![]() ![]() The other factor arguing against the development of such a vehicle is that it conceivably could cannibalize current Mustang sales. ![]() A shortened version of the Mustang, even with stout Shelby GT350 underpinnings including its massively powerful 526-horsepower 5.2-liter engine won’t add much to the sports car conversation vis a’ vis the mid-engine C8 Corvette. Using Mustang bits without a clear definition of what the Thunderbird could or should be is a recipe for history to repeat itself. It enjoyed a production run of only three years with just over 68,000 built. It turned out to be, as they say in Texas, all hat, and no cattle. The 3.9-liter V8 only made 252 horsepower (later bumped to 280). The results, despite the somewhat alluring retro styling, was nothing short of a disaster. It was an open car with a removable hardtop sporting a porthole. ![]() It was based on a European-developed DEW98 rear-drive chassis developed for the Jaguar S-Type and Lincoln LS. On paper, the 2002 Ford Thunderbird had a lot to offer. Building a car using an existing platform without a clear definition of if it’s a pure performance play after Corvette’s audience or perhaps a new kind of Grand Tourer drips with a bad case of déjà vu. Let’s hope it’s not a rerun of the last Thunderbird. Still, having the Blue Oval offer a sports car alternative to the Corvette that’s not astronomically priced like the GT would be a welcome addition to the automotive landscape. While the prospect of a front-engine sports car to fill the gap for diehard enthusiasts not wowed by the ‘Vette’s switch to a mid-engine layout is intriguing, the smart money is likely to be bet elsewhere. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |