2004 Sc
- Thread starter 1BADSC
- Start date
Randy N Connie
Registered User
I seen a peice on TV about the 2004 SC THUNDERBIRD, but didn't
hear or see a thing about BMW.
randy
hear or see a thing about BMW.
randy
pro street rich
Registered User
the end of the bird
The 04 bird will be the same small one that they came out with two years ago. There is talk but not for sure that the 4.6 will get a blower. Either way this is the end for this name plate.. there will be seven body's built on the new platform and none of them will be a bird... Say good by to the name plate that was so good for Ford..... Long live the birds if nothing else, in the minds of all the happy owners....Rich
The 04 bird will be the same small one that they came out with two years ago. There is talk but not for sure that the 4.6 will get a blower. Either way this is the end for this name plate.. there will be seven body's built on the new platform and none of them will be a bird... Say good by to the name plate that was so good for Ford..... Long live the birds if nothing else, in the minds of all the happy owners....Rich
What will they think up next?
Ok, so the afterburner tailights and eggcrate grille appealed to the Garlitz era 50 somethings.
I suppose in five years Ford will want to go Retro errr... "Heritage"
Again.
I can see it in the planning stages in the board room:
Ford concept exec: " Think 'shag' carpets and disco balls"
Ford planning exec: " Yeah, groovy, optional lava lamp instruments will really spice things up"
Ford marketing exec: "Just remember buzz words like, 'Studio 54', 'Bell Bottoms', 'Perms' and 'Cocaine' and I'm sure they'll sell like hotcakes"
Ford bean counter: "...and if we charge about $45,000 per copy and keep the runs limited to about 20,000 per year, we should be able to net our usual 220% profit margin"
Ford Jr. as himself: "yeah, yeah, this 'heritage' thing really IS the ticket... we certainly can't come up with something competitive on the world market...so we should look to our past and former glory in a violent death throw attempt to recapture our lost dominance on the Domestic car market"
Ok, so the afterburner tailights and eggcrate grille appealed to the Garlitz era 50 somethings.
I suppose in five years Ford will want to go Retro errr... "Heritage"
Again.
I can see it in the planning stages in the board room:
Ford concept exec: " Think 'shag' carpets and disco balls"
Ford planning exec: " Yeah, groovy, optional lava lamp instruments will really spice things up"
Ford marketing exec: "Just remember buzz words like, 'Studio 54', 'Bell Bottoms', 'Perms' and 'Cocaine' and I'm sure they'll sell like hotcakes"
Ford bean counter: "...and if we charge about $45,000 per copy and keep the runs limited to about 20,000 per year, we should be able to net our usual 220% profit margin"
Ford Jr. as himself: "yeah, yeah, this 'heritage' thing really IS the ticket... we certainly can't come up with something competitive on the world market...so we should look to our past and former glory in a violent death throw attempt to recapture our lost dominance on the Domestic car market"
nice, that sums it up very well. However, we will be seeing more one off show cars put into production now with some of the new computer programs used for design of engines and computer stress testing components before the first part is ever built. All of the big 4 Chevy, Toyota, Dodge, Ford will be doing more of these cars. Like the new Mustang, and the GT 40, and the SS, and SSR. guess we will have to wait and see.
I think the BMW 6 is more in line since it is a lux touring car with class and handling. While the GTO is a simple monaro knock off that looks like a Monte Carlo /Gran Prix grabage, and will not ride or handle like the BMW. And the high price of the BMW fits better in line with the high prices the SC went for.
I too was excited for the GTO....Until I saw they were just renaming the Monero. GM SUCKS!!! All they do is rebadge **** and call it something new. They had an amazing prototype GTO that looked amazing, and it even had the tach out on the hood like the Firebirds and GTO's. But instead we get the shaft. Car and Driver said it best when they said "we don't get excited about GM prototypes becuase when they decided to build it, it becomes so bastardized by the time it hits the showroom, that it looks nothing like what it is supposed to.
I too was excited for the GTO....Until I saw they were just renaming the Monero. GM SUCKS!!! All they do is rebadge **** and call it something new. They had an amazing prototype GTO that looked amazing, and it even had the tach out on the hood like the Firebirds and GTO's. But instead we get the shaft. Car and Driver said it best when they said "we don't get excited about GM prototypes becuase when they decided to build it, it becomes so bastardized by the time it hits the showroom, that it looks nothing like what it is supposed to.
JAFO
Registered User
Yep. Although I'm disappointed in the Magnum SRT-8 now, due to the pic that ThunderSC put up in another post. That one went from tough to WTF?
I'd like the new GTO a lot more if they had just made it the new Grand Prix. It looks like one, but if they'd have said "this is the new Grand Prix. V8. RWD. This is the direction we're going now, and this is just the beginning." THAT would have been cool. Trying to tie in the GTO name just for excitement was stupid. Maybe offer a GTO package/higher performance version of the car, like the original LeMans, but not just flat out GTO.
Also, other than purchase price and difficulty finding a good BMW tech in MS, I'd take a BMW over just about any other car within the price range. Sorry.
I'd like the new GTO a lot more if they had just made it the new Grand Prix. It looks like one, but if they'd have said "this is the new Grand Prix. V8. RWD. This is the direction we're going now, and this is just the beginning." THAT would have been cool. Trying to tie in the GTO name just for excitement was stupid. Maybe offer a GTO package/higher performance version of the car, like the original LeMans, but not just flat out GTO.
Also, other than purchase price and difficulty finding a good BMW tech in MS, I'd take a BMW over just about any other car within the price range. Sorry.
I liked the GTO concept too...
I mean, it was the closest modern offering that was equivilent to the SC. But with one unfourtunate exception. The LS1 V-8.
Not that I'm putting down the LS1 V-8. In fact I think it's a great engine. But why must everything that is "high performance" American HAVE to be 8 cylinders and Big cubes?
This certainly seems to be incongrous with todays astronomical gasoline prices. In a car market where we see manufacturers concerned with CAFE and all are rushing to emulate Honda and Toyata for a hybrid vehicle, one would think that engineers would try harder for a innovative 6 cylinder that would provide the power of a 8 cylinder but give the economy of a 6. OH wait, ford did that with our engines.
I think now that the pontiac Grand Prix GTP is now rated at 260hp a Rear wheel drive version would be great. Those wishing more performance could order up a "high boost" version making 300hp.
We all know it's possible and folks will still get pretty darn close to 30mpg on the highway with the 6-speed.
I mean, it was the closest modern offering that was equivilent to the SC. But with one unfourtunate exception. The LS1 V-8.
Not that I'm putting down the LS1 V-8. In fact I think it's a great engine. But why must everything that is "high performance" American HAVE to be 8 cylinders and Big cubes?
This certainly seems to be incongrous with todays astronomical gasoline prices. In a car market where we see manufacturers concerned with CAFE and all are rushing to emulate Honda and Toyata for a hybrid vehicle, one would think that engineers would try harder for a innovative 6 cylinder that would provide the power of a 8 cylinder but give the economy of a 6. OH wait, ford did that with our engines.
I think now that the pontiac Grand Prix GTP is now rated at 260hp a Rear wheel drive version would be great. Those wishing more performance could order up a "high boost" version making 300hp.
We all know it's possible and folks will still get pretty darn close to 30mpg on the highway with the 6-speed.
True that on the LS1 mileage...
I had a friend that ordered up a 1998 Trans AM with WS6 package and 6-speed. He generally used the cruise on the highway at 65mph and reported back about 28mpg.
I've only gotten 28mpg with my SC going downhill with a tailwind!
But still, if America wants to truly be competitive with the foreign car market, then they need to be cometeing on the same grounds.
One of the fastest cars in the word doesn't use a V-8. I'm referring to the Porche 911 Turbo. It uses a 3.6L flat 6 that's twin turboed. It makes 450hp. I'm sure that 450hp is more than enough HP for everyday use, but you get the idea.
For GM, I seriuosly think it would be a better idea to use a "boosted" smaller engine rather than a larger displacement engine in the quest of reducing the weight on the front end. Wouldn't it then be sweet to a actually see an American car handling as well as most of the competition due to the fact that there is less weight up front.
I had a friend that ordered up a 1998 Trans AM with WS6 package and 6-speed. He generally used the cruise on the highway at 65mph and reported back about 28mpg.
I've only gotten 28mpg with my SC going downhill with a tailwind!
But still, if America wants to truly be competitive with the foreign car market, then they need to be cometeing on the same grounds.
One of the fastest cars in the word doesn't use a V-8. I'm referring to the Porche 911 Turbo. It uses a 3.6L flat 6 that's twin turboed. It makes 450hp. I'm sure that 450hp is more than enough HP for everyday use, but you get the idea.
For GM, I seriuosly think it would be a better idea to use a "boosted" smaller engine rather than a larger displacement engine in the quest of reducing the weight on the front end. Wouldn't it then be sweet to a actually see an American car handling as well as most of the competition due to the fact that there is less weight up front.
Um sure, it is called the Corvette Z06, out handles most of its more expensive brothers. Me personaly, I like the american V-8 power. A turbo 6 is never going to give you that powerful rumble and feeling of a big v-8. And the weight difference between v-6's and v-8's are not that big, especially if you are dealing with two turbos, intercoolers, and all the plumbing.
V-8's are great.
Nothing quite sounds like them and they are totally ingrained in the American Psyche. Just like Drive In Movies, Elvis and Apple Pie.
You're right about the Vette Z06. In fact I dream of owning one of those. But then again a $45,000 car is something that most can't afford.
Wasn't Gm planning for the GTO to be in the high 20K range?
The vette has some great innovations allowing it to handle the way it does. Low center of gravity, wide front and rear track, even front/rear weight distribution (due to transmission being in rear) as well as a unusually stiff chassis courtesy of it's hydroformed steel rails.
Think GM has refined that technology enough to put it in a high 20's car? I think not. So... using a smaller engine with a higher specific output would seem like the cheaper and more economical soluation rather than the traditional thinking of "Let's cram a V-8 in there and see what she does".
Do realize that when our SC's were created Ford could have easily chucked a Blown 5.0liter in the car and called it "done". We would have had a car making 300hp or damn near close. But the MN12 was never originally conceived to house a 8 cylinder.
Why you ask?
Well ford execs were looking to have the thunderbird flagship compete directly with Mid-size, rear wheel drive, Personal luxury/performance coupes from overseas.
Specifically the BMW 6-series at that time. Was there a V-8 in the Beemer? No. Just a host of wonderfully well balanced N/A'ed inline 6 engines.
In order for their new car to handle similarly to the autobahn offerings, they needed to keep the front from getting too heavy. This is easier accomplished with a V-6 whose bare block weighs a mere 120lbs.
In america, since 6 cylinders have always taken a back seat to a V-8 and are generally seen as a "Base" engine, the level of refinement and specific output was abismal at best. Ford needed to do something and they needed a "quick fix" (another part of American Psyche 'gimme a pill') and so used the supercharger from Eaton.
The platform was only meant to support either base 3.8L or supercharged 3.8L.
Unfourtunatly that American psyche stuff would haunt them because, although selling well, Ford wasn't selling as much as they'd like. Customers had associated the Thunderbird name plate with V-8's and to NOT see one under the hood was sacrelidge. So in 1991, the 5.0 filled in the slot nicely between both engines.
But to get the 5.0 to fit in a car NOT designed to house a V-8 required much late night oil burning. Eventually they did it and ultimatly killed off SC sales.
When an american car has a V-8 in it, one expects it to be fast.. afterall it has a V-8, the stuff that legends are made of!
But when something is fast that doesn't have a V-8 in it, certainly makes you wonder.
I seem to remember another non-v-8 car pi$$ing alot of people off they called it "Buick Regal Grand National".
Nothing quite sounds like them and they are totally ingrained in the American Psyche. Just like Drive In Movies, Elvis and Apple Pie.
You're right about the Vette Z06. In fact I dream of owning one of those. But then again a $45,000 car is something that most can't afford.
Wasn't Gm planning for the GTO to be in the high 20K range?
The vette has some great innovations allowing it to handle the way it does. Low center of gravity, wide front and rear track, even front/rear weight distribution (due to transmission being in rear) as well as a unusually stiff chassis courtesy of it's hydroformed steel rails.
Think GM has refined that technology enough to put it in a high 20's car? I think not. So... using a smaller engine with a higher specific output would seem like the cheaper and more economical soluation rather than the traditional thinking of "Let's cram a V-8 in there and see what she does".
Do realize that when our SC's were created Ford could have easily chucked a Blown 5.0liter in the car and called it "done". We would have had a car making 300hp or damn near close. But the MN12 was never originally conceived to house a 8 cylinder.
Why you ask?
Well ford execs were looking to have the thunderbird flagship compete directly with Mid-size, rear wheel drive, Personal luxury/performance coupes from overseas.
Specifically the BMW 6-series at that time. Was there a V-8 in the Beemer? No. Just a host of wonderfully well balanced N/A'ed inline 6 engines.
In order for their new car to handle similarly to the autobahn offerings, they needed to keep the front from getting too heavy. This is easier accomplished with a V-6 whose bare block weighs a mere 120lbs.
In america, since 6 cylinders have always taken a back seat to a V-8 and are generally seen as a "Base" engine, the level of refinement and specific output was abismal at best. Ford needed to do something and they needed a "quick fix" (another part of American Psyche 'gimme a pill') and so used the supercharger from Eaton.
The platform was only meant to support either base 3.8L or supercharged 3.8L.
Unfourtunatly that American psyche stuff would haunt them because, although selling well, Ford wasn't selling as much as they'd like. Customers had associated the Thunderbird name plate with V-8's and to NOT see one under the hood was sacrelidge. So in 1991, the 5.0 filled in the slot nicely between both engines.
But to get the 5.0 to fit in a car NOT designed to house a V-8 required much late night oil burning. Eventually they did it and ultimatly killed off SC sales.
When an american car has a V-8 in it, one expects it to be fast.. afterall it has a V-8, the stuff that legends are made of!
But when something is fast that doesn't have a V-8 in it, certainly makes you wonder.
I seem to remember another non-v-8 car pi$$ing alot of people off they called it "Buick Regal Grand National".
Joe, Nice to see you join in here, you always seem to have interesting opinions on the auto industry. The reason I brought up the GTO and Monaro, is that in Australia (and possibly the middle east) the car is available with the L67 (3.8L SC) in RWD. So you have all the main components, supercharged 3.8L V6, RWD Coupe with a decent amount of interior room. Now the reason we didn't get that version here is that there are enough purists crybabying about the new GTO already, without making it a V6 car. GTO was supposedly the original muscle car, a factory hotrod, A midsize with an engine from a fullsize.
1Bad, you say the GTO isn't in the same luxury and price range as the SC? I think it is closer than the new 6 series. My SC stickered at $27k, the GTO is low $30k's. I think the 6 series is more Mark VIII territory regarding luxury and price.
For some reason Ford doesn't see luxury and performance going together as much as BMW. You want luxury you get the LS8, you want the performnce side, you get the Cobra. Personally I would do what Cadillac has done (mixing the CTS and Z06) make the new Cobra drivetrain available in the LS. (Would have been great in the FN10 chassis to.)
Some nameplates can get by with a V6, but not GTO. Now let me toss out a thought I had. Start with the Monaro platform, for a powerplant use a twin turbo HF V6 (the engine originally planned for the CTSV and avialable in N/A form in the SRX, 2004 CTS, and Rendezvous Ultra) now you have a high tech turbo V6 coupe. What other GM division could use a "halo" car? Buick! Give it sort of a 2 door regal GS look. A new GN.
1Bad, you say the GTO isn't in the same luxury and price range as the SC? I think it is closer than the new 6 series. My SC stickered at $27k, the GTO is low $30k's. I think the 6 series is more Mark VIII territory regarding luxury and price.
For some reason Ford doesn't see luxury and performance going together as much as BMW. You want luxury you get the LS8, you want the performnce side, you get the Cobra. Personally I would do what Cadillac has done (mixing the CTS and Z06) make the new Cobra drivetrain available in the LS. (Would have been great in the FN10 chassis to.)
Some nameplates can get by with a V6, but not GTO. Now let me toss out a thought I had. Start with the Monaro platform, for a powerplant use a twin turbo HF V6 (the engine originally planned for the CTSV and avialable in N/A form in the SRX, 2004 CTS, and Rendezvous Ultra) now you have a high tech turbo V6 coupe. What other GM division could use a "halo" car? Buick! Give it sort of a 2 door regal GS look. A new GN.
"My SC stickered at $27k" That was in 1989- 1995. Add inflation on top of that, along with how much new cars are going up in price and you end up with a number closer to the BMW. Look at the current T-Bird without a performance package. Dealers won't let them go for much under 40,000. As much as I love Pontiac, no car that pontiac has built has been close to the SC in the luxury dept. Sure there are attempts at a luxury but it just doesn't happen. Everything on GM cars (other than the drivetrain) feels cheap and mismatched. But anyway, we could argue about this forever and still go no where. We all have our opinions and that is that.
Yeah, we could argue forever and go nowhere, lets just say I like to beat dead horses. The question of comparing the MN12 T-birds to the New T-bird is a mute point - they are completely different cars. Think about the similar major redesign and market change for the T-bird in the '70s. The all new '77 model T-bird was about 1/2 the price of the '76. That doesn't mean Inflation was negative by a large amount at that time.
New car prices do not necessarily follow inflation. The last few years the industry has been fighting negative pricing, new car pricing has not risen that fast. Dealers are stuggling to sell identical cars for the same price they did last year. Take for example a loaded Mustang GT. 1995 price ~$27k, 2004 price ~$30k nearly the same spacing I mentioned from the 1994 SC price of $27k to the 2004 GTO price of low $30k area. I don't know if you have looked or not but the 6 series reportedly will start around $69k.
I love my SC but I know damn well if Ford had kept them in production they wouldn't have nearly tripled in price by now.
The GTO, and certain Bonnevilles are at the level of Luxury the SC was at. Once you get some time with a new GTO you will realize how closely it resembles the SC.
New car prices do not necessarily follow inflation. The last few years the industry has been fighting negative pricing, new car pricing has not risen that fast. Dealers are stuggling to sell identical cars for the same price they did last year. Take for example a loaded Mustang GT. 1995 price ~$27k, 2004 price ~$30k nearly the same spacing I mentioned from the 1994 SC price of $27k to the 2004 GTO price of low $30k area. I don't know if you have looked or not but the 6 series reportedly will start around $69k.
I love my SC but I know damn well if Ford had kept them in production they wouldn't have nearly tripled in price by now.
The GTO, and certain Bonnevilles are at the level of Luxury the SC was at. Once you get some time with a new GTO you will realize how closely it resembles the SC.
Either way a 30,000 dollar Ford and a 30,000 Trans Am in 1989 were just as highly priced BMW in 2003
The SC's were steep for most to swallow in 89 and the BMW price is steep to swallow as well, but that is the car the SC was meant to play with anyhow. Either way it is about time we started getting large two door touring cars back into the mix. Have you seen that new Bently GT.
The SC's were steep for most to swallow in 89 and the BMW price is steep to swallow as well, but that is the car the SC was meant to play with anyhow. Either way it is about time we started getting large two door touring cars back into the mix. Have you seen that new Bently GT.
Don's Bolt
Registered User
Guys don't forgett about the 2 supercharged vehicals ford is making now.
The Cobra and the Lightning
390 HP for the Cobra and 380 HP for the Lightning
with just a few bolt ons and a chip the cobra can easilly make 600rwhp
So Ford has not forgott about the performance market, and both are rear wheel drive.
The Cobra and the Lightning
390 HP for the Cobra and 380 HP for the Lightning
with just a few bolt ons and a chip the cobra can easilly make 600rwhp
So Ford has not forgott about the performance market, and both are rear wheel drive.