It’s model year changeover time for America’s pony car, which is often at least mildly exciting given the sheer fanbase of the Ford Mustang. Alright, so it’s not like winning the lottery, but it is a bit like getting socks for Christmas as an adult. Normally, this is a good time, but depending on your preferred trim level, one alteration of standard equipment might make you feel shortchanged.
First up, you can get some fantastic new colors for 2026. Orange Fury—which is really more of a yellow—is back on the menu, and Adriatic Blue absolutely rules. At the same time, the ’80s-inspired FX package is fun, and it’s nice to know that Ford’s holding the line on pricing for the performance package. However, if you select the Ecoboost Premium or GT Premium trims and scroll down, you’ll notice something’s missing.
Yep, you’re looking at a Mustang GT Premium without the single-frame infotainment screen. For 2026, the big showpiece of the S650 Mustang’s interior is no longer standard equipment on those trims. Instead, the cheapest way to get it is as a $1,000 standalone option, or you can get it bundled in with the High Series package that costs $2,900 on a Mustang GT Premium and $3,000 on a Mustang Ecoboost Premium. Already, this doesn’t sound like a great deal, and that’s before you realize this option doesn’t really give you a bigger or better screen.
See, all new Mustang models feature a 12.4-inch digital gauge cluster and a 13.2-inch infotainment touchscreen, regardless of whether you pop for the conjoined screens or not. Both setups feature fantastic black levels and both setups are responsive, meaning the $1,000 premium for the “Magnesium Framed Panoramic Curved Display” doesn’t actually buy you additional screen. It just buys you bezel, and while a bit of magnesium and a bit of extra glass sounds nice, there’s no benefit over separate screens.
Having tried both screen setups, the premium option serves no functional purpose, is purely aesthetic, and could actually make component replacement more expensive in the rare event of the screen acquiring damage. Instead of replacing either the digital cluster or the infotainment screen, you’d be replacing a giant screen array.
Regardless, there are two ways of looking at this upcharge. The first is that the curved display costs $1,000 and the active valved exhaust costs $1,595, so the valved mufflers really only run you $595. Car person math. The second is that a 2026 Mustang GT Premium costs the same as the 2025 model, so Ford’s really just yoinked the big bezel out to give you less for your money. While cost management is something every automaker does, it would be much appreciated if skipping the fancy display saved you more than just the difference of inflation.
Of course, the Mustang Dark Horse gets the single-frame display as standard, and the non-Premium Ecoboost and GT trims never got it in the first place, so maybe those trims are where the real value’s at. Still, if you want a Mustang Ecoboost or GT with leather, be prepared to pay a little bit more if you also want the single-frame screen setup.
Top graphic image: Ford
Ford is up to their usual bullshit, it appears. My MIL who ordered a Maverick got all flustered because she got an email about 2026 changes. Most didn’t effect her, as she’s all in on the hybrid, but on the Lariat trim the power sliding rear window isn’t standard now, it’s a $350 option. They also took away the Desert Tan color, as well.
They did add a light blue that’s nice, but she went with a dark gray. It was the bright blue but she didn’t want “everyone in town to know where she was.”
I’m just hoping Ford “Quality” is decent for 2026. I’m not holding my breath, tho.
This article is further proof that resigning from my 15 year career at a Ford dealership was a wise move.
I used to believe in Ford, but now I just feel like they’re lost in the recall wilderness. Overall, I think the auto industry as a whole is going down the tubes with its unsustainable pricing and over-complicated offerings.
Too many manufacturers are going premium, which will result in fewer of their vehicles on the road and more old clunkers on the road because people aren’t interested, motivated, and/or able to buy new cars.
I’m looking at these and I’m not even sure which one is supposed to be more expensive?
Can I get a discount if I opt for no screens at all? Because it looks really stupid, especially in a Mustang.
I’d pay them the extra thousand bucks — maybe even a little more — for the “no screens-analog gauges-real buttons” package.
Complaining that the touchscreens and infotainment goodies aren’t enough for you is almost like simply admitting you don’t like driving.
100% the old analog dash looked great, this new dash lost all personality and why I will not consider the current Gen
It’s federal law that you have to have a backup camera and thus a screen.
This was a very confusing article to read. I’m still not sure if I understood the prices, the options and the screen differences. Is it just a bezel or a unified large screen?
It’s like the author is assuming we are all familiar with the Mustang’s option list
Functionally the screens are exactly the same and in the same spots. You can either get them as two separate screens or pay an extra $1,000 to get them packaged in a single frame so they look like one big screen.
Kudos to Ford making the accessory switches below the center dash vents at a quick glance, to me seeing it on a phone screen, looking like a 70’s AM radio tuning dial and station screen
I’ll see myself out…
It’s really odd that they would have two different setups. I thought car manufacturing was all about streamlining costs by having as many shared components as possible.
They package them differently and charge an extra $1000 for something that likely costs $10 – $20. This is where the small margins in the auto industry are made.
You can either have some people pay stupid amounts for options and higher trims that don’t actually cost the manufacture more or we can cut trims and options and raise the price of the vehicle across the board.
Options and high trims pay for base models that sell at no or negative margins. The big spenders are subsidizing the base models.
Arrrgh, I hate this crap, I have clogs, pass me a spinning machine.
Car one,
I have a key, I walk up to the car, unlock the door and sit in the drivers seat. Put the key into the clearly marked slot, ignition, start.turn key to ignition, pumps hum and tiny lights go from red to green. flick the key to start and it starts, good to go.
Car two,
Shiny new wonder car, dropped off overnight for me write nice things about it. No key, no worries, says they, we have paired the car with your phone. I do not have a mobile phone!! The genius new car wonder folk have somehow linked my landline to a car.
For oh so many reasons this is not going to work.
And here you wittering about screens.
Can I pay $1000 and get some actual gauges instead of the tacked on big screen tv from Best Buy?
Ooooh, Insignia!
I prefer the 2 to 1—the single looks cheaper and not in the smart, frugal way. Does it matter, though, when they’re all washed out from solar glare?
But does it include a countdown timer to the next recall? Also more space for ad placement.
I prefer the cheaper screens. The big crime on the Mustang is that stick is paywalled behind the GT.
Hmmm dual iPads with the Pedestrian Targeting Sight™ or The Monolith?
Both are terrible! Yay!
Give me a S197 or give me death.
Bigger screen costing more? How much of a discount can I get by shrinking the screen down to 0.00″?
So $1000 for 2 tablets to be glued to your dashboard? Not a fan.
Don’t be silly. They use staples and duct tape.
They have to use duct tape so they can do the replacement when the recall happens.
The double screen looks a lot more clunky than the single screen. Ford Pimpworks knows this so they’re charging more for Sally. It’s not a rip-off. It’s a poke-you-in-the-eye-call-your-wife-a-dirty-name insult. I agree that repairs would be easier for the double screen. For manufacturing though, surely it cost more to make and install two frames than one.
“Instead, the cheapest way to get it is as a $1,000 standalone option, or you can get it bundled in with the High Series package that costs $2,900 on a Mustang GT Premium and $3,000 on a Mustang Ecoboost Premium.”
“The first is that the curved display costs $1,000 and the active valved exhaust costs $1,595, so the valved mufflers really only run you $595. Car person math.”
If by “Car person math” you mean Math which isn’t Mathing….
…because on the GT you can get the conjoined screens for $1000, and/or the active exhaust for $1495, and/or CoPilot 360 for $1095 – or you get those three plus all the other stuff within the GT Premium High Group which includes all of the above plus Premium Leather interior trim, power memory seats, memory heated power mirrors w fancy lights, aluminum pedals, Alarm, etc for $2900 – So you’re basically getting the conjoined screen and a bunch of other stuff for free.
One less part to be recalled.
That looks awful, either iteration. Not really fitting of a sports car. Looks more like a racing simulator.
Great analogy! I’d been searching for awhile for a way to encapsulate this sort of thing, and now I have it. I feel it’s apt, as for more and more drivers, driving is less a viseral activitiy and more a largely non-driving-focused entertainment activity/distraction.
I guess considering the reliability of new Ford releases having a decent entertainment screen to view entertainment while waiting for the tow truck might be worth it
S550 was the perfect Mustang interior. This gen is a massive step back.
Are these removable? With how tacked on they look, they should be. Bring your tablet with you! Make the settings fron your couch! They attempted to give it some foxbody callbacks, why not bring back the 80s removable media players?
Looks as stupid as it is expensive.
Does anyone actually care about this shit or is this stupid manufacturer groupthink that’s been focus grouped to hell and back? Like I don’t think a single person I’ve helped choose a car has ever even mentioned the infotainment system other than my old man, who’s an architect and appreciated the aesthetics of the single curved screen in BMWs. But that’s a very specific case.
I genuinely do not care other than wanting it to be simple and work without issue. I know these companies are still chasing the sugar high that is the Tesla dragon but I just don’t believe there are throngs of real, car buying human beings that walk into a dealership and go “oh I’ll pay (X) more of the UBER SCREEN” or “yeah I’m willing to be upsold to the model that has a single huge screen instead of two medium sized ones”.
Am I wrong and too car blog pilled on this topic? Do normies actually choose their cars based on who has the biggest or best looking screen? It just feels like shit that’s being shoved down our throats for no good reason.
Yes, actual real car buyers will pay extra for a bigger screen that costs the manufacturer almost no extra money. It is a huge profit center.
Can’t say whether or not people will pay extra for what looks like one big screen instead of 2 but buyers want big screens in their cars today.
Big screens the nerd equivalent of Porsche Penis envy.
Automakers care about the Benjamins not your fetishes.
Well new cars sales are the shit but I just figured that was because they want a million dollars for an entry level mustang that is going to break down before the 1960s 12 months or 12,000 mile warranty
Have you not seen the reaction to GM dropping Carplay/Android Auto? Lots of “I’ll never buy a car that doesn’t have AA!” statements. And that means you need a screen. A better looking screen will make the whole car feel like it’s better engineered – just like VW putting soft touch interiors in the Golf 25 years ago made everyone think they were better quality.
NARRATOR: They were not.
It depends. I did buy the bigger screen in my RAM 1500, but it’s vertical and somewhat more useful in that I can display AA in the top half and something else in the bottom half. It’s also still integrated into the dash well. But I much prefer the smaller screen and real buttons in our pre-MCE 2021 BMW 330e. I am not a fan of the huge, tacked on screen look that extends way above the dash, or the giant combined screens.
I do like a screen for GPS maps, but 7″, or a widescreen that isn’t very tall is fine for me. I did put a double din screen in my NC Miata, again, just to get Android Auto capability for maps.
With Ford Quality #1, this thing will surely work as planned.
They both seem fairly tacked-on.
I miss when displays and their respective controls were integrated into the car’s dash.
Integrating the screen into the dash costs significantly more money because you have to make different dash tooling to accommodate each size of screen. Either that or just make the dash for the big screen and put in in filler trim pieces but that makes the standard version look really cheap.
Remember the days when the base model’s radio didn’t have the CD player, so you got a little cubby-hole that you used to wedge in a pair of sunglasses instead?
But, seriously, cost of screens and cost of incremental sizes of screens being what they are, it’s pretty sad
We have to make money on something. Base vehicles are cheaper today adjusted for inflation. The only margin is on higher trims and options.
I want to see the math on this. I would have no problem buying a new 2007 Toyota Camry today at the real cost I think manufacturers lie about the actual cost comparisons.
I refuse to believe if you built a 2007 today with no upgrades and for paid off R&D it would cost more than a 2025 Camry. It makes no sense.
I generally use 1995 as that is when I started driving but we can add 2007.
Base MSRP
1995 Camry Coupe: $ 16,128 ($34,350.00 in 2025 dollars)
2007 Camry Sedan: $ 19,900 ($31,022.00 in 2025 dollars)
2024 Camry Sedan: $ 26,420
Or we can look at weeks of median income
1995 median income $34,080 (Camry = 25 weeks of income)
2007 median income $50,230 (Camry = 21 weeks of income)
2024 median income $83,730 (Camry = 16 weeks of income)
Either way you look at it a base Camry is much cheaper for the average family today than in the past. You can do the same for other vehicles and types of vehicles. Like for like vehicles are cheaper today. The only exception is trucks and then base models are only slight more expensive than 3 decades ago (1 more week of income)
2007 Camry made today wouldn’t cost more than a 2025 Camry – it would cost even less. Of course it would also be illegal to sell so that is a mute point.
Can this be stickied to every comment thread where pricing is mentioned?
It drives me insane how poorly understood this is.
Doesn’t matter. The general reaction to hard facts is denial. Cars “feel” more expensive so they are more expensive.
Either that or the person replying is an industry or region where their income is not keeping up with inflation and they are drifting lower in the income brackets over time. (That happened to my father as a machinist that refused to learn CNC programming). Sucks for them but that isn’t anything automakers can control.
(I do have this data for different vehicles in a Google Sheets file for easy cut / paste)
I would add that as you go back in time people / families spent less and less on take out food, vacations, etc. And there was not an expectation that every family member of driving age had their own vehicle. Of course medical and tuition expenses were far less before both became extortionate plots Real estate and rent too. Insert picture of Sam Kinison here.
Houses were also much smaller. Today the average new house has more square footage for each household member than an entire family in the 60’s. (2,400 for less than 3 people)
I grew up in a working class neighborhood. Houses were 800 – 1,000 sq ft for families of 4 – 6. 3 bed / 1 bath. A bedroom for the parents, one for the girls, one for the boys, and 1 bathroom for everyone to share.
My father added an extra 1/2 bath to our house which made it unique in the neighborhood.
Please provide information on a modern car with all options would be cheaper than building an older car with no r&d and the equipment paid for. It is just labor and materials
Making a car for 20 years with no R&D or new tooling is a fantasy.
Regulations don’t stand still. Emissions, fuel economy, safety – they all steadily change and the car has to be updated to meet the new standards.
Tools have a limited number of parts they can make. Stamping dies and injection tools wear out and need to be replaced.
Robots wear out and simply go out of date. You can’t find parts to keep them running.
Moot point. It is not silent.
Yes but built today you wouldn’t spend more on a minimum build vs a over built too many options
Yes you could buy a better stereo and speakers for 25% of the price and easily install it yourself.
I wonder how much it would cost to make the main screen bigger and just integrate the backup camera into that display. From what I’ve seen, many instrument clusters already duplicate what’s on the screen, so why not just get rid of one of them entirely?
The center screen is primarily used for navigation, entertainment, and HVAC. Passengers like to have access to those features so putting all of that into the screen in front of the driver doesn’t work.
Using physical controls for HVAC and radio costs more than having a screen and the passenger still wouldn’t be able to see the navigation.
People also really like a big screen for navigation and will willingly pay for to have one. There is no reason to get rid of it.
I guess so when you shift into reverse the Rugrats won’t complain you cut off their enjoyment of watching Rugrats
I may be in the minority, but I don’t like the way the joined screens look. All I think it does is make two meh after-thought design choices look like one homely after-thought design choice.
I agree. If I had to have one or the other I prefer the separate screens.
I’d much prefer a real gauge cluster, though. And the center screen would look better dropped lower into the stack.
Wait, they change MORE for the bigger screen? That seems backwards