not only does the ZR1 have a more-efficient intercooler system with a heat extractor hole in its hood, but it also packs four new radiators, bringing the number of heat-exchangers to 13.

There's always issues with new performance cars. In the 2017 MT BDC competition, a brand new $130,000 Jaguar F-type SVR had a suspension failure before track testing even began. The Ford Focus RS has head gasket issues. The Alfa Romeo Giulia Quadrifoglio had horrible reliability, but now it's one of the best sedans ever.

Problems get fixed, people move on. GM has learned from their mistakes and is now making cars with the best cooling on the performance market. Push a 6th Gen ZL1 around a road course without breaks, and it'll run out of gas before anything on it overheats.

[Norm Peterson]

Originally Posted by SSfriendly

I think Ford knew the take rate on the MY15-17 power pack being 30% had a direct influence on what the PP1 became. Shift the options and price up too high and sales drop significantly. My guess is, they wanted to milk as many profits from the PP1 as possible, hence the lower pricepoint and performance.

Nearly everything added to the PP2 costs more money. Bigger wheels, bigger swaybars, track ready tires etc. If Ford had released the PP2 as it's only option, they would have been pissing away money on each buyer that didn't really want to track their car...but only wanted the unique wheels, brembo brakes etc. I can't blame them for their decision.

My personal opinion is...if I was looking for a track first, weekend second vehicle the 1LE would be top of my list. As it stands, myself (like most others) are looking for a daily driver first vehicle. The 1LE and PP2 are always going to be a lower production (lower profitability) vehicles.

This ↑↑↑

Originally Posted by ULTRAZLS1

So in the end it’s smart and more profitable to not give consumers the best car they can provide for the money? I suppose. But that’s weak as hell imo

That question eventually boils down to opinion. What some person at the corporate decision level (with some committee's input) thinks 'best' means. That does suggest that the sort of buyer they're really targeting isn't nearly as hardcore about cornering & handling as the 'Performance' part of PP1 is trying to claim it's good for.

If I was to buy a new car for me today, it'd most likely be a 1SS 1LE. Certainly over a GT PP1 even without the H2H and the ensuing forum commotion.

I expect more than that from the company I’m buying from. It’s really funny these ford guys give ford every excuse.

Call it excuses if you will, but there's a fair amount of complaint/feelings of being shortchanged in there as well.

The second a base GT competes with a base SS these arguments will disappear

Agreed.


Norm

[DevilsReject97]

Originally Posted by SpeedIsLife

I think you're confusing trim with model.

Ford Mustang-Model
GT aka Grand Touring-Trim

Chevrolet Camaro-Model
Super Sport-Trim

No, although I can see why you would think that. Traditionally, cars that were considered a GT or a grand tourer, had their own respective model names....such as the Jaguar E-Type or the Ferrari 250 GTO. These cars were called GT's....

The Mustang GT is simply that, the Mustang GT. It's not a grand touring car just because the name is GT. The same applies to the Dodge Charger R/T.

I understand that the GT is a trim, but it is also a model. The two words can be interchanged depending on how you use them...

Here's from the Mustang's own Wiki page..

Additionally, a variety of performance packages were introduced that included the Mach 1, the Boss 302, and Boss 429. The two Boss models were to homologate the engines for racing. The 1969 Mustang was the last year for the GT option (although it did return on the 3rd Generation Mustang for the 1982 Model Year). A fourth model available only as a hardtop, the Grande, saw success starting in 1969

Originally Posted by SSfriendly

You're dead wrong here. The 2 biggest items that affect price (outside of the engine and transmission) are wheels and tires. GM is going to downsize both of those and offer an all season on their base...you can book it. And you don't just change the wheel and tire dynamics without touching the suspension as well. The spring rates and shocks will be changed to better suite the larger sidewall tires and in the end....all of this will affect performance. If GM does it right, they can offer a lower priced V8 entry camaro than the mustang.

Let me explain it to you again. Most people don't want the extra tech, the added weight, etc etc. So jettisoning that will be a huge start. As for the tires, you clearly don't know shit about the Camaro. They already offer All Season tires in the exact same 245-40 and 275-35 setups that the Camaro currently runs. So no, the car will be just fine as is.

Plenty of people have already switched over to these types of tires as well for daily use too...

Originally Posted by SSfriendly

In the Fbody days, the Z28 aligned with the base GT and the SS was the up-level, so no...the Z28 has not always been the type of car as the GT350.

The current GT 350 is a road course oriented Mustang. That is what the Z/28 has always been, a road/track oriented Camaro. That was my only comparison of the two. The Z/28 is a car with upgraded brakes/suspension in a different way compared to the SS, traditionally. There are of course exceptions.

[Norm Peterson]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

I think the GT and the GT PP1 fell behind by such a large margin...or the SS and SS1LE jumped ahead by such a large margin that the Mustang guys think it isn't fair to compare them when they're on the same trim level. So now they think the GT PP should be compared to the SS and this new PP2 should be compared to the SS 1LE. And the thing is that they've been saying it enough times that even us over here started believing it. LOL.

If you look at some of the available specs for the GT in both base and PP1 versions, the changes are too small to be called an upgrade (better off as a reasonable production change for a new model year). The differences are nowhere near as significant as the 1LE's upgrades over the SS in the wheel width and tire size categories. 255/xx on 9" wides up front might have been cutting edge - 15 or 20 years ago.


Norm

[Norm Peterson]

Originally Posted by Mr. Wyndham

It's not the "idiot buyers" for assuming Ford would build something that would do what they said it would do. It's shifty Ford for not telling everyone upfront they'd need the track pack to do it, because otherwise it's a garage queen.

Idiot buyers were those who either bought the car with the tech package (because otherwise the car was too 'raw') and tracked it anyway or bought it without the track pack out of ignorance (yes, Ford should have helped out a bit more here). Could be Ford only saw track junkies (GT350R) on the one hand and around-town wanna-be's (non-R) on the other, and nothing in between.


Norm

[Norm Peterson]

Originally Posted by DevilsReject97

No, although I can see why you would think that. Traditionally, cars that were considered a GT or a grand tourer, had their own respective model names....such as the Jaguar E-Type or the Ferrari 250 GTO. These cars were called GT's....

The Mustang GT is simply that, the Mustang GT. It's not a grand touring car just because the name is GT. The same applies to the Dodge Charger R/T.

In the Mustang's case, GT absolutely is a trim designation (as opposed to nothing at all being there for the sixxers and EB's). That Ford apparently borrowed that tag from the original "Grand Touring" definition for their own purposes doesn't mean it's going to fit that definition any better than trying to fit the Mustang into a sports car definition does or ever did.

But "Mustang GT" does identify and distinguish the Mustang in V8 guise as being of higher performance potential than just 'Mustang' with no further description. As borrowed and used by Ford over the decades it need not imply anything more than that.


Norm

[DevilsReject97]

Originally Posted by Norm Peterson

In the Mustang's case, GT absolutely is a trim designation (as opposed to nothing at all being there for the sixxers and EB's). That Ford apparently borrowed that tag from the original "Grand Touring" definition for their own purposes doesn't mean it's going to fit that definition any better than trying to fit the Mustang into a sports car definition does or ever did.

But "Mustang GT" does identify and distinguish the Mustang in V8 guise as being of higher performance potential than just 'Mustang' with no further description. As borrowed and used by Ford over the decades it need not imply anything more than that.


Norm

You are still making my case for me. As I said, the term trim/model can be used interchangeably based on the way it is used. However, the GT model or trim if you will, is still a specific name of the car.

Boss Mustang isn't called a Boss Mustang GT or GT Boss Mustang. It's called a Boss Mustang. Same goes for the Mustang GT. And I do agree with you, the car's don't exactly fit into any specific "sports car" classification the way they want it to...

[shaffe]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

And if you're looking to win races, or to NOT overheat, or to run 11s bone stock, or not tramline, or not have trans shudder, or not have hood vibration, or not snap axles and driveshafts, or not plow into a crowd of people, then avoid the Mustang at all costs.

Doesn't the A8 Camaro have trans shudder?

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

One thing I'll applaud Ford for is their ability to market the Mustang. they do that much better than GM. Back when I got my S550, one of the tings that stood out (and also played a pivotal part of my decision) was the friendliness of the dealerships. I went to several Chevy dealerships to look at Camaros and not one of them offered me a test drive or even tried to push the Camaro on me. the Ford dealerships tho, no matter what you go in there for it seems like they'll try to push you towards a Mustang. They offer test drives, they'll even let you take the car for a few days. Incidentally, the only time a Chevy dealership gave me that offer was back in 05 when they were trying to sell me a Mach 1, lol!! Ford dealerships are willing to play ball when it comes to making a deal. And they'll get you in a Mustang no matter what and whether it's an EB or GT. Chevy dealerships have an arrogant attitude most of the time and they'll treat the Camaro SS like gold. And the Corvette...shit, I don't think some of them will even let you look at one without putting a deposit on it, lol!! GM needs to get their dealerships to start moving these cars. They can't just continue to sit around with arrogant uppity attitudes and have Camaros sitting on lots indefinitely and wonder why sales are low. If they start cutting more deals and moving vehicles then things will change.

To be clear, not all Ford dealerships are welcoming and not all Chevy dealerships are uppity. But it seems that more often than not the Ford dealerships will work their asses off to get you in a Mustang while the Chevy dealerships have more of a cavalier attitude about sales.

It's nice to see you bashing things other than Ford lol

Originally Posted by ST1LE

WOW.

Are we really arguing now which is more embarrassing between overheating issues with A8 ZO6's, and the multitude of issues with the GT350?

Seems this thread has run its course.

Yeah this thread ran it's course a while ago lol

[Norm Peterson]

Originally Posted by DevilsReject97

You are still making my case for me. As I said, the term trim/model can be used interchangeably based on the way it is used. However, the GT model or trim if you will, is still a specific name of the car.

Boss Mustang isn't called a Boss Mustang GT or GT Boss Mustang. It's called a Boss Mustang. Same goes for the Mustang GT. And I do agree with you, the car's don't exactly fit into any specific "sports car" classification the way they want it to...

Common usage and the tendency to abbreviate most everything is getting in the way here.

People on this forum and a few other places also know what ZL1's and SS's are, but I don't think anybody is granting those designations "model-level" status yet.


Norm

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by shaffe

Yeah this thread ran it's course a while ago lol

I can't help but be mesmerized at how the topics shift so rapidly...

[ST1LE]

Originally Posted by Mr. Wyndham

I can't help but be mesmerized at how the topics shift so rapidly...

HAHAHAHA.....and how we just all switch directions at the same time.

LOL, I am not sure if I should be impressed, but I sorta am.