Mustang Panel Alignment Problems

[zstanny]

I hear what everyone is saying on this thread and I do agree that for the money the alignment of body and interior panels should be good if not very good. I also get that in the end these are mass produced vehicles, and let's not forget all we have seen are pre-production models. CEO Jim Farley is dedicated to increasing quality at Ford so we may see an improvement in production Mustangs over the pre-production units. I believe that is why they had so many test mules out and about to work out all the bugs and kinks before it arrives in the hands of the customer. Ford is watching this forum and paying attention. I think that what actually comes out of the factory will be better quality/fit & finish over the pre-production units. Just my $.02.

I think you're being overly optimistic. Take the new white dark horse that was in NY. If you were Farley, and that was your new, shiny, top trim mustang, with all eyes on it, with people sitting in it, going for ride alongs, would you let it have a single panel off? After making comments about improving quality? That, to me, speaks volumes.

I'm obviously lowly compared to the CEO of Ford. But I don't think alot of us are new to being promised one thing, and being delivered another from a CEO, a Senator, a President, a boss, etc.

Sponsored

 

[6String]

Ford were losing money well before that. The EV future has arrived outside the US so if they don't invest they are doomed - they are already playing catch up hence the reason they are having to platform share with VW in Europe. Ford sell more vehicles outside the US than in the US.

Uh, yeah--Ford didn't just this year (or last year) start dumping money into EVs. This isn't the first time (or the first century) the auto industry and specifically, Ford has gone the route of electrification. If you know automotive history, Henry Ford's friend Thomas Edison started experimenting with battery powered vehicles as early as 1903. In 1914, Ford produced a battery powered vehicle they intended to market alongside the Model T as an Edison-Ford. The Fusion Synergi (2015) was a plug-in hybrid.

The EV future has arrived in the EU--12.1% of new car sales. You might want to wait to see how that plays out. If it gets to 50% or greater--I'd be willing to bet those vehicles will not be powered by the same technology that exists today. They may be battery powered, but it won't be lithium-ion batteries.

Ford's partnership with VW might not be the best ROI for Ford in the EV field. The biggest potential payback is the co-sponsored patent with Perdue University. If they can pull off bringing the patented technology for fast charging to the market, if means consumers would be able to fast charge an EV in five minutes. Potentially, Ford (and Perdue) could see far more revenue from building infrastructure than building cars.

Lithium ion that powers most current EVs has severe drawbacks. How much lithium and cobalt is domestically produced in the EU or the US? (The major suppliers of lithium aren't members of the EU. China is single largest supplier of LI batteries. The world's largest supplier of cobalt is the DRC.) The mining is toxic--in China fish and livestock have been found dead due to toxins released by lithium mining operations over 150 miles from the source. Recycling is far less efficient than recycling an ICE vehicle. Discarded LI batteries are a fire a hazard and the heavy metals can pollute ground water. The biggest bad news for auto manufacturers is the price of lithium doubled between 2016 and 2018.

California has mandated 100% of new car sales be zero emissions by 2035. CA annual sales represents twenty percent of all EU annual new car sales. Yet CA, like the EU, is not energy independent. The CA grid will not support 1.85 million new EVs charging. The government mandate makes the assumption that a) manufacturers can supply enough batteries to build those vehicles and b) the infrastructure to support charging a massive increase in demand will be in place by 2035. That is if there is a demand. Due to the price increases of the rare earth metals, only the wealthy may be able to afford a new car in the Republic of California by 2035.

I may be wrong. I make mistakes all the time. (My wife is quick to point out those mistakes.) The EV future may eventually arrive, but I predict it will be far different than those driving the move today project. Changing technology will reshape the end product. Costs, in manufacturing and insurance, will prevent universal adaptation. Pollution, toxic waste, will offset the CO2 benefits. And the lofty goals set by activists and government bureaucrats will cause untold economic havoc amongst the common people.

Whew! I am going to climb off my soapbox now.

 

[Gregs24]

Uh, yeah--Ford didn't just this year (or last year) start dumping money into EVs. This isn't the first time (or the first century) the auto industry and specifically, Ford has gone the route of electrification. If you know automotive history, Henry Ford's friend Thomas Edison started experimenting with battery powered vehicles as early as 1903. In 1914, Ford produced a battery powered vehicle they intended to market alongside the Model T as an Edison-Ford. The Fusion Synergi (2015) was a plug-in hybrid.

The EV future has arrived in the EU--12.1% of new car sales. You might want to wait to see how that plays out. If it gets to 50% or greater--I'd be willing to bet those vehicles will not be powered by the same technology that exists today. They may be battery powered, but it won't be lithium-ion batteries.

Ford's partnership with VW might not be the best ROI for Ford in the EV field. The biggest potential payback is the co-sponsored patent with Perdue University. If they can pull off bringing the patented technology for fast charging to the market, if means consumers would be able to fast charge an EV in five minutes. Potentially, Ford (and Perdue) could see far more revenue from building infrastructure than building cars.

Lithium ion that powers most current EVs has severe drawbacks. How much lithium and cobalt is domestically produced in the EU or the US? (The major suppliers of lithium aren't members of the EU. China is single largest supplier of LI batteries. The world's largest supplier of cobalt is the DRC.) The mining is toxic--in China fish and livestock have been found dead due to toxins released by lithium mining operations over 150 miles from the source. Recycling is far less efficient than recycling an ICE vehicle. Discarded LI batteries are a fire a hazard and the heavy metals can pollute ground water. The biggest bad news for auto manufacturers is the price of lithium doubled between 2016 and 2018.

California has mandated 100% of new car sales be zero emissions by 2035. CA annual sales represents twenty percent of all EU annual new car sales. Yet CA, like the EU, is not energy independent. The CA grid will not support 1.85 million new EVs charging. The government mandate makes the assumption that a) manufacturers can supply enough batteries to build those vehicles and b) the infrastructure to support charging a massive increase in demand will be in place by 2035. That is if there is a demand. Due to the price increases of the rare earth metals, only the wealthy may be able to afford a new car in the Republic of California by 2035.

I may be wrong. I make mistakes all the time. (My wife is quick to point out those mistakes.) The EV future may eventually arrive, but I predict it will be far different than those driving the move today project. Changing technology will reshape the end product. Costs, in manufacturing and insurance, will prevent universal adaptation. Pollution, toxic waste, will offset the CO2 benefits. And the lofty goals set by activists and government bureaucrats will cause untold economic havoc amongst the common people.

Whew! I am going to climb off my soapbox now.

This has been done to death over on S550 so no reason to start derailing this thread with it.

Plenty of answers to your views on there

 

[6String]

This has been done to death over on S550 so no reason to start derailing this thread with it.

Plenty of answers to your views on there

I get it. You didn't like the post. It runs counter to your view--so go away.

 

[IceGamer]

I get it. You didn't like the post. It runs counter to your view--so go away.

No, he's just right. Why bring up a completely different topic when nobody asked for it?
Maybe you open another threat for it because I don't think this is the right place for it - regardless of anyone’s believes. Here we discuss panel alignment in the Mustang and why it might be an ongoing concern.

 

[Gregs24]

I get it. You didn't like the post. It runs counter to your view--so go away.

No - your post is off topic, so I will not reply and derail the thread.

If you want to start a thread in the appropriate place, or join the existing discussions on S550 then crack on.

 

[S650 GT]

The European pre production cars also have the same panel gap issues

 

[Q6543]

Wait for the mid cycle refresh.

 

[S650 GT]

Wait for the mid cycle refresh.

Do you mean before the consumer cars come out or maybe somewhere mid 2024?

 

[Q6543]

No , like when they make the next tweaks, 2027/28
Gen2 s650.

I’m sure tightening/ smoothing out tolerances/gaps will be part of new tooling.

 

[6String]

No, he's just right. Why bring up a completely different topic when nobody asked for it?
Maybe you open another threat for it because I don't think this is the right place for it - regardless of anyone’s believes. Here we discuss panel alignment in the Mustang and why it might be an ongoing concern.

My humble apologies.

Perhaps you are right--but by your rationale, gregs24 response to my OP was also wrong. His post contained no mention of QA or panel gaps. Gregs24 responded with to my OP with comments on Ford's lagging electrification efforts and partnership with VW and mention of EU electrification without mention of panel gaps or QA.

However, GREGS24 response was welcome. It made a good, valid point about the pressure on Ford to catch up on EVs. That pressure, in part, could explain the lack of focus on the overall improvement to Ford's ICE lineup--and may explain why Ford has not chosen to make panel gaps a priority.

My response may have been over the top but highlights the massive obstacles (raw materials, costs, infrastructure, etc.) to overcome moving to an EV future. Overcoming those requires massive amounts of money. And since there is only so much in the budget, every dollar spent overcoming those obstacles, is a dollar Ford (or any other manufacturer) cannot spend on ICE development--Including improvements of fit and finish to the Mustang. Just speculation, I do believe the reason there is not an all-new Mustang instead of a revised edition of the S550. Development funds were siphoned from ICE to the new EV division. (What happened to the rumored hybrid?)

Money diverted to the EV division directly influences investment made in the ICE division. Panel gaps, fuel efficiency, and minimal engineering advancements may all result from money spent elsewhere on the part of Ford's management. It can assure that QA issues such as panel gaps et. al. will be ongoing concern--lack of focus. The development of EVs should not come at the expense of short-changing their existing ICE customers.

 

[BrianJ77]

I think you're being overly optimistic.

Maybe so. I'm more of a realist than anything, but my overly optimistic view, in your opinion, has to beat reading the back and forth that was on this thread. Anyway, here's to optimistic hoping that the panel gaps will at least be livable.

 

[zstanny]

Maybe so. I'm more of a realist than anything, but my overly optimistic view, in your opinion, has to beat reading the back and forth that was on this thread. Anyway, here's to optimistic hoping that the panel gaps will at least be livable.

I really hope so as well. And yes, the optimism in the sea of mustang7g negativity is indeed appreciated.

 

[S650 GT]

And here we have another thing.

This is the Dark Horse handling package.

On this car you get this plastic curved thing around your wheel arches.

You can even see the plastic plug that is coming out that should be pushed in. But for some reason it does not fit well.

This hurts my eye.

 

[Gregs24]

The European pre production cars also have the same panel gap issues

It looks like the plastic rear lip is fitted too high. If you adjust the bootlid down it would not align with the rest of the bodywork. Typical pre-production car to be honest.

Sponsored