NASTY Lil' Cobra Being Twin Screwed

"Joe" > wrote in message
...
> Michael Johnson > wrote in
> :
>
>> wrote:
>>> On Oct 21, 11:26 am, Michael Johnson > wrote:
>>>
>>>>>>>> I think an upscale Cougar well optioned with a 400 hp, 5.0L, N/A
>>>>>>>> 32 valve V-8 would sell like hotcakes priced around $35k.
>>>
>>>>>>> I still say a 4 door, sporty station wagon Mustang would sell
>>>>>>> like crazy!
>>>
>>>>>> That's like putting mustard on ice cream.
>>>
>>>>> I agree, to the purist, it would be revolting. But to the somewhat
>>>>> brand loyal, practical man and somewhat experienced, or most likely
>>>>> displaced, secretary with several kids and friends, football
>>>>> practices and games, and the odd weekend project, I think it would
>>>>> do quite well.
>>>
>>>> I have a feeling that the number of new buyers they get from a four
>>>> door Mustang would be offset by the number of Mustang enthusiasts
>>>> they would lose. IMO, some things just aren't meant to be, like a
>>>> four door Mustang.
>>>
>>> Mike,
>>>
>>> I don't know why you would assume a 4-door Mustang or a Mustang wagon
>>> would drive buyers of the 2-door variety away. I don't think it
>>> would.
>>>
>>> Or am I crazy to think buyers can easily be fooled with some
>>> different trim and a name change -- i.e Firebird/Camaro and
>>> Cougar/Mustang,
>>>
>>> Patrick
>>> (Love to have a Mustang mini-wagon/some thing like the old BMW M-
>>> coupe.)
>>
>> I'm all for Ford putting out a performance wagon. Just don't
>> *******ize the Mustang to do it. It would only take away from the
>> Mustang's heritage, IMO.
>
> I think the Mustang would survive with its heritage intact. Even after
> the Mustang II era, it's going as strong as ever.

The Mustang II era was Nothing compared to *******izing the entire car by
making it a 4 door, or worse a wagon. (think the gay Nazi's driving the '74
pinto wagon in the Blues Brothers here
http://www.imcdb.org/images/019/429.jpg) The Mustang II remained a 2 door
PONY car. They did what you are suggesting under another name plate, then
as they should now. Would you also lobby for a 4 door station wagon
corvette? How about the Ford GT super car with 4 doors, cause we are all
getting older ya know... That's retarded, and so is destroying the
Mustang, it is, was and always has been a two door PONY CAR.

Doesn't it strike you a little odd that you think someone would buy and
drive a re-badged Volvo station wagon with a pony in the grill and C-scoops
in the quarters because they "really" wanted to be driving a 2-door pony
car, a Mustang???
Come On Now, just because you are getting older doesn't mean you gotta ruin
it for everyone else.

Joe wrote:
> Michael Johnson > wrote in
> :
>
>> wrote:
>>> On Oct 21, 11:26 am, Michael Johnson > wrote:
>>>
>>>>>>>> I think an upscale Cougar well optioned with a 400 hp, 5.0L, N/A
>>>>>>>> 32 valve V-8 would sell like hotcakes priced around $35k.
>>>>>>> I still say a 4 door, sporty station wagon Mustang would sell
>>>>>>> like crazy!
>>>>>> That's like putting mustard on ice cream.
>>>>> I agree, to the purist, it would be revolting. But to the somewhat
>>>>> brand loyal, practical man and somewhat experienced, or most likely
>>>>> displaced, secretary with several kids and friends, football
>>>>> practices and games, and the odd weekend project, I think it would
>>>>> do quite well.
>>>> I have a feeling that the number of new buyers they get from a four
>>>> door Mustang would be offset by the number of Mustang enthusiasts
>>>> they would lose. IMO, some things just aren't meant to be, like a
>>>> four door Mustang.
>>> Mike,
>>>
>>> I don't know why you would assume a 4-door Mustang or a Mustang wagon
>>> would drive buyers of the 2-door variety away. I don't think it
>>> would.
>>>
>>> Or am I crazy to think buyers can easily be fooled with some
>>> different trim and a name change -- i.e Firebird/Camaro and
>>> Cougar/Mustang,
>>>
>>> Patrick
>>> (Love to have a Mustang mini-wagon/some thing like the old BMW M-
>>> coupe.)
>> I'm all for Ford putting out a performance wagon. Just don't
>> *******ize the Mustang to do it. It would only take away from the
>> Mustang's heritage, IMO.
>
> I think the Mustang would survive with its heritage intact. Even after
> the Mustang II era, it's going as strong as ever.

I wouldn't risk it if I were Ford. Bone head moves have a way of
getting blown out of proportion and I would consider a four door Mustang
a bone head move. Do you like the idea of a four door Camaro, Corvette,
Miata, Porsche, etc.? I can't believe you would. Would you? <waiting
nervously for an answer>

On Oct 22, 8:14 pm, Michael Johnson > wrote:
> wrote:
> > On Oct 21, 11:26 am, Michael Johnson > wrote:
>
> >>>>>> I think an upscale Cougar well optioned with a 400 hp, 5.0L, N/A 32
> >>>>>> valve V-8 would sell like hotcakes priced around $35k.
>
> >>>>> I still say a 4 door, sporty station wagon Mustang would sell like crazy!
>
> >>>> That's like putting mustard on ice cream.
>
> >>> I agree, to the purist, it would be revolting. But to the somewhat brand
> >>> loyal, practical man and somewhat experienced, or most likely displaced,
> >>> secretary with several kids and friends, football practices and games, and
> >>> the odd weekend project, I think it would do quite well.
>
> >> I have a feeling that the number of new buyers they get from a four door
> >> Mustang would be offset by the number of Mustang enthusiasts they would
> >> lose. IMO, some things just aren't meant to be, like a four door
> >> Mustang.
>
> > Mike,
>
> > I don't know why you would assume a 4-door Mustang or a Mustang wagon
> > would drive buyers of the 2-door variety away. I don't think it
> > would.
>
> > Or am I crazy to think buyers can easily be fooled with some different
> > trim and a name change -- i.e Firebird/Camaro and Cougar/Mustang,
>
> > Patrick
> > (Love to have a Mustang mini-wagon/some thing like the old BMW M-
> > coupe.)

> I'm all for Ford putting out a performance wagon. Just don't *******ize
> the Mustang to do it. It would only take away from the Mustang's
> heritage, IMO.

So, simply stretch out a Mustang platform and body, change out the
grill/some trim, slap on a Falcon name and it's golden?

Patrick

On Oct 22, 8:40 pm, Michael Johnson > wrote:

> > I also think the 2-door model was an excellent idea but just had poor
> > execution. 2-seaters are supposed to be sporty and Ford's last
> > generation T-bird, at nearly 4,000 scale-busting pounds, didn't have a
> > chance. But if they could have gotten that Thunder [thighs] Bird down
> > to around 3,200, given it a slightly more aggressive stance/look,
> > installed some real thunder under the hood and given it a competitive
> > price, I think Ford would have found a nice sales niche.
>
> The reason I think it was a bad idea is they greatly narrowed the car's
> target market. Ford took the original car from a two seater to a four
> seater with great success. Had they not done that it would likely have
> been discontinued. Why they thought going back to two seats would mean
> more sales is beyond me.

So Ford should forever concede the American 2-seat market to the
Corvette?

<Cough>Viper<cough>

> IMO, the only thing wrong with the last generation four seat T-Bird was
> its weight. Had they trimmed 300-400 pounds out of the car it would
> have been a terrific performer. As I said earlier, that car had RWD,
> IRS, a solid performing V-8, good styling, nice interior, relatively
> good performance etc. Ford needs a car with those traits in the worst way.

I agree. And I would like to think so. The problem is they ALWAYS
load these "personal coupes" down with tons of options and BS and they
ALWAYS become bloated behemoths. Then any chance of them to be
sporting is lost. Why they can't take a lightweight platform, add a
trimmed-down stylish body, keep the interior mostly manually operated
but very functional, give the steering nice feel, bolt on a set of
killer brakes, and fit a potent motor between the frame rails is
beyond me.

Patrick

> wrote in message
oups.com...
> On Oct 22, 8:40 pm, Michael Johnson > wrote:
>
>> > I also think the 2-door model was an excellent idea but just had poor
>> > execution. 2-seaters are supposed to be sporty and Ford's last
>> > generation T-bird, at nearly 4,000 scale-busting pounds, didn't have a
>> > chance. But if they could have gotten that Thunder [thighs] Bird down
>> > to around 3,200, given it a slightly more aggressive stance/look,
>> > installed some real thunder under the hood and given it a competitive
>> > price, I think Ford would have found a nice sales niche.
>>
>> The reason I think it was a bad idea is they greatly narrowed the car's
>> target market. Ford took the original car from a two seater to a four
>> seater with great success. Had they not done that it would likely have
>> been discontinued. Why they thought going back to two seats would mean
>> more sales is beyond me.
>
> So Ford should forever concede the American 2-seat market to the
> Corvette?

That is an entirely different topic and market than the Thunderbird ever
was...

Besides the latest 2 seat T-bird was not in the same room let alone group as
the Corvette and Viper.
<Cough>Ford GT<cough>


>
> <Cough>Viper<cough>
>
>> IMO, the only thing wrong with the last generation four seat T-Bird was
>> its weight. Had they trimmed 300-400 pounds out of the car it would
>> have been a terrific performer. As I said earlier, that car had RWD,
>> IRS, a solid performing V-8, good styling, nice interior, relatively
>> good performance etc. Ford needs a car with those traits in the worst
>> way.
>
> I agree. And I would like to think so. The problem is they ALWAYS
> load these "personal coupes" down with tons of options and BS and they
> ALWAYS become bloated behemoths. Then any chance of them to be
> sporting is lost. Why they can't take a lightweight platform, add a
> trimmed-down stylish body, keep the interior mostly manually operated
> but very functional, give the steering nice feel, bolt on a set of
> killer brakes, and fit a potent motor between the frame rails is
> beyond me.
>
> Patrick
>

wrote:
> On Oct 22, 8:14 pm, Michael Johnson > wrote:
>> wrote:
>>> On Oct 21, 11:26 am, Michael Johnson > wrote:
>>>>>>>> I think an upscale Cougar well optioned with a 400 hp, 5.0L, N/A 32
>>>>>>>> valve V-8 would sell like hotcakes priced around $35k.
>>>>>>> I still say a 4 door, sporty station wagon Mustang would sell like crazy!
>>>>>> That's like putting mustard on ice cream.
>>>>> I agree, to the purist, it would be revolting. But to the somewhat brand
>>>>> loyal, practical man and somewhat experienced, or most likely displaced,
>>>>> secretary with several kids and friends, football practices and games, and
>>>>> the odd weekend project, I think it would do quite well.
>>>> I have a feeling that the number of new buyers they get from a four door
>>>> Mustang would be offset by the number of Mustang enthusiasts they would
>>>> lose. IMO, some things just aren't meant to be, like a four door
>>>> Mustang.
>>> Mike,
>>> I don't know why you would assume a 4-door Mustang or a Mustang wagon
>>> would drive buyers of the 2-door variety away. I don't think it
>>> would.
>>> Or am I crazy to think buyers can easily be fooled with some different
>>> trim and a name change -- i.e Firebird/Camaro and Cougar/Mustang,
>>> Patrick
>>> (Love to have a Mustang mini-wagon/some thing like the old BMW M-
>>> coupe.)
>
>> I'm all for Ford putting out a performance wagon. Just don't *******ize
>> the Mustang to do it. It would only take away from the Mustang's
>> heritage, IMO.
>
> So, simply stretch out a Mustang platform and body, change out the
> grill/some trim, slap on a Falcon name and it's golden?

The Mustang platform has not always been exclusive and it wouldn't
bother me if they used it as the basis for a wagon. Just don't make it
look like a stretched Mustang with two extra doors. The Mustang is a
pony car and it should stay that way, IMO.

"My Name Is Nobody" > wrote in
news:NrqTi.11763$na2.7081@trndny08:

>
> "Joe" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Michael Johnson > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>> wrote:
>>>> On Oct 21, 11:26 am, Michael Johnson > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I think an upscale Cougar well optioned with a 400 hp, 5.0L,
>>>>>>>>> N/A 32 valve V-8 would sell like hotcakes priced around $35k.
>>>>
>>>>>>>> I still say a 4 door, sporty station wagon Mustang would sell
>>>>>>>> like crazy!
>>>>
>>>>>>> That's like putting mustard on ice cream.
>>>>
>>>>>> I agree, to the purist, it would be revolting. But to the
>>>>>> somewhat brand loyal, practical man and somewhat experienced, or
>>>>>> most likely displaced, secretary with several kids and friends,
>>>>>> football practices and games, and the odd weekend project, I
>>>>>> think it would do quite well.
>>>>
>>>>> I have a feeling that the number of new buyers they get from a
>>>>> four door Mustang would be offset by the number of Mustang
>>>>> enthusiasts they would lose. IMO, some things just aren't meant
>>>>> to be, like a four door Mustang.
>>>>
>>>> Mike,
>>>>
>>>> I don't know why you would assume a 4-door Mustang or a Mustang
>>>> wagon would drive buyers of the 2-door variety away. I don't think
>>>> it would.
>>>>
>>>> Or am I crazy to think buyers can easily be fooled with some
>>>> different trim and a name change -- i.e Firebird/Camaro and
>>>> Cougar/Mustang,
>>>>
>>>> Patrick
>>>> (Love to have a Mustang mini-wagon/some thing like the old BMW M-
>>>> coupe.)
>>>
>>> I'm all for Ford putting out a performance wagon. Just don't
>>> *******ize the Mustang to do it. It would only take away from the
>>> Mustang's heritage, IMO.
>>
>> I think the Mustang would survive with its heritage intact. Even
>> after the Mustang II era, it's going as strong as ever.
>
> The Mustang II era was Nothing compared to *******izing the entire car
> by making it a 4 door, or worse a wagon. (think the gay Nazi's
> driving the '74 pinto wagon in the Blues Brothers here
> http://www.imcdb.org/images/019/429.jpg) The Mustang II remained a 2
> door PONY car.

The Mustang II started life on a Pinto chassis and morphed into its own
unique self after much factory rework.

> They did what you are suggesting under another name
> plate, then as they should now.

1) I didn't make the suggestion.

2) The Mustang II was a far worse mortal sin to Mustang heritage than
any Mustang 4-door or wagon.


> Would you also lobby for a 4 door
> station wagon corvette?

I'm not lobbying for anything except performance vehicles. 4 doors,
wagon, hatch, convertible, you name it. If it performs, then I'm for
it.

> How about the Ford GT super car with 4 doors,
> cause we are all getting older ya know... That's retarded, and so is
> destroying the Mustang, it is, was and always has been a two door PONY
> CAR.

If you want to label the Mustang II as a pony car, then go for it. But
that's even more retarded than your other examples.

> Doesn't it strike you a little odd that you think someone would buy
> and drive a re-badged Volvo station wagon with a pony in the grill and
> C-scoops in the quarters because they "really" wanted to be driving a
> 2-door pony car, a Mustang???

Actually, no. But I never had that thought.

> Come On Now, just because you are getting older doesn't mean you gotta
> ruin it for everyone else.

So who's holding a gun to your head forcing you to buy this vehicle that
doesn't even exist?

Michael Johnson > wrote in
:

> Joe wrote:
>> Michael Johnson > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>> wrote:
>>>> On Oct 21, 11:26 am, Michael Johnson > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I think an upscale Cougar well optioned with a 400 hp, 5.0L,
N/A
>>>>>>>>> 32 valve V-8 would sell like hotcakes priced around $35k.
>>>>>>>> I still say a 4 door, sporty station wagon Mustang would sell
>>>>>>>> like crazy!
>>>>>>> That's like putting mustard on ice cream.
>>>>>> I agree, to the purist, it would be revolting. But to the
somewhat
>>>>>> brand loyal, practical man and somewhat experienced, or most
likely
>>>>>> displaced, secretary with several kids and friends, football
>>>>>> practices and games, and the odd weekend project, I think it
would
>>>>>> do quite well.
>>>>> I have a feeling that the number of new buyers they get from a
four
>>>>> door Mustang would be offset by the number of Mustang enthusiasts
>>>>> they would lose. IMO, some things just aren't meant to be, like a
>>>>> four door Mustang.
>>>> Mike,
>>>>
>>>> I don't know why you would assume a 4-door Mustang or a Mustang
wagon
>>>> would drive buyers of the 2-door variety away. I don't think it
>>>> would.
>>>>
>>>> Or am I crazy to think buyers can easily be fooled with some
>>>> different trim and a name change -- i.e Firebird/Camaro and
>>>> Cougar/Mustang,
>>>>
>>>> Patrick
>>>> (Love to have a Mustang mini-wagon/some thing like the old BMW M-
>>>> coupe.)
>>> I'm all for Ford putting out a performance wagon. Just don't
>>> *******ize the Mustang to do it. It would only take away from the
>>> Mustang's heritage, IMO.
>>
>> I think the Mustang would survive with its heritage intact. Even
after
>> the Mustang II era, it's going as strong as ever.
>
> I wouldn't risk it if I were Ford. Bone head moves have a way of
> getting blown out of proportion and I would consider a four door
Mustang
> a bone head move.

Michael, I basically agree with you. But I can definitely see a slot
for a Ford 4-door vehicle to go head to head with the Charger, Magnum,
300, and the up-and-coming G8. If you don't want to call it a Mustang,
that's great. Call it something else. I really don't care what it's
called.

> Do you like the idea of a four door Camaro, Corvette,

I haven't seen a contemporary 2-door Camaro yet, so I'll reserve
judgement on that. The CTS-V is a 4-door Corvette, whether you like it
or not.

> Miata, Porsche, etc.? I can't believe you would. Would you? <waiting
> nervously for an answer>

The Cayenne is arguably a 4-door performance Porsche. Let's also take a
look at MB, BMW, Audi, Acura, etc. They all have 4-door performance
vehicles that will kick major ass.

As for the Miata, well, that's a weenie car with RWD. Stuff a 350hp V8
in it and that's another story...

Michael Johnson > wrote in
:

> wrote:
>> On Oct 22, 8:14 pm, Michael Johnson > wrote:
>>> wrote:
>>>> On Oct 21, 11:26 am, Michael Johnson > wrote:
>>>>>>>>> I think an upscale Cougar well optioned with a 400 hp, 5.0L,
>>>>>>>>> N/A 32 valve V-8 would sell like hotcakes priced around $35k.
>>>>>>>> I still say a 4 door, sporty station wagon Mustang would sell
>>>>>>>> like crazy!
>>>>>>> That's like putting mustard on ice cream.
>>>>>> I agree, to the purist, it would be revolting. But to the
>>>>>> somewhat brand loyal, practical man and somewhat experienced, or
>>>>>> most likely displaced, secretary with several kids and friends,
>>>>>> football practices and games, and the odd weekend project, I
>>>>>> think it would do quite well.
>>>>> I have a feeling that the number of new buyers they get from a
>>>>> four door Mustang would be offset by the number of Mustang
>>>>> enthusiasts they would lose. IMO, some things just aren't meant
>>>>> to be, like a four door Mustang.
>>>> Mike,
>>>> I don't know why you would assume a 4-door Mustang or a Mustang
>>>> wagon would drive buyers of the 2-door variety away. I don't think
>>>> it would.
>>>> Or am I crazy to think buyers can easily be fooled with some
>>>> different trim and a name change -- i.e Firebird/Camaro and
>>>> Cougar/Mustang, Patrick
>>>> (Love to have a Mustang mini-wagon/some thing like the old BMW M-
>>>> coupe.)
>>
>>> I'm all for Ford putting out a performance wagon. Just don't
>>> *******ize the Mustang to do it. It would only take away from the
>>> Mustang's heritage, IMO.
>>
>> So, simply stretch out a Mustang platform and body, change out the
>> grill/some trim, slap on a Falcon name and it's golden?
>
> The Mustang platform has not always been exclusive and it wouldn't
> bother me if they used it as the basis for a wagon. Just don't make
> it look like a stretched Mustang with two extra doors. The Mustang is
> a pony car and it should stay that way, IMO.

Now that you mention it, the whole Fox line back in the '80s had your 4-
door and wagon Mustangs. They were called LTDs and Fairmonts. What's
in a name?

wrote:
> On Oct 22, 8:40 pm, Michael Johnson > wrote:
>
>>> I also think the 2-door model was an excellent idea but just had poor
>>> execution. 2-seaters are supposed to be sporty and Ford's last
>>> generation T-bird, at nearly 4,000 scale-busting pounds, didn't have a
>>> chance. But if they could have gotten that Thunder [thighs] Bird down
>>> to around 3,200, given it a slightly more aggressive stance/look,
>>> installed some real thunder under the hood and given it a competitive
>>> price, I think Ford would have found a nice sales niche.
>> The reason I think it was a bad idea is they greatly narrowed the car's
>> target market. Ford took the original car from a two seater to a four
>> seater with great success. Had they not done that it would likely have
>> been discontinued. Why they thought going back to two seats would mean
>> more sales is beyond me.
>
> So Ford should forever concede the American 2-seat market to the
> Corvette?

They shouldn't take the only decent two door four seater they have and
turn it into a low volume two seater. It is bad for business and just
one in a long list of screw ups they have done in the last 10-15 years.
If they want to compete with the Vette and Viper then they had the
perfect car in the two seat, V-10 Cobra. Remember that car? It was an
ass kicker. When the average Joe thinks of the T-Bird they don't
imagine a Vette beater. Ford needs a popular two door, four seat coupe
far worse than a low volume, two seat luxury car.

> <Cough>Viper<cough>

<cough>V-10 Cobra<cough>

>> IMO, the only thing wrong with the last generation four seat T-Bird was
>> its weight. Had they trimmed 300-400 pounds out of the car it would
>> have been a terrific performer. As I said earlier, that car had RWD,
>> IRS, a solid performing V-8, good styling, nice interior, relatively
>> good performance etc. Ford needs a car with those traits in the worst way.
>
> I agree. And I would like to think so. The problem is they ALWAYS
> load these "personal coupes" down with tons of options and BS and they
> ALWAYS become bloated behemoths. Then any chance of them to be
> sporting is lost. Why they can't take a lightweight platform, add a
> trimmed-down stylish body, keep the interior mostly manually operated
> but very functional, give the steering nice feel, bolt on a set of
> killer brakes, and fit a potent motor between the frame rails is
> beyond me.

Where Ford missed a great opportunity, IMO, was a good redesign for the
next generation four seat T-Bird which would have involved a serious
diet. Had they done it right, or even marginally right, we would have
bought one when the '94 got totaled. We still bought a Mercury Sable (a
good car for what it is) but it wasn't a purchase we were thrilled with
and we had literally one day to decide what to buy. The really sad
thing is that Ford didn't have anything better than a Sable/Taurus to
offer us. Had there been a four seat T-bird available, I'm 95% sure it
would be sitting in the driveway right now.

The T-Bird we had was actually a good performer considering its weight.
It had decent pickup, steering was decent (thanks to no FWD), and
actually cornered well with the stock skinny tires. It really wouldn't
have taken much for Ford to make a very good coupe. IMO, the bones for
one was already there.