I'd have to bet against it - Ford almost made a HUGE mistake when it tried to take the Mustang to FWD (Probe). I find it hard to believe (although not impossible) that they'd use the Mustang name plate for sedans. I sure hope they don't.
Even though Chrysler did it with the Charger, the Charger name plate hadn't been used in decades. Many people who have purchased the current Charger probably weren't born when the "real" Chargers were popular!
Agreed.
Their answer lies in their European line. They need to incorporate some of those models and designs. Same with Australia.
I passed the dealer today, and saw an 05 sitting on the lot. It was sonic blue, which caught my eye, so I stopped and checked it out. (my brother is looking for a used auto, and that's his favorite color)
Anyway, I notice that instead of the "GT" badge on the fender, it has a smaller, rectangular badge that reads GT A. It also had flowmasters. The sales guy obviously didin't know about it. He paused for a moment when I asked what that meant, and he said "It's the program designation". I didn't believe him, of course.
Is this some special model, or do you think it might have been something the previous owner did?
Thanks as always.
If I remember correctly the GT A emblems were used on early model stangs(cant remember exactly what year) and the "A" stood for automatic. you can still purchase the emblems.
To me, it seems very sad.
My take....
Ford is seing alot of new Mustang buyers that are outside the norm, i.e, non-enthusiast types, etc... so they figure with variants they can catch even more sales to the average buyer.
Buckster said:They finally get something right and they just have to **** with it.
danio3834 said:No NO NO, Wrong wrong wrong, this is bad.
If they wanna make a cool rwd sedan, more power to them, but DON'T call it a Mustang!
gotsmart said:So Ford looks at Chrysler bastardizing the Charger nameplate and decides they can do the same with Mustang? Bad move. Adding a sedan and wagon would dilute the Mustang brand and make it meaningless, pissing off loyal pony-car fans in the process. Surely they have enough good brands in the vault that they can pull from the archives?
I think using the Falcon name would make more sense, since that was the vehicle the original Mustang was derived from. But if they slap the Mustang badge on anything with more than two doors (a fastback hatch notwithstanding), they're digging their own grave (even deeper).
Miscellanea said:Did you see that? It's the last speck of light you'll see from this Supergiant about to implode into a blackhole. Ford is so much worse off than I could ever dream of if this is what they have to do to get a decent selling four door sedan. A collapse is imminent.
JRX said:I think Ford needs more or better drugs...
ledwig said:In the US market this would only serve to dilute said brand cashet (Charger). It might make sense to do it for export but call it something else here, like how the Jeep Liberty is branded as a Cherokee in Europe.
Fairlane? Falcon?
David Thomas said:Um...yeah this is just stupid. This was probably one of a hundred such meetings. From what I hear Ford following GM's move of importing their Aussie RWD sedans is much more likely than this.
Calling it a Falcon or Fairlane (since that name is not being used ont eh people mover anymore) would be fine. But why muck it up with the pony? Plus those Gillette Fusion grilles look really good on almost anything.
scotte said:If they call it Falcon, Fairlane, Galaxie, or Torino (but NOT "Gran Torino") , that might work, IMHO.
But, as someone who's had only Mustangs in his garage the last 20 years, a 4-door "Mustang" will send me running for a Camaro or Challenger ASAP, if not sooner.
It's a wonder that the Enlightened Ones at the Glass House who thought this up didn't call it "Edsel"...beccause that's a 4-door Mustang would be another one of (&, IMO, it would kill The Ford Motor Company ).
Xedos6 said:Think hard now Ford, don't you remember doing something similar once before? Was it the Thunderbird Sedan? How'd that work out? Let's see, Thunderbird withered away to a gradual death that even the most retro of retro styled rebirths couldn't fix.
Would it be too much trouble for Ford to just build an exciting, RWD performance sedan with Mustang styling cues, but call it something different? How little respect does Ford's marketing department have for the customer's intelligence, if they assume that people won't recognize a competent car unless its got a galloping horse on the grille.
Miscellanea said:To dilute one of the only marques that is keeping the FORD nameplate alive is foolish. Creating a new sedan based off the underpinnings of the Mustang and giving it a new name is not such a bad idea. Lord knows Ford could use a performance sedan, but the rendering above with 4 doors and a pony is just all wrong...all wrong. As a mustang owner I have visions of a Soccer Dad pulling up next to me with kids in tow and throwing some "look, we both drive a Mustang" revs my way. Only, his is a 4 door.
danio3834 said:There is no debate. Mustang is either coupe or convertible, fastback or notchback. No 4 doors, it ruins all creditability in by books. If you wanna haul 5 people around in your Mustang, tell them to suck it up and scrunch in or buy a Crown Vic.
4-door Wrangler DID dilute the name, pointless...
silversurfer said:When I saw this I just could not believe it. Ford, please don't do this. It would be a foolish move. To try to "copy" the Dodge Charger path is simply more evidence that no one at Ford "gets it". How hard could it be to bring back another name and make a kick ass rear wheel drive sedan. How about the Falcon? As for the Mustang sedan, please Ford, for your own good, don't do this.
wohho said:At some point I should prepare a proper rant towards the idiotocracy that runs Ford, but in the meantime, pointing out that this is grasping at straws in barely sport. To me, this sounds like a rumor born in the autojourno blogotubes. If it's even marginally based in reality, it's indicative of the systemic issues in the Ford world.
TPSreports said:I think they should come out with a Mustang Minivan, a Mustang SUV, a Mustang crossover, and maybe a Lincoln version called the Lincoln MSG.
ghiaguy said:Does anyone remember the 4 door Thunderbird? It was a sales hit for one year and then the TBird descended into oblivion. Great Ioacoca's ghost, this is a bad plan.
scurvyman said:Good luck getting the same kinds of people who like Mustangs to continue to hold that opinion as soon as they hear about the new Ford Mustang mother****ing station wagon.
ledwig said:The difference is that the Mustang has varied little from its original form for 42 years and has a strong identity as such. The brand has only now fully recovered from the Mustang II, and it wasn't even a 4-door.
Make a sedan from the same platform - great. Make it nearly identical to the Mustang to play off of its brand recognition - fine. But putting the Mustang "running horse" on a sedan is gambling with the only thing of real value that they still have.
detroit9000 said:Forgive me as I parlay into stereotypes (as you must when you're dealing with brands). You see, it's all about chicks. These are boy cars, and you have to register them with chicks. A Jeep is a Jeep to a chick. It's a Jeep, or it's a Jeep SUV. A mustang is a mustang. A mustang four door? Houston, we have shrinkage. Girls will not care to remember that there are four door mustangs and two door mustangs. There will only be Mustangs, and the brand cache will deplete once they register mustang under the "four door" column. It will be too confusing. It will lose punch. It's like selling Fendi bags at Sam's Club.
Give it a different name. Market it as "inspired by Mustang". Call it a brother. Hell, give it a horse name.
But DON'T dilute the brand.
daga said:This is one of those articles where even if you only read the title, you immediately think "oh god, no"
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?