TopCat501

Talk of a Ford response has been around for a year or so https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a26912015/ford-f-150-raptor-v-8-supercharged/

That's no intake manifold; for a lack of better words think upside down s/c. something along these lines http://www.fordnxt.com/features/sema-coverage/sema-2017-3-0-liter-whipple-gen-5-2018-coyote-blower/

So what are the chances that part of FCA's decision to announce US expansion plans was to some degree motivated to curry favor with the incoming administration to "assist" in a more favorable resolution to this matter??? I mean FCA has known about this EPA issue for months and seemingly has delayed until the EPA finally lost patience. Delayed for 1 of 3 reasons 1) they don't have a reasonable response or 2) waiting for a new EPA chief & administration less environment oriented or 3) both 1 & 2

Off road truck leader? Not only that but also this >> class leading 900 ft lb of torque I thought Ford announced 925 torque recently? Is the Ford 925 SAE certified? If not, maybe that's why Dodge still feels they are still top-dog for that metric.

Great info; thanks for posting this each month. So is more Mustang production heading overseas? August USA sales of Mustang declined m-o-m but inventory declined significantly from 26600 to 22800. Hopefully lots of August production was sent overseas to ease the unbelievable delay time from order-to-delivery being experienced in some countries. As USA peak seasonal demand for Mustang winds down Ford now has the enviable option to maintain relatively stable production and retain less for USA while shipping more units overseas. . . . . meanwhile you have Camaro . . . . inventory level from oldest to most recent -- 22200 > 26000 > 27400 > 29900; at what point does GM cry uncle and either cut production or bust out massive incentives??? (perhaps GM thinks the tepid cut of $1000 recently for select models will do the trick)

Thanks for the post JPD80; always interesting information What a disaster the FCA car segment is; and it is only going to get worse going forward until I suppose they disappear altogether. No wonder FCA has been purchasing and accumulating carbon credits as they'll eventually just be a producer of trucks, SUVs & vans

More proof that the GT program will span more than 2 years. Per Raj Nair "We created a distribution strategy in an effort to be as fair as possible and are working on a plan that will allow us to make even more deserving applicants happy. Stay tuned" https://www.at.ford.com/en/homepage/news-and-clipsheet/news/2016/8/rajinterview.html There was a reason, besides late back-outs, that Ford sent out 3 types of response letters to applicants. Only thing possibly derailing a >2 year production is unforeseen assembly problems that arise which, I suspect, is the reason Ford will not commit beyond 500 units at this point. Once assembly is up and running, Ford will be able to determine if quantity & quality benchmarks are acceptable. Only then will Ford make the call to shut it down @ 500 units or continue on for an additional 2 to 4 years.

Makes sense. But Ford has recently extended their racing commitment from 2 years to 4 years. Multimatic is the current builder of the track version of the GT so I am assuming Ford will not switch builders at the 2 year mark

^^ exactly Ford is being cautious as usual. Why would Ford go to the trouble to build a "priority wait" list? Applicants received 1 of 3 letters: 1) Accepted 2) Chance to place yourself on a wait list 3) Not accepted. Once cars are being produced and the reaction from the public can be evaluated, I'm guessing Ford will evaluate going beyond the definite 2 year run based on production problems / cost over runs and goodwill/hype/buzz the car creates in the market place. I can't see the program not being extended unless build problems or cost overruns are encountered. Smart move by Ford, under promise and over deliver if they are so inclined as opposed to tucking tail and running by announcing later that a 4 year run is cut short to 2 years. Or hhhmmmm . . . . . . . .does the possible mid-engine Corvette (rumored arriving in 2 to 3 years) have something to do with Ford's limited 2 year plan???

Thanks JPD80, great information. What is the avg days supply based on? Prior moth sales? Last 3 month avg sales? Or something else? Looks like Camaro inventory is sufficient enough to eliminate the limited inventory excuse for poor sales

I called GM; they said it was a STEEL toolbox not an aluminum one. But seriously, the article said GM discovered this many months ago in their internal testing of competitors vehicles. And while not realistic in the real world, it is a dramatic visual sight to see and stirring an emotional reaction in a potential customer is the holy grail of advertising/marketing. In this case, the attempt is to stir a negative emotion towards a competitor vehicle. Ford's marketing tact seems to always aim to stir a positive emotion about their own product. GM not so much, they've used the negative approach in the past and they are doing it again

The YouTube video is just 1 part of the whole campaign. Chevy’s ballsy comparison advertising also assailed Ford executives by materializing in front of Ford suppliers and customers all over the Motor City this week in a multi-media comparison-marketing blitz perhaps without precedent in the U.S. automotive industry, including big-bucks wraparound newspaper ads and, reportedly, Jumbotron stadium videos. They were giddy at Chevy, perturbed at Ford. “It’s a cheap shot,” groused one Ford executive. “But we’re the industry leader, so naturally they’re going to come after us.” Added another Ford executive: “GM is stuck with what they have for another few years, without a new truck version coming, so they have to do what they can.” http://www.forbes.com/sites/dalebuss/2016/06/10/chevrolets-motor-city-hit-job-on-ford-f-150-is-one-of-most-aggressive-comparison-campaigns/#f5ca7f519250 Seems quite the effort on the part of GM to plant doubt in the public's mind regarding the durability & toughness of aluminum. Whether the situation is realistic or not I think GM must be pleased with the amount of attention the campaign is getting. Whether it works or not remains to be seen.

Yes, more than a 2 year run. Intended run is said to be for 6 years subject to change based on market condition and demand. This from a very very well connected friend of Ford Performance who post on the Ford GT forum. Hopefully if the program does last the intended duration, Ford will update components and/or drivetrain over the program's life cycle as improvements become obtainable. Why 2 years for the initial application only process?? My guess is that Ford wants to initially get this car into the hands of people they deem will provide a high profile for the car. It would be a shame to have the vast majority of the initial owners just garage queen the cars. I think Ford wants to do the most they can to assure this car is driven and talked about by the initial owners. Perhaps there will be no application process after the initial 2 year production run as Ford may feel that 2 years should be enough to accomplish their goals in the eyes of the general public and the motoring community at large.

I think light weighting has as much or more to do with the gorilla glass development for the GT. Ford appears to be looking everywhere for weight savings in regards the GT (why not? in relation to a $350k-$400k MSRP what's an additional $1k to $2k for a lightweight extra strong windshield). Besides I'm sure Ford wants to put the upcoming Zora (midengine) corvette a rung below the GT in every way possible.

Also interesting (to me at least) is that while the 5.2 is designed to run on 93 octane it'll run perfectly fine on 87 with a loss of only 15 peak HP. Nice feature.