2024 Mustang sales lowest in history of Mustang

[IceGamer]

You certainly make some interesting points. But the reality of today’s market is such that building a profitable two door sports coupe at a reasonable price is no longer possible. People, with the exception of us enthusiasts, just don’t want them. They want SUV’s and pickup trucks. And like it or not, more and more folks are finding EV’s fit their needs. That leaves us out in the cold. Could Ford build what you have suggested? Of course, they could. Be we both know that dream is never going to come to fruition. The demise of the Mustang and Flat Rock will be the end of a long and prosperous era, never to be recreated.

It may certainly end that way but I think in a somewhat distant future there will be no other cars other than EVs and gas guzzling V8s and above. It might be EVs only but the rich and filthy always want to stand out and you can’t if everyone drives the same. So there is a silver lining in my future… Maybe not attainable for most but a silver lining none the less…

But in the not so distant future I see a market for a truly new V8 version of the Mustang. I bet they had similar discussions over at Corvette a couple of years ago but sometimes baldness pays off especially if ‘bald’ is what we want.

Sponsored

 

[MustangMitch69]

You certainly make some interesting points. But the reality of today’s market is such that building a profitable two door sports coupe at a reasonable price is no longer possible. People, with the exception of us enthusiasts, just don’t want them. They want SUV’s and pickup trucks. And like it or not, more and more folks are finding EV’s fit their needs. That leaves us out in the cold. Could Ford build what you have suggested? Of course, they could. Be we both know that dream is never going to come to fruition. The demise of the Mustang and Flat Rock will be the end of a long and prosperous era, never to be recreated.

I'm surprised "supply and demand" isn't being referenced more often in this thread. When people want less of something, it becomes more expensive to produce and therefore more expensive to sell, it's that simple.

I never thought a Honda CRV or Toyota RAV4 would be basically the same price as an Accord or a Camry, but here we are because people are wanting so many of them.

Ford is doing the best they can with what they have, and I'm very grateful that they've continued producing the mustang. Whatever hurdles Chevy and Dodge has faced with the outgoing V8 camaros and chargers/challengers, Ford has been able to overcome.

My perspective is that camaros have been the track car, chargers/challengers have been the burnout or straight-line car, and the mustang has been the most well-rounded and therefore has sold the most in recent years.

The economy is a lot different now than it was just 5 years ago. Parts cost a lot more to make now than they did then.

Also, nobody is talking about muscle cars or pony cars like it's 1970, they're taking about compact SUVs with good gas mileage that can comfortably fit 4 people.

Economy. Supply and demand. It's that simple. And in my opinion, Ford has done a brilliant job navigating the challenges that have come with both.

 

[MaddNomad]

Besides, I don’t think that other ‘muscle’ cars were legislated out of existence, at least that’s not the only reason. The Challenger certainly was but ultimately it was bad management to assume an EV could easily replace a true muscle car with a V8. The upcoming Charger i6 won’t do much better because a muscle car is characterized by actual muscle and a 3.0L i6 has everything but muscle… I drive a 3.0 inline 6 and have driven many inline 6 engines (from 2.7L to 3.8L) and I can tell you guys that there is nothing ‘mighty’ about those power plants. Nothing replaces displacement in terms of feeling and characteristics. They’re not the fastest though…

Anyhow, the Camaro was on its way out way before ‘woke governments’ took over. That Camaro was just not an overall appealing car. On paper it was the better car and it should have sold well but the design wasn’t very appealing towards the end and it wasn’t really practical either. I’m pretty sure that most Porsche/Corvette owners have at least another car to do the grocery shopping and all that kind of stuff in but that didn’t count for Mustang or Camaro buyer.

Great take adding context. I remember watching a podcast with Sangyup Lee, the designer of the Camaro. He was saying that GM didn’t really want to make the Camaro but it got enough buzz obviously. Factor in them moving Al Oppenheiser (their Dave Pericak, but actually was committed to Camaros) to EVs only and watching the Camaro stop being improved they basically phased it out long before. It’s no coincidence that it was already discontinued before either. GM always prioritizes the Vette over other performance cars.

Dodge comparisons are just goofy to me because all they did was crank out cars without updating anything. Everyone saw the writing on the wall with their leadership and company.

 

[Gregs24]

I’m suggesting that “robbing Peter to pay Paul”, in essence, is a business strategy where you prop up a failing business unit - EV’s by increasing prices on your successful business unit - Think F150’s. I know there are not a lot of F series trucks relatively in Europe... Texas probably has more registered F250’s than all of Europe, but it’s a different market completely.

I would disagree with just one thing here. The EV's are the FUTURE business not a failing business and hence the huge amount being invested in that future. Ford either develop EV's fast and hard or they will simply vanish as the global market changes. There are Ford cars that are made elsewhere in the world that you don't have at all but it is all one company. F150 / 250 is a total irrelevance in Europe for example, but we have the Explorer EV, Capri EV and Puma EV.

All companies (not just cars) have to use profits to invest in the future products. A good example of a company that didn't invest in changing products was Kodak, they ignored digital cameras to their ultimate peril.

 

[MustangMitch69]

Great take adding context. I remember watching a podcast with Sangyup Lee, the designer of the Camaro. He was saying that GM didn’t really want to make the Camaro but it got enough buzz obviously. Factor in them moving Al Oppenheiser (their Dave Pericak, but actually was committed to Camaros) to EVs only and watching the Camaro stop being improved they basically phased it out long before. It’s no coincidence that it was already discontinued before either. GM always prioritizes the Vette over other performance cars.

Dodge comparisons are just goofy to me because all they did was crank out cars without updating anything, everyone saw the writing on the wall with their leadership and company.

The vette is a huge success so I don't blame GM for focusing on that. The C8 looks like a Ferrari but costs a third the price. It's also taking Porsche's lunch because it costs about the same as the 718 but has a lot more features, and just its base model is lot faster than their turbo 4's.

If GM followed in Ford's footsteps and tried to do another gen camaro, the cost to the customer COULD be C8 territory. I don't blame them for focusing on the vette, and Ford would probably make the same decision if they had a successful vette equivalent.

 

[MegaMan]

this whole thread is ridiculous. The other pony/muscle cars are legislated out of existence by the woke governments position. That is about to change. Will they come back? Maybe. Everything costs more now, get over it. With the "average" new car now about 50K, a new Mustang at 60k is a smoking deal. Don't like it or can't afford it? Get a better job or buy something else.

That’s exactly my point. Try finding another car that’s sub 60K new that’s as cool as a GT…let alone 500HP or a similar powertrain even…or looks half decent lol…. Can’t find em’ It’s a freakin steal IMO.

 

[smurfslayer]

I would disagree with just one thing here. The EV's are the FUTURE business not a failing business and hence the huge amount being invested in that future. Ford either develop EV's fast and hard or they will simply vanish as the global market changes. There are Ford cars that are made elsewhere in the world that you don't have at all but it is all one company. F150 / 250 is a total irrelevance in Europe for example, but we have the Explorer EV, Capri EV and Puma EV.

All companies (not just cars) have to use profits to invest in the future products. A good example of a company that didn't invest in changing products was Kodak, they ignored digital cameras to their ultimate peril.

I see what you’re saying here. I’ll agree, Ford is looking to future sales with the electric offerings, but I do still stand by the failing description. They’re not profitable in the current form. They’re not technologically mature enough to make them as practical as ICE power plants. The weight penalty alone is making the manufacturers design around the battery heft.
I have a buddy who went from ’19 Raptor to a powerboost F150, to a lightning. It was family vehicle , he had the power setup so he could use it for backup power, and had it for about 18 months.
As I mentioned before, at any speed over 50, the range plummets. At 70mph, he was getting about 200 miles flat, but wait: You can’t actually make 200 miles because you have to find a charging station and they’re often a bit out of the way. At about 30k miles, he needed new shocks all around and tires were almost gone. It did the black screen of death twice, no start, no power. Nothing. My other friend with the Mach E keeps all the trips within 90 miles or less.
It’s quick, and that can be fun - she has a bit of a heavy foot, but otherwise ICE does it better for her.

They could be more feasible with ranges that were closer in proportion to ICE, and if they could actually make a profit but for Ford, that seems to be years off and that’s going to mean increasing prices for the entire ICE lineup year over year for the foreseeable future.
I just read the ’25 Mach E prices were reduced.

good analogy about Kodak.

 

[Bikeman315]

It's also taking Porsche's lunch because it costs about the same as the 718 but has a lot more features, and just its base model is lot faster than their turbo 4's.

Not sure about that. Personally I would take a 718 all day long versus a Vette. Now a 718 vs. a Dark Horse, I'm not so sure.

 

[Bikeman315]

That’s exactly my point. Trying finding another car that’s sub 60K new that’s as cool as a GT…let alone 500HP or a similar powertrain even…or looks half decent lol…. Can’t find em’ It’s a freakin steal IMO.

Of course it a deal. When you are comparing 2025 to 2025. But the naysayers are trying to compare today's cars to yesterday's. Back when the Mustang was a sports car for the masses. Wasn't it just yesterday on here when everyone was bitching about the price of the Gen 2 S550.

 

[Gregs24]

I see what you’re saying here. I’ll agree, Ford is looking to future sales with the electric offerings, but I do still stand by the failing description. They’re not profitable in the current form. They’re not technologically mature enough to make them as practical as ICE power plants. The weight penalty alone is making the manufacturers design around the battery heft.
I have a buddy who went from ’19 Raptor to a powerboost F150, to a lightning. It was family vehicle , he had the power setup so he could use it for backup power, and had it for about 18 months.
As I mentioned before, at any speed over 50, the range plummets. At 70mph, he was getting about 200 miles flat, but wait: You can’t actually make 200 miles because you have to find a charging station and they’re often a bit out of the way. At about 30k miles, he needed new shocks all around and tires were almost gone. It did the black screen of death twice, no start, no power. Nothing. My other friend with the Mach E keeps all the trips within 90 miles or less.
It’s quick, and that can be fun - she has a bit of a heavy foot, but otherwise ICE does it better for her.

They could be more feasible with ranges that were closer in proportion to ICE, and if they could actually make a profit but for Ford, that seems to be years off and that’s going to mean increasing prices for the entire ICE lineup year over year for the foreseeable future.
I just read the ’25 Mach E prices were reduced.

good analogy about Kodak.

That is moving on to the are EV's any good conversation which will always attract religious opinions! The F150 is probably a bad example as it is brick with a truly huge heavy battery. The move in Europe is to smaller lighter batteries, solid state or semi solid state (both coming this year) and much better aerodynamics. The big battery idea for range just doesn't work as it adds huge weight and extended charge times. The big drive is for efficiency - The new Mercedes CLA manages a genuine 5.2 miles/kWh (460 mile range) and it just took the record for the most miles driven in 24 hours by an EV, which is a clever benchmark for efficiency, at 2309 miles averaging 96mph. Compared that to the F150 Lightning which can scrape 2.5 miles/kWh. The Merc is not just a prototype either, it is a production ready car available later this year.

Solid state / semi solid state batteries suffer much less from cold / heat degradation problems and are much easier to maintain requiring less cooling / physical protection which reduces weight and hence improves efficiency.

The car makers who spend the money on R&D NOW will be the ones that make the huge profits in the future.

The limitation is not the cars now (or at least it doesn't have to be) it is the infrastructure which is country specific, some are absolutely fine, some are not. The direction of travel however is very clear.

 

[Gregs24]

Of course it a deal. When you are comparing 2025 to 2025. But the naysayers are trying to compare today's cars to yesterday's. Back when the Mustang was a sports car for the masses. Wasn't it just yesterday on here when everyone was bitching about the price of the Gen 2 S550.

Pretty sure they were bitching about the Gen1 S550 compared to the S197

 

[MustangMitch69]

Not sure about that. Personally I would take a 718 all day long versus a Vette. Now a 718 vs. a Dark Horse, I'm not so sure.

The Dark Horse is a proper track car

Not sure about that. Personally I would take a 718 all day long versus a Vette. Now a 718 vs. a Dark Horse, I'm not so sure.

The Dark Horse is a formidable track car! That's the main difference between it and the GT in my opinion. In some track tests it's putting up better times than the ZL1, Mach 1, and GT500, so I would consider it priced very competitively for what you get.

And I should have specified I was comparing the C8 to the base model 718 for which MSRP is only about $70K. The GTS 4.0 with the flat six is about $100K and the GT4 RS about $160K so once you get into the higher trim levels of the 718, I would absolutely prefer one of those!

A friend of mine just bought the base model with the turbo 4 and let me drive it, and it's fun and handles turns like a champ, but it feels stripped down and more like a BMW than a Porsche, in my opinion.

 

[Gregs24]

Not sure about that. Personally I would take a 718 all day long versus a Vette. Now a 718 vs. a Dark Horse, I'm not so sure.

The practicality of the Mustang swung it for me - I need the boot space and occasional rear seats. How many 2+2 coupes are there on the market? Bentley Conti GT, BMW 4 series, Mercedes CLE - that's about it. 911 doesn't count unless you are an amputee.

People don't buy coupes any more - FACT (except a few of us loons on here)

 

[MaddNomad]

I see what you’re saying here. I’ll agree, Ford is looking to future sales with the electric offerings, but I do still stand by the failing description. They’re not profitable in the current form. They’re not technologically mature enough to make them as practical as ICE power plants. The weight penalty alone is making the manufacturers design around the battery heft.
I have a buddy who went from ’19 Raptor to a powerboost F150, to a lightning. It was family vehicle , he had the power setup so he could use it for backup power, and had it for about 18 months.
As I mentioned before, at any speed over 50, the range plummets. At 70mph, he was getting about 200 miles flat, but wait: You can’t actually make 200 miles because you have to find a charging station and they’re often a bit out of the way. At about 30k miles, he needed new shocks all around and tires were almost gone. It did the black screen of death twice, no start, no power. Nothing. My other friend with the Mach E keeps all the trips within 90 miles or less.
It’s quick, and that can be fun - she has a bit of a heavy foot, but otherwise ICE does it better for her.

They could be more feasible with ranges that were closer in proportion to ICE, and if they could actually make a profit but for Ford, that seems to be years off and that’s going to mean increasing prices for the entire ICE lineup year over year for the foreseeable future.
I just read the ’25 Mach E prices were reduced.

good analogy about Kodak.

I agree. I’m honestly interested in the project Ford has been working on with that little Skunkworks team. I think that could find some success and phase out the Mach E and Lightning.

 

[robvas]

In some track tests it's putting up better times than the ZL1, Mach 1, and GT500

Which ones? The only one I had seen was the throttle house review (?)

it was the same speed as the Mach 1 (as expected) in the Lightning Lap and 5-6 behind the GT500 and ZL1, it would be very, very surprising to see it beating them in other tests.

Sponsored