This topic keeps worming its way into your author’s brain, and it remains a regular point of discussion in the TTAC Slack chat room. How could it not? Ford announced the demise of its non-Mustang passenger car lineup earlier this year while simultaneously declaring that no customer would be left behind.
No one’s being cut loose from the Ford family, CEO Jim Hackett remarked. Ford’s just reinventing the car. Okay…
Now that Dearborn’s plan to import the lightly crossoverized Focus Active from China has bit the dust, entry-level customers (meaning those without much dough, or those in the mood for downsizing and good fuel economy) can choose from the base, front-drive, three-cylinder EcoSport and not much else. What a choice. Maybe a low-end Escape, if those exist? We’re already well into the $20k range now, before tax, admin, and freight.
As Ford figures out how to reinvent the car, assuming it truly wants to continue courting entry-level buyers, there’ll be a dwindling number of certified pre-owned Fiestas, Focuses, and Fusions available for some years to come. Of course, the number of buyers looking for these models is dwindling, too, which is why Ford made its decision in the first place.
Maybe it will all work out — youngsters with their first professional job can hop into a low-mileage off-lease special, and empty nesters who didn’t set much aside for retirement can do the same. Then, when Group A has moved up the corporate ladder and Group B has, um, relinquished its driving privileges, there’ll be at least some customers willing to consider whatever Ford comes up with to flesh out the bottom of its lineup.
Or maybe Group A is, by now, in the mood for something more family-friendly? Hmm…
It’s worth noting that the subcompact Ford Fiesta, scheduled for execution early next year, is up 2.5 percent in terms of year-to-date sales. It’s not much volume — 33,225 units, or about a third of the rapidly falling (and already discontinued) Focus’s volume — but noteworthy for being the only Ford passenger car without a minus sign next to its YTD figure. Combined, Fiesta, Focus, and Fusion sales amounted to 24,202 units last month —11.5 percent of Ford branded vehicles (of which a full half were pickup trucks and vans).
After axing the North American Focus Active, Ford claimed it wasn’t a big loss, as it didn’t plan to sell more than 50,000 of them a year. Clearly, the automaker feels it’ll be just fine without a low-end vehicle. With more utilities on the way and the F-Series pushing its sales and margins into the mesosphere, it has the privilege of not having to worry about low-margin compacts, as well as their buyers. Fine.
So, the question today is this: should Ford just come clean and say it’s willing to abandon low-end buyers? Does it bother you that it continues to dance around the topic, alluding to vehicles that haven’t yet materialized, and might never appear?
[Image: Ford Motor Company]
F-150 Motors – oops, I meant to type “Ford” – better hope like hell that a) gas prices stay low, b) interest rates stay low, and c) Toyota doesn’t get serious about full sized trucks.
“Toyota doesn’t get serious about full sized trucks”
Toyota’s vending machines have not had much money in their coin-return slots lately so I won’t count on a big engineering budget for their trucks.
Their bottle deposit program might scrape together enough to get an intern for next year.
It’d be foolish for Toyota to “get serious” about full size trucks. No doubt Toyota knows its limitations.
Ford’s strength *tomorrow* depends on its profitability today. Or should Ford just push along, paycheck to paycheck, continue embracing losses, just in case fuel prices go up someday?
Yes gas prices could go up, but for how long would they sustain?
But for now, how many automakers don’t offer fullsize Pickups/SUVs? If they did, would we care if they’re profitable?
No we don’t look at silly things like profitability.
The fuel consumption of the fullsize Pickups/SUVs isn’t much more than midsize trucks anyway.
Either way, no way is everyone switching to a compact hatch/sedans if gas prices skyrocket. Most will keep driving what they’re driving, and no matter how long fuel prices stay up in the stratosphere.
I was referring more to the competition in general, but if there’s anyone who could make a great pickup, it’s Toyota. I’m not sure why they haven’t gotten serious about it.
Gas prices alone won’t kill F150 sales. Higher gas prices PLUS higher interest rates / tighter credit would do the trick, though, and they’d also cause an inordinate amount of damage to any maker who is concentrating on trucks and SUVs (cough…FCA).
Ford could make a great small car too. So far they’ve made the corporate decision not to.
It’d take a series of calamities to cut F-150 sales just in half. Never mind F-250 and up, which are far less want-based. Except car sales would suffer almost as much at that point.
But Ford would easily survive 300K or so, total F-series sales, especially without small cars sandbagging Ford down. There’s still no other car on earth more profitable.
I don’t remember hearing Ford say their cars were not profitable, just that they were not as profitable as trucks and SUVs.
“…just that they were not as profitable…”
That’s the understatement of the year. Whole other different universe.
It’s the so called “intelligent” loss of sales – Ford is trying to shore up their money by trimming low and no margin or money losing lines until they can get their crap together which seems pretty bad with repeated recalls and management shakeouts and what-have-you.
Its a risky gambit given that all the pieces are set for another economic contraction of epic porportions at some point down the road.
If the next collapse is big enough, it won’t matter what you’re building or selling. You won’t be doing either for very long.
Low end Fords are, and have historically been, utter crap. The Focus had the second most unsatisfied owners of any compact car in this year’s CR survey, ahead of only the Sentra. The Fiesta beat only the Versa and the Fiat 500. They also both have the lowest reliability ratings and depreciate like fresh fish.
Exposing renters and poor people to garbage doesn’t build the brand.
I have a difficult time believing that there will be a crossover or a hybrid/electric anything that will slot below the current Ecosport. Maybe Im wrong, but whether Ford wants to admit it or not, it seems apparent that they are abandoning what was once considered “entry level”. But, you could also look at it as simply moving the goal posts. Entry level is now $20k or more, at least in a Ford showroom.
I could buy moving the goal posts if it wasn’t for Kia/Hyundai. IMHO they have shown how to make <$20k cars. So I've got to think that ya, they (Ford) abandoned entry level.
Ford is putting it all in on black. If it comes up red, they get eaten alive. If credit rules change and consumers can’t get a $350/month for 96 months loan for an F150 or Exploder, they’re going to run into issues when their lower end products (EcoSport) are some of the worst vehicles produced since the malaise era.
This QOTD feels clickbaity and overdone, but I’m here so congrats.
As I’ve said in the countless discussions on this before, makes no sense for Ford to incur massive losses to retain market share. That’s unsustainable. Ford’s big mistake was broadcasting these moves in hopes of saving the stock as now every armchair Bob Lutz is pounding their keyboard to decry it. But I think for now it’s the right move and if demand comes back they can bring the new Fiesta and Focus that is already on sale across the pond.
The question is why can the likes of Nissan and Hyundai offer about half a dozen entry level vehicles (>=$20,000) while Ford can offer one? Time to buy Mazda and learn how to efficiently develop and produce a vehicle.
“The question is why can the likes of Nissan and Hyundai offer about half a dozen entry level vehicles (>=$20,000) while Ford can offer one? ”
The real question is “how much money are they making on them?”
For the same reason Nissan can’t build a truck worth mentioning. And, there’s a crucial difference: when Nissan sells one of their junkers to people who’re okay with intercoolers spewing coolant into intakes, they still make a profit.
“every armchair Bob Lutz is pounding their keyboard to decry it.”
yep. Internet Car People seem to believe car companies should be happy to lose money cranking out cars for them to argue about on the internet (but not actually buy.)
sorry, that ain’t how business works. the automakers know darn well that Internet Car People are a bunch of BSers who never actually buy anything they say they’d buy, despite their incessant claims.
What massive losses? Did Ford say that?
Why would they need to say that? No automaker will admit it, unless it’s a halo car or some limited edition. Either they’re taking a loss or there’s much less profit every year, so why ride in into the ground?
DenverMike
When Ford first announced their decision, if I recall right, it seemed to be more of a response to low Ford stock prices and trying to make the return on equity numbers look more in line with Wall Street expectations than actual losses on the sale of cars. (That may be different now that people know Fusions et al are going away.)
Kind of like 10% of $1,000,000,000 looks better to some anylist than 5% of $2,000,000,000. But I don’t know what the real numbers are.
This is one man’s opinion: Ford stopping production of items people willing to wander onto a Ford lot don’t want to buy and with a lower margin than what they do want to buy isn’t entirely insane. Presumably Ford isn’t dumb enough, over time, to let the quasi-SUVs deviate from their sedan lines so sedan production can commence within months if the market changes.
Ford’s position in the United States for the last decade is the big, burly man-truck maker who also make some cars. The Fiesta never really moved in the US. The Focus developed a less-than-stellar reputation in the US because the first-gen became a fleet & first-time buyer special and nothing has moved that impression. Our Fusion is well regarded where it sold as Mondeo, but they can’t and won’t move the needle in the US in the face of Camry, Accord, Altima and Sonata. (Maybe Sonata when the market works out that it’s not Japanese and is built in the US.) The truck impression will get a favorable number of Moms into their qSUVs.
And I’ll offer an inverse argument when VW tries to sell an open-bed vehicle in the US.
When did you buy your Fusion and what % lower than MSRP did you pay for it?
It would be even more insane for Ford to continue selling cars in such high volume at a loss. That’s just not how business works.
They sold 200,000 Fusions last yearbin the US. That’s more volume than many brands. As has been pointed out, these cars will still be offered in other markets, so the development savings aren’t that big. That was the whole point of Mullaly’s one Ford approach. This will improve profits in the short term but it will be broutal long term. They will basically loose all entry level shoppers that don’t want an EcoSport. The last time the domestic three thought they could ignore this market, they gave away more than half their market share to the imports. Let’s see if it works better this time.
@MBella: Exactly! Ford saves NOTHING in development money because the next generation of all these cars have all already been designed. This was a sudden decision with nothing ready to fill the void left by these cars leaving. Now Ford has to spend to develop the new models to fill the showroom. FCA did the same thing with the Dart and 200: cancelled them suddenly, then tried to scramble around for a partner to make some cars with.
This whole situation was so poorly handled by management and the PR department. Reeks of incompetence.
I do not get it. Ford announced that it stopped, mothballed development of the new Fusion. There will be no new Fusion nowhere and it will not magically spring up when market changes back to sedans. There cannot be several teams developing Fusion. One which developed it now is assigned with the new project.
Do you really think there won’t be a new Mondeo? They can’t give up on one of their best models in other markets.
@MBella In Europe? No, they cancel. It was in the news yesterday. Ford of course denies it. But there are no miracles unless they move the whole mothballed project to China and create Chinese “team Mondeo” which continues project. In Europe Mondeo class car do not sell well. Both magical Camry and “Audi killer” Accord abandoned Europe. And GM too.
Rumored, never confirmed. Many things have been rumored
Ford left this customer behind awhile back. Where a Gr Marquis and a Sable once occupied the garage, you’ll now find a Camry and a Charger. The Camry shouldn’t require any explanation, and the Charger turned into a FCA default as the last domestic full-size V8 sedan standing.
The Grand Marquis/Sable customer is probably dead, not buying cars.
Exactly. Anyone who wants a traditional American style rwd sedan will find a MUCH better car in the Chrysler 300…and if youre too young to own a walker or have an AARP card you wont look ridiculous in the Chrysler.
Had Ford been serious about it they could have developed a pretty good full-size RWD platform. They’ve got decent RWD experience and can tune a chassis pretty good when given the chance.
Ford’s fullsize problem being they wanted to stretch that old Volvo FWD/AWD Volvo platform as long as possible and thier fullsize line suffered because of it.
“Where a Gr Marquis and a Sable once occupied the garage, you’ll now find a Camry and a Charger.”
Wrong. In my case it is Fusion Titanium (which is technically a Mercury in Latin). And I will be dead, just have some patience please.
Well, we don’t need a truck and Ford does not make a mid-sized sedan or a minivan and a minivan is our next purchase sometime in the next year.
Our daughter who is nearly college age has no interest in anything but a car. She really likes the Charger, especially in Hellcat form.
Our son only wants a Jeep. He is saving for a Jeep Wrangler Unlimited in Yellow with a body colored Freedom top. Rubicon package if he can find one.
TO answer, no, Ford has nothing we would buy at this point. When our 1st Gen Durango gets old we will buy another for towing and while we would not look at an F-150 a smaller Ford SUV might fit that need but I doubt they will have a RWD based SUV in that size.
Ford does make a mid size sedan, its called the Fusion and you can get a 2019 and should be able to get a 2020 too.
As far as your SUV goes yeah they will have a RWD based one in the same size class as the Durango in 2020 when the new Explorer drops.
We’l see Ford’s real direction when they decide what to do with the Mondeo’s replacement–if there is one. I think Ford is waiting to see what shakes out of the irrational US tariff politics, or wait for this administration’s replacement for some sane trade policy.
We’ve been plenty happy with our 2013 Fusion. It is the successor to four generations of Accords and it’s objectively better than any of them. Quieter, better ride and handling, and better fuel efficiency. And it was the only midsize sedan available with a six-speed manual with both upscale options and colors not on the gray scale.
The minivan is first, we have a ’14 sedan and it will be a few years before that is replaced and I was under the impression by 2020 that they would have no sedans available. I like the looks of the Fusion and as long as it has a smooth engine with good power (280-300hp) it will be on the short list.
What is the new SUV based on?
Ford needs one Accord sized sedan based off of the Mustang and they would be perfectly fine.
That would be an Accord-sized sedan with Mustang-level fit and finish. Then, a smug editor at C&D would pen a leading article entitled “The family sedan isn’t dead. The poorly executed sedans are dead.” Oh wait, they already have.
They’d have to add a solid foot to the wheelbase to make any sort of usable back seat out of a Mustang sedan.
@ TMA1
The Mustang trades packaging efficiency for style. They could do an Accord size sedan on the Mustang platform – well provided they could stretch it just a few inches.
Accord – 192.2 LOA 111.4 WB 57.1 HOA 73.3 WDT
Mustang – 188.3 LOA 107.1 WB 54.4 HOA 75.4 WDT.
So the accord is only 3.9 inches longer in overall length, 4.03 inches longer in wheelbase, 2.7 inches taller and 2.1 inches narrower in width although 18 more cubic feet of interior volume (103 vs 85).
The trunk is fairly decent sized on the Mustang and few inches of wheelbase would provide the needed space in back for legs along with a less rakish roof. They could also trade some front leg room for space in the rear as well. I’m 6’2″ and with the seat all the way back I’m uncomfortably spaced from the pedals and I have friend who is rather portly and he has no problems stretching out on the passenger side.
Obviously it wouldn’t be able to pull full size panther duty but it would probably work well as a Lincoln LS 4 passenger sized vehicle.
Ford’s only problem would be that Mercedes and BMW have that market wrapped up so it would be a vanity project or only make sense in say Europe where for the time being they still appreciate a good medium sized sedan.
Yeah, I was being somewhat facetious. I own a ’16 GT. They’d have to add some length in the middle, and cut some space in the front legroom. Not much they can do about the length of the car from the A-pillars forward though, which is where the Mustang begins to be a big car.
I don’t see a huge issue with Ford abandoning traditional car buyers. I would guess a majority are currently either buying Japanese/Korean makes or going used. It’s not like the cars the offered over the past 5 years lit the market on fire anyways.
I believe the smarter move would be taking hybridization of their crossovers seriously. I would also argue that a Hybrid Focus Active, kind of like the Kia Niro would be a smart move. I’m starting to see a lot more Niro’s in my area.
The only other part I wonder is how the loss of cars will affect the depreciation of Ford Crossovers. Fiesta/Focus’s do well with the under 10k crowd at our used car lot since they’re usually newer/less miles than foreign brands. Makes me think that the crossovers will take a bigger hit.
Ford is taking Hybridization very seriously. Hybrid versions of the Escape and Explorer are on their way as is a F-150 Hybrid, who’s powertrain will likely make it into the Expedition shortly.
Ford’s lineup of cars is fine. They just have names starting with the letter E and tend to be tall 4-door hatchbacks now.
“So, the question today is this: should Ford just come clean and say it’s willing to abandon low-end buyers?”
Sure, no harm in saying it. They don’t have to serve anyone if they don’t want to. There are plenty of other makers who are willing to sell my wife the subcompact hatchback that she prefers. It’s not the biggest niche, but it is big enough that someone always seems to make something for it. If Ford doesn’t want to sell us a car, that’s fine. Honda, Toyota, Nissan, Chevrolet, KIA, Hyundai, and Mitsubishi are all happy to.
“Does it bother you that it continues to dance around the topic, alluding to vehicles that haven’t yet materialized, and might never appear?”
Not really, it’s just more corporate double-speak. I have gotten used to it.
The unspoken assumption here is that abandoning the entry level is what Clayton Christiansen called “the north-eastern migration”. Once takes a set, it can’t be stopped, and the company will cede segment after a segment, until nothing is left. And BTW, Christiansen pointed out that companies engaging into NE-ing post their best profitability figures right before they go belly up.
The solipsistic tone of this article is really odd. It’s written as if Ford is some sort of public good that owes it to the public to produce inexpensive vehicles.
There was a time when successful companies did consider the public good.
Generating vehicles people aren’t buying largely because of social forces outside the control of the producer isn’t a public good. Making a certain variety of apparently undesirable car as a matter of principle isn’t good business.
Jettison the mythic “customer” who doesn’t buy anything.
angrystan
First, the comment was meant in a general way in reply to mrwiizrd, just to say the concept of companies being concerned about the general good shouldn’t be so easily disregarded.
Second, people are buying these cars, and quite a few still consider them desirable.
While you may consider Ford’s decision as good business, I consider it another sad capitulation of a once mighty American business.
“Generating vehicles people aren’t buying”
Except people are buying them. The sedan market is a smaller pie for sure, but it’s a pie that does still exist. Last year GM sold 186,000 Malibus, Honda sold 323,000 Accords, Toyota sold 387,000 Camrys, and so on. Between those plus Optima, Sonata, 6, Passat, Altima, and Legacy 1.5M sedans were sold last year out of 17.2M cars. And that’s just a cherry picked selection of only midsized sedans. It’s not just a few internet weirdos, it’s millions of buyers each year.
Personally, I find it odd that Honda, Toyota, Nissan, GM, Kia, Hyundai, and VW can all find a way to sell cars for a small profit but Ford can’t. A profit that is definitely smaller than an SUV, but still a profit.
There are two possibilities here. Either everyone is selling cars at a loss and we will be seeing more announcements of discontinued car lines over the next few years, or Ford was jut bad at making money on selling cars. Personally, I suspect that later.
I’m wondering whether Ford intends to completely pull out of Europe next. The question has been asked–all these “One Ford” products could simply be imported from Europe where there are already factories producing them for that market; even at a lower volume. The rest of the R&D is already sunk cost. Even 30k Fiesta’s a year should help spread those costs and increase overall margins.
Importing the Focus in China makes sense on paper (until the tariff), but the problem was “China”. If it was “Spain” few would argue
Yes I know high labor costs exist in Europe, but is it really that bad when automation does so much? If so, make them in your Romanian plant. Container/ocean freight is the cheapest form of transport. Bottom line: if it doesn’t make sense to amortize this investment across the USA also, then they’re so incompetent they’re likely planning to pull from Europe in due time.
I think Ford is looking at a great shrinking of the personal ownership of automobiles for non-commercial purposes, and is retracting and protecting it’s assets in planning for this. Ford will have difficulty finding where to put it’s money. Nice buildings are one strategy!
When automated ubers become the form of commuting transport for the masses, vanity will no longer drive the market (not “my” car, not a reflection of me), brand value will decrease.
Ford may become more like GE, a brand that used to build a lot of things, but becomes a slowly shrinking leviathan of paper assets with a few niche products they actually still make (jet engines/F150)
They seem to be doing quite well in Europe. Ford’s smaller cars are consistently in the top three there. A Focus has about the same level of desirability as a Golf, which is a very good thing.
Why would they pull out?
Because despite sales success they still can’t make money there, and the overall balance sheet looks even worse now that the development dollars they spend aren’t being spread beyond Europe.
The GE analogy might be a good one. GE also seems to have lost the plot. They have been selling everything that isn’t nailed down. It’s become something like a reverse Berkshire Hathaway. A few months ago while their stock was tanking, I started researching them, and found articles saying they are looking for buyers for both the aviation and locomotive divisions. That’s almost like Toyota selling their automotive division. I don’t know what they plan on doing afterwards.
My first major vehicle purchase was a low-end GM car, a ’99 Saturn SL2. It served me very well for several years. It left me with a good feeling about GM vehicles overall, and when it was time for me to get a new family car, I decided to buy a Buick Enclave.
Had it not been for my positive experience with that cheap-o Saturn, I likely would have avoided that blue-hair special “SUV” and went with a Honda product instead. GM drew me in with their low-end car and offered me something more posh once my wallet allowed for it.
Ford is doing itself a disservice by ignoring those folks who’d probably be interested in a $40k Explorer in 10 years, but only have a Fiesta budget today.
Now imagine if you bought a Ford lemon instead of that Saturn. The strategy you’re outlining only works when the company’s entry-level product is competitive, or at least functional. How many Mitsubishi buyers come back after riding out a Mirage?
The problem with Saturn was once you graduated beyond the Scope of series, there was nowhere to go. GM figured you’d move up to that looks like a big S series Cutlass, but the things that attracted buyers to Saturn (dealers that weren’t crap for one) were lacking across GM and if you did “move up” to another GM brand you were likely disappointed. Recall too that Saturn existed to “show the rest of GM the way” (it was all about those gen x dollars back then).
By the time they filled out Saturn’s lineup the S series was a decade old platform and the other models we’re GM rebadges. The Ion sealed their fate.
Lighten up the C-Max and either have a plain gas model, or a plugin hybrid.
Lighten up the C-Max and either have a plain gas model, or a plugin hybrid. With the battery somewhere besides in the middle of the boot.
A decent idea there. I believe the C-Max hybrid and plug-in hybrid were developed in a bit of a rush. I strongly considered buying a plug-in C-Max, but I really didn’t like the high cargo floor.
Wouldn’t this check a lot of the boxes for the same people that buy 2WD CUVs?
Also, I think it would have done a lot better with a better name. “Hey, I bought a C-M…” Your listeners are starting to get worried that the final syllable will be “…men”.
If Ford continues to produce and develop the Mondeo, Fiesta and (non-active) Focus in Europe, they should, if need arises, be able to re-release those models in America. Their talk about discontinuing them in Europe is disconcerting. From what I heard the Focus and Fiesta, aside from automatic transaxle issues, wasn’t a bad car. Of course, in America, that killed the car. We want three rows, not three pedals.
Buyers don’t come back as easily as that. One Ford leaves a category, it would take them a lot of money and years to get it back.
Ford missed the boat if they wanted to have any hope of making their mark as far as sedans go. The Aussie Falcon platform was PERFECT for the states, if they didn’t want to use the Mustang’s platform to make a rwd sedan with powerful 6 and 8 cylinder options. Appliance grade fwd midsize sedans aren’t needed in ANY D3 lineup since Asia has that covered. The Focus and Fiesta hatches in ST/RS trim will be missed though.
Nope. I’m a Mopar guy anyway, so in the case of the few Fords that interest me, FCA does it better or is unchallenged:
–Ram > F-series
–Challenger > Mustang
–Wrangler > Bronco (which doesn’t even exist at this point
–Charger/300 > no equivalent
–Durango/GC > no equivalent
I was a MoPar guy too… they paid my way through U.of D. engineering school. Had a ’59 6 window sedan Dodge with 326 and pushbutton transmission. ’64 Valiant slant 6 that wouln’t die, ’70 Duster, a couple Caravans, won’t talk about the Colts….
but today there’s no compact hatchback. Maybe I should move to Europe, it’s full of them.
Your smoking dope when it comes to Challenger > Mustang. The S550 blows the Challenger so far into the weeds it would take a supertanker filled with agent orange to clear enough grass and a few hydrogen bombs going off to provide enough light to find it.
In every mertic except drag racing (and Challenger will most likely take a back seat come next year with the GT500) the current Mustang is hand downs better and since it isnt a full size car trying to masquerade as a pony car interior volume is almost pointless outside of trying to fill the shoes of the “personal luxury” two door barges that roamed from the 70’s till the early aughts.
That said, the Challenger is a cool car, its a cool Muscle car but it isn’t in the same league as the Mustang and Camaro when it comes to overall performance (widebody cars included) which even the run of the mill 435 horsepower 15-17 Mustang GT showed when run against the Hellcat on something that didnt end in 1,320 feet.
“outside of trying to fill the shoes of the “personal luxury” two door barges that roamed from the 70’s till the early aughts.”
But that’s what I’m looking for.
If straight line thrust and less than aplomb handling are your game the Challenger is your car. If your looking for something a more sporty and want to pass on a back seat that doubles as a single sized bed then its Mustang and of course if your looking for something bridging sporty car and sports car Camaro it is.
Something for everybody in the American two door sedan market.
For a GT car and for daily driving the Challenger will hold its own just fine. It even has a back seat for the kiddos or adults.
For a track day car it will still be fun even if you aren’t setting record lap times. A Miata doesn’t either.
For high speed autocross or time attack the Mustang would be a better car.
Raph, with all due respect I cannot call Challenger a “luxury”. Interior is depressing place to be in. I don’t know why they did not learn from MB while they had a chance.
Ford small cars were routinely bad mouthed by many; “buy a Toyota/Honda or Korean instead”. The market reflected that. Now that Ford is going to stop selling small cars that routinely rank 3rd or 4th in sales for their category; the interwebz are freaking out. Why should Ford keep building low-profit, darned by faint praise cars when the market says they’re bad? The Sloan model is dead and ironically, Toyota is the best at copying it. In an ideal world: Corolla to LS/GX in a buyers lifetime. Fiesta/Aveo/Civic to (near luxury) Continental/FWD Cadillac/Acura? Maybe.
They’re not looking to build brand loyalty in first time buyers. They’re looking at next quarters’ profits. Eating their seed corn.
I have driven a few Focus and can honestly say I would buy Korean over the Focus every day of the week. The interior of the Focus is cramped and hideous. The older ones were much nicer inside.
If I were looking for a tossable car and didn’t care about the interior then a FiST or FoST might be on the short list.