By on July 26, 2017

2018 Ford Mustang GT rear - Image: FordThe 2018 Ford Mustang GT, freshly facelifted and powered up, will cost you 6 percent more than the 2017 Ford Mustang GT.

The base price for a Ford Mustang EcoBoost falls to $26,085, a $610 drop as Ford eliminates the basic Ford Mustang V6 from the lineup and moves the EcoBoost downmarket to aid affordability. Now with 310 horsepower and 350 lb-ft of torque, the least expensive 2018 Ford Mustang is $400 more than the least expensive 2017 Ford Mustang.

But it’s the 2018 Mustang GT, now priced from $35,995, that’s growing increasingly expensive. A $1,900 jump is nothing to sneeze at, particularly given the speed with which the $40K barrier is now crossed.

Non-Shelby Mustangs can get pricey in a hurry.

Replacing 2017’s $1,195 optional six-speed automatic transmission is a new 10-speed automatic co-developed with General Motors — it’s where the Camaro and Mustang showcase a most American form of overlap — that costs $1,595. Meanwhile, in order to match Ford’s hyped sub-4.0-second 0-60 miles per hour time, you’ll need to add a GT Performance Package that costs $3,995.

Back in the halcyon days of 2017, in which we still reside, the Mustang’s GT Performance Package was a $2,995 option group. You can now add MagneRide damping to a regular (i.e. non-Shelby) Mustang, for $1,695. There’s also a new $895 active valve performance exhaust.2018 Ford Mustang GT Performance Package - Image: FordThus, to a Mustang GT Premium, add an automatic transmission, orange paint, the 401A option group (with a 12-inch digital instrument cluster, heated steering wheel, navigation, and nicer trim), a security package, performance exhaust, the performance package, blind spot monitoring, MagneRide, Shaker audio, and Recaro seats, and the price climbs to $55,250.

The 2018 Shelby GT350 starts at $58,045, a $1,000 increase over 2017.

Undoubtedly, there’s more for your money with the 2018 Mustang. The EcoBoost now generates 30 additional lb-ft of torque. The 5.0 GT produces 25 more horsepower and 20 more lb-ft of torque than in 2017. Two-pedal drivers will appreciate the benefits of the 10-speed transmission.

But you’re also seeing the impact of steadily decreasing Mustang sales. Ford wants to make money on the Mustang, a global success story for the Blue Oval. With U.S. Mustang sales falling, doing so requires making more money per Mustang.

Mustang volume tumbled 13 percent in 2016. Through the first-half of 2017, U.S. Mustang sales are down 29 percent, with Ford on track to sell only 75,000 Mustangs by year’s end. That’d be a six-year low, and a 55-percent drop from 2006, when Ford didn’t have pesky rivals from Chevrolet and Dodge stealing market share.

[Image: Ford Motor Company]

Timothy Cain is a contributing analyst at The Truth About Cars and Autofocus.ca and the founder and former editor of GoodCarBadCar.net. Follow on Twitter @timcaincars.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

56 Comments on “2018 Ford Mustang GT Base Price Rises $1,900; Pricier Options Take the Bill to New Heights...”


  • avatar
    JimZ

    wow, adding options to a car makes it more expensive. who knew?

    • 0 avatar
      ACCvsBig10

      wow the inflation is really real

      • 0 avatar
        Lou_BC

        New cars are just WAYYYY too expensive ;)

      • 0 avatar
        Dan

        A bit of it is inflation but much of it is keeping the volume down on the V8 for CAFE compliance. The vacuum cleaner editions are still cheap. The base 2.3 stickers within a couple of bucks of an Accord SE. It’s the $10,000 to move up to a GT that stings. GM had to do the same thing with the Camaro, the V8 is $11,000 there.

        Just 10 years ago the GT started in the middle class Camcord price range. Not anymore.

        • 0 avatar
          bikegoesbaa

          Just 10 years ago the GT also had 300 horsepower.

          Now the base Mustang has more than that.

          The cheapest 2017 V6 Camry now starts at $32k, which isn’t too far off the price of a 2017 GT.

          • 0 avatar
            Dan

            The V6 Camcords are reflecting the same CAFE compliance pricing that this is.

            The 2018 I4 Camry has 31% more horsepower than it did 10 years ago. Where’s its $10,000 price hike?

  • avatar
    gasser

    Note to Ford: raising prices decreases demand.

  • avatar
    arach

    This is great news for camaro Fans.

    Chevy was getting hammered because of their high Camaro pricing compared to offerings like the Mustang. Raising The v8 cost of entry will help narrow that gap and minimize the amount Chevy needs to cut prices themselves.

    • 0 avatar
      TMA1

      Good point. When I bought my Mustang GT, the only Camaros on the lot were the fully loaded versions. The one I test drove had a $47K sticker, and Chevy wasn’t cutting prices since the car was still new. I paid $33K for my GT Premium.

    • 0 avatar
      Scoutdude

      This it the opposite of good news for Camaro fans. Raising the cost of the Mustang does mean that reduces pressure on Camaro prices which means that a Camaro buyer may have to pay more.

      Now it is good news for GM and Chevy dealers who won’t be under as much pressure to discount.

  • avatar
    jh26036

    Inevitable money on hood…

    • 0 avatar
      carguy

      +1 Ford can set the MSRP to whatever it wants, but buyers will only pay what the market will bear. While GM is still trying to move the Camaro this will just end in more discounting.

  • avatar
    pmirp1

    Currently you can find new non premium GT Mustangs for less than 30k. Just wait for the initial rush to be over and then buy the GT you want easy between 30-40k.

  • avatar
    TMA1

    The Performance Package was only $2,500 when I bought my ’16. Two years later, it’s $4,000? I thought that makes sense if the MagneRide and active exhaust were included. But damn, you have to pay almost $3,000 more for those?

    The Mustang is really moving away from its everyman roots. The highest sticker I saw when I bought mine was about $45K, and that had every option but those miserable Recaros. $50K+ for any non-Shelby Mustang is just madness. At that price, I’m going to be looking at a Corvette, which I won’t see at every stop light.

    • 0 avatar
      bikegoesbaa

      But even a base 2017 modern Ecoboost Mustang gives more performance and features than a V8 Mustang from 20 years ago.

      It’s also cheaper. A 1995 Mustang GT would be $29k in inflation-adjusted dollars, while a (faster and better) 2017 base Ecoboost starts at $27k.

      The Everyman never had it so good.

      • 0 avatar
        DenverMike

        The ’94 and ’95 V8s in Mustang GTs had even less hp/tq than the ’87 to ’93 GTs for some reason, but it wasn’t so much the V8s that sucked, it was the standard 2.73 rear axle ratio (handicap!), unless you knew to order it with 3.08s, but those only helped a little.

        I’d definitely rather have a ’95 pushrod 5.0 (in a new ’18 Mustang) than the Ecoboost 2.3. And it’d probably be faster (with it) with less hp/tq than the Ecoboost 2.3.

        I know it’d sound better, but I installed 3.73s in my ’90 Mustang GT and it was a whole different animal! It was so awesome, I’d be gawd damned if the car wasn’t designed with 3.73s and the slow gears were added for production reasons at the last minute. Bummer for car enthusiasts.

        I didn’t know how much I hated the factory 3.08s until I got the 3.73s. 5th gear would bog (with the 3.08s) under 60 mph, and 4th was too buzzing at 55. 1st to 4th were really close ratios, with a huge overdrive.

        With the 3.73s everything worked as it should, and only 2,000 rpm at 80 mph!

        • 0 avatar
          Scoutdude

          Yeah it was the CAFE bean counters that forced those gear ratios. On the Marauder it was designed for 4.10s in part due to the large rear tire diameter. However once the bean counters got a hold of it they went out the door with 3.55. That put the effective rev per mile at about what the 3.23 gear Police and HPP cars had.

          At one point I had a 92 CV HPP so it had 3.23s and a 93 GM that had the 3.08. The CV actually ended up getting better MPG in most cases because it could get into OD and stay there, where as the 3.08 car often dropped down a gear on grades that the other car could stay in OD all the way up. Particularly pronounced if you try to use the cruise in rolling hills.

      • 0 avatar
        DenverMike

        btw mpg stayed the same since I could put it in overdrive sooner.

      • 0 avatar
        TMA1

        I get how inflation works, but the would be Mustang buyer of today is saddled with student loan debt, and too underemployed to swing the kind of car debt he would have taken on 20 years ago.

    • 0 avatar
      arach

      Its always been known the poorer you are the more you spend on cars (on average), so maybe its just going MORE towards the “everymans” roots

  • avatar
    Oberkanone

    Lower price Ecoboost, not really-
    Was $255 Now $405 Spare wheel and tire
    Was $1195 Now $1595 automatic transmission
    Was $195 Now $295 18″ wheels
    Was $995 Now $2,000 interior upgrade (interior and wheels in 2017, package 101A in 2018)

    • 0 avatar
      jh26036

      So all useless crap…perfect.

    • 0 avatar
      tekdemon

      The interior upgrade is more expensive but arguably a better value now since it comes with more stuff like dual zone climate control. And at least based on reviews of the GM implementations the 10-speed is probably worth the price hike. I think the changes to pricing mostly make the non-premium versions a hugely better value than before and conversely make the premium trim crazy expensive.

  • avatar
    EBFlex

    It amazes me how much better cars you can buy for $55K NO Mustang is worth $55K let alone a Miata looking basic Mustang GT.

    Ford is high.

  • avatar
    30-mile fetch

    I want to squint in disapproval and wag my useless internet finger at this, but $36K for a sub-4 second V8 muscle car that is apparently far nicer and far more nimble than its predecessors seems like a pretty good deal to me.

    That’s 4Runner money, and the Toyota seemed worth it for the unique capabilities it has. I think the same goes for a V8 Mustang, perhaps more so.

    • 0 avatar
      Timothy Cain

      No disagreement. As TMA1 says, the Mustang does seem to be moving away from its everyman roots. But it’s also a screaming performance bargain.

      • 0 avatar
        TMA1

        I think the everyman is expected to drive a turbo-4 these days, because the price gap to the V8 has gotten huge.

        I also wouldn’t call the Mustang nimble. It drives like a big car. My Miata could dance circles around it, if it could ever catch it.

    • 0 avatar
      MrIcky

      Well, technically 40k for the sub 4 second because that requires the 4k performance options and the 10speed… but still it’s a good buy. And the front looks a little better than the 17s as a bonus.

    • 0 avatar
      tekdemon

      Except it’s not $36K for the sub 4 second acceleration because that requires the magnetite suspension which has a special drag strip launch more for the rear end, as well as the ten speed automatic and the stickier tires in the performance pack. So you’re looking at over $7000 more in options to hit that time.

      Honestly with the handling improvements from magneride and power bump to the ecoboost the best deal is definitely on a base ecoboost model with the performance and suspension upgrade.

  • avatar
    chris724

    Just yesterday I was pricing out a 4 cylinder convertible. It came in just over $40K with the options I selected. Should I wait for an ’18, or try to get a better deal on the ’17? I am not flexible on the color or options.

    • 0 avatar
      TMA1

      Depends what color and options you want. Ford rotates three colors in and out, in addition to the standard palette. If you want Lightning Blue or Grabber Blue, head to your Ford dealer now, because they won’t be back for a few years.

      Personally I think the ’17s look better (though I haven’t seen the ’18 in person). I’d be scared off by new tech in the first year, unless I was leasing. The ’17s will soon be discounted heavily, whereas you’ll pay a premium for the refreshed model, unless you want to wait another year.

      • 0 avatar
        chris724

        Yeah, Lightning Blue was my choice. There was only one available within 60 miles in the Chicago area. Thanks for the advice! I may have to travel to find what I want.

        • 0 avatar
          TMA1

          Sure thing. I’m not sure when the ’17s stop production, so you might want to hurry. By the time I bought my ’16 last July, they had been out of production for a few weeks and it was hard finding the color I wanted. Ended up buying the car one state over.

          Looks like the ’18s go into production in early October, orders open up in July. So the ’17s may stay in production for a few months longer, but I’m not sure. I don’t see many Lightning Blue cars around.

        • 0 avatar
          TMA1

          Looks like I was wrong, Lightning Blue will be returning. There are quite a few more colors for ’18. Ford now has the build tool up on its website.

  • avatar
    Steve_S

    This way when you get at for $4k off sticker it’s really at invoice.

  • avatar
    stingray65

    This is just another example of CAFE based pricing. Lower the price of the 2.3 that gets better CAFE numbers, and raise the price of the comparatively thirsty V-8. I think BMW has also been increasing the price gap between the 2.0 liter turbo and 3.0 liter turbo for the same reason. The base engine in both cases is plenty potent, but a 4 just doesn’t have the sound and smoothness of a good straight six or V-8.

  • avatar
    AK

    Curious to see if the 2018 Ecoboost has the extended powerband of the 2017s modified with the Ford Performance tune.

    I wasn’t a fan of the Ecoboost when I test drove one but if they have a little extra shove AND don’t fall flat well before redline, that could be a compelling choice for well under $30k.

  • avatar
    FBS

    I expected a price increase but I didn’t expect Ford to bump the price two grand apparently with no changes to the interior.

  • avatar
    sportyaccordy

    Cars are expensive. With the SS dead, and the Camaro interior still feeling like a basement studio apartment (albeit now nicely furnished), what else is there? A stripper C7 starts where this thing ends obviously nowhere near equipped and everything else at the price point has an inferior powerplant. Silverado maybe?

    • 0 avatar
      Dan

      Factoring in the incentives on an ancient Chrysler and their non-existence here until sometime next year, these are going to start pretty close to where a 392 Challenger ends.

      I know where I’d want to be.

  • avatar
    ajla

    They could give the EB 400 hp and price it at $25K and I still wouldn’t want it.


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • Lie2me: Road trips are always fun, especially when the reward is a new car. Good goin’
  • Matt Foley: In the mid-90’s, I worked with a guy who flew out to Phoenix with $1000 cash and said he was...
  • bullnuke: Great story, Corey. Well done.
  • PrincipalDan: I wish you well. It would be hard for me to get the 6 when 8 is available.
  • brettc: Very nice, congratulations on your find! I’m considering doing this to pick up either a southern 500...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Contributors

  • Timothy Cain, Canada
  • Matthew Guy, Canada
  • Ronnie Schreiber, United States
  • Bozi Tatarevic, United States
  • Chris Tonn, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States
  • Mark Baruth, United States
  • Moderators

  • Adam Tonge, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States