PDA

View Full Version : Is Ford showing too much bias



dkmac
01-05-2007, 10:35 PM
I am doing a research paper for collage and I am trying to get some oppinions. I am curious who all thinks that Ford is showing too much favortism towards the Mustang and ignoring its other lines too much?

XxSlowpokexX
01-05-2007, 11:11 PM
I would have to say Ford has always been a bare bones peopel car...Car for the masses.The Stang is there young car and everything else fits a specific purpuse...So froma performance standpoint it may seem they are...But they arnt..Just my opinion however

ufdb
01-06-2007, 05:40 AM
There is still a good market for sportscars, and I think GM & Chrysler are doing a much better job of giving that demographic buying options.

Having said that, I think they did a fantastic job on the new Mustang.

I just wish they would bring back the Thunderbird or Torino name, and have another sports or muscle car in the stable.

XxSlowpokexX
01-06-2007, 12:58 PM
Yah it be nice if they offered a performance option in all different shapes and sizes..I agree

kevenj90sc
01-07-2007, 05:25 PM
Too much bias toward the Mustang? What else does Ford have right now? Nothing I would consider buying besides the Mustang......

The_Ghost
01-08-2007, 05:02 AM
Ford's american lineup SUCKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The Freestar is a horrible piece of crap, the Five Hundred is about as exciting as a loaf of day-old bread, the Fusion looks like butt from the front, and looks too much like a Subaru Legacy Sedan from the back, the Focus looks like ~~~ in the US, I want to escape the escape, the explorer is as innovative as xeroxing the old one and just adding a new grille, same goes for the expedition and excursion, the ranger is a worthless, unreliable piece of garbage, and the F-150 isn't half as attractive as it could be. The new Nissan and Honda offerings are worrysome.

Lincoln's design dept has gone plumb loco with weirdness, but at least they're trying to be some-what edgy.

Now, look at Ford's overseas offerings. For example, the Ford C-max and S-max vehicles. Just as practical as a Freestar, serves the same duty, but much better designed, and a hell of a lot more attractive. For a full-size sedan, we ought to be offering the Australian Ford Falcon as a regular sedan offering with at least half of the engine choices available, the european Mondeo is much better looking and better designed than the stupid Fusion (if only if it were as attractive as its Mazda counterpart), and Ford should be selling us the updated, European Focus platform rather than the uglified new focus, and should consider introducing such gas-friendly but good looking, practical vehicles as the current european Fiesta and Ka. Furthermore, the Ford Transit van should at least be sold here as an alternative to the econoline. Given that Daimler Benz is going to be selling the Smart brand here, and given how well Toyota is doing with its Prius, Yaris and Camry Hybrid models, and how well Honda is doing with the Civic Hybrid, Fit and Accord Hybrid, there is no reason Ford can't introduce a vehicle that can compete with the Japanese competition, given their reputation for quality and good fuel economy that Ford has lost out on as of late.

Here's my dream model lineup.

Coupe: MODERN Thunderbird offering, made attractive and affordable as the MN-12 was. Seating for 4. RWD, 4.6L engine standard 350hp, twin turbo 3.0L V6 400hp option, 5.4 SC option 500hp. 3 trim levels.
Competes with: Corvette, BMW 6-series, BMW Z-series, Porsche Panorama, Porsche Boxster, Infiniti G35 Coupe, Nissan GT-R, Monte Carlo.

Sporty Car: RWD Mustang, could use the introduction of an independent rear suspension, at a minimum. Choice of a 4.0L V6, 350hp V8, SC 600hp V8, or 400hp Twin turbo 3.0L V6 (Lincoln MKR sourced) would be fantastic.
Competes with: Eclipse, Camaro, Corvette, Firebird, Civic Si

Alternate Sporty Car: Ford Iosis
beautiful, environmentally friendly 4-dr sporty car. RWD, with good engine choices and hybrid option. Not as powerful as Mustang, but still would sell in amazing numbers on style alone.

Mini-car: Sportka SE with FWD 1.3L SOHC duratec 93hp or 1.6L SOHC 120hp duratec. Currently sold in UK and AU.
Competes with: Mini Cooper, Honda Fit, Toyota Yaris, Toyota Prius, Honda Insight, Suzuki SX4.

Compact: EUROPEAN FOCUS, FWD with 1.8L duratec 154hp, 2.0L duratec 194, 2.5L Duratec ST 300hp, diesel options 1.8L Duratorq Diesel, 2.0L Duratorq Diesel.
Competes with Civic, Jetta, Corolla, Audi A3, Subaru Impreza
Sold in UK and AU.

Midsize Sedan: Mondeo FWD with AWD option, 2.5L Duratec V6 (227hp) , 2.0L Duratec I4 (194hp), 3.0L ST Duratec V6 (303hp), diesel options 2.0 Duratorq TDCi Diesel 174hp, 230 ft/lb tq, 2.2 Duratorq TDCi Diesel 207hp, 294lb/ft tq.
Competes with: Accord, Camry, Passat, Sonata
Sold in UK.

Full-Size Sedan: Falcon / Fairlane LTD RWD/AWD
Barra 245T engine, 300hp, 353tq, Barra 230* V8 engine 310hp 370tq, The Barra 190 I6 E85 255hp, 280tq. Hybrid Option (not yet developed) (Sold in Australia w/all engine options listed)
RWD. Ford, Do NOT build that awful looking, 300C rip-off interceptor concept.
Competes with: 300C, Magnum, Intrepid, Impala, G6, Grand Prix

Wagon-Van: Ford S-Max. FWD 2.5 Duratec I-5 295hp 238TQ, 2.0L Duratec 194hp I4, 2.0 Duratorq TDCi Euro IV Diesel 191hp 250tq
Competes with: Mazda5, Mercedes B-class, Chevy HHR, PT Cruiser, Uplander, Relay.
Sold in UK, AU

Minivan: Ford GALAXY. FWD 2.0L Duratec 194hp I4, 2.0 Duratorq TDCi Euro IV Diesel 191hp 250tq
Competes with: Toyota Sienna, Kia Sedona, Chrysler Town&Country, Dodge Caravan, Nissan Quest, Honda Oddysey.

Small SUV: European Ford Fusion (NOT AT ALL like US ford Fusion) 5-dr, possibly Ford Edge. FWD or AWD with 1.8L duratec 154hp, 2.0L duratec 194, 2.5L Duratec ST 300hp, diesel options 1.8L Duratorq Diesel, 2.0L Duratorq Diesel

Normal SUV: Ford Territory Barra 245T engine, 300hp, 353tq, Barra 230 5.4L V8 engine 310hp 370tq, The Barra 190 4.0L I6 E85 255hp, 280tq
RWD base, optional AWD.
Currently Sold in: AU
Competes with: Chevy Suburban, Tahoe, Escalade ESV, Lexus RX-series, X5, Audi Q7.

Large SUV: Do we really still need an Excursion?
Thorough redesign with diesel, hybrid and gas options. AWD with fully independent off-road suspension and high towing capacity.
Competes with: Yukon Denali, Aspen, Escalade

Commercial Van: Ford Transit RWD
2.4 Duratorq 190hp 350lb/ft tq, 2.3L Duratec 195hp I-4
6-spd Auto / CVT / 6-Spd Manual, 4.10 gears
Competes with: Dodge Sprinter, Chevy Express, GMC Savanna
Retain F-series based Econoline vans for 250-series and up high-load and towing applications

Small Pickup: Bullet-proof the ranger. Re-engineer the whole damn thing. Its reliability must be as good as the Toyota Hilux/Tacoma. It needs to be running 20 years from now with 200,000 miles on the original engine with nothing major failing.

Full-Size Pickup: Civilize the F-150 and at least bring it up to par with the new Honda, Toyota and Nissan competition. The F-150 does well as it is, but power, reliability, and quality need to be stepped up, and it wouldn't hurt to make it better looking, either.

Exotic: Ford GT.
Needs MORE POWER, better fuel economy, more civilized driving manners and most importantly, VASTLY IMPROVED RELIABILITY, ie being able to complete a round trip to somewhere without something breaking.
Competes with: Ferrari F430, Lamborghini Gallardo, Porsche Carrera, McLaren Mercedes SLR, Porsche Carrera GT, Honda NSX, Nissan GT-R, Lexus LF-A/Toyota Concept Coupe. The others here are far more refined and unfortunately, more reliable than the GT. The GT needs to be THE BEST at something, it needs to have SOMETHING going for it outside of being really good looking. The fuel economy wouldn't be so bad if it had more power, and the handling wouldn't be such a concern if it behaved more civilized when driven normally as well as when the driver wants to have a little fun. The real killer is its inability to go somewhere without SOMETHING going wrong. It should at least be able to make 3-4 trips somewhere without a trip to the dealer.


Ford needs to get with the program and re-introduce its global lineup in its home market, which is what I've been saying for years. Ford is rapidly losing marketshare here, and unless it does something drastic by 2010, Ford, as well as GM and DaimlerBenz are in some serious trouble here in the USA.

Bottom line:
Ford has paid too much attention to the Mustang here, and as a result the entire rest of the Model line has suffered. While Nationalism will still yield a few buyers regardless of quality, the superiority of the alternatives will ultimately bleed Ford's buyer-base dry. Ford already HAS vehicles that can save itself well within its stables, already in mass production elsewhere that can conform to higher MPG expectations and keep up with current automotive styling trends with cars that are attractive and actually look MODERN. If Ford wasn't so sure those of us in the good ol USA being Mustang-whores, it might have seen it could've saved a ton on R&D costs and further lowered its overall expenses by simply offering what it is already producing elsewhere, reducing costs of production for both overseas models as well as here by globalizing the lineup. While Ford UK is doing a great job and making sales, Ford US continues to disappoint by offering the Mustang as its only really attractive vehicle in ANY class.

WAKE UP, FORD.

Before it's too late.

-Ghost

lilredstang
01-08-2007, 03:28 PM
Ok. From what I can see. It looks like Ford is selling mostly mustangs and f-150s. Those happen to be the last two models that the REALLY put any:rolleyes: serious effort into. And look, they are selling pretty well. Well enough that if they did not have them Ford may be history. I hope that they make the connection between the amount of effort they put into the stang and the F-150 and the amount of them they have sold. Maybe then they will realize that maybe..just maybe if they put the same time and effort into its other models they may also sell better. I do think that Ford could use a larger and smaller "go fast" car. Maybe a boosted AWD focus to compete with the cobalt. As for the bigger one I'd like to see them wait a few years a take the bird off the shelf. It would be nice if they would use a streached version of the new mustang chassie. It has proven to be strong & stiff. While they are at it the mustang IRS that never made it into the production version would be nice. The 03-04 supercharged cobra motors would be an interesting idea for a "supercoupe". Basicaly use all the mustang stuff possible to reduce production costs and of course make it easier to get aftermarket mods.

NRTrackStar
01-08-2007, 03:41 PM
I think you need to go back and re-read what you just wrote. While I agree that Ford does invest a lot in the Mustang, there is a good reason for it-it's the only performance car the dumb~~~~s in this country will regularly purchase. America has absolutely no interest in buying performance vehicles. None. Look at how bad the GTO flopped. Find me a car as nice as the GTO with the same performance for the same price. You won't, yet people wouldn't buy it. Yet people are more than willing to fork over the same money for 4 cylinder automatic Accords. That sends a very clear message to automakers, I think. If you look at it that way, why would any automaker develop performace vehicles for the American market when people flat out refuse to buy them. It wastes resources. I also disagree with most of your assessment of Ford's lineup. Let's go through them.

Fusion. Has been rated higher in initial quality than both Camry and Accord the past few years. Next year it gets the 3.5 rated at I think 263 hp and AWD. Performance-check. Reliabiltiy-check. Styling-it's been selling well, so sorry you don't like it, but check.

Five-hundred. Fills a necessary market segment that is boring to us. It's a nice car, not very exciting, but it has to be boring to sell to old people. And it sells decently, so I see no problem with it.

Focus can still hold it's own. Remember the SVT? That didn't sell, did it. Would you consider the Civic to be considerably higher performance than the Focus? Cause performance doesn't seem to be the driving force behind the cheap car market. The Civic has a reputation for being very reliable, and that has taken it a very long way. The other platform would be nice, but I don't think it would make a huge difference in sales, because the biggest difference there is performance, which we have already determined isn't important.

Mondeo. Remember the Contour? Same car. Ford couldn't give them away, not even the SVT's. Another performance car that wasn't the Mustang that consumers told Ford to shove up their ~~~ (like the SC/SHO/SVT Focus.) Nice cars that people just wouldn't buy.

Tiny cars. Good luck selling those in America. Good idea that will not catch on, I don't think. And Americans will not buy diesels, regardless of how much sense they make because Americans are stupid. I wouldn't mind being wrong about this one though, because they wouldn't be bad to have around.

Vans. Ford's vans suck. You are correct. I don't think there are huge margins in the van market though, and the Odyssey is very, very hard to beat.

Hybrids. If you buy a hybrid, you are stupid, don't like having money and are incapable of critical financial analysis. Sorry.

Your lineup.

The Falcon. I like the car. A lot. I would buy one if it had the balls that the GTo did. Most Americans won't though, cause it's GTO ish and Americans apparently don't like those. I think the Fusion fits that segment well, and the performance will be there next year.

The Thunderbird won't be back for some time, and it will never have the performance that you want. It's a novelty car, nothing more.

Your Mustang desires are insane. 500 hp for the highest level is plenty. 600 is ridiculous. Will they even be allowed to sell that? It will never happen. And the Mustang will never compete directly with the Si.

Ford's SUV's are most likely the best out there. They don't make the Excursion, but if people will buy big pigs like that then why shouldn't Ford build them? They make huge margins on those, facilitating the development of other programs (which, unfortunately, you don't like.) And I don't know what the hell you're talking about with the F-150. It's the best selling truck for a reason, and that reason isn't because it's uncivilized. I can't figure out how a truck can get more civilized than that. If you can then maybe you need to go work for Ford and help the idiot engineers develop a truck that will sell better than it already is. That truck more than holds its own against ANY competition in terms of reliability and performance. And you want to bullet proof the Ranger? The only trucks in the same galaxy in terms of reliability are the Hilux/Tacoma. A 4 cyl, 5 speed Ranger is already virtually indestructable. What more do you want man?

Ford GT. They don't even make this anymore. And you need to elaborate on how having more power than it already does would help fuel economy, because that logic escaped me. It's a moot point anyway, though, because fuel economy does not matter at all in the segment. But that doesn't matter either, because Ford really doesn't even need to be toying around in the super car market anyway. The GT served its purpose, and now its done. Ford isn't in the super car market, and they don't need to be wasting tons of money developing limited production vehicles that no one here would ever be able to buy anyway.

Styling. Do you think the Camry is an exciting, cutting edge design? How about the Accord? I don't. People don't seem to care though. The Fusion fits right in with those designs, I think. And you make mention of the Subaru Legacy. Have you ever really looked at a Legacy GT? That car is incredible. But they're not moving 250,000 units per year selling those here either, because that's not what Americans want. It's not a Ford thing, it's an American auto buyer thing.

Basically, your analysis of the situation makes little sense to me. You're basically saying that getting rid of/restyling the already segment leading SUV's (disregarding the margins they make on them), adding a bunch of performance cars that the public has repeatedly stated they don't want and won't buy, and investing heavily into the untested super small car market segment will save Ford. I'm sorry you don't want a Mustang. I don't want one either. But people only seem to like the Mustang, and Ford has always had trouble getting people to buy anything else performance wise. Next year we get a pretty kick ~~~ Fusion, and I'm kind of excited about it. But don't blame the Mustang or Ford for not wasting development resources on building performance oriented cars that Americans won't buy. They've done it before, and they've always flopped. Blame Americans who won't buy the cars that both you and I would very much like to see here. And you can blame unions-those disgusting entities will likely be the end of both Ford and GM.

The_Ghost
01-08-2007, 05:33 PM
Maybe a boosted AWD focus to compete with the cobalt.

That already exists, it's called a Focus ST, powered by the Volvo S40's 2.4L turbo I-5, producing quite a lot of HP. We just don't sell it here. Unfortunately, it is not AWD like originally promised, BUT it doesn't understeer like the damn cobalt.

The_Ghost
01-08-2007, 07:03 PM
I think you need to go back and re-read what you just wrote. While I agree that Ford does invest a lot in the Mustang, there is a good reason for it-it's the only performance car the dumb~~~~s in this country will regularly purchase. America has absolutely no interest in buying performance vehicles. None. Look at how bad the GTO flopped. Find me a car as nice as the GTO with the same performance for the same price. You won't, yet people wouldn't buy it. Yet people are more than willing to fork over the same money for 4 cylinder automatic Accords. That sends a very clear message to automakers, I think. If you look at it that way, why would any automaker develop performace vehicles for the American market when people flat out refuse to buy them. It wastes resources. I also disagree with most of your assessment of Ford's lineup. Let's go through them.

Fusion. Has been rated higher in initial quality than both Camry and Accord the past few years. Next year it gets the 3.5 rated at I think 263 hp and AWD. Performance-check. Reliabiltiy-check. Styling-it's been selling well, so sorry you don't like it, but check.

Hyundai scores well in 'initial quality', but ohhhhhhh well. I'd like to see a car that's as attractive as its Mazda counterpart, and do you remember that wonderful bit of sexiness that was the Iosis concept vehicle?
Guess what's showed up as the face of the next Mondeo. I would gladly buy a Mondeo over the US Fusion.
AWD is not standard and simply comes along pirated from the Mazdaspeed6.
We will see if the new 3.5 is reliable, or even a worthwhile engine. While it has matched the performance numbers set as a benchmark by Nissan's 3.5L V6, reliability and quality will be the big issues for this car. I wouldn't hate this car so much if the front end looked as if it had SOME effort put into it-- as in, attractive enough to make me feel like I wouldn't mind seeing it in my driveway every day.

Five-hundred. Fills a necessary market segment that is boring to us. It's a nice car, not very exciting, but it has to be boring to sell to old people. And it sells decently, so I see no problem with it.

Why is the Lincoln division so much better looking?
If the Five-Hundred was doing its job as a full-size sedan, it'd be worth the police agencies using them as police duty cars. It hasn't done the job well enough and the Crown Vic continues to fill that slot while the Dodge Charger and Chevrolet Impala are taking police marketshare away from it elsewhere. Second, I've seen quite a few Chargers and Impalas on the road-- how many Five-Hundreds have you seen lately?

Focus can still hold it's own. Remember the SVT? That didn't sell, did it. Would you consider the Civic to be considerably higher performance than the Focus? Cause performance doesn't seem to be the driving force behind the cheap car market. The Civic has a reputation for being very reliable, and that has taken it a very long way. The other platform would be nice, but I don't think it would make a huge difference in sales, because the biggest difference there is performance, which we have already determined isn't important.

Because they didn't sell us the turbocharged RS version, they sold us a lousy non-turbo, unexciting 170hp vehicle. Not exactly my cup of tea, and I'm not going to pay the SVT premium for little more than a Celica GT-S, particularly when I know a much better version is being sold elsewhere.

Mondeo. Remember the Contour? Same car. Ford couldn't give them away, not even the SVT's. Another performance car that wasn't the Mustang that consumers told Ford to shove up their ~~~ (like the SC/SHO/SVT Focus.) Nice cars that people just wouldn't buy.

Wrong. The reason Ford couldn't give the Contour away was because of the total lack of quality and abysmal reliability of the 4-cylinder versions. It sold quite well initially, and as the things fell apart, Ford could not repair the vehicle's reputation and thus had to discontinue the name in the US. Had Ford invested in something called QUALITY CONTROL, the Ford name would not have been so tarnished and unfortunately, as a result of the half-assed build quality of the contour, many people said that they will never buy a Ford again.

Tiny cars. Good luck selling those in America. Good idea that will not catch on, I don't think. And Americans will not buy diesels, regardless of how much sense they make because Americans are stupid. I wouldn't mind being wrong about this one though, because they wouldn't be bad to have around.

Just look at the sales numbers, Toyota's Yaris is selling so well that dealerships cannot keep the things stocked. The Prius has waiting lists just to buy one, and Honda's Fit is selling extremely well. Nissan's Versa isn't doing too hot, but then again, that thing totally sucks balls and isn't delivering the gas mileage numbers people want out of their tiny car.

Vans. Ford's vans suck. You are correct. I don't think there are huge margins in the van market though, and the Odyssey is very, very hard to beat.

Yes it is hard to beat, but the S-Max or Galaxy would make nice competitors.
However, in reading the new issue of consumer reports, the Kia Sedona outscored all of the american van offerings. When Kia is better than you, something needs to be done.

Hybrids. If you buy a hybrid, you are stupid, don't like having money and are incapable of critical financial analysis. Sorry.

Give it a second thought. A decent hybrid offering would boost sales and give the marque a more eco-friendly image, if nothing else it'd be good for PR. However, Toyota's new Supra is looking at 400hp and is going to be a hybrid, and Honda's new NSX replacement will be hybrid as well, if the rumors are true. While Hybrids are currently for old people and hippies, there are a freaking LOT of them around. I almost as many Prius on the road now as I do Camrys and Accords. There is a definite market for it.

Your lineup.

The Falcon. I like the car. A lot. I would buy one if it had the balls that the GTo did. Most Americans won't though, cause it's GTO ish and Americans apparently don't like those. I think the Fusion fits that segment well, and the performance will be there next year.

The Falcon *does* have the balls the GTO does. The Falcon comes from the same place the GTO (Holden Monaro) comes from. Part of the reason the GTO isn't selling well is because nobody knows it's out there. It has had a virtually non-existent advertising campaign, like the Lincoln LS enjoyed.

The Thunderbird won't be back for some time, and it will never have the performance that you want. It's a novelty car, nothing more.

Yeah, that's just wishful thinking, I know. I don't ever expect the car to come back as a 4-seater. I just threw that out there.

Your Mustang desires are insane. 500 hp for the highest level is plenty. 600 is ridiculous. Will they even be allowed to sell that? It will never happen. And the Mustang will never compete directly with the Si.

Mustang has to do something or else Corvette *will* remain king-of-the-hill performance wise, particularly with the scary fast Corvette SS (see: blue devil) sporting a supercharger that is currently running laps around the nurburgring.
Have you seen HP numbers of normal cars these days? The BMW M5 and M6 are driving around with FIVE HUNDRED AND FIVE horsepower, and Corvette Z06's already have that. The Corvette SS will see at LEAST 100hp more, putting it well into the 600hp range. The Bugatti Veyron, while just an engineering excercise, puts down 1001 HP, and while you will probably never see one, it just goes to show that you can build and sell a car that comes with 1000hp from the factory. At this point 1001 HP is unfeasable for a normal car, I see no reason why 600hp cannot make an appearance as the Uberstang, particularly when the Shelby Cobra model already out puts down over 500hp. I don't see why they can't wring 100 more ponies out of a more advanced engine when Chevy is doing it, using an engine design that is over 50 years old. Given the Mustang is Ford's performance every-car we should have at least 3-4 engine options for the car, according to price, perhaps V6, V8 3v, V8 3v S/C, V8 4v S/C I/C. Independent rear is LONG overdue for this car, and it makes absolutely no sense to make an effort NOT to include one. It should at least be an option. The ride and handling of the car REALLY suffer for it. It should be included, if only to improve ride comfort and control. Our 2000 Mustang is so jittery on the 405 fwy that I had to spend an extra 400 dollars putting ZR rated 255 series tires on the thing just to make it finally stick to the damn pavement when there's bumps and such. None of my independent rear vehicles have that problem. The damn windstar is more surefooted on the freeway. Lastly, while the Mustang does not compete directly with the Civic Si it is very near its performance bracket and the average buyer is around the same age, so there is some market overlap.

Ford's SUV's are most likely the best out there. They don't make the Excursion, but if people will buy big pigs like that then why shouldn't Ford build them? They make huge margins on those, facilitating the development of other programs (which, unfortunately, you don't like.) And I don't know what the hell you're talking about with the F-150. It's the best selling truck for a reason, and that reason isn't because it's uncivilized. I can't figure out how a truck can get more civilized than that. If you can then maybe you need to go work for Ford and help the idiot engineers develop a truck that will sell better than it already is. That truck more than holds its own against ANY competition in terms of reliability and performance. And you want to bullet proof the Ranger? The only trucks in the same galaxy in terms of reliability are the Hilux/Tacoma. A 4 cyl, 5 speed Ranger is already virtually indestructable. What more do you want man?

Have you read the reliability reviews for the Ranger? More complaints than I had time to read. That said, have you watched CNN lately? Bosnia, Serbia, Afghanistan, Kosovo. Everywhere you look, the bad guys are a bunch of dudes riding around in an ancient toyota truck that's still running strong. The mexican gardeners know it, that's why they're all driving toyota pickups and using Honda lawn equipment.

The F-150 just isn't as nice as say the Titan, Ridgeline or Tundra. I have driven all of them, and the F-150's 5.4 just did not feel lively or pull at all in a decent manner, even with the truck completely empty. Tachometer should be standard on the truck-- there's no reason why I should have to use the technician's digital odometer trick every time I want to see the tach. It costs an extra what, $.50 to include one per car?
Really, I don't have that much to complain about with the F-150 except how the seats feel, and the way the engine feels. When I was working at U-Haul, our tired, 180,000 mile 460 V8's felt way more energetic even in a heavy-~~~ F-250 Boxtruck than the 5.4L Triton did in the unburdened 2005+ F150. The Triton V10 did not feel terribly energetic or strong, either in the newer 2005+ F250 boxtrucks. While these were stripped out models, I drove and compared the standard, regular person F-150 with a 5.4L and was unimpressed with the interior quality and style of the car. The F-250's style is just fine, though. I'm cool with the F-250. But my complaint about the Tach still sticks. It costs an extra $.50, so why not include it? Why skimp on something that everyone else includes as standard? Why do I need a full-size tach on my windstar and not on my f-150?

Ford GT. They don't even make this anymore. And you need to elaborate on how having more power than it already does would help fuel economy, because that logic escaped me. It's a moot point anyway, though, because fuel economy does not matter at all in the segment. But that doesn't matter either, because Ford really doesn't even need to be toying around in the super car market anyway. The GT served its purpose, and now its done. Ford isn't in the super car market, and they don't need to be wasting tons of money developing limited production vehicles that no one here would ever be able to buy anyway.

I said the fuel economy isn't that big of an issue given the segment, but it is problematic when compared side-by-side to the other supercars in its segment. You have to fill it up more than you do any of its competitors, save for the Zonda, but the key complaint is the ABYSMAL reliability. How are you going to look cool in it if it's always on a flatbed on the way to the dealer, or at the dealer being fixed? As for being able to buy them, maybe noone can buy them where you live, but around my neck of the woods quite a few folks can afford them and several people have (not people I see on TV mind you, but real everyday folks I've seen driving around) bought them. Unfortunately, they're in the shop as frequently as a Mercedes Benz.

Styling. Do you think the Camry is an exciting, cutting edge design? How about the Accord? I don't. People don't seem to care though. The Fusion fits right in with those designs, I think. And you make mention of the Subaru Legacy. Have you ever really looked at a Legacy GT? That car is incredible. But they're not moving 250,000 units per year selling those here either, because that's not what Americans want. It's not a Ford thing, it's an American auto buyer thing.

Yes, I have looked at a Legacy GT and driven the thing. It is an AMAZING piece of machinery. But at what it costs and with its lack of customer incentives, it is a hard buy. Furthermore, it isn't hardly advertised. I see quite a few Forester, Tribeca and Impreza ads, but nothing for Legacy.
As I said above, Ford got the back end of the fusion ok- the complaint was it looked too much like a legacy, which isn't a bad thing-- the problem is the front end is totally unattractive. I could live with the face of a Camry or Accord in my driveway but seriously, I can't stand how it looks like a last-gen Honda Prelude in the front. It looks like they had the design all nice, and then somebody smacked the clay model really hard in the front with a board by accident, night before the unveiling and flattened it, and then they were all like, "well, um, no time to fix it, let's just leave it like that."
Yes, I know Americans want conservative design in their boring everyday car, and you know what? That's fine by me. I know people don't want to stand out. But I also know people aren't going to want an eyesore. Just look at the example set by the Aztek. The Accord, Camry, Altima and the ilk are all decent to look at. They are not eyesores. The Mazda6, the Fusion's platform-mate and mechanical brother, is a very attractive, sexy car. I don't see why the Ford version can't be half as sexy. That's my primary complaint with the car. While Accords and Camrys are selling like hotcakes, when the Taurus was still around, were people buying it? No. They weren't, because the alternatives were better looking, offered better fuel economy and were more reliable. Now we have the fusion, which is as unattractive as the Taurus was in its final years, and it's just rubbish to look at. I wouldn't want one in my driveway when I could have a Mazda6 or an Accord instead. I mean, at least make it as pretty as an accord, for christsakes.

Basically, your analysis of the situation makes little sense to me. You're basically saying that getting rid of/restyling the already segment leading SUV's (disregarding the margins they make on them), adding a bunch of performance cars that the public has repeatedly stated they don't want and won't buy, and investing heavily into the untested super small car market segment will save Ford. I'm sorry you don't want a Mustang. I don't want one either. But people only seem to like the Mustang, and Ford has always had trouble getting people to buy anything else performance wise. Next year we get a pretty kick ~~~ Fusion, and I'm kind of excited about it. But don't blame the Mustang or Ford for not wasting development resources on building performance oriented cars that Americans won't buy. They've done it before, and they've always flopped. Blame Americans who won't buy the cars that both you and I would very much like to see here. And you can blame unions-those disgusting entities will likely be the end of both Ford and GM.

Re-read my post. The situation, as asessed, provides solutions to boost Ford's fuel economy to Toyota or Honda standards, improve the desirability levels of their car-type offerings, and improve reliability overall and reduce costs by mass producing parts already being made elsewhere. The more you make of something, the less it costs you to make it. So, instead of spending R&D money developing two different cars for the same market segment on different sides of the ocean, produce the same car, at a higher profit, and improve reliability because you've only got one vehicle on either side of the ocean to worry about. I am not introducing a ton of "performance" cars, in fact, I listed the horsepower numbers actually produced by Ford UK and AU's existing engines, converted from KW and NM to HP and TQ. You could have Prius-esque fuel economy with one of Ford's current Duratorq diesels here in the US, while at the same time delivering a competitive power and beautiful, attractive styling. Everything I listed already is being built elsewhere, save for what I listed for the Mustang and F-150 which really don't need to be messed with that badly. You already have this AVAILABLE, fully built, tested and developed. This isn't investing heavily into something totally new, and it's simply bringing your products from elsewhere here.
And so, why not improve your (Ford's) offerings?

And why not improve your build quality a little, too? Our 2000 Windstar has eaten a transmission after just 60k mi, and needed to have its leaky plastic intake replaced-- twice-- our 2000 Mustang has had its fuel pump fail short of 80,000 miles, has suffered two failed exhaust manifolds, and is extremely difficult to control at freeway speeds. Our 2004 Focus was a joy to drive, but did not deliver anywhere near the fuel economy expected, even with its PZEV 2.3L I-4, and a 5-speed, it only averaged about 20 mpg, and was noisy and had started to rattle, despite meticulous care and maintainance (until its murder-by-camry at 26,000 miles), whereas our 1995 Thunderbird LX 4.6 (the one with 30,000 miles) averages 18mpg with an automatic and literally twice the displacement. Our 1989 Taurus practically disintegrated as soon as it hit 100,000, and everything on that car needed to be replaced at least once. Our 79 2.3 SOHC 4-spd Mustang served dutifully until it was retired, still running well, in 2000 after failing smog for the third time at 160,000. Our 86' E-150 is still around performing chores now and then, and continues to function poorly despite my best efforts to make it produce all 160hp and get at least 12mpg that my 4.9 liters are supposed to be giving me. So, 50% of our Ford vehicles have done quite poorly. Now, had my only Ford car been a Taurus or a Windstar, I would tell you quite readily that I would never buy another Ford. I simply don't see why build quality in the lineup cannot be consistent enough that people can buy the cars and expect them to last at LEAST 10 years as they can do with a Toyota or Honda.

My dad has been complaining about Ford's practice of cheaping out at the expense of reliability and long-term quality for years, even though we have 5 of them at my house now. My Grandfather complained about the shortcuts, too when he worked at the Ford plant on Terminal Island outside of Long Beach, CA years and years ago. We are very much a Ford family and we're concerned for our Ford. We really do like to buy american products, and like to see our money stay within our country, but gosh, Ford sure is making it hard. I sure as ~~~~ am not going to buy GM, either. Our 54,000 mile Saturn has had more go wrong with it than any other car we've owned.


In summary, I am not asking for a complete redevelopment of the line-- I am asking for a global lineup that's the same everywhere. I am asking for cars that are already fully developed and ready to go and already sold under the FORD marque elsewhere to be introduced here, and proposing that Ford make a move into the smallcar market by offering, at least briefly, a Fiesta or a Ka to compete with xA, xb, Yaris, Fit, SX4, Accent and Versa while the market for it is hot. Don't miss out on the opportunity while others are cashing in on a market none of your US vehicles taps.
Other makes are offering more attractive, more powerful cars, and I don't see why Ford cannot step up to the plate with competitive offerings with Fords already sold overseas.

Thanks for reading.
-Ghost

quick35th
01-09-2007, 01:01 AM
I suppose I see where you're coming from reliability wise. I myself put considerable effort literally gimping a 91 Sable to 96k before I gave up. However, mom has a 97 Lincoln Continental with almost 120k that has been unbelievably reliable. The thing doesn't even hiccup. Dad's Explorer is also solid, despite having to endure several automotive travesties that should have brought an end to the transmission. I'll give you 15 year old Fords being ~~~'s, because I've had (and still do) them, and they are. But I don't think it's fair to label newer Ford cars that way, because they really aren't. I too come from a Ford family. My grandpa worked for Ford his whole life, and I have honestly never owned a car that wasn't a Ford, so I want them to succeed just as you do. But the mentality you are presenting here is exactly what Ford is fighting now. Even if they build a good car, it doesn't matter, because they have a poor image in product quality that will only be reversed with time. A long time. GM is in the same boat. American automakers aren't in a position where they can make mistakes, as they are under a microscope right now. Honda can, and their mistakes are quickly forgiven, which is why they can still sell Odysseys.

I don't think your Mustang argument is reasonable. You're honestly asking Ford to build a car that can satisfy a market segment ranging from around 20k to 70k. 16 year old girls need to be able to drive it to school, and it needs to be able to run 11's in the quarter and 7 minutes on the ring. If you want Ford to go against the Corvette, they need a new car to do so, because there is no way to make the Mustang both affordable and have the performance to beat it. It was never meant to beat the Corvette, and it never will. That's why you can't buy a Vette for 20k. They can build a Mustang to outrun the Vette in a straight line, but it won't be really driveable, because the chassis just can't be designed to really handle that kind of power and still be cheap.

All I have to say about your F-150 argument is tow a 7000 lb trailer with an F-150 and then go tow the same trailer with a Tundra. Tell me which one does it better. Let's see what Toyota's legendary quality is all about. Ford trucks are meant for towing-that's how they're tuned. The Titan is a bad ~~~ truck, I'll give you that. The Ridgeline can't do very many truck things, so it shouldn't even be included here. If Ford's only requirements were to build a car like truck that doesn't have to plow or tow, I bet they could build a really nice riding truck too.

As long as Ford continues to build Crown Vics, PD's will continue to buy them. Ford doesn't need to sell them Five Hundreds-I don't even think they have a police package available. We'll see what happens when they stop making Crown Vics. But you have to expect PD's to start buying Chargers and Impalas when other automakers actually start offering them. That's just the way it goes.

I foresee very few problems with the 3.5 in the Fusion. It's not like its a new design from a new family. It comes from a family that's proven to be very reliable. As far as the aesthetics of the Fusion go, that's simply your opinion. I personally think the new Camry looks like ~~~~, but I also know it will sell. And I don't care where the AWD system came from, so long as it has it available. Only time will tell in terms of quality, but it has been quite good so far.

I see where you're coming from in your global lineup argument. It does make sense, and maybe it would help. Perhaps I underestimated the market and incorrectly classified the Focus as a direct competitor to cars like the xA and the Accent. But I do think Ford offers a decent lineup, although it undoubtedly focuses on its trucks. That's how they have made their money in the past, and it will most likely need to change in the future for them to remain a well-rounded car maker.

quick35th
01-09-2007, 01:02 AM
BTW, that was NRTrackStar posting from Shane's computer. Whoops.

The_Ghost
01-09-2007, 04:22 AM
I don't think your Mustang argument is reasonable. You're honestly asking Ford to build a car that can satisfy a market segment ranging from around 20k to 70k. 16 year old girls need to be able to drive it to school, and it needs to be able to run 11's in the quarter and 7 minutes on the ring. If you want Ford to go against the Corvette, they need a new car to do so, because there is no way to make the Mustang both affordable and have the performance to beat it. It was never meant to beat the Corvette, and it never will. That's why you can't buy a Vette for 20k. They can build a Mustang to outrun the Vette in a straight line, but it won't be really driveable, because the chassis just can't be designed to really handle that kind of power and still be cheap.

Hrm, perhaps you're right on the mustang bit; but seriously I'd really like to see at least 4 engine options. I do not see Ford producing a Vette competitor if it isn't going to use the Tbird to do it.

All I have to say about your F-150 argument is tow a 7000 lb trailer with an F-150 and then go tow the same trailer with a Tundra. Tell me which one does it better. Let's see what Toyota's legendary quality is all about. Ford trucks are meant for towing-that's how they're tuned. The Titan is a bad ~~~ truck, I'll give you that. The Ridgeline can't do very many truck things, so it shouldn't even be included here. If Ford's only requirements were to build a car like truck that doesn't have to plow or tow, I bet they could build a really nice riding truck too.

The Tundra that I drove (which was a 2000 model if I recall correctly) with the iForce V8 towed quite nicely when we had to take numerous RV-class (in normalspeak it's a 6x12 closed doubleaxle trailer) to another U-Haul location 30 miles away. I drove an F-250 14' U-Haul truck with a 460 2000 miles towing a loaded auto transport and had no problems, whereas the F-150 pickup with the 5.4 we rent for $19.95 a day felt weak when weighed down with a loaded auto transport. My key complaint with teh F-series in general as it sits now is that I don't like the ride/interior enough, and there doesn't seem to be enough power. Key example were my tired 90's F250s with 460s in them versus the Triton V10, the Triton just couldn't move as well.

As long as Ford continues to build Crown Vics, PD's will continue to buy them. Ford doesn't need to sell them Five Hundreds-I don't even think they have a police package available. We'll see what happens when they stop making Crown Vics. But you have to expect PD's to start buying Chargers and Impalas when other automakers actually start offering them. That's just the way it goes.

PD's are already buying chargers, and have been buying the impala for quite a while now. The Oklahoma State Patrol Chargers I saw sitting in the median were pretty damn scary looking-- all back with a bit of lettering on the side if I recall correctly. The Crown Vic platform, useful as it is, has really reached the end of its life and is seriously wanting for a redesign-- it's been the same since what, 1997/98? It seems to me the logical step for a fullsize would be to use a Five-Hundred with AWD as a police car-- that'd be wicked useful in snowbelt states-- instead of a rwd Crown Vic-- I mean, I really can't see why they would introduce the Five Hundred at all in the segment that it's in if not to replace the crown victoria.

soooo... yeah

quick35th
01-09-2007, 01:05 PM
BTW, that was NRTrackStar posting from Shane's computer. Whoops.

I was about to say I dont remember typing that big long novel out last night. Kevin must have forgotten to log me off and log him in :rolleyes:

Shane

XxSlowpokexX
01-09-2007, 02:14 PM
Well I;m not going to get deep into this but what Ford needs to do is win Back the American Market with cars they want...Overall Ford has a lineup that hits the various segments of the American Market place..And performance vehicles is a very very very small segment.

However I think offering high profile high performance versions of almost every car lineup they have would boost sales...Almost like free advertisement that people will pay for....Remember win on Sunday Buy on Monday?..

When someone sees a new Hemi Charger with a flashy package out there it brings attention to the car. Maybe the person wont want one of those...But they may want a 6cyl model...What does it cost Chrysler?...They charge the customer so not much..

The cars that dont sell much are the ones that bring in sales for others. 6cyl mustangs WAY outsell the v8;s...But would they sell as well if there was no v8?..Or performance option>?...Heck the Stang would have been gone long ago if that was the case

Whats wrong with having a performance version of a 500?...Or any other line out there..

The reason why the contour SVT or focus SVT themselves didnt fare all that well is because there wasnt much to it..Tuned suspension..Extrude hone this and that....That alone shows you not much went into it..Instead of creating performance peices...They just blueprinted stock peices.....But these cars may have just helped sell contours and Focus's as a whole....

AND MORE THEN ANYTHING..........Ford neeeds to hire a better marketing department..Its nice to think cars sell themselves but they dont.

Lastly.....The one market you need to ABSOLUTELYconvince to buy your products are the teenagers and mid 20's population...Because they are your companys future...Besides the mustang...Fords not doing avery good job at that...Keeping in mind not every parent will allow there kid to own a mustang...

Chrysler was able to sell crap for years due to good advertising....Fords has a problem selling even there good cars...Thats the problem.

Would it hurt Ford to have a spiffy version of every lineup...I dont think so

The_Ghost
01-09-2007, 06:53 PM
However I think offering high profile high performance versions of almost every car lineup they have would boost sales...Almost like free advertisement that people will pay for....Remember win on Sunday Buy on Monday?..

When someone sees a new Hemi Charger with a flashy package out there it brings attention to the car. Maybe the person wont want one of those...But they may want a 6cyl model...What does it cost Chrysler?...They charge the customer so not much..

AND MORE THEN ANYTHING..........Ford neeeds to hire a better marketing department..Its nice to think cars sell themselves but they dont.

Lastly.....The one market you need to ABSOLUTELYconvince to buy your products are the teenagers and mid 20's population...Because they are your companys future...Besides the mustang...Fords not doing avery good job at that...Keeping in mind not every parent will allow there kid to own a mustang...

Would it hurt Ford to have a spiffy version of every lineup...I dont think so

Those are some very valid points-- I seldom see any Ford advertising that has anything relevant to vehicle sales in it-- the last one I saw was with that Taylor Hicks guy singing.

What the hell was that supposed to accomplish? It told me NOTHING about ANY vehicle.

As a recent teen and now early 20's kid, I can honestly say that outside of the Mustang, no kid I know of really wants one of the new Fords. I don't see kids lusting after Fusions, Focii (focuses?) or anything else. Even then the Mustang isn't that terribly enticing to the younger market and I typically see older folks buying and driving the current generation Mustang.
I do however see kids driving Audis, Mercedes Benz and BMW's constantly.

And as for the Free Advertising with a high performance model-- you're totally right. I thought about it and every time I see a charger with the R/T or Super Bee 70's musclecar graphics packages it screams LOOKITME!!!! and gets your attention. It is not only free advertising, but men who were teens in the 70's are total suckers for the musclecar graphics packages thanks to it being a somewhat midlife-crisis mobile while still remaining usable as a family car. Unfortunately Ford's high performance models have not been high performance enough and have not really done a whole lot to distinguish themselves from the regular car and don't really grab your attention-- the whole LOOKITME factor. I have, however, noticed more than a few Boss 302 2007 Mustang GT's running around.. Now, how about putting a graphics package on something else? The free advertising really helps. And by graphics I don't mean anything gay-looking like the Ford Ranger "SPLASH" package graphics.

-Ghost

XxSlowpokexX
01-10-2007, 02:16 PM
Yes but they need somekind of performance to backup the graphics..In new chasis designs they should take that into consideration..

I could have even made the very bland looking last generation taurus sweet looking....Seriously

CarlisleLandOwn
01-11-2007, 03:02 AM
Ghost and Damon, I couldn't agree more. Ford has the money, they have the cars already built/designed world wide, and they certainly have the ability ... now what?

The next problem I see is Ford is trying to be too many things to too many companies. Jaguar, Volvo, Mazda, Land Rover, Aston Martin Ö They need to sell off at LEAST Land Rover, Aston Martin, and Jaguar then get back to basics.

As far as building something Americans want, my wife asked for a Honda Accord, and a Honda Accord is what she got (never argue with the boss). Fusion? Milan? Mazda? Made in Japan? Or the car built in Kentucky? We chose the car that was built in the USA. Ford had a perfectly good car that they neglected (Taurus/Sable) and just plain let fall through the cracks.

The_Ghost
01-11-2007, 07:26 AM
Ghost and Damon, I couldn't agree more. Ford has the money, they have the cars already built/designed world wide, and they certainly have the ability ... now what?

The next problem I see is Ford is trying to be too many things to too many companies. Jaguar, Volvo, Mazda, Land Rover, Aston Martin Ö They need to sell off at LEAST Land Rover, Aston Martin, and Jaguar then get back to basics.

As far as building something Americans want, my wife asked for a Honda Accord, and a Honda Accord is what she got (never argue with the boss). Fusion? Milan? Mazda? Made in Japan? Or the car built in Kentucky? We chose the car that was built in the USA. Ford had a perfectly good car that they neglected (Taurus/Sable) and just plain let fall through the cracks.

I disagree with the Jaguar and Land Rover comments, those properties are worth holding on to, whereas Aston Martin sells in such low volumes, it is virtually pointless to retain the property.

Jag and Land Rover engineering does benefit the rest of the line and at the same time, it improved Jag's overall reliability... I would have never even considered buying a jag before Ford bought them, but I will consider it now because I know the wiring harness isn't made out of straw and paperclips.
I am fairly sure the 3.9L V8 currently used in the Thunderbird and former Lincoln LS was sourced from Jag... right?

And Land Rover is a hot property to have, living in Southern California, I see TONS of Land Rovers/Range Rovers, especially in Newport Beach. My neighborhood is only upper middle class but Range Rovers/Land Rovers are quite popular here-- I don't see it being logical to sell the things off, particularly when they continue to be capable off-road vehicles. When they quit being functional as an off-roader, that's when it's time to sell the property.

Reliability isn't even that big of a deal considering that Mercedes Benz has such awful reliability that Consumer Reports could not recommend a single model they had, yet they sell like hotcakes day after day here in So Cal and abroad in affluent areas.
People don't care that they'll have to get to know their service manager on a first-name basis, they care about the fact that they've got a shiny mercedes benz. People will open their wallets and buy regardless of reliability "because I(ve) (always) wanted one(a mercedes)". Why Benzes still popular given their absolutely ABYSMAL reliability (I thought Ford had quality control problems, and here an entire BRAND of $50,000-200,000 cars has all kinds of problems.), I will never know. I guess people will buy what they want, regardless of how reliable it is-- simply because they want it.

Some people just GOTTA HAVE the Mercedes Benz. They don't care about any of the features or whether or not it's reliable as long as it has no aesthetic blemishes and is a mercedes. It needs to be attractive, it needs to be pretty, it needs to make people envious, make them want it. While Mercedes reliability has suffered significantly, they DO on the other hand, consistently deliver an attractive, if somewhat conservative, model lineup year after year. Perhaps it is because the styling of the brand speaks of class, and the lines of their cars exude class and style. Can you honestly say that a five-hundred, fusion or focus exudes style or class? Hell, even their Lincoln and Mercury platform-mates-- none of them seem to quite have that look that makes you feel like you really want one... that emotional hook engineered into the shape and lines of the car just isn't there.

While emotion isn't everything it is the vast majority of what will sell a car. As a former car salesperson, I know this better than anybody. The excitement, the emotional hook-- the "I want it and I gotta have it" factor. While it is there with the Mustang (and people are buying them in droves because of it), it is not there with the rest of the model line. Right now if you're buying a five-hundred or Fusion, you're saying "I bought this car because I wanted a huge rebate/discount off msrp" or "I'm old and don't really like this car, but bought it because I've been coming to this dealer for 30 years" "oh, I'm old and have three grown children, i'm a shapeless, unattractive, boring blob, just like my car. i bought a FORD because I'm boring. i want to kill myself.". or the US Focus says "I'm a girl and don't know anything about cars", or "My parents bought it for me" or "I'm a poor college student" or "I'm 16". Mind you, it's not the cool kids driving them, the Focus just isn't cool. A Mustang is cool.
Some of the style they give the Mustang-- it wouldn't hurt the make the rest of the line attractive, too. The Mazda division has caught on-- I can't think of a single (car-based) Mazda that is totally boring looking. Every single one of them has some quality to the external design that says "I haven't forgotten how to have fun" or "I am not totally devoid of style", and there is probably one car in the Mazda lineup that has appeal to every one of us in some way or another or you'll at least admire the way it looks.

Now, there are tons of young and old people who will buy a mustang simply "because I like the way it looks". My girlfriend bought her 00 Mustang in cash because she liked the way it looked. She didn't care that the Celica GT-S was the same price and handled better, offered better fuel economy and reliability, she cared that it was pretty, and that it was a Mustang. People will buy Mustangs because "I've always wanted a Mustang", much like the people who say "I've always wanted a Mercedes (or BMW, or Bentley or Rolls Royce or Jaguar what have you)". You don't hear people say "I've always wanted a Taurus." As I've been implying with my lineup above, Ford's offerings need to be attractive if they expect to sell anything at all in the US outside of F-150s and Mustangs.

But then again, I was talking about the mindset of the typical mercedes benz buyer. that's a slightly different buyerbase..
At the same time, the guy who buys a land rover may also think about buying a Navigator or Excursion. Navigators and Excursions are another popular choice. Among the elderly folk, interestingly enough, there have been a lot of Priuses as of late, which is surprising, given that old people typically hate spending money, but apparently somebody's been giving them the toyota koolaid and they have been drinking it by the whole.

this is a problem, because these same flag-waving, looney conservative old people ought to be opening their wallets to buy a full-size ford or lincoln, and instead they funnel their money into Toyota.

I should probably make this into a thesis about the southern california car buying culture given how large of a market it actually is. Orange County probably sells more cars monthly than some states sell.

-Ghost

XxSlowpokexX
01-11-2007, 05:35 PM
Well Ford like I said needs to cater to the "NEW GENERATION"...because they will be the ones buying the cars for years to come.

Ford will Sell AMartin only if Jaguar and Land Rover go with it.

I would have to say Ford did do a good job getting those lines into the 21st century while neglecting there American cousins..

Ford comes out with some great vehicles and then wonders why they dont sell...The lincoln LS comes to mind..The Marauder..heck even the new style cougar could have sold well if marketed properly..

It all makes me sick really....But you wont catch me buying A Honda Accord Made in kentucky when the profits most definitely go overseas:O)

There are way to many imports on teh roads when compared to cars made at home..For every import bought..One less american car is bought..Which is a few less American jobs...A few more towns dying...It goes on..

Win the public back with American pride..Quality..And well...Thats what we need to do

The_Ghost
01-13-2007, 01:00 AM
Well I had a long discussion the other day with an elderly woman about why she bought a mercedes benz when she herself said she didn't need it-- 'because it was pretty, and i liked how it looked and how the interior was designed. i hate the dealers, though.', and what's more, 'my neighbors liked mine so much they went out and bought the same one (C230K) in the same color (silver).', the lady said.
I then asked her if she had wanted to buy a Ford or Chevy recently because of the style alone, or had that "it's so pretty, I want it." feeling about any american car maker for that matter, and she said no.

As I stated earlier, Ford is not appealing to anybody on style alone, which is a lot of what WILL sell a car here. Style and appearance is REALLY important. Nobody wants to buy a car that's ugly, regardless of how great a car or how functional it is. I believe the example of the Pontiac Aztek proved that point extremely well.

Update:
Did some more research, and even FORD agrees with me-- the small car market is becoming HUGE, however I disagree with their numbers, as I feel that their graph is lagging 2 or so years behind, and in order to capitolize on it best, they need to move now.

Refer then, to the Ford Reflex presskit (http://media.ford.com/products/presskit_display.cfm?vehicle_id=1370&press_subsection_id=421&make_id=92).
The Ford Reflex uses that hideous 3-bar grill scheme and I don't hate it. Hybrid, AWD, performance, Styling-- it's a win-win situation.
Ford Media: The North American market for small vehicles will grow 5 percent per year through 2008 to reach more than one-third of all cars sold.


Reflex features an advanced diesel-electric hybrid propulsion system that harnesses diesel, electric and solar power. This combination of power can deliver maximum fuel economy – up to 65 mpg – without compromising performance.

The concept features an electric motor on the rear axle in addition to the hybrid propulsion system on the front axle. The rear motor provides all-wheel-drive capability, improved driving dynamics and the fuel economy benefits of a full hybrid vehicle.

Here's the problem, illustrated even more clearly now.
Ford is wasting all of its marketing efforts on Mustang and not putting a damn thing into the rest of its lineup. Though they may be advertising Mercury as kind of a competitor to Nissan, I guess? (that's who the ad suggests they're targeting, or at least who it makes me think they're targeting), I have not seen a single ad for the Fusion touting its optional AWD or 3.5L V6, or superior driving dynamics. I know for a fact an AWD fusion, or in particular an AWD, american Hybrid car would sell REALLY WELL in Detroit, Greenbay and Chicago, and other Snowbelt areas.

-Ghost

CarlisleLandOwn
01-15-2007, 07:18 AM
Here's the problem, illustrated even more clearly now.
Ford is wasting all of its marketing efforts on Mustang and not putting a damn thing into the rest of its lineup. Though they may be advertising Mercury as kind of a competitor to Nissan, I guess? (that's who the ad suggests they're targeting, or at least who it makes me think they're targeting), I have not seen a single ad for the Fusion touting its optional AWD or 3.5L V6, or superior driving dynamics. I know for a fact an AWD fusion, or in particular an AWD, american Hybrid car would sell REALLY WELL in Detroit, Greenbay and Chicago, and other Snowbelt areas.

-Ghost

So, the Fusion gets a 3.5 and the 500 get the 3.0? W.T.F. kind of sense does that make? I drove a fusion while teaching a class in Atlanta, and it’s a REALLY NICE car! (No testicles what so ever) The Milan and Fusion have a MUCH nicer interior then the Camry/Accord. But here is where the problems come in. Camry and Accord have a history. The public trusts the Camry and the Accord to be the reliable appliance that they truly are. What is a Milan? What is a Fusion? What is a 500? No one has a clue. Now, ask a Market segment what is a Taurus? What is a Thunderbird? They will tell you exactly what they are. Trust is something that is earned, built up over time. Ford can't make up their mind, and stick to something without screwing it up or letting it die due to neglect.

Mercury Cougar, the sister car to the mustang, only with luxury, competing with Jag … oh, never mind we will just buy jag, now it’s a Torino, no wait, we want it to be a thunderbird …

Thunderbird, the sports car/personal luxury car, now the family car, now blah blah blah …

What is an Accord? What is a Camry?

How many people can pick out a BMW from its beginnings until 2007 without knowing what it is, without seeing that it is a BMW? How many people can pick out an 89 Capri, ok a 79 Capri, or a 69 Capri? 3 Completely different cars marketed at separate markets under the same name. Good job Ford. Wonder why you can't sell a car that is worth its salt ...

As for Ford using Mazda as a shared platform, didn't they learn that isn't a good idea with the failure of the Probe?

XxSlowpokexX
01-15-2007, 04:31 PM
Yes Ford Makes up new names that the buying market cannot relate to. Even Nissan was smart when they bought out Datsun..It was a Datsun nissan...nissan Datsun.......Nissan.....

I'd personally like to see the tbird develop into something special and non retro.. A great handeling 4 passenger GT type car..Personally I think its the only niche it can fill for Ford successfully. But how much of a market is there for a GT type car?...The GTO failed miserably,,BMW and Mercedes seem to eb doing ok with them in limited numbers.

I think it be a great superstar in the lineup..using the direct injection twin turbo v6 they been touting as getting great gas milage along with upwards of 400hp...

Ford needs to realize that there is room up top for a car other then the stang that will compete in a totally different class of cars..The supercoupe could have been that car in its time but but just didnt evolve with the times..The newest retro tbird is a sweet car but its a novalty item....Overall a great car but doesnt really do anything all that well.

twin turbo v6 Tbird....GT coupe.....close .9 g handeling min IRS...4 passenger..trunk room...Perhaps a rear door some to rx8 for egress reasons...

It can be done.....ahhhhh ehh well Turbocoupep for 2010~!

The_Ghost
01-15-2007, 10:11 PM
Yes Ford Makes up new names that the buying market cannot relate to. Even Nissan was smart when they bought out Datsun..It was a Datsun nissan...nissan Datsun.......Nissan.....

I'd personally like to see the tbird develop into something special and non retro.. A great handeling 4 passenger GT type car..Personally I think its the only niche it can fill for Ford successfully. But how much of a market is there for a GT type car?...The GTO failed miserably,,BMW and Mercedes seem to eb doing ok with them in limited numbers.

I think it be a great superstar in the lineup..using the direct injection twin turbo v6 they been touting as getting great gas milage along with upwards of 400hp...

Ford needs to realize that there is room up top for a car other then the stang that will compete in a totally different class of cars..The supercoupe could have been that car in its time but but just didnt evolve with the times..The newest retro tbird is a sweet car but its a novalty item....Overall a great car but doesnt really do anything all that well.

twin turbo v6 Tbird....GT coupe.....close .9 g handeling min IRS...4 passenger..trunk room...Perhaps a rear door some to rx8 for egress reasons...

It can be done.....ahhhhh ehh well Turbocoupep for 2010~!

Slight correction..

Nissan did NOT buy out Nissan. Nissan started out in the US as Datsun, literally "Son of DAT" because the Japanese Execs at Nissan, being all honour and image-concious did not want to risk blemishing the Nissan name, were its US Division, Datsun to fail. In 1983, after Nissan felt its success had been established, it decided it could put its name on the products it was selling in the US. It was never "bought out", and remained within Nissans control the entire time.

As I said, and I agree, the Tbird would be fantabulous as a 4-seater GT coupe, if marketed CORRECTLY as a competitor to the 6-series and SL class, and the twinturbo V6 (as seen in the Lincoln MKR) would be fantastic.

-Ghost

CarlisleLandOwn
01-16-2007, 05:42 AM
Yes Ford Makes up new names that the buying market cannot relate to. Even Nissan was smart when they bought out Datsun..It was a Datsun nissan...nissan Datsun.......Nissan.....

I'd personally like to see the tbird develop into something special and non retro.. A great handeling 4 passenger GT type car..Personally I think its the only niche it can fill for Ford successfully. But how much of a market is there for a GT type car?...The GTO failed miserably,,BMW and Mercedes seem to eb doing ok with them in limited numbers.

I think it be a great superstar in the lineup..using the direct injection twin turbo v6 they been touting as getting great gas milage along with upwards of 400hp...

Ford needs to realize that there is room up top for a car other then the stang that will compete in a totally different class of cars..The supercoupe could have been that car in its time but but just didnt evolve with the times..The newest retro tbird is a sweet car but its a novalty item....Overall a great car but doesnt really do anything all that well.

twin turbo v6 Tbird....GT coupe.....close .9 g handeling min IRS...4 passenger..trunk room...Perhaps a rear door some to rx8 for egress reasons...

It can be done.....ahhhhh ehh well Turbocoupep for 2010~!

Ford needs to re-invent its cash cow. The mid size sedan. From there they need to come up with an Economy car that doesn't suck. Trucks Ford has fairly worked out, they just need to NOT neglect them. Toyota and Nissan are coming directly after them.

Basicaly, Ford needs to look at Honda, Toyota, and Nissan and ask why they aren't in the same league any more.

XxSlowpokexX
01-16-2007, 11:13 AM
Ghost..I had a slightly different interpretation but the basis for the NAME change and keeping both on for awhile was the same

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Datsun

Jason,

The only way Ford or GM is going to be able to do that is to get people to buy their cars...They need something exciting for people to talk about..As we agree..500...great car..Montego..great car..Exxciting?..Not in a long shot

CarlisleLandOwn
01-16-2007, 11:40 AM
Damon, there is nothing exciting about a Camry or Accord. Yet they are selling them much faster then Ford is selling the Mazda Fusion or Volvo 500. Remember, 90% of the public is car stupid. They want something solid, reliable, semi conservative, that feels more up scale then what it truly is sold as, and most importantly RELIABLE. I think Ford has it with the Fusion, but you and I both know they will do 1 of 2 things. Screw it up; too many changes from its original concept/neglect to keep up with the times, OR they will drop it from the lineup entirely. Those are the 2 things people are waiting for Ford to do. What happens when you completely drop a car line? The cars re-sale value plummets. What about trust? Is Ford going to drop your car line before you finish paying it off? If you get into an accident and total your vehicle, they go off book value. You paid 20k+ for your car, now it doesnít exist any more and its book value went to hell. You get nothing for your 3 year old 30k mile car. Next, get a Ford tech to work on a SC, ok, an Independent shop. Can't find anyone to work on it Ö Ok, something that sold more units like a SHO? Yeah, find someone to work on that. Ok, now find parts.

Take a Taurus to a dealership. Take a Crown Victoria to a dealership. Take a F150 to a dealership. Ok, now take all of them to an independent shop. EVERYONE can work on them. In 7 years where are you going to get 500 parts? You think Volvo is going to sell you parts? What about the Fusion? Bastard vehicles are BAD. Who remembers the Villager? More expensive then a Windstar, fewer features, hard to get parts from Nissan, and all the Nissan wiring issues they are famous for. Also, because they are based on cheaper platforms that are SO close people associate them with the cheaper car. Cimarron anyone? Ford needs to get their head out of their ~~~ or they won't be selling cars in the United States. Itís that simple.

I can't wait for the new Accord wagon to come out. 6 speed Manual, 271hp to start with. Oh, and I know in 10 years where I can get parts/the car fixed because they will still make it. Ford is shooting not only themselves in the foot, but customers that WERE loyal in the chest.

XxSlowpokexX
01-16-2007, 12:33 PM
Jason,

The exciting part is to make people remeber it being its a new name..New line..Camry and accord have been around forever now..So they have a following...Look at Daimler/Chryslers marketing approach..We are talking ALL NEW CARS that peopel are excited about...talking about...Then buying...Regardless of quality. if you are going to create a new line of cars..You need to get a buzz going...It need to fill a niche..People need to feel happy/good about purchasing it..Bottomline

CarlisleLandOwn
01-16-2007, 01:24 PM
Jason,

The exciting part is to make people remeber it being its a new name..New line..Camry and accord have been around forever now..So they have a following...Look at Daimler/Chryslers marketing approach..We are talking ALL NEW CARS that peopel are excited about...talking about...Then buying...Regardless of quality. if you are going to create a new line of cars..You need to get a buzz going...It need to fill a niche..People need to feel happy/good about purchasing it..Bottomline

K car saved Chrysler ...

Sounds to me like you are describing the credit challenged will buy anything I can get financed for crowd. Isn't that what Kia is for?

People still remember the contour and what a giant unreliable ~~~ it was. People still remember the LS and all its issues. People still remember...

I remember my Taurus; I remember how reliable it was. I remember how comfortable it was. I know how much nicer fit and finish on it is compared to even RECENT imports. I remember how ugly/weird it looked. I remember how underpowered it was … I remember the switch from a good looking automobile to a cross eyed preying mantis. What actual FORD product do I have to choose in that market segment now?

XxSlowpokexX
01-16-2007, 03:17 PM
But after the K car they were falling..And Daimler brought in new life.

I think we have all had good and bad experiences with cars. My ex had a contour which had no problems whatsoever..Another ex had an accord which was nothing but problems..I have freinds that work in almost every import car dealer imaginable and they say they would never buy so and so car that thier own dealer sells...Its all based on our experiences.

As you said the car buying public is 90 some odd percent dumb. They will buy just because.

Ford needs to lure people to buy and then keep them..Luring them is the problem becaus eif you cant do that ther eis noone to keep

CarlisleLandOwn
01-17-2007, 02:03 AM
Damon, itís true that by joining with Mitsubishi Chrysler finally started building exciting looking cars, but exciting performance cars have always been a part of the Mopar lineup, taxi cab interiors and all.

Your ex lied. For the most part the CDW27 platform was solid, I'll agree on that, but everything around it was a nightmare. Everything from OPTIONAL splash shields on the Alternators, to overflow tanks actually venting onto the alternator. Electrical problems fit and finish issues ... remember the dash pad curl? Or the power locks issues? Ztecís with vibration issues in automatic form (flex plate issues). Duratec V6ís spinning rod bearings at low mileage (excessive harmonics). Letís not even get into the multiple recalls on a car that wasn't exactly new, just new to us. For the price Ford spent on developing the CDW27, you would think it would have been the best car out there. Problem with sales is it replaced a car that cost 20% less! Justify that one to a customer. Well, we don't sell that car any more, here is its replacement, and yes, it is more expensive ... by a lot. I thought it was one of Fords better driving cars. Handled FANTASTIC! It truly was a 3 series BMW competitor. Comfortable ride, great predictable feedback, it was truly European! Ford just ruined it and put it into economy midsize car status then priced it out of that market segment.

I'm not disagreeing with your lure and snare tactics, itís VERY good, but Ford needs to REALLY start hunkering down and building off the basics. Once you get the consumer, you have to KEEP them. You do that through quality. Once you piss off a customer you ruin your reputation, and they wonít buy that second vehicle for their wife.

Imports arenít the answer, I know this, but certain companyís have an excellent business model, a well thought out product. Ford has the money, Ford has the talent, Ford has the ability Ö but the only thing I can see happening is politics as usual. Temporarily fix the problem until it becomes someone elseís problem when they get elected into office

XxSlowpokexX
01-17-2007, 03:41 PM
Well Ford recently put up a bunch of "STUFF" for collateral on a huge loan..Much liek Gm has done in teh past. So for teh first time in a long time Ford will have the money to build on instead of trying to crunch within themselves. Hopefully that along with thier capabilities wil llead to something positive.

We need to see how Fords restructuring pans out and how they use this newfound money(besides job buyouts)

Nah the contour held up very well..Hers did at least 4cyl

CarlisleLandOwn
01-18-2007, 05:12 AM
Well Ford recently put up a bunch of "STUFF" for collateral on a huge loan..Much liek Gm has done in teh past. So for teh first time in a long time Ford will have the money to build on instead of trying to crunch within themselves. Hopefully that along with thier capabilities wil llead to something positive.

We need to see how Fords restructuring pans out and how they use this newfound money(besides job buyouts)

Nah the contour held up very well..Hers did at least 4cyl

I hope they come out with something worth buying, I'm going to need a new car in a year or so.

thunderbirdlver
01-18-2007, 10:45 AM
im not real good on this stuff but when ford is dissed, i bring up my 5.0 birdy. years ago i wanted a new trans. y? i dont even know anymore. so i started doin neutral drops. at high rpms, dead stop, even moving to bark the tires. i wanted a trans! this is no crap im not messing around! 6 months go by! yes 6 montsh and the trans is fine. one day i get to work, put it in reverse hit the gas and vroooooom. engines goin but im not. so i take it to the shop ready for a trans. the mechanic ask if i was racing or what. i said no y? he said u twisted the output shaft of ur transmission off in the driveshaft. ive only seen race cars do that drag racing. he checked the trans and it was still in good working order. i still ordered a new trans. but still ive had chevys and dodges drop transmissions on normal driving while i couldnt kill my bird. they were front wheel drive though. but still i was surprised. well plus the engine on my 89 3.8 had like 300,000 miles on it and was still runnin strong when i got rid of it.

The_Ghost
01-18-2007, 09:37 PM
What happened to your 5.0L isn't exactly relevant, but it does show on certain things Ford did build in quality, namely with truck RWD transmissions. Unfortunately Ford went totally the wrong direction by going front wheel drive when the way to maintain quality might've been to stay RWD and remain totally invincible. My Fordvan has a leaky trannypan and half the time doesn't have half the fluid it needs-- I think I've run it dry twice but it keeps on ticking and just will not die. And neither will that invincible-~~~ 4.9L I-6.

-Ghost

thunderbirdlver
01-18-2007, 11:25 PM
Unfortunately Ford went totally the wrong direction by going front wheel drive when the way to maintain quality might've been to stay RWD and remain totally invincible.

amen brother.... AMEN!!:)

CarlisleLandOwn
01-19-2007, 04:22 AM
Ghost, Ford not only kept customers, but increased sales with the front wheel drive market. Now they are finally getting into the AWD car market. When you live where winter weather sucks, front wheel drive and all wheel drive are nice to have. They aren't necessary, but they are nice.

My personal opinion is, you just can't beat a GOOD all wheel drive system unless your doing all out drag racing. Street driving, Road racing, Autocross, rally, all other forms of racing have to handycap AWD cars so they don't dominate the class or they put them in their own class.

thunderbirdlver
01-19-2007, 10:00 AM
yea but awd is only good in snow or dirt. on dry pavement the front wheels tend to push a little. even in awd. but when we r beating our cars in the field, i can outrun waynes subaru in the turn and im in an 88 thunderbird! i can drift just right all the way around the turn. ton of fun! :cool:

anyway i think the new awd from ford is pretty neat. im glad to see ford getting awd cars.

The_Ghost
01-20-2007, 10:44 PM
I strongly disagree;

AWD is a fantastic benefit to have, and a RWD based AWD system similar to Nissan's ATTESSA system.

Like RWD with optional AWD.

That would be super.
Or at least make AWD an OPTION for just about everything. I can certainly tell you they'd sell more windstars in the midwest with AWD as an option.

I'm probably going to buy a Suzuki SX4 as my next vehicle because it's the cheapest new car I can buy with a 5-spd and AWD at just 15k, and that's with a 10 year powertrain warranty.

While AWD is not always necessary, it is FANTASTIC to have should you ever actually need it...

Having driven cross-country during February of 2004 in a RWD car through the Rocky mountains and through a snow-covered midwest, without the benefit of snowchains, I can say that RWD is VERY difficult to manage, BUT FWD can be just as difficult-- I used my 280ZX and a towcable to help pull a Sunfire out of a snowbank because it couldn't pull itself out.

-Ghost

tim
01-21-2007, 10:28 AM
I too am going to be replacing my work car soon. Its a Suzuki. Ok I know. But its been a great car. After a lot of thought I have decided to try an American car again. I want a bare bones 4 banger good gas mileage and it has to be dependable. Price is important too. I am really a penny pincher when it come to a daily driver. What does Ford have that wont make me want to throw up?

thunderbirdlver
01-21-2007, 11:52 AM
I strongly disagree;

AWD is a fantastic benefit to have, and a RWD based AWD system similar to Nissan's ATTESSA system.

Like RWD with optional AWD.

That would be super.
Or at least make AWD an OPTION for just about everything. I can certainly tell you they'd sell more windstars in the midwest with AWD as an option.

I'm probably going to buy a Suzuki SX4 as my next vehicle because it's the cheapest new car I can buy with a 5-spd and AWD at just 15k, and that's with a 10 year powertrain warranty.

While AWD is not always necessary, it is FANTASTIC to have should you ever actually need it...

Having driven cross-country during February of 2004 in a RWD car through the Rocky mountains and through a snow-covered midwest, without the benefit of snowchains, I can say that RWD is VERY difficult to manage, BUT FWD can be just as difficult-- I used my 280ZX and a towcable to help pull a Sunfire out of a snowbank because it couldn't pull itself out.

-Ghost

thats what i said. awd is great in the dirt and crap. dont need it on pavement. i cant have awd cause i love brakestands! :D

The_Ghost
01-21-2007, 06:40 PM
I too am going to be replacing my work car soon. Its a Suzuki. Ok I know. But its been a great car. After a lot of thought I have decided to try an American car again. I want a bare bones 4 banger good gas mileage and it has to be dependable. Price is important too. I am really a penny pincher when it come to a daily driver. What does Ford have that wont make me want to throw up?

The Ka.

What I would do if I was you, is find a supercheap Fiesta / Festiva, or an Aspire.
That's super-mega-economical. With a 5-speed Fiesta, you can pull close to 50mpg out of that teency 1.0 liter 4.

The Focus is a good car, but you know what? The only good one was made in 2004, and CA only-- the 2.3L 5-speed PZEV package, and the last of the good-looking US focuses. The PROBLEM, however, is the lack of a tachometer. ~~~, no fricken tach in a 5-speed car, and the shiftup light doesn't come on till you're practically bouncing off the rev limiter?
While I can override this and can bring up the digital tach through the odometer, I don't want to have to sit there and do the ford service digital odo override code EVERY TIME i want to go somewhere. For an extra $1.00 per car they could've included the tach on a stickshift car. Why does my Windstar need a tach when it's automatic, and my Focus doesn't have one when it's a 5-spd??
Ford currently doesn't make anything as economical as the Fiesta anymore, or as competitive as the Honda Fit or Toyota Yaris. Unfortunately it isn't there.
Ford doesn't have what you want, at this time.

Suzuki's got what I want in my price range.
http://www.suzukiauto.com/

When Ford can give me a Focus ST or a Fiesta RS, I'll buy a new ford.

-Ghost

CarlisleLandOwn
01-22-2007, 02:16 AM
thats what i said. awd is great in the dirt and crap. dont need it on pavement. i cant have awd cause i love brakestands! :D

I don't know what you are even trying to say. Get your facts together and ONLY when they are then you can post.

AWD on pavement is far superior to rwd or fwd when it comes to going around corners. When you figure out that traction around corners, and OEM under steer are 2 different things then maybe we can have an adult conversation, until then I'm glad you're not out there increasing our insurance premiums driving an awd car.

The_Ghost
01-22-2007, 01:38 PM
I don't know what you are even trying to say. Get your facts together and ONLY when they are then you can post.

AWD on pavement is far superior to rwd or fwd when it comes to going around corners. When you figure out that traction around corners, and OEM under steer are 2 different things then maybe we can have an adult conversation, until then I'm glad you're not out there increasing our insurance premiums driving an awd car.

Unfortunately, carlislewhatshisface is right-- most AWD cars have understeer dialed in DELIBERATELY, for 'safety'.

While I do enjoy gloating to my WRX-driving buddy that I can do a burnout and he can't, I know that given how much drastically lighter than me he is and with AWD grip, mechanically, his car is far superior to mine. I would gladly have AWD over just RWD or FWD.

-Ghost

CarlisleLandOwn
01-22-2007, 01:48 PM
Unfortunately, carlislewhatshisface is right-- most AWD cars have understeer dialed in DELIBERATELY, for 'safety'.

While I do enjoy gloating to my WRX-driving buddy that I can do a burnout and he can't, I know that given how much drastically lighter than me he is and with AWD grip, mechanically, his car is far superior to mine. I would gladly have AWD over just RWD or FWD.

-Ghost

Ahem, LAND OWNER, I own land in carlisle. Ok, you probably haven't heard the story or seen my movie. Its ok.:)

NRTrackStar
01-22-2007, 02:06 PM
Pretty much all cars have understeer dialed in deliberately from the factory for safety reasons, regardless of drivetrain configuration. It's not just an AWD thing.

XxSlowpokexX
01-22-2007, 04:02 PM
I witnessed the making of the movie

The_Ghost
01-22-2007, 09:18 PM
i have no idea what you're talking about.

There's a cargo company called carlisle something or other and marie callendar's here has a cargobox trailer that says that behind the restaurant. Anyways, at least I didn't insult you or do anything else terribly vulgar. :P

Unfortunately almost everything has understeer dialed in from the factory-- just less with some cars than others... the supercoupe in particular had amazingly controllable, neutral handling. It is my belief, however, that the average joe would not be able to control the car, as wild as it was, despite the neutral handling.. it was not very forgiving.

Interestingly enough, the windstar does not exhibit understeer-- I think the elongated rear and weight behind the front wheels gives it a little bit of an oversteer characteristic.

I test drove a Suzuki SX4 today, and was quite impressed by the little car. The interior quality was good and it wasn't crummy, like Suzukis past. Now, if only Ford could turn around its act like Suzuki's trying to. The only complaint I had with an otherwise outstanding vehicle was that the engine itself was noisy at idle-- only from directly under the hood, it sounded a little tappety, otherwise it was dead quiet. With the Focus we had or my tbird, our windstar or mustang, they all idle quite loudly and exhibit a loud sucking noise, almost vacuum-esque.

Anyways, as opposed to the 2007 Focus ZX3 hatch I drove, which cost $3,000 more, by the way, the Suzuki is better equipped, safer, roomier, seated better and drove better. If I was to buy today I can already tell you where my money'd be going.

Though I haven't driven a 05+ Mustang 5-spd Pony Pkg yet, or even a 5-spd 05+, I am betting it won't drive half as well.

-Ghost

thunderbirdlver
01-22-2007, 09:25 PM
I don't know what you are even trying to say. Get your facts together and ONLY when they are then you can post.

AWD on pavement is far superior to rwd or fwd when it comes to going around corners. When you figure out that traction around corners, and OEM under steer are 2 different things then maybe we can have an adult conversation, until then I'm glad you're not out there increasing our insurance premiums driving an awd car.


wow ur a jerk. but i drove front wheel, all wheel, and rear wheel drive. i loved my rear wheel drive the best. so i do not care what u think. stop acting like my sister.

Lethal-Venom
01-24-2007, 11:05 AM
..........

lilredstang
01-24-2007, 05:25 PM
OK. So what if ford didnt put as much work into the mustang as they did? Does anyone realize how well those things sold. The new mustang was a test. They wanted to try doing things differently to improve overall quality and reduce the production costs. They nailed a bullseye. Now not only is the mustang making ford some nice cash but its redesign has tought them a thing or two that will now trickle down to other ford products. GIVE IT TIME!
They can't do a major redesign of every car and truck all at once. "Good things come to those who wait"

CarlisleLandOwn
01-25-2007, 07:06 AM
I witnessed the making of the movie

Do you know of anyone that has pictures of video of the event other then D?


i have no idea what you're talking about.

There's a cargo company called carlisle something or other and marie callendar's here has a cargobox trailer that says that behind the restaurant. Anyways, at least I didn't insult you or do anything else terribly vulgar. :P
-Ghost

I had my car rotating on Axis in the field behind the Hotel Carlisle. D video taped it, while about 50+ people cheered it on. In the end I recieved a ticket for tresspassing, and paid to fix the grass. Hence the name Carlisle Land Owner ... I own land in Carlisle! :D

mc94xr7
06-02-2008, 10:15 AM
the only thing ford has going for them is there stang and truck. every thing else is a piece of chevy. if i wanted a 4 banger, i'd buy Japanese. end of story:eek:

greg91sc
02-22-2009, 10:40 PM
Here is thae way I see it. Look at the economy, where would you like to buy from??? North America or Japan??

I wouldn't buy a GM because thier reliability is terrible. They do not have any products that are true quality anymore. Even thier 5 ton trucks (T8500) are junk with the small Japaneese motor in them. The old Cat powered ones were 100% better. Sinking ship

Chrysler is a different story, if they had staled as Daimler Chrysler and not launched the gas guzzeling products when gas was $140/ barrel thier possition would have been different.

Now on to Ford. Yes much of the line up is not appealing to many people at the moment but they are doing something right. They seem to be a hell of allot more reliable and they are allot cheaper than an import to fix. I drive a diesel 7.3 F350 and every day it starts it drives and always ready for whatever is throwen at it. (except it hates the -35c temp). Now the SC was not the most reliable car in the world but it sure did appeal to all of us. Now Ford should take input from its customers on what they want to see in the future. Bring back the Tbird and offer a range of packages. The Turbo Coupe was a hit when it was launched, the same with the SC so why can't the next one be a sucess??

I think these hybrids are not going to stick, wait and see what the repair bills on those are going to be, let alone the resale value. Or how about GMs Impala the V8 that can run on 4 cyl, ok lets see how the engine wear on that goes.

The Mustang has been around for along time and will continue. Mabye allitle too much attention, but it has never steered them wrong.

This is a quote off SCCOWC from John who posts as Vtgecgrs and it hits the nail on the head in my opinion " You do realize that Ford did not get any of the bailout money right. They did not need the money as they had enough capital to run until the end of 2009. Ford also have alot of new products coming out that are pretty good.

I have an employee that has an 07 toyota camry and it need an alternator with only 61k on the car and toyota wants 900.00 to do the repair. Ford and GM would be less than 1/3. If we do not support north american products we will end up losing in the end. Even Toyota's quality has been droping too. I did not like the bailout either I would actually like to see GM and Chrysler go down as it will give Ford a chance as they are the strongest of the three by a long shot and they may become more viable as a result. The problem is if GM or chrysler go down they will drag down all tjhe other companies too as suppliers that provide parts for all of them will likley go bankrupt too and that will make it difficult for all the manufacturers from being able to produce cars in north america which means even more job losses. the residual effect on the economy is likely worse than the bailout. I just wish there were better controls on where the money was spent.

All car manufactuer's are hurting right now even the foreign ones. Toyota and Honda are even offering 0% which is unheard of for them. The fact they are private owned means we will never know how bad they are doing financially and they would never tell us if they were in dire straights as that would hurt them even more. Ford was stupid to try and get money for free with GM and chrysler. "


http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f229/greg91sc/IMGP1191.jpg
Greg

The_Ghost
02-23-2009, 03:25 AM
Here is thae way I see it. Look at the economy, where would you like to buy from??? North America or Japan??

I wouldn't buy a GM because thier reliability is terrible. They do not have any products that are true quality anymore. Even thier 5 ton trucks (T8500) are junk with the small Japaneese motor in them. The old Cat powered ones were 100% better. Sinking ship

Chrysler is a different story, if they had staled as Daimler Chrysler and not launched the gas guzzeling products when gas was $140/ barrel thier possition would have been different.

http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f229/greg91sc/IMGP1191.jpg
Greg

I'd still rather buy American than Japanese-- I'm still a Ford loyalist, and I am drooling over the new SHO...

Here's what's wrong with Chrysler -- Not enough products people want to buy, complete dependence on rental fleets to sell cars.
When was the last time that someone you know bought a NEW Sebring by CHOICE? Sure, they still have the Caravan-- but hardly any of those sell. And what about that awful Dodge Caliber and Dodge Nitro? Sure, you can get one used in SRT4 trim for less than 10k, but the primary problem is that 90% of Chrysler's crap is UGLY, hateful to drive and expensive.

The other problem is that Chrysler basically has no plan to get out of this besides keep asking for money.
Before the end of the year, sad as it is, I am betting there will not be a Chrysler as we know it. The Jeep brand will be saved, and likely Dodge, but Chrysler will not be mourned.

Join me on jalopnik.com as we follow Chrysler's death. They stopped production back in December with no promise to resume and still haven't.
They're storing unsold cars on their test tracks. You can even get Employee Pricing ++ on a 6MT Challenger (see the jalopnik article!).
I also speculate that someone will buy out the VIPER as a brand... But what do I know?

shoalcracker
07-30-2010, 01:47 PM
Is this a burp in the system.

davec73
11-29-2011, 09:05 PM
this thread is 5 years old how bout closing it

rbrown
07-18-2012, 11:35 PM
lol.

Why did you bring it up. Let sleeping dogs lie...