If the refreshes go as well as the Five Hundred to Taurus redo, it may not make a Hell of a lot of difference. But it probably will. This website has constantly derided The Big 2.8 for letting popular (and unpopular) models wither on the vine, as their transplanted competition raced one or two or even three (four?) steps ahead with newer, shinier, better versions of existing products. So we're happy to report that FoMoCo's global product chief Derrick Kuzak put his hand on a stack of Automotive News' [sub] sales stats and swore by all that is saleable that his employer will now be "carrying out a product cadence that calls for change at three-, six-, nine- and 12-year markers." And Derrick's he's not weaselling, either. "At every one of those milestones, every one of our products, (we will make) a change that is marked and recognizable by the customer." Yes, well, that assumes consumers can identify Ford, Lincoln and Mercury's anodyne models in the first place– never mind their updates. But we quibble. Clearly, Ford CEO Alan Mulally's desire to emulate Toyota continues apace. Which is just as well; the clock is ticking.
Find Reviews by Make:
Read all comments
Let’s hope they fast-track that Focus redesign.
Free the Lincoln LS!
Ford is going to make it through the rough times. I think AM gets it as does Nardelli. RW hasn’t a clue.
Hallelujah!! This, of all the turnaround plan actions put forth so far, is the most important. It doesn’t matter how good a car Ford makes if they don’t change it for 15 years. I hope they follow through on this promise.
Nardelli does have a clue, but he’s just one of the minions moving Chrysler towards the strip and flip that his masters want. RW either doesn’t have a clue or is feigning it because they don’t want anyone to know that they really want GM NA to file for bankruptcy.
If Ford sticks to this plan it will be a good thing. Especially if they roll product updates and fixes into the cycle. There is no excuse for letting faulty transmission or engine designs carry on year after year.
Nine and 12 year markers??? WTF?? If they are going to keep products around for that long with only “recognizable changes”, they still don’t get it. They’ve made “recognizable” changes to the Focus, but it is still outdated.
Frequent model changes will be necessary to keep up with the competition, but will they be sufficient given the flatlining economy? Fortunately, the car lineup will be almost all new in about 2 years time – Verve/Fiesta/whatever, C2 Focus, Interceptor-ish Taurus, and a Fusion refresh.
Uh, I thought the Five Hundred to Taurus refresh was considered a good one. Setting aside the naming and considering the car alone, the biggest complaint about the Five Hundred was the powertrain, right? The Taurus has an upgraded powertrain. What’s to complain about there? Isn’t addressing the problem a good thing?
If the current “Taurus” was brought out as-is when the Five Hundred emerged, I expect it would have been held in fairly high regard, but now the image is poisoned by the previous vehicle. Forget all that, isn’t the Taurus a pretty darn good car now? I’d take one over a crossover if I wanted to cart around four people plus a bunch of stuff in the (gigantic) trunk.
Refreshment is “Refreshing”. Ongoing improvement is what is needed to stay competitive. There is plenty competition out there in the car & truck market. No one can afford to get caught napping.
# thalter :Nine and 12 year markers??? WTF?? If they are going to keep products around for that long with only “recognizable changes”, they still don’t get it. They’ve made “recognizable” changes to the Focus, but it is still outdated.
Realize that the 2007 Honda Accord still had parts of the 1991 Accord floorplan in it and you get an idea how Toyota and Honda carry forward and improve their products. If they’re updates the way that Honda and Toyota do it, they’ll be fine. AM is a big-time believer in the Toyota way, which is a good direction to go.
Forget all that, isn’t the Taurus a pretty darn good car now?
It may be, but looking at one makes me nod off as though I were in my high school civics class after lunch. Seriously, could their be a more mundane-looking vehicle of recent vintage on the road today? At least the Sebring has the distinction of being astonishingly ugly.
I suppose that makes sense if you think that grotesque is better then inoffensive. Can’t say I’m with you there.
Once, Ford refreshed EVERY year..now what do we have …the same boring piles year after year.
Need a coupla examples?
Of the Panther trio, only the Lincoln Town Car has been reskinned more than once. The Crown Vic and Grand Marquis have been reskinned ONCE since 1979.
The Ford Ranger? Look at a 1983, and a 2008. What’s the major difference? The grille.
Hey Ford, how do you expect to pay off that multi-billion dollar loan with your current lineup?
It’ll take a miracle, and introducing the 2009 F150 with the same ‘ol 5.4 isn’t gonna help much.
BKW: “Hey Ford, how do you expect to pay off that multi-billion dollar loan with your current lineup?”
Isn’t that the point of the article ? Ford seems to have a plan.
Look–we all agree Ford can’t win with their current line-up—that is why they will be offering new vehicles (eg. Verve, Flex, and a “real” new Taurus)and offering significant refreshes to the vehicles that already are performing well (eg. Edge, F150 and Fusion)
Importantly—if we take Kuzak at his word–they will not sit on their asses and let cars rot on the vine (eg. original Taurus).
I call this a plan…what say you ?
With whose money?
Did I mention the Taurus is dull? It’s a retirement home on wheels.
So far, Ford looks like they’re sticking to their guns on this. 2009 Fusion about 36 months after launch. 2010 Edge about 36 monhts after launch. 2011 Focus will be less than 36 months. Taurus is ahead of schedule as well. Further out, the EUCD2 Fusion is set for MY2012 currently, 36 months after the 2009 launch.
The notion that these updates will lack the necessary improvements to boost Ford’s products ignores the fact that we’ve yet to see a “Mulally” update (updates started since the big man came to Dearborn). The Fusion will be the first, basically, and it looks to be fairly sheetmetal and interior intensive on top of new engines, transmissions and a hybrid. The 2010 Taurus and Edge will be the second and third, and we know at least one of these is a complete reskin on top of a heavily revised platform.
The Ranger and Panthers are the last two of Ford’s past errors – errors that this team won’t correct until the global platforms are ready early next decade. They make up about 5% of Ford’s sales and are hardly representative of Ford’s current offerings or future potential.
Nearly forgot to mention:
3 years – cosemtic, minor platform updates (unless something significant comes up).
6 years – completely new body with new lines, major platform updates
9 years – same as three on new body
12 years – completely new ground-up platform
Technology, engine, transmission, feature updates as needed to keep competitive.
When Ford closes the Twin Cities assembly plant, that’ll be the end of the Ranger, and Ford has nothing to replace it with.
The Crown Vic is strictly a fleet vehicle now, and both it and the Grand Marquis are scheduled for extinction. What does Ford plan on replacing both with? Nothing.
The Taurus (nee 500…what a horrible name, what was Ford thinking?) isn’t selling worth a hoot. I have yet to see ONE print or TV ad for it and the Sable, nee Montego.
Rebates are heavy on the Fusion here in LA LA Land…ergo, sales are sliding, so it’s the same old sad story…paying ppl to buy them.
The Big Three gave away the passenger car market 20+ years ago. Their chances of getting it back are twofold: Slim and none.
Stick a fork in Ford…they’re done. Several months ago, Alan Mulally said as much when he was quoted as saying…”Ford is in a race against time.”
Refreshed or not…I say again…how will Ford pay off that multi-billion dollar loan, when next to nothing is selling?
Ford needs to refresh all right. Get rid on the bean counter that is Alan Mulally, and put a car guy back at the helm, Lee Iacocca might just be available. Mebbe he can work the miracle that Ford must have in order to stay in the carbiz.
introducing the 2009 F150 with the same ‘ol 5.4 isn’t gonna help much.
What’s wrong with the 5.4? I am not disagreeing, just asking.
I will chime in and say I like the new Taurus. Conservatively styled maybe, but at least it’s not an amalgam of strange angles that seems to be the styling trend these days. And now that the Vulcan is gone (hooray!) it actually has decent power…hopefully the new mill will have staying power.
I’d like Ford to be able to follow through on this plan, but like other posters I don’t see where the money is going to come from (the taxpayer maybe?).
“BuckD :
January 28th, 2008 at 1:30 pm
Forget all that, isn’t the Taurus a pretty darn good car now?
It may be, but looking at one makes me nod off as though I were in my high school civics class after lunch. Seriously, could their be a more mundane-looking vehicle of recent vintage on the road today? At least the Sebring has the distinction of being astonishingly ugly.”
Ah yes… but Toyotas are every bit as boring. And most of America seems to like boring… as long as it includes reliable. I have no problem if that brings Ford enough business to become healthy and strong again. Just as long as there are enough vehicles sprinkled throughout the lineup to please enthusiasts like me.