Idea of the muscle car is dead (Or, why Ford can't sell cars now)

On Jul 31, 1:42 pm, Spike > wrote:

> God help the USA if we have a left leaning President and a left leaning Congress in
> control!

After the last 7+ painful years, I say bring it...

Patrick

On Jul 31, 7:43 am, (Itsfrom Click) wrote:

> NOW......3,4,5 years later GM and Chrysler market their
> responses.....and the Challenger is introduced as a Hemi only. Saleens,
> Cobras, etc., etc. ..... just what we need with $4 gas

I can only guess at how these current 300+ HP muscle cars cars would
have sold back in the mid 90's with $1.20 gallon gas...

> (along with the
> 4500 pound Flex).

Porky yes, but typical/average today. Hell, 2-seat Porsches are over
3,500 and GT-Rs are almost touching 4,000.

> Meanwhile, it seems the Japanese and Koreans are able to have the right
> cars at the right time.

Like the Tundra? ;-)

> What I don't know is if the Mustang, Challenger and Camaro are intended
> as mass market cars, or niche vehicles. Time and time again in the
> 70s,80s,90s we saw cars discontinued because they supposedly didn't sell
> in sufficient quantities to justify (like "only 150,000 a year").....so
> I can't see cars being designed just for old farts like me (you know,
> wanted a new Mustang in '68 but didn't have 2 cents to my name......my
> new GT convert wasn't bought as transportation, but as a toy and "dream
> fullfillment" and I could care less what gas costs for it -- I put gas
> in it twice a year). But I don't see "secretaries" driving them
> either......are there enough old farts and good ol' boys to justify
> muscle cars?

I think it is/would be a mistake for Ford and GM to walk away from
their pony cars. These cars are part of their DNA. Ford = Mustang.
Mustang = Ford. Same with the Camaro. Problem is they have to make
these cars evolve without getting away from the original formula of
fairly small, lightweight, stylish/sporty cars, with excellent
performance for the dollar, based on/built off common mechanicals at a
relatively low sticker price.

Patrick

On Jul 31, 12:38 pm, "dwight" > wrote:

> I have to believe that there are two major considerations in NOT buying a
> Mustang.

> 1. Insurance. The rates for a V8 engine are killer for young people. Hell,
> I'm an old fart, and I still pay a penalty for having a V8, one that puts my
> rates on a 1993 Mustang right up there with my wife's new 2007 Escape. I get
> a break on the insurance for the convertible, because I can't drive both
> cars at the same time, otherwise, I'd have to seriously consider keeping
> two!

But doing a little street racing in a V8 pony car on the way to get a
gallon of milk is relatively cheap entertainment.

> 2. Young people usually mean young families. I've lost count of how many
> people have said that they had to sell off their Mustangs when they had
> kids. To me, that's a lame excuse, since the back seat of a Mustang isn't
> much good for anything BUT kids, but it must be the whole
> access-to-the-back-seat-in-a-coupe thing that makes them go away. It's so
> much easier to transport children in a 4-door sedan, minivan, or SUV.

But I've read women are having kids/family at a much later age now.
It's more like late 20s/30s than early 20s.

> Those of us who are kidless and have the means can look to Mustangs,
> certainly, but a V8 coupe doesn't fit the needs for a lot of the younger
> ones.

It fits if the Mustang has a hatchback.

Patrick

On Jul 31, 9:57 pm, Spike > wrote:

> As for Muscle Cars..... Ford will be keeping an eye on Chevrolet with
> the 2010 planned release of the Camaro. You can bet that their sales
> staff will be crunching numbers.

I think the Mustang is safe. GM says the Camaro will be more
expensive than the Mustang. And the Camaro will weigh about 200-300
lbs more.

Patrick

On Aug 1, 8:03 am, (Itsfrom Click) wrote:

> Maybe youngers don't know: RUST: if you lived anywhere salt was used
> in the winter, a normal car could be pretty well rusted-out in 3 years.
> Those '55 Chevies that look so good now, were full of holes when they
> were 5 years old.

That's no joke! Up in the rust belt, after 4-5 years the 60's cars
looked worse/were more ragged-out than a salmon after spawning.

But we didn't think much of it, since the rest of
> the car was worn out, too: tires didn't last 20,000 miles, you replaced
> shocks, water pumps, mufflers, radiators, generators every couple years.
> You changed the oil and got a "lube job" every 1000 miles. And a
> tune-up (points, plugs, carb adjust & time) at least once a
> year....hoses and belts might last 2 years.....you changed anti-freeze
> every year. Right thru 1954, Packard's recommended Spring check-up
> included dropping the oil pan for cleaning! The upside was that if you
> knew what you were doing, you could shop around for a 2 year old car and
> find a "creampuff" that had been taken care of for next to
> nothing......I used to buy 2 year old T-Birds (when they were on 3 year
> styling cycles).......my '61 had 20,000 miles on it - paid all of $600,
> which was way above "market" but it was pristine.

> So.....an old Hemi Cuda or Challenger is worth over a million
> today........what will the new muscle cars be worth in 10, 20, 30 years?
> Undoubtedly, they are "better" cars, but.........

I wouldn't use the word "worth". I think it's more accurate to say
some people have paid ridiculous money. Kinda like those who have
paid thousands for an old baseball card.

Patrick

wrote:
> On Jul 31, 1:42 pm, Spike > wrote:
>
>> God help the USA if we have a left leaning President and a left leaning Congress in
>> control!
>
> After the last 7+ painful years, I say bring it...
>
> Patrick
>

You've got it. You'll either have a left leaning "Republican" or a
left leaning "Muslim."


--



From what I've seen you doing in nana.sightings this
month, I really must question your conclusions. Of
the roughly 4079 reports you posted to nana.sightings,
my favorite will remain your LART of the mail you
received from Cron, running on your own computer. - David Ritz

> wrote in message
...
> On Jul 31, 1:42 pm, Spike > wrote:
>
>> God help the USA if we have a left leaning President and a left leaning
>> Congress in
>> control!
>
> After the last 7+ painful years, I say bring it...
>
> Patrick

Yep while they fly overhead in the Lear and Cessna Citations and flip us the
bird. I assume you heard the dems was all upset that they could not get
discounted gas by draining the city gas in Chicago for their convention,
since city gas has no taxes on it.

what the dems want is us in horses and buggies so they can commute by jet
and limo

On Aug 4, 10:39 pm, "WindsorFox<SS>" > wrote:

> >> God help the USA if we have a left leaning President and a left leaning
> >> Congress in control!

> > After the last 7+ painful years, I say bring it...

> You've got it.

Whew... thank you!

We went so far right we went right into a ditch. I say it's time we
yank it left to get us back on the road. Then if/when we go into the
ditch on the left side we can pull it back to the right again.

> You'll either have a left leaning "Republican"

I think McCain is good guy and one that can work both sides of the
isle... something we desperately need.

> or a left leaning "Muslim."

Religion doesn't determine a person's character. (And, not that it
matters, but you know he's Catholic, right?)

Obama is another good guy, and I think he has the potential to be a
great president. That is as long as some Neanderthal doesn't
assassinate him first...

Patrick

> wrote in message
...
> On Jul 31, 12:38 pm, "dwight" > wrote:
>
>> I have to believe that there are two major considerations in NOT buying a
>> Mustang.
>
>> 1. Insurance. The rates for a V8 engine are killer for young people.
>> Hell,
>> I'm an old fart, and I still pay a penalty for having a V8, one that puts
>> my
>> rates on a 1993 Mustang right up there with my wife's new 2007 Escape. I
>> get
>> a break on the insurance for the convertible, because I can't drive both
>> cars at the same time, otherwise, I'd have to seriously consider keeping
>> two!
>
> But doing a little street racing in a V8 pony car on the way to get a
> gallon of milk is relatively cheap entertainment.

I try to be good around the neighborhood. I really do.

>> 2. Young people usually mean young families. I've lost count of how many
>> people have said that they had to sell off their Mustangs when they had
>> kids. To me, that's a lame excuse, since the back seat of a Mustang isn't
>> much good for anything BUT kids, but it must be the whole
>> access-to-the-back-seat-in-a-coupe thing that makes them go away. It's so
>> much easier to transport children in a 4-door sedan, minivan, or SUV.
>
> But I've read women are having kids/family at a much later age now.
> It's more like late 20s/30s than early 20s.

Even MORE of a reason to avoide a coupe. Imagine a bunch of broken down
30-somethings trying to shepherd small children in and out of that back
seat. I haven't even SEEN the back seat in the Mustang since I topped 50.

>> Those of us who are kidless and have the means can look to Mustangs,
>> certainly, but a V8 coupe doesn't fit the needs for a lot of the younger
>> ones.
>
> It fits if the Mustang has a hatchback.
>
> Patrick

It sure as hell fit ME. I always quote your line - the ultimate sport
utility vehicle. Unfortunately, the youngest Mustangs with a hatchback are
now 15 years old, and not a consideration for today's booming babyers.

dwight

On Aug 5, 2:16 pm, "Les Benn" > wrote:

> >> God help the USA if we have a left leaning President and a left leaning
> >> Congress in
> >> control!

> > After the last 7+ painful years, I say bring it...

> Yep while they fly overhead in the Lear and Cessna Citations and flip us the
> bird. I assume you heard the dems was all upset that they could not get
> discounted gas by draining the city gas in Chicago for their convention,
> since city gas has no taxes on it.

> what the dems want is us in horses and buggies so they can commute by jet
> and limo

Sounds like the "reporting"/opinion of the FauxOX, spin zone,
propaganda news channel.

Patrick