Mustang Hybrid (S650) Announced, Debuts in 2020

[FastLap57]

Don't think so, there will always be way too mant GT500's produced, my money is on my GT350.

until a gt500 then its going way down...

Sponsored

 

[mustang_guy]

Amen!
Although I would hate to see the V8 disappear altogether. Would be nice to have numerous drivetrains to choose from.
Even a small displacement V8 (4.0L) with an electric assist would be fine with me. The world is evolving and we can't just sit and hope nothing changes.
But as long as there are enthusiasts, there will always be vehicles tailored to us enthusiasts regardless of tighter and tighter government regulations.

Too many drivetrains can lead to an over saturated market. Like we dont already have that problem. Too many choices isnt necessarily a good thing. It can also lead to quality control issues.

 

[dron_jones]

Too many drivetrains can lead to an over saturated market. Like we dont already have that problem. Too many choices isnt necessarily a good thing. It can also lead to quality control issues.

I agree in principal but in this instance we are really only talking about the difference between two (ecoboost, v8), and three (ecoboost, v8 and hybrid), i'd hardly call that over saturation.

For those reminiscing back to the original mustang, for my car (1968), they had an I6, a 289, 2x 302's, 2x 390, and a 428 and that doesn't even include, transmission and rear differential/gearing options :eyebulge:

 

[traxiii]

Ford COSWORTH made 600HP from their 3.0L V8 DFV engine normally aspirated back in the '70s. Smaller doesn't have to be less powerful especially with power adders. I would love to see a twin turbo, 3 or 4 liter V8 in a Mustang.

 

[mustang_guy]

I agree in principal but in this instance we are really only talking about the difference between two (ecoboost, v8), and three (ecoboost, v8 and hybrid), i'd hardly call that over saturation.

For those reminiscing back to the original mustang, for my car (1968), they had an I6, a 289, 2x 302's, 2x 390, and a 428 and that doesn't even include, transmission and rear differential/gearing options :eyebulge:

Im almost 50 and I think three different motors is too many. Its too many now and it would be too many then. I think a lot more QC should have went into the ecoboost. While i prefer the cyclone v6 to the ecoboost, they clearly have plans to remove it. Its a lot of wasted money sinking cash into 3 engines on top of special moniker vehicle's like a gt500 etc, every time a new chassis roles out. It most definitely was a waste of cash back to the time you're reffering to as well. A specialized engine makes sense for special badged vehicles with history thats it. For the sake of economy is backwards, sink more money into that second engine and find more mpg.

My stance is based on over 3 decades in the industry.

 

[Norm Peterson]

I doubt that it really cost all that much to develop the 302 from the 289, or the 428 from the 390 (which itself evolved from the 352 - ultimately that from the original 332). So even though dron's list of engine displacements is 7 items long, it reduces to only three basic choices, sixxer, small-block, and big-block. Little different from the S197's sixxer, GT, and GT500 choices.

Over-saturation is really a turbo-4 vs NA-six problem. With a model that only sells about 100,000 units/year, much overlap at all - whether perceived or actual - is the definition of 'over saturation'. Never mind that it's a consequence of too much external pressure to satisfy an artificial mpg test procedure that doesn't always correlate to user driving habits.

The questions then become "After the I4T vs V6 matter is settled, which of the remaining engines would any hybrid end up overlapping? And then what?".


Norm

 

[dron_jones]

I doubt that it really cost all that much to develop the 302 from the 289, or the 428 from the 390 (which itself evolved from the 352 - ultimately that from the original 332). So even though dron's list of engine displacements is 7 items long, it reduces to only three basic choices, sixxer, small-block, and big-block. Little different from the S197's sixxer, GT, and GT500 choices.

Over-saturation is really a turbo-4 vs NA-six problem. With a model that only sells about 100,000 units/year, much overlap at all - whether perceived or actual - is the definition of 'over saturation'. Never mind that it's a consequence of too much external pressure to satisfy an artificial mpg test procedure that doesn't always correlate to user driving habits.

The questions then become "After the I4T vs V6 matter is settled, which of the remaining engines would any hybrid end up overlapping? And then what?".


Norm

Sorry but its the same thing, 3 engines is still 3 engines, yes the engines were simpler back then by today's standards but the tools and testing methodologies were also less sophisticated. As for your point on the 4 vs. 6, they came out with the 4, determined market reaction to it, and once determined that the market accepted it they removed the six. What's the issue?

 

[dron_jones]

Im almost 50 and I think three different motors is too many. Its too many now and it would be too many then. I think a lot more QC should have went into the ecoboost. While i prefer the cyclone v6 to the ecoboost, they clearly have plans to remove it. Its a lot of wasted money sinking cash into 3 engines on top of special moniker vehicle's like a gt500 etc, every time a new chassis roles out. It most definitely was a waste of cash back to the time you're reffering to as well. A specialized engine makes sense for special badged vehicles with history thats it. For the sake of economy is backwards, sink more money into that second engine and find more mpg.

My stance is based on over 3 decades in the industry.

Unfortunately today's consumer demands more options than ever before. walk into any grocery store and look at the beer aisle, the wine aisle, the barbecue sauce aisle hell any aisle, the proliferation of choices are enormous. If Ford took your advice and rolled all its money into V8's and got rid of the 4 and 6 guess what, no rental car fleets, less sales in over seas market, less traction with younger generation focused on fuel economy and environmental consciousness. The mistake of most people is believing that their own beliefs reflect the beliefs of the masses, the "whats good for me is right for everyone mentality".

My stance based on an entire career in consumer insights.

 

[mustang_guy]

Unfortunately today's consumer demands more options than ever before. walk into any grocery store and look at the beer aisle, the wine aisle, the barbecue sauce aisle hell any aisle, the proliferation of choices are enormous. If Ford took your advice and rolled all its money into V8's and got rid of the 4 and 6 guess what, no rental car fleets, less sales in over seas market, less traction with younger generation focused on fuel economy and environmental consciousness. The mistake of most people is believing that their own beliefs reflect the beliefs of the masses, the "whats good for me is right for everyone mentality".

My stance based on an entire career in consumer insights.

I didnt say to only leave the 8 that would be stupid. Just that they should focus on 2 options. Ever think people want/demand way too much? :shrug:

 

[dron_jones]

I didnt say to only leave the 8 that would be stupid. Just that they should focus on 2 options. Ever think people want/demand way too much? :shrug:

Every day :lol:


two options as opposed to three or four or one is a arbitrary one without the necessary information. Trust me when i say that ford is spending a lot of money and resources to provide options based on consumer insights. Most companies will do focus groups, limited market releases, test markets etc, for automotive its a bit harder as the cost of investment for even a limited market release would be so high. Instead they end up releasing multiple options and gauging consumer attitude towards the offering. This is exactly what they did with the turbo 4 and 6, since the 4 did not flop they are using it to replace the 6 as the base engine option.

 

[chrisvr6]

how will that look like ? :frusty:

 

[Blue Horse]

The Mustang really started to die with the S550 Mustang, and the 4 banger,that wasn't bad enough, Ford added BOOST, and then made it Euro UGLY,and now they are going to finally KILL the Mustang with Electric,may the Mustang rest in peace

 

[Ebm]

.

how will that look like ? :frusty:

A lot smaller than that ancient thing. Also, all engines mounted in the Stallion are longitudinal.

For comparison, here is a hybrid engine bay. For your viewing pleasure! I think it will be about 1 and a half times this size since this engine is a 1.8 I believe. This is a transverse engine, so imagine it as a longitudinal engine.

 

[Norm Peterson]

The mistake of most people is believing that their own beliefs reflect the beliefs of the masses, the "whats good for me is right for everyone mentality".

Make sure that you're applying the boldfaced thought in an even-handed manner. Just because a certain belief is held by "the masses" does not mean that that same belief must be held by any given individual, either. Like a double-edged sword, it cuts both ways.


I know my automotive thoughts do not echo those of the masses in many respects, and I wouldn't expect you to buy a car spec'ed the way I'd prefer. Hell, you might not even like it at all. On the flip side, being forced into what somebody else thinks I should like just because they want them all built their way would be equally abhorrent.


Norm

 

[Norm Peterson]

A lot smaller than that ancient thing.

Pardon, your slip, errr . . . bias is showing.

But tell me, how well do you think any hybrid powerplant(s) would match up with a conventional 6-speed/3-pedal manual transmission? And for those who consider any form of automatic transmission to be an absolute deal-breaker all by itself, then what? Is my objection to ever owning anything with either EV or hybrid drive starting to make more sense yet?


Norm

Sponsored