'Stangwagon?

Topic: 'Stangwagon? (Read 3472 times) previous topic - next topic

'Stangwagon?

December 14, 2006, 05:43:03 PM

http://www.cnn.com/2006/AUTOS/12/14/mustang_wagons/index.html

'Stangwagon?

Reply #1 – December 14, 2006, 05:50:15 PM

I've been talking about this too.

To me it's pretty interesting in that it kind of goes back to the beginning of the Fox-chassis days.

If they go to the multiple "styles" (sedan, wagon, etc) they could bring back the Fairmont nameplate :hick:

The LS style platform (DEW) that the Mustang sprang from and got neutered and ized for the actually has no place under a Mustang....too much "musclecar heritage"...so for the average meathead a Mustang would have to as a default be more of a straightline performer. That would be the cheaper platform to then spread to the 4-door and wagon models. If they keep it modular like they should have with the DEW platform, then that allows for the IRS models with the better road manners for things like Cougars/Tbirds and Lincolns, etc.
Then what they could have is a new era of swapability (not that the manfs think like that), and thus an enthusiast could take the equivalent of the "Fairmont" wagon and stick the high power "Mustang" engine in it and back it up with the high-zoot "XR-7" IRS.....

To me this is interesting stuff.

What this also means is they could finaly pull the Mustang off it's pedestal at the top of the Ford model lines (the GT does not count...) and place a new "performance car" in that spot (to actually compete with the Vette and Viper in that "class") and not cause the figurehead car's mediocre performance to dilute the rest of the line and keep the performance versions of some of the other models from having to be hamstringed so as to not out-perform the supposed "top dog".

'Stangwagon?

Reply #2 – December 14, 2006, 05:56:09 PM

Why not call it a Torino?

'Stangwagon?

Reply #3 – December 14, 2006, 06:01:09 PM

Its an interesting topic, i would have to see one in person to be able to say yay or nay. I'm more worried about them getting rid of the already compact focus to make room for Ka's.The only upside of them getting rid of the Focus for the Ka would be if the Ka makes a good impact we may see more Euro Fords, which i would not mind.

'Stangwagon?

Reply #4 – December 14, 2006, 06:09:47 PM

Dodge Magnum anyone?

'Stangwagon?

Reply #5 – December 14, 2006, 06:19:26 PM

[/IMG]

'Stangwagon?

Reply #6 – December 14, 2006, 06:46:03 PM

Quote from: Ifixyawata;118369

Dodge Magnum anyone?

I was gonna post a smart ass comment like that poking fun at how they missed the boat by about 2 years.

'Stangwagon?

Reply #7 – December 14, 2006, 07:25:17 PM

Quote from: thunderjet302;118363

Why not call it a Torino?

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

'Stangwagon?

Reply #8 – December 14, 2006, 09:19:16 PM

Quote from: Chuck W;118360

To me it's pretty interesting in that it kind of goes back to the beginning of the Fox-chassis days.

they actaully had a 66 (i think it was 66) 2 door wagon concept that never came out. they thought it would appeal more to people who like mustangs but needed more trunkspace, i guess it was for 20 somethings starting a family, but still wanted a 'stang

Quote from: SLEEPER T-BIRD 87;118383

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

'Stangwagon?

Reply #9 – December 14, 2006, 10:50:01 PM

Why not a Falcon? They already use the name in Australia (so the badging is already made :hick:), and the original Mustang was born from Falcon mechanicals, so it would make sense to build a modern Falcon from modern Mustang mechanicals. The Mustang should remain two-door only, but that's no reason to not use the platform for RWD sedans, wagons, and perhaps even a Ranchero (the Falcon UTE from Australia). Of course, since it would make sense, Ford won't do it.

On an unrelated note: I recently read an article about the upcoming Challenger and Camaro, more particularly a comment about how DC and GM are both trying to figure out how to sell the cars at Mustang price levels (it's such a problem that apparently there will be no "base" V6 Challenger, they'll all be more expensive Hemi models). Apparently the IRS planned for both cars is too expensive. Rather ironic that GM and DC will both be using simpler and cheaper-to-build pushrod engines while Ford uses OHC and multivalve technology, yet Ford can still do it cheaper just by putting a stick axle in...

'Stangwagon?

Reply #10 – December 15, 2006, 12:12:01 AM

Quote

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

They did make 4 door Torinos and wagons ya know

Quote

On an unrelated note: I recently read an article about the upcoming Challenger and Camaro, more particularly a comment about how DC and GM are both trying to figure out how to sell the cars at Mustang price levels (it's such a problem that apparently there will be no "base" V6 Challenger, they'll all be more expensive Hemi models). Apparently the IRS planned for both cars is too expensive. Rather ironic that GM and DC will both be using simpler and cheaper-to-build pushrod engines while Ford uses OHC and multivalve technology, yet Ford can still do it cheaper just by putting a stick axle in...

Did you read that in Motor Trend? I read a similar article in there and it said the same thing. On the same page MT said that Ford is going to make the *new* BOSS 302 the Mustang engine in '08. I think they screwed up. Why would Ford abandon the OHC 4.6 to go back to the Windsor small block? The BOSS 302 is just basically a beefed 302 small block. I think someone at MT was smoking crack when they wrote that..............

'Stangwagon?

Reply #11 – December 15, 2006, 12:46:52 AM

Quote from: thunderjet302;118431

They did make 4 door Torinos and wagons ya know

Did you read that in Motor Trend? I read a similar article in there and it said the same thing. On the same page MT said that Ford is going to make the *new* BOSS 302 the Mustang engine in '08. I think they screwed up. Why would Ford abandon the OHC 4.6 to go back to the Windsor small block? The BOSS 302 is just basically a beefed 302 small block. I think someone at MT was smoking crack when they wrote that..............

Actually the crate "BOSS" is an updated version of the old small block, but the upcoming production BOSS is going to be a multivalve OHC engine of 5.0 liters. It's the once-cancelled "hurricane" engine.

Quote

The 5.0-liter V-8 crate engine will go on sale early next year. It will be available in a variety of configurations with between 340 and 500 horses of power. The base block will start at $1,759, with prices for complete engines ranging from $4,650 to $10,000.
"It's designed to withstand the rigors of racing, but is also affordable and streetable," said Jamie Allison, manager of the Ford Racing Performance Group. "It's a new old engine."
Other than the name and the number of cylinders, there will not be a lot of similarity between the Boss 302 crate engine and the production version. While the iron-block crate engine uses old-fashioned push-rod technology, Hall said the production version will be an overhead-cam engine. It is also likely to have variable valve timing to boost fuel economy.
Ford killed the Hurricane program in 2005 because of concerns about development costs and rising gasoline prices. That decision dismayed many buttstuffysts who said the company desperately needed a more powerful V-8 to compete with DaimlerChrysler AG's Hemi and General Motors Corp.'s Vortec V-8s. Ford Americas President Mark Fields revived the Hurricane project earlier this year, but later decided to change the name.

The article (Detroit News)

'Stangwagon?

Reply #12 – December 15, 2006, 02:44:43 PM

Ah so MT did screw up. They made no distinction between the BOSS 302 crate engine and the production BOSS. I'm guessing the BOSS production engine is going to be similar to the DOHC 5.0 that Ford already makes for the Mustang FR500 cars.

'Stangwagon?

Reply #13 – December 15, 2006, 02:51:13 PM

these days Ford could screw up a wet dream.....

'Stangwagon?

Reply #14 – December 15, 2006, 02:52:48 PM

Quote from: mywifeskitty;118498

these days Ford could screw up a wet dream.....

Even a idiot can't do that :pbb: