S650 Mustang launches in 2022 as 2023MY reveals Ford Linkedin post

[Twin Turbo]

Thank you! I take it SOP is Start of Production?

Sponsored

 

[Topnotch]

Starting bid on this 1964 World's Fair Plate (where the Mustang was first revealed) starts at $650

 

[Twin Turbo]

Is that yours,TN? If so, I don't think I could ever let that go.......it so cool! (unless, of course, you were able to sell it for enough cash to buy a '23MY GT )

 

[cbrookre]

Most geniuses weren't appreciated in their time. I forgive you.

To be clear, I am not against Ford making a two seater, or even making a version of the Mustang that is a two seater (extending it to a performance brand rather than a model, which they seem intent to do). But the Mustang lineup should include something that is capable of transporting 4, even if somewhat uncomfortably. I would personally not have thought of a Mustang if it were more like the Camaro/BRZ with no trunk and courtesy/unusable back seat or if it were Miata size and configuration. But I could justify it, for the time being, with a cramped but usable back seat and usable trunk.

 

[sk8erord]

To be clear, I am not against Ford making a two seater, or even making a version of the Mustang that is a two seater (extending it to a performance brand rather than a model, which they seem intent to do). But the Mustang lineup should include something that is capable of transporting 4, even if somewhat uncomfortably. I would personally not have thought of a Mustang if it were more like the Camaro/BRZ with no trunk and courtesy/unusable back seat or if it were Miata size and configuration. But I could justify it, for the time being, with a cramped but usable back seat and usable trunk.

I still think they should revive the t-bird as a 2 seater and go after the corvette. But not retro this time - make it modern. Hell, put it under Lincoln if they need to. The Mustang is fine as it is. I'd love to see someone domestic take on the vette.

 

[amk91]

IF the speculation is correct, my guess is Hackett is focused on CUVs and SUVs and trucks only now so making engineering decisions to CD6 to keep it compatible with a sedan was pushed way down on the priority list.

My speculation here now.... S650 is a heavily modified S550 to support large batteries required for plug in hybrids and likely has significant weight savings due to the use of aluminum. That's why it got a new designation even though it's closely based on the S550. S750 is the all new platform (possibly entirely electric focused).

That's what I heard from some guys at BOF and a relative at Ford.

Sounds correct in terms of it, some form of electrification is planned for certain for S650 versus S550. However, I see no tangible trace of S750 as a program code? I guess it's too far out to show up, outside of speculation and vague interviews. That CD6 car is 6 years away.

SN95/S197/S550/S650 aren't a modified anything. They are program #'s, not platforms.
I believe the only reason people refer to S550 as the platform was because, until recently, the actual platform it was riding on was never really referenced.

And it doesn't help how Wikipedia automatically has some editors who make the dumbest assumptions and just blindly label it as the successor to D2C. That doesn't help nor does Ford pretending that their 50th anniversary car was 99% all-new, to save face during the 2013-14 media blitz.

I would guess the platform may be unnamed, or also uses s550, because its the only vehicle to use it.

Nah, it's definitely D2C.

Back when the Big 3 almost went under, Ford cancelled the GRWD (Global Rear Wheel Drive) platform that was either under development, or about to be. Whilst I can understand why they made this call at the time, I always felt that if they'd pushed ahead with that, they would have had some superb RWD cars that would have put them ahead of the market.

Here we are a decade later and investment has been made in a new rear wheel drive architecture.......and Ford decide they're not building sedans any more

I do wonder how much S550 there is under CD6. Is CD6 really all new? I recall it being stated that the rear suspension of the Aviator concept was almost identical to S550.

Still, even if S650 is a heavily reworked S550, I'm just glad we're getting a new Mustang. Camaro fans aren't so lucky, and even Dodge seems unsure as to what's next for the Challenger/Charger twins.

Yeah, sadly Mulally probably felt they were more than overwhelmed and just put that GRWD on the backburner for good, to focus on T6, T3, CD4, and D3/D4. Problem is, if they committed to it with heads held up high, they easily could've come out well ahead of Chrysler and GM over time. GM wasted Alpha and Omega horribly, whereas Chrysler has kept the same RWD LX architecture since 2004 (modified in 2011 to LD) and Giorgio will be old by the time anything American gets it.

Looking at the Aviator, I did feel apprehensive about the S550 rear suspension and wondered if I misspoke about CD6 being all-new? What some insiders claim about it not being car capable, seems contradictory.

I don't know how that could happen.

I wonder how much freedom the design team will get if S650 is evolved from S550. Personally, I'd love a return to the "Dorito" rear 3/4 window

(this one was actually a very early rendering from the S550 team)

At this point, I think the idea is to evolve the current car. The unified DLO bridged by B pillar likely isn't going away.

Whatever the platform is called..... It doesn't matter. My point stands. S650 is on the same but heavily modified platform as s550.

Yep very accurate. I think it's more like Foxbody to SN95 or S197 to S550. As you could easily call the S550 a reworked S197.

I don't usually do this, but here's a snapshot from our forecasting system. Highlights are my doing, of course.

This post is a winner, thank you! I can never find anything like that and they block access to us mere mortals. So I'm guessing summer 2022 launch?

 

[amk91]

Does anyone think that the S650 will now use more aluminum components or even have an aluminum body? Seems prohibitive, but maybe that can lighten the car, since it is very unlikely to get any smaller?

I asked my Ford contact and he doesn't know yet, but will get back to me.

 

[martinjlm]

Does anyone think that the S650 will now use more aluminum components or even have an aluminum body? Seems prohibitive, but maybe that can lighten the car, since it is very unlikely to get any smaller?

I asked my Ford contact and he doesn't know yet, but will get back to me.

That would require an all new architecture, which would make it NOT on D2C platform. So very, very unlikely.

 

[Nexus]

And it doesn't help how Wikipedia automatically has some editors who make the dumbest assumptions and just blindly label it as the successor to D2C. That doesn't help nor does Ford pretending that their 50th anniversary car was 99% all-new, to save face during the 2013-14 media blitz.

Nah, it's definitely D2C.

Correct.
People seem to blindly quote some wiki and people forget anyone can edit it. Not a good source for absolute truths. Just goes to show you how wrong information can spread.
To be fair, it wasn't exactly broadcast when the 2015 came out what platform it was on, and I've seen it mentioned more times in the last couple days in this thread than since the 2015 launched.

 

[amk91]

That would require an all new architecture, which would make it NOT on D2C platform. So very, very unlikely.

That's what I thought. Some guys were insistent on S650 losing weight, which I'm convinced *isn't* possible at this point, unless some aluminum components were developed to fit anything on D2C.

Glad you've proven the smaller and lighter theory wrong, as that was already hard enough for 2015 and never guaranteed. Thank you martinjlm!

Correct.
People seem to blindly quote some wiki and people forget anyone can edit it. Not a good source for absolute truths. Just goes to show you how wrong information can spread.
To be fair, it wasn't exactly broadcast when the 2015 came out what platform it was on, and I've seen it mentioned more times in the last couple days in this thread than since the 2015 launched.

Amen to this 1000x and thank you. This is so dead accurate, I can't even express it better than I have in text. Ford was shy about it and when discovered, it was an ugly truth no one wanted to mention (as to taint the "wow" factor of the S550).

I had hoped CD6 in 2020 would make up for keeping D2C beyond 2014, but I hear that after Mark Fields left in 2017, CD6 Mustang hit the chopping block for the time being.

 

[zackmd1]

Correct.
People seem to blindly quote some wiki and people forget anyone can edit it. Not a good source for absolute truths. Just goes to show you how wrong information can spread.
To be fair, it wasn't exactly broadcast when the 2015 came out what platform it was on, and I've seen it mentioned more times in the last couple days in this thread than since the 2015 launched.

I would imagine they could still use aluminum on a large portion of the exterior panels without affecting the platform underneath? Still could drop some weight but just not much on the chassis/platform itself.

I'm not expecting massive weight drop (like others have mentioned) but still, 100-200 should be somewhat plausible with aluminum exterior and some other choice mods (maybe seats that are not 50lbs a piece for starters....)?

 

[IPOGT]

See I don’t want a smaller mustang, I like the size. It feels bigger than a regular car and as long as it hauls I’m happy.

Brz frs feels like a shoebox and I don’t like how cramped it feels

I think the size is perfect just the way it is.

 

[zackmd1]

However, I see no tangible trace of S750 as a program code? I guess it's too far out to show up, outside of speculation and vague interviews. That CD6 car is 6 years away.

I mentioned it because of the Mach E engineer QA that came out earlier. He/she claimed that the Mach E is "what's allowing them to keep the S750".

 

[amk91]

I mentioned it because of the Mach E engineer QA that came out earlier. He/she claimed that the Mach E is "what's allowing them to keep the S750".

Yes, that's what I noticed too, but nothing else shows up for it yet outside of these interviews. Just like the 15th generation F-150, which is probably coming out then too. It's really too bad the 8th generation Mustang will be first all-new car in 3 generations, while 7th gen is great, but how far will it move the needle forward even?

Poor selling Alpha Camaro has outperformed our car for awhile, that one hopes S650 will fix that little burden, once and for all.

Random, but I do like how they've found a codenaming system of SX50 for each generation of Mustang going forward (S550, S650, S750, S850?).

 

[Fly2High]

I would love it if they could get the Mustang on a diet.

Slim it back down to 70 inches wide and shorten the overall length about 18 or so. The current car has so much wasted space as it is. The doors also could be thinner giving space back to the interior.
The front wheels could be pushed forward more making it easier to drive a low car since it will have a shorter overhang length. Changing the front also could get rid of all that dead airspace in the grill which could tighten things up too. Take the space from this and give it to the cabin so the rear seat becomes actually usable. Moving the wheels and changing the front might allow some alteration to engine placement which could get a better weight distribution. I find it interesting how the M2 Comp is shorter, narrower and lighter but has the same interior space and performance. It also has a shorter hood and does it with a inline 6. It has 2 more cylinders to fit lengthwise compared to a V8 (4 cylinders long). It also has 2 turbos and all that plumbing to fit yet does it using less space. I think Ford should take notes from the rest of the world and design a platform and drivetrain and then fit the body as closely around that. I have a feeling they build a body first leaving a ton of space for, 'just in case' they need it later.

I think we need to weigh even less than the current Camaro SS. Could you imagine a Ford car with a 400+hp V8 and weighing less than 3600 pounds. I would prefer the car to be as light as possible for the weight it is rather than build a car for several hundred hp more. Let those who want to hop it up add stiffeners. They do now as it is.

I also want the car to focus on autocross and track work. I do not want it to be a drag style car. It performs much better than the previous generations but, as the Camaro and Supra show, it is still not a pure track car. Let's make it faster by improving handling.

I saw a 67 Mustang coupe and it was smaller than my 2019 GT in all dimensions but had a more spacious interior and a bigger trunk space. Smaller yet bigger. That is what Ford should do to the Mustang.

there is one big reason why they cannot go smaller. Emissions. They can take an existing car and change nothing about the engine but put it into a bigger platform so that it moves up to the next car category and suddenly that car can be produced with room for emissions.

https://www.autonews.com/article/20160814/OEM11/308159946/is-cafe-making-cars-bigger

So boys and girls, I expect Ford, to be able to keep making Mustangs, will need to fatten the Mustang again on the S650 or future platforms just to be able to keep the V8 going. All this will do is rob it of performance and add weight to an already heavy car. Just once I would like to see a manufacturer choose weight reduction to improve economy. Look at how much better the Corvette is in fuel economy. It weighs much less and probably has better drag too. Of course, no American will pay for a lighter car. They do not pay for metrics that get smaller, only bigger.

Sponsored