2015 Mustang GT MSRP starts at $32,925

[Captain Crawfish]

Too much money for a car. But if you have 30 g's burning a hole in your pocket by all means go get one.

[racrguy]

If they were overpriced they wouldn't be selling them and the market would adjust their price to be lower dude. That's how it works.

I know that's how it works, and me saying they're overpriced is subjective. It's the same way with 60-65k 1 ton trucks. Fuck that. I'm not paying that kind of price for a truck, or mid 30's for a mustang gt.

If they are overpriced, they won't sell. You know the actual transaction price will come down significantly after a few months. MSRP is for suckers.

I agree, but I know of no way to compare actual sales price.

[Mike]

Pass.

[Baron Von Crowder]

Pass.

In.

[Mike]

In.

I might have to reconsider.

[CWO]

FWIW median US yearly household income was ~$7,100 in 1967

~$51,000 in 2012

The new car prices don't seem that bad to me, but I am a simpleton.

[Mach1]

The holding of the HP/Weight is getting ridiculous, going to be a fat under powered pig?

[CJ]

The holding of the HP/Weight is getting ridiculous, going to be a fat under powered pig?

Yeah I touched on this earlier. Cars make more power, and their weight increases at the same rate. Ford cut weight in the F150 this generation, maybe the mustang will follow suit?

[Venom]

I love the ecoboost in my f150. I have a intake,exhaust and tune and I run mid-low 13's at the track.

[kirbster]

Yeah I touched on this earlier. Cars make more power, and their weight increases at the same rate. Ford cut weight in the F150 this generation, maybe the mustang will follow suit?

Possibly by 2017? You'd think they would anyway. I read Dodge engineers added so much to the 15 Challenger they had to change the rear axle housing from steel to aluminum to keep the curb weight the same as 2014. All the extra computers and electronics. But I guess that is part of it now.

[racrguy]

FWIW median US yearly household income was ~$7,100 in 1967

~$51,000 in 2012

The new car prices don't seem that bad to me, but I am a simpleton.

By those numbers household income went up 618.31%, yet the cost of a base mustang (050A) went up 952.80%

[46Tbird]

I was looking at Mustangs in 2002 and they were in the upper 25's sticker price for a GT premium, based on an assumed sticker price of $25,600 and a new 401A sticker, the price has gone up 51.25% in 13 years. It took from 1964 to 1976 to make the same percentage jump, but the difference was only 1205. source

The cost of a 1964 Mustang coupe standard ($2320) adjusted for inflation according to this is $17,742.16, a 1976 coupe standard priced at 3525 would be $14,686.80 today.

Cars are insanely overpriced.

Uh, a base 1964 coupe had a 101hp cast iron straight-six, a three-speed manual transmission, no air conditioning, no power steering, manual drum brakes, manual windows, no seat belts, leaf springs, and a generator. The 1976 version wasn't much improved over that.

There is slightly more content in the 2015 offering. Things like 400hp with good fuel economy and low emissions, an all new chassis with IRS, incredible brakes and handling, the reasonable expectation to last 200k miles in its lifetime, and some semblance of comfort and safety. Frankly I think a price of "double" the inflation rate is still a bargain for what you're actually buying.

[Baron Von Crowder]

Uh, a base 1964 coupe had a 101hp cast iron straight-six, a three-speed manual transmission, no air conditioning, no power steering, manual drum brakes, manual windows, no seat belts, leaf springs, and a generator. The 1976 version wasn't much improved over that.

There is slightly more content in the 2015 offering. Things like 400hp with good fuel economy and low emissions, an all new chassis with IRS, incredible brakes and handling, the reasonable expectation to last 200k miles in its lifetime, and some semblance of comfort and safety. Frankly I think a price of "double" the inflation rate is still a bargain for what you're actually buying.

you mean things like seats the recline are more valuable?

[IHaveAMustang]

My question is what turbos are the "Ecoboost" turbos? Will they be reliable after 60K? 80K? 100K?

I've never had a Turbo/Super'd car before because I always worry about the turbos blowing out when it goes high mileage.

[Rick Modena]

Uh, a base 1964 coupe had a 101hp cast iron straight-six, a three-speed manual transmission, no air conditioning, no power steering, manual drum brakes, manual windows, no seat belts, leaf springs, and a generator. The 1976 version wasn't much improved over that.

There is slightly more content in the 2015 offering. Things like 400hp with good fuel economy and low emissions, an all new chassis with IRS, incredible brakes and handling, the reasonable expectation to last 200k miles in its lifetime, and some semblance of comfort and safety. Frankly I think a price of "double" the inflation rate is still a bargain for what you're actually buying.

One hell of a bargain if you ask me. I always laugh at the people who say that they don't build cars like they used to. Like what exactly?