Mustang In "Misery" As Mazda Goes Mexican

Edward Niedermeyer
by Edward Niedermeyer

Mazda has confirmed [to Reuters via Automotive News [sub]] what has been rumored for a while (especially in the Mexican media): open a new plant in Guanajuato, Mexico, near VW and GM’s Silao facilities. Production starts this fall and the line starts rolling in 2013, according to “people familiar with the matter.” In the meantime, Mazda6 production at the Flat Rock, MI joint venture plant continues until mid-2012, at which point Mazda will make a decision that it’s still “studying,” but it won’t be building the Mazda6. Interestingly, Mazda’s new Mexican plant is only being built for “at least” 50k units of

compact cars, initially for sale in Mexico and South America, and eventually export to North America.

Could the next-generation of Mazda midsizers be hecho en Mexico as well? It’s possible, but we won’t know until Mazda announces more details about the new factory. Meanwhile, nobody’s expecting Mazda to hang around Flat Rock… least of all Ford.

A separate AN [sub] piece gives J.D. Power analyst Jeff Schuster a chance to sum up the Mustang’s “misery,” and he spells out the situation in Flat Rock succinctly:

The Mustang on its current sales pace isn’t enough to sustain Flat Rock. The Camaro has a more modern feel and seems to draw more attention from a younger age group. Even with a boost from a redesign, because of what Camaro has achieved, you’re still looking at sales volume for the Mustang below 100,000 a year. The bottom line is something at Flat Rock will have to change.

The math goes something like this: Flat Rock can build 240k units. Last year the Mustang sold 73,716 units and the Mazda6 sold 35,662. This is why Mazda is (likely) going to leave, and it’s why Ford needs to completely re-think the plant. The Mustang isn’t getting a redesign until 2014, and if the Camaro doesn’t crash out (and it’s shown few signs of faltering this year) it will likely lose volume every year until then. Throw some rejuvenated competition from Hyundai’s Genesis Coupe, and Mustang’s chances of ever sustaining much better than 100k units seems unlikely.

The plant’s flexibility is cited as a key benefit, but unless Mazda is incredibly confident in its next-gen “Mazda-rati” midsizer, it’s hard to see the plucky automaker committing to over 100k annual units at a UAW plant any time soon. I’m guessing that this new Mexican plant site includes plenty of room to grow… and since Ford’s made big profits thanks in large part to its Mexican manufacturing footprint, they might not be far behind.


Edward Niedermeyer
Edward Niedermeyer

More by Edward Niedermeyer

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 33 comments
  • Advance_92 Advance_92 on Jun 17, 2011

    In Chicago I see almost no Camaros or Challengers, and only a handful of Mustangs. It's probably a regional (urban?) thing.

  • Panzerfaust Panzerfaust on Jun 17, 2011

    The Mustang has had the Ponycar market to itself for quite a while, so its not surprising that a repristinated Camaro is doing well, but those sales will taper off a bit once the market gets saturated, which I think is the issue with the Mustang, this basic model has been on the street for 6 years. It should have had a bigger refresh two years earlier. I think all Ford would need to do to pick up some extra production is to stretch the Mustang platform a bit and build a RWD two-door hardtop with more interior room than the Taurus and give it every drive train option that the Mustang has. Give Roush-Fenway some sponsorship and I bet you'd sell 100,000 units.

  • MaintenanceCosts "GLX" with the 2.slow? I'm confused. I thought that during the Mk3 and Mk4 era "GLX" meant the car had a VR6.
  • Dr.Nick What about Infiniti? Some of those cars might be interesting, whereas not much at Nissan interest me other than the Z which is probably big bucks.
  • Dave Holzman My '08 Civic (stick, 159k on the clock) is my favorite car that I've ever owned. If I had to choose between the current Civic and Corolla, I'd test drive 'em (with stick), and see how they felt. But I'd be approaching this choice partial to the Civic. I would not want any sort of automatic transmission, or the turbo engine.
  • Merc190 I would say Civic Si all the way if it still revved to 8300 rpm with no turbo. But nowadays I would pick the Corolla because I think they have a more clear idea on their respective models identity and mission. I also believe Toyota has a higher standard for quality.
  • Dave Holzman I think we're mixing up a few things here. I won't swear to it, but I'd be damned surprised if they were putting fire retardant in the seats of any cars from the '50s, or even the '60s. I can't quite conjure up the new car smell of the '57 Chevy my parents bought on October 17th of that year... but I could do so--vividly--until the last five years or so. I loved that scent, and when I smelled it, I could see the snow on Hollis Street in Cambridge Mass, as one or the other parent got ready to drive me to nursery school, and I could remember staring up at the sky on Christmas Eve, 1957, wondering if I might see Santa Claus flying overhead in his sleigh. No, I don't think the fire retardant on the foam in the seats of 21st (and maybe late 20th) century cars has anything to do with new car smell. (That doesn't mean new car small lacked toxicity--it probably had some.)
Next