If you are a Thunderbird fan. Check out the Thunderbird Playlist. We have video for every year Thunderbird ever produced. Click the link for the playlist here ---- > ruclips.net/p/PLz2M3b_orpr2eZoFKtONmqB3B3k1UAAkq
That is very possible. They are different enough to attract a following. I gave up try to figure out what was going to collectible in the future long ago.
I have a 2002 T-Bird with 24k miles on it, with a white hard top -- and as a younger generation, first of all I love this car, but secondly you'd be absolutely suprised how many people who are my age look at my car and are like "Wow! What kind of car is that?" since the body style is so adorable and unique. Definitely love my T-bird and am so happy to be an owner of the a retro bird!
As the owner of a torch red 04 premium T Bird I rather like the fact that there’s not too many manufactured my wife want a cool cruising convertible that wasn’t like every other Audi, BMW, Mercedes Etc to be unique. We get so many compliments on this car with many younger people asking “what is it”. It’s a great cruiser and fits nicely into my collection of fun cars! Thanks for the great historic information on this model run. It truly makes me appreciate the car that much more. 😊
@ like everything in life, you get what you pay for. A little research and finding the right low mileage original with one or two owners usually demands a premium but I e see what appears to be nice ones in $12-15K range
I absolutely loved my red 2002. It didn't look like any other car on the road and made a real statement. I've owned over 40 cars and this is the one that always made me feel special driving it. This automobile was all about style. That porthole top is unique and a signature Thunderbird design cue. It made good power and handled just fine. Granted, I live in an area with warm weather and smooth roads. Just my wife and I, so plenty of room for the two of us. The AJ V8 was designed well after Ford purchased Jaguar by the way, so don't worry about reliability if that's holding you back. The only issues that seem to crop up on well-used ones are rubber suspension bushings needing replacement and minor electrical problems. In a time when most people want an SUV or a giant pickup truck as a daily driver, the revived 2 seater T-Bird made and makes little economic sense from a business case perspective for Ford. Thank God there were enough enthusiasts still around in the company to make this very special car happen. A modern classic in my opinion.
I love all the retro stuff, including the hated ones. love these they look great. Also the prowler and SSR. I dont even understand the hate for any of these
I completely agree. I think they were not that popular for the same reason the first small bird didn't sell all that well. They were a two seater and that eliminated a lot of buyers.
Glad you enjoyed it and thanks for watching. There are a lot of these cars out there that are in great condition and with low miles so finding a nice today isn't that difficult. Best of luck.
Can't say I agree with you. You said this would be controversial and it is. I own a 2004 that I bought new. With the first year sales exceeding expectations, it was off to a good start. I think it hit its market perfectly. If it had been more powerful and not a grand tourer, it would have robbed sales from the Mustang. Some of the problems can be traced to Ford management. When leadership changed, the Thunderbird (in fact the entire Premier Automotive Group) became a victim to a common Ford practice known as "launch and forget." Yes, the Miata was cheaper, but it was not a V-8 and didn't have the luxury features. The Pontiac Solstice and Saturn Sky (also no V-8) were priced as high as the Thunderbird. In addition, the dealer markups on these were unconscionable. Cars that had a sticker price of 41K were being retailed for up to 70k. That certainly drove many potential customers away. Ford also cut corners. Considering the fact that this was a "halo" model, it didn't have features offered on even the cheapest Fords, such as an auto dimming rear view mirror, keyless entry, etc. Add to that the fact that Ford was incredibly inflexible with customers. I wanted a bronze one with a tan interior, but I didn't want a tan canvas top. I tried to special order with a black canvas top (not like they had a shortage of those) and they absolutely refused. I' m in South Florida, so maybe that's why the dealer premiums never went away. I finally found a new one in Valley Stream, NY that was actually a bit under sticker price. It wasn't the color combination I wanted (this one is Platinum with a black interior - I find black interiors common and boring), but it saved me over 20k compared with anything in my part of the country, so I bought it. I enjoy the car very much, but I do wish they had kept it all Ford. With the 4.6L V-8, it would be a far more reliable car. What pretty much doomed it to failure was that there was very little marketing effort (hardly ever saw an ad) and that outrageous dealer premium, not the concept of the car. Not all of us wanted an asphalt burning monster then or now. Would have been nice if they had followed this edition with a 4-seater, like they did back in the 50s.
Jim, Thank you sharing your opinion. They did hit the ground running with this car however I think my main point here is there are only so many buyers for this type of car and there's just not enough of those folks to keep Ford interested. Mazda only sells on average 7,500 MX-5's a year over the last 10 years. That kind of number wouldn't have impressed Ford. Being in South Florida the T-Bird makes much more sense for you than it does in the northeast where I live or really anywhere where it get's cold. I do agree the 4.6 would have swayed more buyers to take a look at the car. The 4.6 powered one of the prototypes so that could have happened. I'm glad to hear you enjoy the car. I might have one if not for the Jaguar engine. I have to admit that has kept me from buying one.
I would agree they are not bad cars. They are a nice touring car but they have a very shallow pool of potential buyers and that was the problem for Ford. A majority of those that wanted an updated 55 Thunderbird bought it in the first year of production. After that sales really fell off.
I bought a 2004 with 30k miles on it and put a Borla exhaust and K&N intake on her so it's probably got a bit over 300 hp now. I have out run many things/stayed with I thought would have run away from me and had it cruising at 130 (could have gone faster) and smooth as glass. I own a CTSV coupe and enjoy this bird with top down more than any other car I have owned and that is a large number. I replaced all the ignition coils and put in iridium plugs, new belts and replaced the bad suspension bushings so 10k invested there.
My late ex-Sister in law had one. It was a very nice and fun car to drive… when it ran. The 3.9 v8 had cooling system problems and EGR problems. Check engine lights were almost always on. I did enjoy driving it. Handled well, chassis felt solid…just not a reliable car…
@@TonysFordsandMustangs always thought had they just put the “lowly” 4.6 2V in there it would have been a much better car. If the could have shoehorned in a 4v 4.6 even better 😎
I loved just about every T-bird ever buit....except the 4 door versions...and this version. I would've liked to see Ford recreate the '61 thru '63 model years.
In my opinion this was and remains a car for the ages. Not an economic success but rather a car that did have considerable soul. Contrasted with today's styling the last T-Bird is a lovely car.
I think they should have made it more luxurious and kept it as an exclusive vehicle.Maybe collaborations with Coach, Kenneth Cole, Tory Burch, Ralph Lauren Would have been not only a good look but an highly short after vehicle especially in limited production.
Thanks for posting. Great video! As someone who loves my Retro-Bird and wouldn't give it up for the world I will grudgingly admit you are right about many of the reasons why it failed...it really should have had a small backseat. My only quibble with your video despire showing the concept cars on screen you made no mention of the retractable hardtop. I consider that the BIGGEST missed opportunity of the 11th generation. ANyone who ownes one and has wrangled with the 80 pound hardtop will tell you that. I don't know what they were thinking forgoing retracable roof when it appeared to work beautifully.
Thank you for watching! The top was most likely shelved do to cost concerns. That and the car would have almost completely lost the trunk. I'm sure it's quite the bear to wrestle that top onto that car. I'm glad you enjoy yours and I have considered them several times but the Jaguar in them always scares me away. I did consider putting the topic in the video but since it was never manufactured (only on one concept car) I decided to omit that. I try to keep the videos short and relevant to the production cars.
When I first got in the car at the dealer, back at introduction, and I couldn't get the seatback to lean back because of contact with the vertical panel behind the seat, I knew the car would not sell much. If you moved the seat forward to allow the seatback angle, you had no room for your legs. Packaging (and - to a degree - high price) doomed the car from the start.
If they had just bit the bullet and made the Thunderbird a long wheel-base Mustang derivative, then they could not only save tons of development time and money but raid the fun parts for special editions. At the very least not have used that stupid Jaguar V8.
They used the Lincoln LS or DEW platform because they were looking to make a touring car. I believe the Jaguar S-type is on that platform as well. That S-type was/is hard on the eyes. Ford ended up selling Jaguar to TATA in 2008. I think the lost a lot of money on that deal as well.
I'm a total Ford man, I only buy cars built by the Ford Motor Company, so I might be a bit biased. When it comes to the Thunderbird, it managed to capture us with every generation. When Ford introduced the 1955 model year, it was meant to be a Corvette fighter, and it did. The Thunderbird went on to create an entire new car category, The Personal Luxury Car. Of course GM and Chrysler rushed to introduce their version of the PLC. In 1963, GM introduced the Buick Riviera to directly complete with the Thunderbird. Chrysler introduced the Dodge Charger, then the Challenger and Cuda. They all sold well but none ever topped Thunderbird. I don't know why, Ford had the reputation to grow each model year. They did it with most of their models. They didn't just limit that strategy to the Thunderbird, but it's the best example. They did it with the Mustang, the Couger, and even the Falcon. We can't say it wasn't a good strategy because all the models mentioned above all sold well, but it was the Thunderbird that grew the most, starting with the 1958 4 seater, and finishing with the mid-70s. In 1969, the Thunderbird was built on the Lincoln Mark lll, and again, it worked. Both the Thunderbirds and the Marks sold great in those model years, they were both excellent cars. Each generation of the Thunderbird changed significantly with each model year, and yet they managed keep enough of Thunderbird's culture which keep the passion of previous model years heritage to keep the Thunderbird passion alive. I like that. As for me, I think the Thunderbird culture lived on with every generation, and it's still very much alive today.
I test drove a gray one when new...I am forgetting if a 2004 or 2005. It was quite nice, and I almost bought it. But I decided to wait a bit more to buy another car, and got a used 2002 Jaguar XK8 convertible in August 2006 that actually had some warranty left on it because the first owner bought the car in November 2002. That a whole other level of car in comparison, especially with how luxurious the interior was in the Jaguar. It was all black which is hard to come by and just a beautiful car. I don't regret the decision one bit, though I still like these last Thunderbirds. I would have wanted one in black with the white roof and black and white interior, but it bothered me that I couldn't get a white soft roof to go with the white hard roof.
I have one of the rarest Thunderbirds. 1960 Square bird. Three speed manual column shift. With only standard options. There were many birds made 58-60. But the amount with manual shift are a few. My family acquired the car from the original owner in 1974 and I still own it to this day. Beautiful Raven black red/white interior. I have been looking for any info about the car if you have any? I know in 1959 the inaugural Daytona 500 one won for a couple of days till the Pettys cried and took it away from Johnny Beauchamp.
Ford or any of the manufacturers didn't really look at the data as valuable back then. They didn't expect that people would hold onto these cars for 60+ years.
@@walleyechannel Demand drives market prices. Those that like these vehicles and are looking to buy one appreciate the low cost to buy one. The bigger birds are just not that popular however back in the day they were much more popular than the smaller earlier T-birds. I made a video about the smaller birds and how their sales numbers increased dramatically with the introduction of a rear seat. ruclips.net/video/cTC1CE071sU/видео.html
I’ve got a lovely back 2003 version and love it! What I don’t love is the scarcity of parts when something goes South-it’s a huge problem with these T-Birds.
Love the first commercial. "Get in honey, and drive off with the adult." Wow, 50th anniversary and they couldn't do anything but slap badging on it and a couple of other "nothing" changes.
I think I completely agree with the doomed to fail claim. I like and appreciate auto makers bringing back retro styling, particularly the 5th gen muscle cars of the big 3. These years just didn’t do it for me
A couple of problems with this generation; Ford throttled back on what the Thunderbird and also the Lincoln LS were allowed to make for power. They didn't want to "rob" sales from the Jag S-Type or the Jag XK which had larger displacement versions of the same motor. They also let both cars die on the vine. No updates and no advertisement. Another 50 hp and the LS and the Thunderbird would have been perceived different and sold different.
That's possible. I don't think the Thunderbird would have done much better even with the additional HP. It was marketed as touring car and the additional HP wouldn't have hurt but I doubt that could produced the sales numbers needed to keep it going.
I like the late 90s early 2000s “retro flashback” cars actually and I'm not even a baby boomer I'm a late millennial almost gen Z. The ONLY retro flashback car I don't like the look of is the PT Crusier. But the others look great. They look much better than modern cars. I think they should bring back 50s styling again. I think if they made EVs look like 50s-60s concept cars they'd probably sell a lot better. Retrofuturism is very popular.
I’m jealous I can’t have one :( I really want an early 2000s thunderbird but I’m in Australia and we don’t sell any of the modern ones just the old School ones :(
@@TonysFordsandMustangs what I mean is I think it’s just time consuming expensive and some rules say it has to 25yrs or older to be LHD and the only LHD cars in Australia are 1940s-1970s cars
@@TonysFordsandMustangs all 2000s cars are right hand drive. Because it’s law to convert them unless it’s 25 yrs or older I don’t know if you can get away with it by not telling them but :/ so I don’t know if Impoering a newer LHD car and then just flying under the radar will work :/
@@Jo_Wardy It would be difficult to convert one of these cars to Left hand drive as they were never meant to export overseas. It would think it could be done but it would be difficult.
I loved the look of this car, just as I loved the original Thunderbird. I never liked the way carmakers kept making beautiful sporty coupes bigger and bigger. This Thunderbird was awfully expensive… but exceeded sales targets in the first year.
Thank you for watching and for your comment. This is a good looking car and many original buyer have tucked these away and saved them these just like the first generation. There are almost always nice examples to be had in the used car marketplace.
Ford should have called the Taurus Thunderbird and it would have sold to beat the band.... they raced the Taurus and racing was key to sales of the TBird in the 80s to mid 90s.
@@TonysFordsandMustangs Well, they did market the Pontiac Solstice and Saturn Sky (both 2 seaters) at the same and at almost the same price, but without a V-8, so there must have been some interest in 2 seaters.
@@johnmick9457 Those cars were sold in the 80's when people bought actual cars. By 2000's the shift to the SUV's was full steam ahead. Ford only builds one car today. I dislike SUV's but that is the current market place.
My wife wants one of these last generation two seat Thunderbirds and we picked one out from a used car dealer. But now they are 20 years old. Our bank wouldn't loan on it. So cash sale or stay home. We bought a Mitsubishi Eclipse convertible.
Larry you tell the wife know there are plenty of them out there. Most are low mileage and well taken care of cars. Maybe the next time around? Thanks for watching!
Ford lost an opportunity by under-designing this model. As a fan of the tri-fives, this could have been so much more. A little less plastic, and a bit more ‘55-56-57 in the design would have been exciting. For example, include the exact tail lights of the ‘56, or hooded headlights, or interior metal….even a continental trunk bump…something. I was hoping. I agree with your description.
I think there just wasn't enough buyers in the marketplace for a manufacturer like Ford to build this car. They require a vehicle to sell 25K plus a year in order to continue to manufacture it. Even if they had been a bit more retro with the design I don't think they could have sold it in the numbers they required for it to continue. It is unfortunate. Thanks for watching!
Cars are wonderfully personal. The reason I buy a car is different from why everyone else buys a car…and vice versa. We all have different needs and therefore need different cars. As an enthusiast, I’ve become very concerned about the homogenization of the automobile since the turn of the 21st century. The auto makers are for profit enterprises and they are going to make the decisions that make the most financial sense. No, the 11th gen Thunderbird was not and is not a car for everyone. I don’t see that as a problem…when you look at what’s being built, marketed and sold as an automobile now…they are transportation appliances with very little character, quirks or nuances. Ford makes ONE car now…the Mustang because they can capture more sales with SUVs, Crossovers, Pickups and Vans. The world needs more individualism in its cars. The world needs more Thunderbirds but, they don’t make money so, we won’t see much of them.
If Ford would have used the 5.0 and made them faster they would have sold more. I have the 02 whisper white version love the car but would be better if it was faster
I always thought the interiors were very cheap looking & had no class compared to the interiors of any of the first half dozen or more generations. The look was a good start & like you said at the first sign of the sales dip or at least knowing the history of the car that the 2 seater was a temporary jump off for something with more seats & performance to come next, then like history, sales will repeat & grow.🤔
Thanks for watching. I'm glad you like the video and I do the best I can. That pronunciation issue has kept me from buying one. It's unnatural to me. :)
It made no sense that the THUNDERBIRD didn’t have a serious High-Performance engine..especially since the much-cheaper($10,000 LESS!!) Mustang had MORE AVAILABLE POWER!! It should’ve been THE OTHER WAY AROUND !!! FORD took all of the THUNDER out of the BIRD…and then stood back and WATCHED incredulously…wondering WHY IT DIDN’T SELL !!
The rear styling is beautiful on these cars. It's the front styling that looks (IMHO ) bad. The 1955-1957 thunderbird had hooded headlamps, this car should have too.
I think you're looking at it from a marketing investors standpoint. A enthusiastic point of view is beauty and for me rarity. COPO Cameron was not volume related, But price one!
I'm looking at it from Ford's perspective yes. It wasn't a good return on investment for the company. There are plenty of owners of these cars that love them and that's great. Ford should have known there was limited amount of buyers for this car. Their own research in the late 50's told them this but IF you got a car you enjoy that's awesome.
The Ford product planners torpedoed this car before it was ever built. Dealers took deposits two years before the cars were delivered only to find out it had a bottom-level Mustang motor. And the "build quality" was far from Continental Mark II standards.
It has too much 90's jelly bean look. Should've had more bold/square fenders and 4 doors. This definitely gave ford a feel on how people would react to the s197 design. Not 100% to the original but a more modern retro look.
If they went with the 4.6 they could be modified, swapped, had an aftermarket. Instead, no one knows or cares what this engine is from. It's not that kind of car, well nothing is, until people do it. What no one modified 50's American cars? There's retro and there's making a car for the elderly.
I agree a 4.6 in there would have been a much better choice. Still there was a limited pool of buyers for this car and that ultimately is what killed it.
The demographics didn't make sense, the "I always wanted those 55s' when I was 16 years-old & they first came out..." which meant your target-buyers were 65 + years old?
That's true and that is who bought most of these cars. You can find plenty of these cars in the used car market with low miles as many are rarely driven. Ford only wants to build cars that can be sold in high numbers and they should have known from the first time around that a two seater was never going to do that for them.
@@TonysFordsandMustangs This generation of the T-bird wasn't that bad...but some key "stylistics" conspired to utterly ruin the looks. I see but only two visuals that "wreck the look", ...that silly porthole window on the hardtop...leave the thing in the past where it belongs. Since it is barely functional & more of a style statement anyway, virtually any other shape would "look better". Number two, those goofy "chrome eyelids" on the headlights....just what were they thinking? Third, more power....with the thing past 3700 lbs, to even remotely being taken seriously...it should have cleared 400 HP at the minimum.
@@AndieBlack13 The styling touches happened because the retro look was in fashion at the time. That's the only reason this car was built anyway and as to the powerplant Ford was trying to work in their recent acquisitions. I cover a lot of that in this video: ruclips.net/video/GBs81F4u1s8/видео.html
![Noob To Max With DRAGON REWORK In Blox Fruits [FULL MOVIE]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/LnBMOinoOvA/mqdefault.jpg)
If you are a Thunderbird fan. Check out the Thunderbird Playlist. We have video for every year Thunderbird ever produced.
Click the link for the playlist here ---- > ruclips.net/p/PLz2M3b_orpr2eZoFKtONmqB3B3k1UAAkq
These like Prowler and Chevy SSR will be sought after future classics.
That is very possible. They are different enough to attract a following. I gave up try to figure out what was going to collectible in the future long ago.
I have an '05 and enjoy driving it. No issues. It's def a cruiser, which was its purpose. Beautiful car.
You have to love the styling to own one. There just wasn't enough people that did and could afford it for it to sell 25K per year
I have a 2002 T-Bird with 24k miles on it, with a white hard top -- and as a younger generation, first of all I love this car, but secondly you'd be absolutely suprised how many people who are my age look at my car and are like "Wow! What kind of car is that?" since the body style is so adorable and unique. Definitely love my T-bird and am so happy to be an owner of the a retro bird!
Glad to hear you are enjoying your car and thank you for watching and sharing your experience with it.
As the owner of a torch red 04 premium T Bird I rather like the fact that there’s not too many manufactured my wife want a cool cruising convertible that wasn’t like every other Audi, BMW, Mercedes Etc to be unique. We get so many compliments on this car with many younger people asking “what is it”. It’s a great cruiser and fits nicely into my collection of fun cars! Thanks for the great historic information on this model run. It truly makes me appreciate the car that much more. 😊
As you should. Thanks for watching and hang on to that T-Bird!
@@louisappel6884 Are they overpriced?
@ like everything in life, you get what you pay for. A little research and finding the right low mileage original with one or two owners usually demands a premium but I e see what appears to be nice ones in $12-15K range
I absolutely loved my red 2002. It didn't look like any other car on the road and made a real statement. I've owned over 40 cars and this is the one that always made me feel special driving it. This automobile was all about style. That porthole top is unique and a signature Thunderbird design cue. It made good power and handled just fine. Granted, I live in an area with warm weather and smooth roads. Just my wife and I, so plenty of room for the two of us. The AJ V8 was designed well after Ford purchased Jaguar by the way, so don't worry about reliability if that's holding you back. The only issues that seem to crop up on well-used ones are rubber suspension bushings needing replacement and minor electrical problems. In a time when most people want an SUV or a giant pickup truck as a daily driver, the revived 2 seater T-Bird made and makes little economic sense from a business case perspective for Ford. Thank God there were enough enthusiasts still around in the company to make this very special car happen. A modern classic in my opinion.
Thank you for sharing your experience. It is appreciated.
I love all the retro stuff, including the hated ones. love these they look great. Also the prowler and SSR. I dont even understand the hate for any of these
I completely agree. I think they were not that popular for the same reason the first small bird didn't sell all that well. They were a two seater and that eliminated a lot of buyers.
Love your content Tony! Great stuff.
Thank you very much! I'm glad you enjoy the channel.
Thank you for this video. I loved this generation of T-birds when introduced; loved the retro 50's look. Could never afford one but hope to one day.
Glad you enjoyed it and thanks for watching. There are a lot of these cars out there that are in great condition and with low miles so finding a nice today isn't that difficult. Best of luck.
Can't say I agree with you. You said this would be controversial and it is. I own a 2004 that I bought new. With the first year sales exceeding expectations, it was off to a good start. I think it hit its market perfectly. If it had been more powerful and not a grand tourer, it would have robbed sales from the Mustang. Some of the problems can be traced to Ford management. When leadership changed, the Thunderbird (in fact the entire Premier Automotive Group) became a victim to a common Ford practice known as "launch and forget." Yes, the Miata was cheaper, but it was not a V-8 and didn't have the luxury features. The Pontiac Solstice and Saturn Sky (also no V-8) were priced as high as the Thunderbird. In addition, the dealer markups on these were unconscionable. Cars that had a sticker price of 41K were being retailed for up to 70k. That certainly drove many potential customers away. Ford also cut corners. Considering the fact that this was a "halo" model, it didn't have features offered on even the cheapest Fords, such as an auto dimming rear view mirror, keyless entry, etc. Add to that the fact that Ford was incredibly inflexible with customers. I wanted a bronze one with a tan interior, but I didn't want a tan canvas top. I tried to special order with a black canvas top (not like they had a shortage of those) and they absolutely refused. I' m in South Florida, so maybe that's why the dealer premiums never went away. I finally found a new one in Valley Stream, NY that was actually a bit under sticker price. It wasn't the color combination I wanted (this one is Platinum with a black interior - I find black interiors common and boring), but it saved me over 20k compared with anything in my part of the country, so I bought it. I enjoy the car very much, but I do wish they had kept it all Ford. With the 4.6L V-8, it would be a far more reliable car. What pretty much doomed it to failure was that there was very little marketing effort (hardly ever saw an ad) and that outrageous dealer premium, not the concept of the car. Not all of us wanted an asphalt burning monster then or now. Would have been nice if they had followed this edition with a 4-seater, like they did back in the 50s.
Jim, Thank you sharing your opinion. They did hit the ground running with this car however I think my main point here is there are only so many buyers for this type of car and there's just not enough of those folks to keep Ford interested. Mazda only sells on average 7,500 MX-5's a year over the last 10 years. That kind of number wouldn't have impressed Ford. Being in South Florida the T-Bird makes much more sense for you than it does in the northeast where I live or really anywhere where it get's cold. I do agree the 4.6 would have swayed more buyers to take a look at the car. The 4.6 powered one of the prototypes so that could have happened. I'm glad to hear you enjoy the car. I might have one if not for the Jaguar engine. I have to admit that has kept me from buying one.
My 02 Whisper white turns heads I get so many comments on it. These cars are not for everyone but they are not as bad as alot of people say they are.
I would agree they are not bad cars. They are a nice touring car but they have a very shallow pool of potential buyers and that was the problem for Ford. A majority of those that wanted an updated 55 Thunderbird bought it in the first year of production. After that sales really fell off.
I have a 2003 with 32,000 miles. It is Blue and I love it! Bought it new.
Very cool! Thank you for sharing your thoughts on this car and for watching.
I bought a 2004 with 30k miles on it and put a Borla exhaust and K&N intake on her so it's probably got a bit over 300 hp now. I have out run many things/stayed with I thought would have run away from me and had it cruising at 130 (could have gone faster) and smooth as glass. I own a CTSV coupe and enjoy this bird with top down more than any other car I have owned and that is a large number. I replaced all the ignition coils and put in iridium plugs, new belts and replaced the bad suspension bushings so 10k invested there.
Sounds like a great car! Thanks for sharing your experience.
i have a 2003 and love it 36000 miles
I still like the look of these, wanted one when they first came out.
You are not alone. A lot of people wanted one. The issue was for most people it didn't make a lot of sense to buy one so they didn't.
I've always liked the way they looked. I've never owned one but I would definitely buy one if I had the money
My late ex-Sister in law had one. It was a very nice and fun car to drive…
when it ran. The 3.9 v8 had cooling system problems and EGR problems. Check engine lights were almost always on.
I did enjoy driving it. Handled well, chassis felt solid…just not a reliable car…
Well it was part Jaguar and that may have had something to do with that.
@@TonysFordsandMustangs always thought had they just put the “lowly” 4.6 2V in there it would have been a much better car. If the could have shoehorned in a 4v 4.6 even better 😎
@bradbradley353 Agreed though the legendary 5.0L Coyote V8 in it would've made this Retro T-Bird into a powerful beast as well.
I loved just about every T-bird ever buit....except the 4 door versions...and this version. I would've liked to see Ford recreate the '61 thru '63 model years.
@@ADF-fe7fv Very nice cars with that retro look..
Maybe overpriced, but I still like them
In my opinion this was and remains a car for the ages. Not an economic success but rather a car that did have considerable soul. Contrasted with today's styling the last T-Bird is a lovely car.
I think they should have made it more luxurious and kept it as an exclusive vehicle.Maybe collaborations with Coach, Kenneth Cole, Tory Burch, Ralph Lauren
Would have been not only a good look but an highly short after vehicle especially in limited production.
Thanks for posting. Great video! As someone who loves my Retro-Bird and wouldn't give it up for the world I will grudgingly admit you are right about many of the reasons why it failed...it really should have had a small backseat. My only quibble with your video despire showing the concept cars on screen you made no mention of the retractable hardtop. I consider that the BIGGEST missed opportunity of the 11th generation. ANyone who ownes one and has wrangled with the 80 pound hardtop will tell you that. I don't know what they were thinking forgoing retracable roof when it appeared to work beautifully.
Thank you for watching! The top was most likely shelved do to cost concerns. That and the car would have almost completely lost the trunk. I'm sure it's quite the bear to wrestle that top onto that car. I'm glad you enjoy yours and I have considered them several times but the Jaguar in them always scares me away. I did consider putting the topic in the video but since it was never manufactured (only on one concept car) I decided to omit that. I try to keep the videos short and relevant to the production cars.
@@TonysFordsandMustangs LOL i'd absoluely give up the trunk space for the covienece! All the best.
Nice ‘53 Corvette you’ve got there.
When I first got in the car at the dealer, back at introduction, and I couldn't get the seatback to lean back because of contact with the vertical panel behind the seat, I knew the car would not sell much. If you moved the seat forward to allow the seatback angle, you had no room for your legs. Packaging (and - to a degree - high price) doomed the car from the start.
If they had just bit the bullet and made the Thunderbird a long wheel-base Mustang derivative, then they could not only save tons of development time and money but raid the fun parts for special editions. At the very least not have used that stupid Jaguar V8.
They used the Lincoln LS or DEW platform because they were looking to make a touring car. I believe the Jaguar S-type is on that platform as well. That S-type was/is hard on the eyes. Ford ended up selling Jaguar to TATA in 2008. I think the lost a lot of money on that deal as well.
I'm a total Ford man, I only buy cars built by the Ford Motor Company, so I might be a bit biased. When it comes to the Thunderbird, it managed to capture us with every generation. When Ford introduced the 1955 model year, it was meant to be a Corvette fighter, and it did. The Thunderbird went on to create an entire new car category, The Personal Luxury Car. Of course GM and Chrysler rushed to introduce their version of the PLC. In 1963, GM introduced the Buick Riviera to directly complete with the Thunderbird. Chrysler introduced the Dodge Charger, then the Challenger and Cuda. They all sold well but none ever topped Thunderbird. I don't know why, Ford had the reputation to grow each model year. They did it with most of their models. They didn't just limit that strategy to the Thunderbird, but it's the best example. They did it with the Mustang, the Couger, and even the Falcon. We can't say it wasn't a good strategy because all the models mentioned above all sold well, but it was the Thunderbird that grew the most, starting with the 1958 4 seater, and finishing with the mid-70s. In 1969, the Thunderbird was built on the Lincoln Mark lll, and again, it worked. Both the Thunderbirds and the Marks sold great in those model years, they were both excellent cars. Each generation of the Thunderbird changed significantly with each model year, and yet they managed keep enough of Thunderbird's culture which keep the passion of previous model years heritage to keep the Thunderbird passion alive. I like that. As for me, I think the Thunderbird culture lived on with every generation, and it's still very much alive today.
I test drove a gray one when new...I am forgetting if a 2004 or 2005. It was quite nice, and I almost bought it. But I decided to wait a bit more to buy another car, and got a used 2002 Jaguar XK8 convertible in August 2006 that actually had some warranty left on it because the first owner bought the car in November 2002. That a whole other level of car in comparison, especially with how luxurious the interior was in the Jaguar. It was all black which is hard to come by and just a beautiful car. I don't regret the decision one bit, though I still like these last Thunderbirds. I would have wanted one in black with the white roof and black and white interior, but it bothered me that I couldn't get a white soft roof to go with the white hard roof.
Thanks for sharing your experience. It is appreciated!
I have one of the rarest Thunderbirds. 1960 Square bird. Three speed manual column shift. With only standard options. There were many birds made 58-60. But the amount with manual shift are a few. My family acquired the car from the original owner in 1974 and I still own it to this day. Beautiful Raven black red/white interior. I have been looking for any info about the car if you have any? I know in 1959 the inaugural Daytona 500 one won for a couple of days till the Pettys cried and took it away from Johnny Beauchamp.
I do not have any additional info for you. Anything from 67 up is easy to find through Kevin Marti and he has info from 62 to 66.
@@TonysFordsandMustangs that’s what I have found out. Seems their was a fire? In one of the plants and allot of data was lost?
Ford or any of the manufacturers didn't really look at the data as valuable back then. They didn't expect that people would hold onto these cars for 60+ years.
@@TonysFordsandMustangs I just don’t understand why old Fords don’t bring any money but same year Chevy are six figures
@@walleyechannel Demand drives market prices. Those that like these vehicles and are looking to buy one appreciate the low cost to buy one. The bigger birds are just not that popular however back in the day they were much more popular than the smaller earlier T-birds. I made a video about the smaller birds and how their sales numbers increased dramatically with the introduction of a rear seat. ruclips.net/video/cTC1CE071sU/видео.html
I’ve got a lovely back 2003 version and love it! What I don’t love is the scarcity of parts when something goes South-it’s a huge problem with these T-Birds.
If you get rid of the portholes and keep it solid, this car looks pretty damn good with that top on.
Love the first commercial. "Get in honey, and drive off with the adult." Wow, 50th anniversary and they couldn't do anything but slap badging on it and a couple of other "nothing" changes.
Good video thank you.
Glad you enjoyed it and thanks for watching!
I think I completely agree with the doomed to fail claim. I like and appreciate auto makers bringing back retro styling, particularly the 5th gen muscle cars of the big 3. These years just didn’t do it for me
A couple of problems with this generation; Ford throttled back on what the Thunderbird and also the Lincoln LS were allowed to make for power. They didn't want to "rob" sales from the Jag S-Type or the Jag XK which had larger displacement versions of the same motor. They also let both cars die on the vine. No updates and no advertisement. Another 50 hp and the LS and the Thunderbird would have been perceived different and sold different.
That's possible. I don't think the Thunderbird would have done much better even with the additional HP. It was marketed as touring car and the additional HP wouldn't have hurt but I doubt that could produced the sales numbers needed to keep it going.
I like the late 90s early 2000s “retro flashback” cars actually and I'm not even a baby boomer I'm a late millennial almost gen Z.
The ONLY retro flashback car I don't like the look of is the PT Crusier.
But the others look great. They look much better than modern cars.
I think they should bring back 50s styling again.
I think if they made EVs look like 50s-60s concept cars they'd probably sell a lot better.
Retrofuturism is very popular.
I can’t disagree. I’m gen X and there are several that I’m a fan of as well. Thanks for watching and for your comment.
@@TonysFordsandMustangs I even like the look of the SSR.
@@WaveRusher I can’t get there brother. They were way to heavy
@@TonysFordsandMustangs I just meant the styling
I’m jealous I can’t have one :( I really want an early 2000s thunderbird but I’m in Australia and we don’t sell any of the modern ones just the old
School ones :(
So you can't import a car from the early 2000's in Australia? I know every country has its own rules on classic imports.
@@TonysFordsandMustangs what I mean is I think it’s just time consuming expensive and some rules say it has to 25yrs or older to be LHD and the only LHD cars in Australia are 1940s-1970s cars
@@TonysFordsandMustangs all 2000s cars are right hand drive. Because it’s law to convert them unless it’s 25 yrs or older I don’t know if you can get away with it by not telling them but :/ so I don’t know if Impoering a newer LHD car and then just flying under the radar will work :/
@@Jo_Wardy It would be difficult to convert one of these cars to Left hand drive as they were never meant to export overseas. It would think it could be done but it would be difficult.
I loved the look of this car, just as I loved the original Thunderbird. I never liked the way carmakers kept making beautiful sporty coupes bigger and bigger. This Thunderbird was awfully expensive… but exceeded sales targets in the first year.
Thank you for watching and for your comment. This is a good looking car and many original buyer have tucked these away and saved them these just like the first generation. There are almost always nice examples to be had in the used car marketplace.
Ford should have called the Taurus Thunderbird and it would have sold to beat the band.... they raced the Taurus and racing was key to sales of the TBird in the 80s to mid 90s.
I have an 03..its an awsome trouble free car............... 71,000 miles
Awesome to hear! Thanks for sharing your experience!
Beatifull 😮
You must admit, the design, at least to me, had aged well. I'm sure Cadillac still regrets the Allanté, which looks extremely 80s in a 90s model...
My wife loves the cars. I have looked buying one several times but the Jaguar engine has kept me from buying one.
@@TonysFordsandMustangs Imagine a retro Bird with a Coyote?? 💯👍
The car might have been a winner with a better engine and a cheaper price.
That's very possible however there are very few people actively looking for a two seater.
@@TonysFordsandMustangs Well, they did market the Pontiac Solstice and Saturn Sky (both 2 seaters) at the same and at almost the same price, but without a V-8, so there must have been some interest in 2 seaters.
@@TonysFordsandMustangs IDK Ford sold 263,000 EXP and LN7 there was a market for a cheap sporty 2 seater.
@@johnmick9457 Those cars were sold in the 80's when people bought actual cars. By 2000's the shift to the SUV's was full steam ahead. Ford only builds one car today. I dislike SUV's but that is the current market place.
@@TonysFordsandMustangs Really? I guess Mazda doesn't know what it's doing lol, but they have sold over 1 million Miata's
An option of a manual transmission and a supercharger would've gone a long way in attracting more people.
2003 Thunderbird I need a ECM switch and location
My wife wants one of these last generation two seat Thunderbirds and we picked one out from a used car dealer. But now they are 20 years old. Our bank wouldn't loan on it. So cash sale or stay home. We bought a Mitsubishi Eclipse convertible.
Larry you tell the wife know there are plenty of them out there. Most are low mileage and well taken care of cars. Maybe the next time around? Thanks for watching!
Ford lost an opportunity by under-designing this model. As a fan of the tri-fives, this could have been so much more. A little less plastic, and a bit more ‘55-56-57 in the design would have been exciting. For example, include the exact tail lights of the ‘56, or hooded headlights, or interior metal….even a continental trunk bump…something. I was hoping. I agree with your description.
I think there just wasn't enough buyers in the marketplace for a manufacturer like Ford to build this car. They require a vehicle to sell 25K plus a year in order to continue to manufacture it. Even if they had been a bit more retro with the design I don't think they could have sold it in the numbers they required for it to continue. It is unfortunate. Thanks for watching!
Cars are wonderfully personal. The reason I buy a car is different from why everyone else buys a car…and vice versa. We all have different needs and therefore need different cars. As an enthusiast, I’ve become very concerned about the homogenization of the automobile since the turn of the 21st century. The auto makers are for profit enterprises and they are going to make the decisions that make the most financial sense. No, the 11th gen Thunderbird was not and is not a car for everyone. I don’t see that as a problem…when you look at what’s being built, marketed and sold as an automobile now…they are transportation appliances with very little character, quirks or nuances. Ford makes ONE car now…the Mustang because they can capture more sales with SUVs, Crossovers, Pickups and Vans. The world needs more individualism in its cars. The world needs more Thunderbirds but, they don’t make money so, we won’t see much of them.
If Ford would have used the 5.0 and made them faster they would have sold more. I have the 02 whisper white version love the car but would be better if it was faster
I absolutely agree however I don't think the 5.0 would have fit due to the size of the heads.
I always thought the interiors were very cheap looking & had no class compared to the interiors of any of the first half dozen or more generations. The look was a good start & like you said at the first sign of the sales dip or at least knowing the history of the car that the 2 seater was a temporary jump off for something with more seats & performance to come next, then like history, sales will repeat & grow.🤔
Vom on Brother .
It's pronounced ( JAG-WUAR )
NOT Jagwire.
Love the video.
Love that Neiman Marcus edition
Thanks for watching. I'm glad you like the video and I do the best I can. That pronunciation issue has kept me from buying one. It's unnatural to me. :)
I've yet to see a model kit of this generation T Bird.... I'm guessing that us because of it's lsck of popularity...
They did have replica cars in 1:24 scale available to the owners of some of the special editions.
@@TonysFordsandMustangs There were quite a few die cast replicas. I have several in various scales.
It made no sense that the THUNDERBIRD didn’t have a serious High-Performance engine..especially since the much-cheaper($10,000 LESS!!) Mustang had MORE AVAILABLE POWER!!
It should’ve been THE OTHER WAY AROUND !!!
FORD took all of the THUNDER out of the BIRD…and then stood back and WATCHED incredulously…wondering WHY IT DIDN’T SELL !!
The going back to the 80's the Mustang has always had a little more power than the Thunderbird. Someone at Ford wanted it that way.
The rear styling is beautiful on these cars.
It's the front styling that looks (IMHO ) bad. The 1955-1957 thunderbird had hooded headlamps, this car should have too.
To each his own. That hooded headlamp was attempted in the headlight bucket itself. I think those were excluded do the aero concerns.
I think you're looking at it from a marketing investors standpoint. A enthusiastic point of view is beauty and for me rarity. COPO Cameron was not volume related, But price one!
I'm looking at it from Ford's perspective yes. It wasn't a good return on investment for the company. There are plenty of owners of these cars that love them and that's great. Ford should have known there was limited amount of buyers for this car. Their own research in the late 50's told them this but IF you got a car you enjoy that's awesome.
The Ford product planners torpedoed this car before it was ever built. Dealers took deposits two years before the cars were delivered only to find out it had a bottom-level Mustang motor. And the "build quality" was far from Continental Mark II standards.
It has too much 90's jelly bean look. Should've had more bold/square fenders and 4 doors. This definitely gave ford a feel on how people would react to the s197 design. Not 100% to the original but a more modern retro look.
I don't think the design was the issue. I think the potential buyer pool was too small and it was expensive for what it was.
Capriiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
Saturday!
It’s ok , driven my sister-in-law’s a few times. Cock pit is cramped and never feel comfortable driving it.
That's my conclusion as well. It OK but ok wasn't going to cut it for that price point in a two seater.
Looks more like a '53 Corvette.
If they went with the 4.6 they could be modified, swapped, had an aftermarket. Instead, no one knows or cares what this engine is from. It's not that kind of car, well nothing is, until people do it. What no one modified 50's American cars? There's retro and there's making a car for the elderly.
I agree a 4.6 in there would have been a much better choice. Still there was a limited pool of buyers for this car and that ultimately is what killed it.
The demographics didn't make sense, the "I always wanted those 55s' when I was 16 years-old & they first came out..." which meant your target-buyers were 65 + years old?
That's true and that is who bought most of these cars. You can find plenty of these cars in the used car market with low miles as many are rarely driven. Ford only wants to build cars that can be sold in high numbers and they should have known from the first time around that a two seater was never going to do that for them.
@@TonysFordsandMustangs This generation of the T-bird wasn't that bad...but some key "stylistics" conspired to utterly ruin the looks. I see but only two visuals that "wreck the look", ...that silly porthole window on the hardtop...leave the thing in the past where it belongs. Since it is barely functional & more of a style statement anyway, virtually any other shape would "look better". Number two, those goofy "chrome eyelids" on the headlights....just what were they thinking? Third, more power....with the thing past 3700 lbs, to even remotely being taken seriously...it should have cleared 400 HP at the minimum.
@@AndieBlack13 The styling touches happened because the retro look was in fashion at the time. That's the only reason this car was built anyway and as to the powerplant Ford was trying to work in their recent acquisitions. I cover a lot of that in this video: ruclips.net/video/GBs81F4u1s8/видео.html
it looks like a gta car
So its not 100% a FORD. Just the body
There’s more Ford than just the body but there is the jag engine
@@TonysFordsandMustangs Still reasonable prices on things like air filters, etc?
@@TonysFordsandMustangs Do you think they are overpriced because of just the looks?
It looks like most of your viewers have a little bit more knowledge about the bird than you do.