Barron’s [sub] lobs Ford CEO Alan Mulally enough underhand pitches to sink the Yankees, and then offers this strangely incomplete and mislabeled guide to future FoMoCo products. The most convincing part of Big Al’s spiel: cutting costs. Before reading this excerpt [after the jump] from the Q&A, ask yourself this: are these the cars that America wants? Does the Ford brand, and its marketing mavens, have enough oomph to go the distance? Stay tuned . . .
In the past, critics, including us, have faulted Ford for not bringing more of its European cars to the U.S. and Canada.
We are bringing global cars to North America, starting with the Fiesta in 2010. By 2013, at least seven Ford brand nameplates — 80% of our production — will be on global platforms. That means common parts and large cost savings. This is dramatic: When I came to Ford three years ago, we had 97 nameplates. Now we have just 59. Can you imagine what that means in terms of being able to focus efforts? In addition, because market segments contract and expand, we’re pushing toward more flexible plants. Almost all of our plants are going to have flexible body shops in the next two or three years, so they can build several vehicles. That, combined with fewer platforms, will make us very, very flexible. All our plants are now more efficient. Many are half of the size they were in terms of the number of employees. We did all that by working in a collaborative way with the union.
[Thanks to Jim Zellmer for the link.]
That list seems incomplete to me. Where is the Transit Connect EV, the small Mercury, the Focus based EV, the PHEV, the updated Flex. Not to mention all the powertrain improvements across the board as Ecoboost makes its way to the Mustang, F-150, etc. And also, this list cuts off 2013, when the new Fusion and Milan come along.
The point is, Ford has regular product introductions scheduled over the next 3 years to keep lineup fresh.
The list does seem incomplete based on everything we have heard Ford has coming in the next 3 yrs.
Also, why does it list the Edge as a “minivan”?
Having said that, it should be enough but only if the new cars are solid sellers (and profitable) in their segments and have the appropriate marketing support going forward to keep them selling. Big IF…
Obviously Barron’s list isn’t a complete enumeration of Ford’s lineup, but rather an incomplete summary of the product introductions and/or redesigns on the plate.
Ford will be fielding the most competitive set of offerings across the North American volume market segments of anybody. What other company will have more volume market segments covered with strong vehicles than Ford? Rather than asking “is it enough” of Ford, shouldn’t the question be: Who else will be in a position to compete strongly with Ford across the market? Toyota will give Ford strong competition in cars and small CUVs, but Toyota is a joke in the 1/2 ton and larger trucks. Honda is an exceptional rifle shot player, but leaves vast portions of the market uncovered. The declining minivan market is the only one of size where Ford doesn’t have a real entry.
Barrons labeling the Edge a minivan? Sloppy work from another room in the House of Murdoch.
I agree, a bit odd calling the Edge a minivan and the MKX an SUV. I expect a pretty radical facelift of the Flex as well by 2012 if its sales don’t pick up.
I’d say that Ford has plenty of models, possibly even too many in the CUV/Not-quite-wagon field with the C-Max, Kuga, and unibody Explorer on the horizon.
The real key isn’t going to be releasing new models to hit every niche demographic, but continually improving and updating the core models to keep them not only competitive, but top of class.
It works. America is losing wealth every day and continuing to cash out future wealth for immediate consumption.
Unless we invent something that creates 8-10 million high paying/high benefit/low skilled jobs that can’t go offshore, the unemployed are pretty much going to stay that way. Heck they even invented a term to make folks feel good about the economy even though they are unemployed.. “if not your fault that your unemployed… we are having a jobless recovery”
Ford needs to sell quality cars in the US that are designed to be profitable based on non-US sales. Then any sales they get here are just add to profits.
Expect new designs/features to show up in Asia/Europe first and then come here once they are successful over there. We will get the hand me downs. It’s all we will be able to afford.
The Ford brand is going to be extremely competitive. Even when they’re building products that are not ready for the public’s acceptance (Flex, Freestyle, Edge) they are spending extra money to address those concerns.
GM and Chrysler have primarily done that from a quality standpoint. Ford, at least from my observations at the auctions, seems to be very attuned towards the ‘presentation’ aspect as well.
Oddly enough, I don’t see Toyota addressing these concerns to the same degree as Ford. I see a far stronger orientation towards cost cutting and improving quality… which is fine. But if the product is not competitive in the first place, you have to focus on addressing those weaknesses. The Scion Xb, Xd, Toyota Avalon and the Tundra model are crystal clear examples of this.
The Lincoln and Mercury divisions are not healthy for Ford’s core brand. They are unprofitable and still have a negative brand perception that won’t be overcome. Lincoln is for older folks… who are rapidly dying out. Mercury is indistinguishable from Ford and redundant in virtually every respect.
It seems to me that to be competitive, an automaker needs one of two things. Fresh product that is appealing (ie – the Ford Mustang) or not-so-fresh product that is inexpensive and perceived as a good value on both the cost and durability fronts (ie- the Chevy Impala).
Ford seems to be the only one of the old Big 3 that has a shot at the former. GM and Chrysler appear to have much less (much, much less for Chrysler) in the way of product in the pipeline over this period. Also, as their products age, GM and Chrysler’s value offerings (Impala and PT to name two) are going to continue to whither with an increasing “rental car” odor which will erode resale.
I have to leave, so I will leave the Foreign company comparisons to Ford to someone else.
Buzz I’m receiving on the new Taurus is that it’s larger than many people want a car to be these days. Ford might have gotten it backwards. The 2010 Taurus would have been a hit in 2005. And the 2005 Five Hundred might be the right car for 2010!
On the other hand, people are telling me more and more that they are themselves hearing good things about the Fusion. It’s quickly becoming the Camry for people who don’t want a Camry. I’m not sure where this leaves the Accord.
Found on road dead does not have what it takes (by the way, I own three of their cars).
Only the Fiesta, Focus, Mustang, F150 have any real sales future. They won’t make any money on the Fiesta and Focus, the Mustang is low volume. Hyundai/Kia will nail them at the low end. Honda/BMW/GM/Toyota/Subaru/Nissan at the higher end of the Ford product lineup.
“Ecoboost” is the worst name selection I have heard in my life (turbocharging). So we still have Fix or Repair Daily surviving on the F150.
Walking through my subdivision, someone had a new Buick, black. It had a better paint job than any Ford or Toyota product I have seen in recent years.
I personally think FOrd/Lincoln/Mercury have too many cars.
Mercury shouldn’t even exist now.
Ford has its trucks which are solid performers.
The Focus, Fusion and Taurus provide a full line of vehicles from compact to full size plus its Edge crossover as well as the Explorer and Expedition which some people don’t need but they are still there just in case.
And if you want to spend more, you buy the Lincoln MKZ, MKX, MKS or the Navigator. As much as I’d like to think people don’t want full sied SUV’s anymore, people like my Uncle Thomas are still buying em cause they like to drive their families cross country.
Ford and GM’s product lineups are actually pretty good. Chrysler’s sucks now.
It’s encouraging that Ford may be learning the lesson that regular model refreshes keeps up showroom traffic.
However, all new vehicles also bring the possibility of reliability issue and that is still appears to be an issue for Ford. I recently saw a new Fusion on a dealer lot that had serious interior and exterior quality problems. Not statistical proof of anything but somewhat alarming that this could get through QA undetected.
Having said that, I still think Ford’s product pipeline is in many ways more impressive than Toyota’s as Ford actually has products that people are actually getting excited about.
Matt 51
You think the Fiesta and Focus won’t sell?
I have news for you – they are selling, and the Fiesta will sell. People are broke now but they still need cars and for those people who need inexpensive small cars, these cars will sell. Some people don’t trust or want a Hyundai or a Toyota or a Honda.
And by the way, those stupid monikers you used about Ford’s name are bullshit. I’ve owned a 2002 Expedition and a Mercury Cougar before. Never had to get repairs since I kept up with regular maintanence. The only problem my Expedition had was the need for new Coil packs and control arms since I drove it hard and my Cougar never needed repairs.
Lets not forget all of the folks who were loyal GM and Chrysler customers before American Leyland went on the dole. Ford will benefit from the large cloud of FUD that is over them.
That’s an easy question. I think Ford is set to have the strongest lineup across the board for the next three model years. I don’t see any category where they are not going to be contending for best-in-class.
About Ford’s marketing…look at the scoreboard. Ford has outperformed GM, Toyota, Honda and Chrysler consistently in 2009. Something is working for them.
I’ve argued with Robert before about the effectiveness of Ford’s marketing. I think getting Mike Rowe a couple of years ago was a brilliant move, and Denis Leary’s spots are the only memorable truck ads out there right now.
But I think we’re seeing something else, too. Ford is emerging from the meltdown of the last year as a success story. The government didn’t have to rescue them, they’re making some very good cars, and more people are buying them. That’s going to create a bandwagon effect that we probably won’t see in full force until next year.
Don’t underestimate the importance of this. GM didn’t remain the #1 automaker for 60 years because they made the best cars or had the best marketing. A lot of it happened because GM was the biggest, strongest automaker in the world. If that sentiment shifts to Ford – lookout. They’re going to be helped a lot by GM being much weaker on product for the foreseeable future and Toyota just beginning their turn around. Don’t be surprised if there’s a new #1 in North America three years from now.
Hmmm
Maybe its the eco-Honda driving compact weenie in me…
But I dont think the Ford lineup is perfect (then again Honda / Toyota / Nissan arent either). Chrysler and GM is far from it. At least there is a “credible vehicle” coming from Europe in the form of the Focus hatch and Fiesta. All GM has to work with is that shit car the Aveo.. and the Cruze which is a good size larger than the dirtbox Cobalier it has /had.
The MKX / Edge are both UNIBODY / CUVS. They sit on the same frame as the S80 / Taurus. (Just remember when Ford touts their excellence in crash safety.. it isn’t theirs. Its VOLVO’s!)
The Flex is some massive marketing abomination (that charges ya EXTRA for the signature white roof, that debuted in the concept.) This is a vehicle for people who cant look at a minivan properly and who think they need an Expedition for commuting duties.
As for all of the PHEV vehicles coming over from Europe…
Id just be happy about what IS coming over. Like the Transit (is here, saw them being to dealerships on transporters on Friday). The Fiesta and the (hopefully hatch) Focus are being built here in formerly either Windstar or Exploder plants. I also believe the S and C Max are also coming albiet LARGER than they were in Europe.
And they, like Toyota, are still stuck with size SUV / CUV issues (and are going to be for the next 5-7yrs) like the Escape v Exploder v Edge.
I actually love the Fiesta design along with the coming 2011 Focus hatch, but there are still some GLARING omissions from actual vehicled that I want to DRIVE.
There’s a bunch of retirees down here that got their shorts all in a bunch worried about their Marquis’.
They ain’t been right since they walked into our Ford dealer for their Crown Vic and he had to refer them to the Mercury store.
a side by side comparison of Ford products with Toyota products would be interesting.
The MKX / Edge are both UNIBODY / CUVS. They sit on the same frame as the S80 / Taurus. (Just remember when Ford touts their excellence in crash safety.. it isn’t theirs. Its VOLVO’s!)
Last I checked, Ford owns Volvo. That makes it their platform, regardless of which division is using it.
The Flex is some massive marketing abomination (that charges ya EXTRA for the signature white roof, that debuted in the concept.) This is a vehicle for people who cant look at a minivan properly and who think they need an Expedition for commuting duties.
Mini also charges extra for their signature British flag roof, and I don’t hear people bitching about that. It costs more to do a two-tone paint job, and from what I’ve heard the white roof is a love/hate thing. Making it an option is a better choice than putting it on every one.
The Flex is a large SUV for a world with gas over $3 a gallon. That’s it’s marketing “abomination”. It can be equipped to tow 4500 pounds, can carry seven people comfortably, and gets better gas mileage than any comparable truck-based SUV.
Accords – MKX and Edge are CD3 platform vehicles, not D3. And while yes, D3 did debut with Volvo, it did so while under Ford ownership, so, really, it is also a Ford platform.
The Transit Connect has been an exceptional success thus far, and I can’t wait to see sales figures for August to see how many fly off the lots in its first full month of sales.
The Focus may not be as nice as the Civic (which I’d rate top dog in the compact field) but it is almost even with the Corolla and certainly nicer than the Cobalt or Caliber. The upcoming euro-Focus is a world beater in Europe already, as is the Fiesta, so no reason to have anything but high hopes for those cars.
Flashpoint – I am with you on Mercury, as is pretty much everyone else. As soon as Ford manages to combine all Lincoln-Mercury dealerships with a Ford dealership Mercury will no longer be needed, and will most likely disappear.
Wasn’t there gonna be a Kuga?
Or is this being renamed for the US?
The trick is the Ecoboost.
If put into these smaller cars, the Fusion, Focus, etc…these will be fun little cars.
as Michael Karesh says, people are liking the smaller Fusion.
Imagine this with a ecoboost 4.
I hope they allow Mazda to have it as well.
The Mazda6 could use it.
+1 on /w comment Unless we invent something that creates 8-10 million high paying/high benefit/low skilled jobs that can’t go offshore, the unemployed are pretty much going to stay that way.
Even the best and brightest I knew in at IBM (and those are amongst the most skilled, educated, experienced, hard-working in America, as well as the B&B) are getting the sack: if they are, then what’s the hope for the rest of America?
We’re like the Union side during most of America’s Civil War: you can sign up and fight, but without decent generalship and a winning strategy (one that emphasizes more than just just downsizing and short term profits), you’re just stepping into the meat grinder.
And, more on the topic, I wish to God VW would bring its complete line over. Our local GM dealer took it in the neck…but is thanking its lucky stars its other franchise is VW. Still, VWoA’s mgmnt is damned near as brain dead as Detroit…having the Polo and Lupo lines, but not here, and then spending the farm to develop a me-too SUV/CUV just as that market tanked.
Volvo is part of Ford, and the D3 platform is now a Ford platform. It’s evident from Ford’s excellent safety performance on other platforms that expertise in safety has been transferred and Volvo doesn’t have the monopoly.
Also . . . while the platforms may have originated in Europe, the alt propulsion engineering (i.e., the PHEV or BEV powertrains) are done here in the US.
First of all, Barron’s list is incomplete and has errors, so much for their credibility!
Ford CEO Alan Mulally has installed a “system and process” at Ford for Continuous Improvement and mgmt ownership, that gives Ford the ability to quickly bring new and fresh product to market – ref 2010 Taurus developed in 2-years!
Mulally’s intent on having full coverage in small/medium/large cars/utilities/trucks with refresh cycles every 4-years (or less) – Ref. 2010 Flex w/EB upgrades in only 1-year!
Plus, “patented exclusives” that will make it harder for the competition to copy and catch-up, such as the (10) “exclusive” features in the 2010 Taurus (EPAS, EB, APA, BLIS, MyKey, Sync, forward looking radar, massage seats, and more…). These are NOT “hand-me-downs” from the Europe/Asia markets, they are US based first!
Prediction: The EcoBoost technology Ford is delivering with 355HP and 350Ft-lbs torque in the Taurus SHO, MKS, MKT and Flex has WOWED the auto enthusists and will be huge sell-outs as they hit the market – Ford won’t be able to build enough to meet demand and they will sell at a premium = profit$. This will give Ford a “premium” position in the market and further distance them from the competition! Buy Ford (F).
NulloModo and baldheadeddork:
You actually think Ford assisted EQUALLY with Volvo with the development of the platform underpinning virtually every new Ford / Linc vehicle in the past 3yrs? Taurus / Edge / Flex / MKX / MKZ etc etc?
As for as the Civic goes..
Ive / am in the market for a replacement for my 00 Accord, and while the current one is too big (600lbs), the Civic just isnt enough. Not to mention demographics for Accord buyers are stretching into Avalon / 300 / Crown Vic territory. Time for me to exit and buy a car I with a lower median age and better looks.
As for as the Civic interior goes, it just doesn’t do it for me. Too much damn plastic and not enough features. Not to mention.. no soft touch. Its simple things like the execution in the nav system and center console that aggravate me.
Ive also found the Mazda 3 hatch has a better interior than the Civic, with the 10yr old Focus and or Cobalier being off my charts.
What a terribly miseading list. I’d be pissed if I was a Ford PR guy.
The problem is that Ford is taking a fire hose to water their dried up lawn. Their grass is slowly growing, but they are spending loads of cash (that they shouldn’t be wasting) on multiple solutions to each problem. How many CUVs does Ford really need? How many platforms for high and low volume sedans are necessary?
Well, Ford is making steady improvements to their lineup. Let’s look at their competition:
Toyota: turning into Buick. Their cars are falling more and more out of favor with key demographics (aka younger, trendier, urban.) Their quality is slipping, and their cars handle bad enough for even non-enthusiasts to whine.
Honda: turning into KIA. Honda hasn’t added a decent product to their lineup since the 2006 Civic. The rest of their products have become increasingly disappointing, with the miserable little Insight being a shining example of Honda’s (lack of) engineering prowess.
GM: GM is still making better products, but there seems to be too many conflicting messages. Even if GM is better on its best day than Ford, it’s still worse on its worst day, which it still seems to have far more of.
Chrysler: Who the hell knows.
Hyundai/KIA: These guys are probably Ford’s best competition, but the reality is that there’s still a stigma to owning either.
Accords – Well, since Ford owned Volvo, and Volvo did the work, yes, Ford did the work. If best way to get a safe platform is to farm out the development to your engineers who have the most experience with safety-focussed design, the good business decision is to let them run with it.
Again though, the Volvo D3 platform is responsible for the Flex, Taurus, and MKS. The Edge, MKX, and Fusion are all based on the Ford/Mazda co-developed CD3 platform, as are the Mazda6, CX-7, and CX-9.
Speaking of Mazda, I’d forgotten about the 3. If I were buying a compact today, I’d jump all over the 3 for the best price/performance/style combo. If I had a little more money to spend the Volvo C30 is also pretty appealing.
The Focus isn’t ten years old, it got a major refresh in 2008, and has been given continuous love for 2009 and 2010 with styling improvement as well as interior quality. The S and SE variants are pretty plain and plasticky, but the SEL and SES (especially the 2010 SES) are real lookers, even more so with the dark interior option.
Nullomodo:
The Mazda 3 hatch with the 2.5 (a wishful) Tan interior is a better car than the Honda Civic is.
Mazda at least does a better job integrating the nav system.. than Honda does. Albiet its much smaller than it should be in the Mazda. Where as Honda does a Ford / GM, ships a stock boxed unit n shoved it into a unfinished hole..
The Mazda 3 hatch is a better looking and sportier alternative (with more standard interior options (even though it doesn’t have thoughtful things like manual folding mirrors), even though all black interior.. SUCKS) to the Civic (until Honda brings over the Civic hatch.. then its all over!)
And remember…
The Focus on the market now IS the same one as what was released 10yrs ago. Same frame, with a (I believe) a 2.3 ltr mill. It wont be a new Focus.. until whats being made in the factories from Europe actually goes on sale. Remember, on the heels of the cancellation of the 500 / Freestyle, Ford spent a billion or so to redo the Focus body and add a coupe (complete with fender vents) and a new interior as a STOPGAP until the good shit comes.
And as for as the C30 goes…
Its one of those wishful cars.. that just doesn’t get enough appreciation. I always see them in primer / silver color, with the base motor and no options. Where as.. Im sure ya could trick it out with a 6, in blue… maybe an R design. But then again, they wont focus j/k j/k on a car of its size with they have the X90 / 60 and V70 to throw money at.
If GM had simply copied Mazda inch-for-inch for its Pontiac strategy, Pontiac would stil have a reason to exist. We have a Mazda3 and a CX-9, and love everything about both. (I haven’t even had complaints about the 3’s gas mileage; consistently get 27 mpg in urban driving with the 2.0 and 5-speed manual.)
I cross-shopped my 3 against a Focus SE (same MSRP), and the Focus lost on the following items:
* Interior layout
* Lack of ABS
* Lack of rear disk brakes
It’s the little things that add up, and these are the little things that Ford is going to need to do to maintain this very shaky lead it’s holding in this shaky marketplace right now.
rj:
Gm has refused that anyone besides domestics actually exited for the last 3 decades. Even though Saturn was created to go against the evil slanty eyed Honda and Toyotas.
And honestly..
Pontiac shouldnt have had the shit that killed them.
Pontiac shouldnt be in competition against SS.
Pontiac shouldnt have rebadges of the Cobalier / Aveo / Solstice / Equinox or A MINIVAN!!!
Which Mazda 3 did ya pickup…
Accords: “The Mazda 3…all black interior…SUCKS”
So true. Exterior design apes Transformers, and the interior designers have gone all Goth. Don’t like black interiors? Go elsewhere.
Paint colors are almost as bad. Black, silver and gray shades predominate. Just perfect for black-and-white movies.
The trouble with desingning cars for niche markets is that niche markets are small. I’ve bought several Mazdas but it’s hard for me to work up any enthusiasm for the current garish models.
It’s best to do a few things well than many things mediocre-ly. Just ask Maximum “I don’t like badge engineering” Bob over at GM.
Ford ought to dust Mercury, and then offer only 1 or two products per segment. And let the Lincoln brand be truly distinct.
“Will Ford’s Lineup Be Enough?”
Pretty silly question, if you think about it. What does Ford’s line up consist of? Products in nearly every competitive segment, compact, mid size, full size, near-luxury, several SUVs, popular trucks, etc. Their products are well built, score highly in quality ratings and frequency of repair stats. They score mid-pack or better on fuel economy and are priced competitively.
OK, so Mercury is an awkward fit in the whole scheme of things and it might be difficult to justify its continued existence, but otherwise Ford hits all the right notes in the US market. If their line-up isn’t “enough” when the economy recovers, who the heck’s will be?
Will Ford’s Lineup Be Enough?
Let’s get to the heart of the matter: How many Ford platform(s) are not reworked versions of older platforms?
@ Stewart Dean
Excellent analogy… “We’re like the Union side during most of America’s Civil War: you can sign up and fight, but without decent generalship and a winning strategy (one that emphasizes more than just just downsizing and short term profits), you’re just stepping into the meat grinder.”
It doesn’t matter how smart you are… It takes more than a PhD in astrophysics to outrun the grinder.
Remember when a new car pulling into a driveway was a really big deal in the neighborhood? Well it will be again in the near future…
Ford needs to woo the precious few that have managed to outrun the grinder and are willing to sign up for a brand new ride. I think they can/will. I think GM and Chrysler already lost those folks.
Why would the Edge be listed as a minivan?
Cause it kinda is. In fact, most popular “SUVs” are pretty much just tarted up minivans. Great profits are made off of convincing people they aren’t buying a minivan. The whole point of automotive design over the past 30 years might be described as looking for the best way to convince people who are buying minivans that they aren’t actually buying a minivan. Often the key to success is adding a tow kit option.
And, more on the topic, I wish to God VW would bring its complete line over.
No, no, a thousand times no.
The EcoBoost technology Ford is delivering with 355HP and 350Ft-lbs torque in the Taurus SHO, MKS, MKT and Flex has WOWED the auto enthusists and will be huge sell-outs as they hit the market – Ford won’t be able to build enough to meet demand and they will sell at a premium = profit$.
People will love the Ecoboost until the non-enthusiasts start stretching their oil change intervals far beyond the factory recommendation. Then Ford will have a loud, angry group of customers attempting to pursue a class action lawsuit.
Cause it kinda is. In fact, most popular “SUVs” are pretty much just tarted up minivans. Great profits are made off of convincing people they aren’t buying a minivan. The whole point of automotive design over the past 30 years might be described as looking for the best way to convince people who are buying minivans that they aren’t actually buying a minivan.
Toxicroach, I like your take on design trends. However, I’d argue that the point was to convince people they weren’t buying a station wagon. I feel that most SUVs and CUVs are just station wagons on stilts.
I give Ford credit for trying to make a full line of desirable cars and would even consider buying a Fusion or a F-150. The only major hole I see in their lineup is the lack of a minivan. I don’t have children, but dual sliding doors are extremely useful for getting small children in and out of child safety seats when parked in suburban diagonal side-by-side parking lots.
Agree with Sageev regarding burning cash on CUVs and SUVs with too much overlap. Too many models trying to meet the same basic customer desire for more cargo space and higher ride height than a sedan provides. I understand the need for BOF real full size truck SUVs for simultaneously hauling people and towing stuff, but could the Explorer, Edge, and Flex redesign budgets be combined to make one really good mid-size unibody SUV with many trim options?
roshckier, actually I totally agree. The station wagon is the original family car that everyone wants, but no one wants to be seen in.
Big Al says a lot of things…none of which I believe.
Will Ford’s lineup be enough? Probably not.
Ford products are designed with too many compromises (Taurus SHO). Nothing Ford has or will have stands out above the rest in it’s class.
The EcoBoost technology Ford is delivering with 355HP and 350Ft-lbs torque in the Taurus SHO, MKS, MKT and Flex has WOWED the auto enthusists and will be huge sell-outs as they hit the market – Ford won’t be able to build enough to meet demand and they will sell at a premium = profit$. This will give Ford a “premium” position in the market and further distance them from the competition! Buy Ford (F).
No, once people realize that there is nothing “ECO about a 3.5 V6 returning the same mileage as a 4.6/5.7/6.0/6.2 V8, they will not continue to buy it.
Plus, it is FAR more expensive than the $700.00 Ford was quoted before Twin Force came out. $3,000-$5,000 for a V6 that drinks fuel like a V8 is not a good idea.
Exactly correct CrownVic. As Lutz used to say when he was at Chrysler, you won’t sell a lot of cars if you are everyone’s second choice. Ford dominates in Trucks and the Mustang, but nothing else.
I LMFAO if anyone is delusional enough to believe adding turbos gives Ford anything but headaches. As far as “Big Al” “installing a process at Ford” – his overpriced, out of touch, products – oh, LMFAO.
@rochskier: for better or for worse, station wagons are just a niche in the US, CUV’s are just more profitable than a passenger car variant. Are some CUV’s just (less profitable) minivans in disguise? I read that the Mazda CX-9 was originally supposed to be a minivan but got the CUV treatment in 18 months, and the Ford Flex was supposed to have sliding doors. The Lambda CUVs were supposed to have a minivan variant that got nixed – perhaps that’s why the Chevy Traverse is built in a different plant because it was originally a van.
(The Sienna/Odyssey/Grand Caravan/T&C/Sedona use their interior space somewhat differently than CUVs, with a bigger interior box, lower load floor, and 3rd rows that flip backwards into a deep well. Result is ~40% more cargo space than a Lambda.)
To add to the stilt theory of CUVs: the ‘last Caprice Classic wagon and ’09 Traverse CUV are very close in interior dimensions, despite being well over a decade apart.
The problem is that Ford is taking a fire hose to water their dried up lawn. Their grass is slowly growing, but they are spending loads of cash (that they shouldn’t be wasting) on multiple solutions to each problem. How many CUVs does Ford really need? How many platforms for high and low volume sedans are necessary?
That is the best assessment of Ford I have heard yet.
I would never even consider buying a Ford until I saw one of the test Fiestas around here the other week and it was a nice looking hatch (Better looking than the Yaris hatch I have now). Wish it was a 3 door not a 5 door though. I would seriously consider it if it gets 40 mpg like my Yaris, they bring the 3-door over and the price is low enough.
@P71…we have heard your Ford assessment over and over. I think we all know where you stand.
What I would like from you (as a GM Fanboy) is your assessment of the latest 2 big GM launches…the Camaro and the LaCrosse that seem to be heading down a quality hellhole.
The Camaro is already blowing out transmissions….and if we are to believe Rapid Robert’s rumor, the LaCrosse is beset with electronic demons.
Without mentioning or comparing to Ford—-I would like to hear you talk to the current GM launch quality woes.
“Will Ford’s Lineup Be Enough?”
The bigger question is does Ford have enough cash in reserve to last another two years if the economy doesn’t rebound until then?
My wife will be looking for a small, fun, fuel-efficient car in the next year or so. She looked at VW, and Mini, and then I showed her the 2010 Fiesta – she really likes the looks of the thing.
If it is halfway decent to drive, and the kids fit in the back, I think Ford may have a sale here.
A year or two ago, we wouldn’t have looked at anything Ford had to offer.
Whatever that’s worth.
-ted
Honda: turning into KIA. Honda hasn’t added a decent product to their lineup since the 2006 Civic. The rest of their products have become increasingly disappointing, with the miserable little Insight being a shining example of Honda’s (lack of) engineering prowess.
I would call the Fit, Accord, and CR-V decent at the least, if not exceptional, including by the market’s measure. One loses credibility with comments such as the one above regarding Honda’s engineering capability; in fact, I don’t think such a statement can be made about any automobile company currently at play in the North American market.
P71_CrownVic
And to all the Ford dissing crowd.
So, what are you saying, exactly.
That Ford is NOT going to make it?
Let’s get real, folks.
Even now, in today’s horrid auto environment, Ford IS doing it.
In fact, when all others are failing, Ford is going up.
So how in heck will it get worse?
The line up, even better than shown, is awesome.
The ecoboos has yet to make its imprint in the smaller cars.
When it does, look out Germany and all other premium required turbos.
Man, I really grow tired of the negative, its all doom n gloom-the sky is falling talk.
Has anybody experienced the ecoboost, other than the Flex, which received 5 stars on TTAC?
Got the 2010 focus brochure today and anti-lock brakes and traction control are standard equipment now across all models. I think the mazda3 is the best car in it’s class. My sister and b/i/l just bought 2 of them. One for them and one for their daughter. They had owned nothing but Toyotas for many years, and now they say the next car will be a mazda too. The mazda 3s get 36 mpg average each tankful, not just on a trip. They are checking every time they fill up. I wish Ford would put out their version of the mazda 5. There is no competition in its class. (kia rondo maybe but sales are so small compared to what ford could sell.) I think Ford is on the right track. It amazes me that some people have nothing better to do then bash them, just because they don’t like them. Next time i am fortunate enough to buy a new car or truck, Ford is what it will say on it.
Jeff – I agree, Honda overall makes excellent cars. In fact, I see them as the benchmark that Ford and GM (really no hope for Chrysler anymore, so why pretend) should be shooting for.
Subcompacts – The Fit is easily superior to the Yaris and Accent, has far better reliability than the otherwise nice Versa, and well, who are we kidding, the Aveo is probably the worst new car on the market right now. The Fiesta should give the fit some healthy competition, can’t wait to see what happens.
Compacts – The Civic is the benchmark for small efficient cars. The Corolla is even more dull than the Camry (if that is possible). The Mazda3 is a better car all around (except for fuel economy, but that is the price you pay for sportiness) but the Civic is still the volume seller.
Midsize – The Accord is great. I drove an entry level one that was traded in and was very, very impressed. Aside from lots of grey plastic, nothing about it made it feel cheap. The Camry too common, built too cheaply, and too boring for anyone who sees a car as more than a self-driven bus. The Fusion is getting very close, and even has certain features you can’t get in an Accord, in the end, it comes down to size – do you want the extra space of the Accord or the more nimble Fusion? The Mazda6 is another excellent car in the segment, but for whatever reason, doesn’t seem to get the attention it deserves.
CUVs – The CR-V and Pilot are both excellent, better than the Rav-4 and Venza easily. The Element is the Scion Scion should have built. The Escape can compete with the CR-V with extra features and a better price, and the Flex with the Pilot with a better interior and more availible options, but both are very appealing cars. Again though, the Mazda CX-9 is a great big CUV that should be eating Pilot sales for breakfast, but for some reason isn’t.
Minivans – The Odyssey is the best minivan on the market, bar-none, no arguments, if you want a minivan, buy an Odyssey.
Trucks – The Ridgeline is a joke. This is really the only segment that Honda completely fails in. A pseudo-truck with not-great fuel economy, poor towing and payload capability, and an unheard of in the segment FWD layout. They drive nice, and have a nice interior, but plenty of CUVs and cars do both of those better and don’t pretend to be trucks.
Sajeev Mehta
The SHO will be had at 35K, the MKS turbo at 45…trust me.
And there are no BMWs or performance sedans below 45 grand.
The 3 series gets you in the 40K’s faster than it gets you to sixty.
And that’s what, tier 1?
Actually, I do trust you.
And look forward to your reviews.
I know you are a much more knowledgeable car guy than I.
I guess that’s what makes this sight so cool.
We everyday knuckleheads can converse with you, Farago, Baruth, Niedermeyer and Williams…and others.
And I didn’t mean snobbishness as meanly (?) as it sounded.
I just think when we talk upper tier and lower tier we get to sounding a little funny.
Most will never experience the upper tier.
Few will ever experience the 55 to 65 grand cars, let alone those costing more.
The so called performance sedan is a dream along with the second home.
But when it gets down to it, we are all really looking to scratch our own itches.
I like total packages.
So when it comes to RWD vs FWD vs AWD and everything in between, we each buy with our hearts in the end.
NulloModdo: that’s a great summary; I totally agree, although I think the Ridgeline’s problems are that they are asking $30K for a small pickup and that it really is an ugly beast.
Spyspeed makes a great point: while Ford is certainly rolling out a lot of new products, they are for the most part based on old platforms. The Flex and Taurus are based on 10 year old S80, the Fusion is based on its old platform, the Focus and Mustang as well, and let’s not even talk about the Panther.
This may not be such a bad thing. BMW’s tend to be best in class (cars at least) whether they are in their first year or their seventh, because BMW continually improves them. It looks like Ford is doing the same. Personally, if a car is on an old platform, but it is a safe platform and they’ve spent a decade working out the kinks, that strikes me as a plus. We shall see.
“Ford is certainly rolling out a lot of new products, they are for the most part based on old platforms.”
Every automaker evolves its platforms. Unless there is a glaring deficiency in the platform which can only be fixed through clean sheet redesign, the clean sheet (er, blank computer screen!) is never used.
The “all-new” 2008 Accord platform borrowed heavily from its predecessor platform. In fact, the engine and transmission were carried over almost exactly intact. So what?
I don’t really see the need to continually roll out new car platforms. Engines should evolve of course, as should safety features, electronics, and interior bits to match the current style, but under the sheetmetal, cars haven’t changed a lot in the last 20 or 30 years.
Developing a brand new platform is a huge financial undertaking and really, should only be done one or two models at a time to make sure the proper resources, both engineering and funding, are applied to it. If you look at Toyota, Nissan, Honda, BMW, or any other automaker, new platforms don’t come out very often. The D3 and CD3 are both set up for unibody construction, front engine, front or all wheel drive, and four wheel independent suspension. Until the design requirements for a new model force a change, or until economies of scale require one such as the forthcoming switch to EUCD, why bother with what works? The Fusion still has great packaging and some of the best handling in the segment, the 2007-2009 Taurus proved that the D3 could make a sturdy, safe, and incredibly roomy car, but the market spoke and said it was willing to sacrifice interior space for more style.
In the end, the platform on which a car is based is, and should be, the most slowly evolving part of that car. As long as it drives well and supports whatever new engines and interior bits the manufacturer wants to put in, the platform is doing its job.
So how in heck will it get worse?
Adding to an already HUGE debt load, the many months of very slow sales after this C4C runs out. And the competitive disadvantage they are at compared to GM and Chrysler.
Plus, Ford has spent a HUGE amount of money on re-skinning their products and trying to reinvent Lincoln…and the sales will simply not be there to support those reskins.
And I personally believe that sales will drop as the current administration continues to spend money we don’t have. As a result, taxes will be raised and people pocket books will be emptied.
I also believe that this slight up tick in the market will only be short lived. Many experts are saying that we are only beginning this depression.
My and others view of Ford is not “dissing” as it is just a realization of the truth.
OK, so let me get this straight. The Ranger is being built for the 2013 model year. Right?
Well, regardless, I think it’s mostly enough. Without upgrades to vehicles like the Escape and Focus, Ford’s lineup would fall apart quickly.
I’d argue that the point was to convince people they weren’t buying a station wagon. I feel that most SUVs and CUVs are just station wagons on stilts.
Sad but true.
When I see a SUV I think of Minute Rice. Throughout the world the stickier a rice is the more expensive it is. Sticky rice taste better and is easier to eat.
Minute Rice is not sticky. So the people who manufacturer the tasteless Minute Rice advertised the hell out of its lack of stickiness as being a great feature.
What is a SUV? A badly designed station wagon. They fall over, they are harder to load, and they have worse gas mileage.
So what did the manufacturers of SUVs do? They advertised the hell out or how macho you were if you owned one.
There have been several comments about Ford getting their crash safety technology from Volvo. It would be foolish to argue that there is not cross-pollination between and sharing of knowledge between Ford and their wholly owned Volvo division.
However, it has been a two way street and Ford designed some very crash-worthy vehicles on their own. One stellar example was the Windstar platform which was a double 5 star at Job1 and a quadruple 5 star when NHTSA started testing side impact performance. This vehicle was designed in Dearborn by by Ford and was one of the very safest vehicles on the road based on actual crash injuries per 100,000 miles of usage. When NHTSA evaluated the Windstar, they said that “If they could give 6 stars, Windstar would have been a double 6”.
I am trying to remember anything you ever said that wasn’t dissing on Ford.
And when it comes to believing, in depressions or whatever, the entire industry will be in it together.
And as it is right now, and it ain’t peachy out there, with or without disadvantages, Ford is winning.
Winning against the wall street of yesterday, GM and ChryFiat…everybody.
I however, took a big chance and it paid off big with their stock.
I didn’t go by belief.
I went by the product.
As far as reskinning, if you read many of the above, that’s how you stay alive.
EVERY major brand does just this very thing.
After all these years, the 3 won’t see a change until 2013, AT THE EARLIEST.
How long has that thing been around?
You keep adjusting, improving.
Its only pundits that keep chirping about new platforms, new this and new that.
If you had a factory to run, you’d be broke in no time.
And I not just a Ford guy.
I am trying to find a decent price right now on a A3.
I wanted the Genesis, but am not skilled enough to drive RWD.
I loved the ES350, but was to small.
Ditto BMW anything.
I have a shit load of Mazdas.
And I’m not gonna spend no 50 grand on a car.
@P71_CrownVic
I’m convinced that we are moving into depression. I think this will help Ford. I expect 2 key things that will make Ford THE American car company.
#1 – After the $ collapses, I expect a wave of buy American sentiment. Yes yes.. I know that Honda and Toyota make cars here, but we will be so poor in this country it will be considered damn near treason to send precious American wealth to a company headquartered outside the USA. This kills Chryco given the Fiat connection.
#2 – I also expect a wave of small government / cut my taxes sentiment. Every dollar that any government (state/local/national) will be scrutinized like it’s our last nickel (because it might be our last nickel). This will shut down all future bailouts unless this is a clear connection to national security or an immediate payback that helps the US treasury survive for another week. This kills GM.
Union workers suck enough of my blood through American Leyland bailouts that I do not see any reason whatsoever to buy American on top of that.
BTW, I got a new Lexus IS 250 on Friday. Cross-checked it with 2010 Acura TSX v6 (nice and powerful but too big), Infi G37 (great car, inconvenient seating position). Dropped BMW 1xx and 3xx without testing for their run-flats, reliability, iDrive. Nothing Ford had on offer was anywhere in the range. The Lincoln Fusion badgeswap (can anyone remember if it’s MGZ, MXZ, or MVZ? Jeez!) is basically what Acura is, only worse in every respect. I toyed with an idea of a Mustang, which is kinda like a worse Lexus IS with a solid rear axle and just a bit cheaper, but could not make a case for it. If they had Lincoln Mustang rebadge, or brought back an updated LS, it might’ve been interesting.
Of course the only honest answer to the question posed here is “I don’t know and neither do you.” Ford seems to be making some broadly shrewd moves in its product portfolio; vehicle quality is improving by most measures; and the upcoming cars that we actually know something about (Fiesta and Focus) look promising.
What we don’t know is huge, however. What will gasoline prices be in 2 years? What will Ford’s share price be? How effective will the company be at managing its horrendous debt? Will Toyota be able to reinvigorate its utterly competent but utterly bland lineup? Will the rise of Hyundai/Kia eat deeply into Ford’s profit margins? Will post-bankruptcy GM be able to reestablish itself as a viable domestic company?
There are 2 big things that make me optimistic. One is that Ford is on people’s radar as a credible car brand for the first time in a decade or more. All the positive media attention (the kind that infuriates RF and some of the other folks here at TTAC) is having an effect. So is the assessment of Consumer Reports (again, very influential, like it or not).
The other is the company’s coherent strategy for filling gaps in its lineup and especially for updating its vehicles on a regular, predictable schedule. That was one of the company’s most infuriating managerial lapses for a long time–the build-and-forget mentality that famously killed the Taurus. The future product plans I’ve seen (let’s not even get started on the glitches in this particular report) suggest a clear-headed plan for the next 5 years. Adding vehicles like the the Transit Connect and C-Max suggest that Ford management finally understands that a purely reactive strategy is a strategy for failure.
Seems to me the bigger question here is whether Ford has a viable international strategy, especially in China, Russia, and India. Look at the 2009 first-half global sales figures, just out. Ford’s 30% drop was the worst in the top 10. If they can’t expand abroad, success in the U.S. won’t mean that much.
cpmanx is right about the global impact. Volume automakers need to have platforms that result in vehicles sold worldwide. The capital requirements and fixed costs of a volume automaker simply cannot be overcome with vehicles that can only be sold in one or two markets.
The brilliance of the C1 platform really demonstrates an approach that needs to continue going forward. Vehicles with this base chassis underpinnings are manufactured on 6 continents… which is impressive. But what’s odd is that no C1 vehicle is assembled in the USA…
Luckily margins and volume on pickup trucks remain sustainable for those vehicles to remain NAFTA cash-cows… at least for now. But it looks like Ford isn’t using the large trucks/SUVs as a crutch like Chrysler and to a lesser extent GM.
“Ford’s 30% drop was the worst in the top 10. If they can’t expand abroad, success in the U.S. won’t mean that much.”
So they take their crap which doesn’t sell overseas, cheapen it, rebadge it, and sell it here, is this their formula for success?
“I’m convinced that we are moving into depression. I think this will help Ford. ”
Right about the Depression, wrong about it helping Ford.
“Ford has spent a HUGE amount of money on re-skinning their products and trying to reinvent Lincoln…and the sales will simply not be there to support those reskins.”
Exactly. More debt, more product which won’t sell in this Great Depression. They don’t get it. By the time it is evident Mulally is worse than Waggoner, it will be all over. Probably within the next year, when C4C runs out, and Ford’s 2010 models stall.
Looking at the top ten cars sold in the US, most of the volume seems to come from trucks, midsize sedans and compacts.
How the next gen, Focus and Fusion (nee Mondeo) are recieved will decide a lot about Ford’s eventual fate.
“EcoBoost” = maiming of the English language, or just out and out lying? Eco = ecosystem? Guessing at Ford’s logic “Give turbocharging a green label, so we can sell the idiots an expensive accessory?”
Look, when Consumer Reports issues coverage as favorable of the Fusion as they did this most recent issue, you can’t be looking all that bad with the American consumer.
I think Ford will probably do okay. But only if they don’t run out of money and head over to the Government trough. If they get a “loan” and consumers find out, things will be pretty much over for them. They have some desirable looking cars coming, but they need to do continual improvement on those cars. If they let any of their models wither again, they’ll screw themselves.
However, I don’t know how well Ecoboost will work for them. Especially if they don’t specify synthetic oil from the start. (Look how well the Volkswagen 1.8T did on dino oil). Turbos are great, until they implode out of warranty.
Glaring hole: small-to-midsize pickup….the behemoth f-150s today are way more truck than a homeowner and many small businesses need. The Ranger is positively jurassic. I believe Ford did what they had to do to conserve cash when they Tony Soprano-ed the F-100 idea, but damn, the F150 (and the Silverado and Ram) pickup trucks have moved so far upmarket in price and size that anyone wanting “less” doesn’t have many options.
A Ranger-class compact truck with a modern (safer) platform, a gas-sipping Ecoboost- 4 or a robust 6 (dare I say diesel?) with a bed you can actually reach into, and a moderately comfortable cab?
An underserved hole in their lineup, if’n yer askin’ me.
Mark MacInnis:
Ford of Australia are developing a new Ford Ranger which will be about the size of a Nissan Frontier/Navarra. It’ll have a 1.6l ecoboost.
So they take their crap which doesn’t sell overseas, cheapen it, rebadge it, and sell it here, is this their formula for success?
You’ve got it backwards. Ford is outperforming the market in the US and Europe. Weakness in China and other developing markets is what’s killing them.
Toyota is getting hammered, too. GM is actually inching up on Toyota this year, incredible as that may sound.