Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 04/11/2024 in all areas

  1. Nearly a decade late to this one, but that striking gentleman is my Great Great Grandfather. Stumbling across this made my day, thanks!
    7 points
  2. 6 points
  3. This is neat All 7th-Gen Ford Mustangs Get 1965-Style Digital Gauges in Free OTA Update
    3 points
  4. I really can’t wait for the day when ford isn’t the recall leader and quality really improves.
    3 points
  5. Mustang releases special edition trim packages all the time. And they almost always do something for significant anniversaries. This (the anniversary package) doesn't mean anything other than one more thing to sell to enthusiasts.
    3 points
  6. I hope me venting my frustrations on this forum about my small delay hasn't been contagious. My truck was released from Louisville plant and I received my truck yesterday, nearly 4 months to the day after placing my order at the dealer. Pretty darn quick, but sure felt like an eternity when I really need it for my job soon. (Literally TODAY) It's easy for me to tell you to trust the system, though bugged it may be, and to remain patient. Especially since that my truck is now in my possesion. I made all kinds of borderline offensive comments about how the company I trusted seemed to be losing my respect, and also about how I felt abandoned after being such a loyal customer for 30 plus years. Ford, I owe you an apology. Because I LOVE my new truck!
    3 points
  7. Ford really screwed the pooch when they allowed Europe and North America to do their own thing pre Mulally. Had they gone global with C1 everywhere it could have evolved into C2 and had they gone ahead with global RWD unibody back in 2003 the product portfolio might look a lot different.
    3 points
  8. At the risk of being political, "Death to America" sounds close to inciting insurrection. Can only hope Teamsters were unaware of this in their house.
    3 points
  9. Bingo. Especially for folks who lease. I can only laugh about rperez817 pointing out that Tesla was making 30 changes per day.
    3 points
  10. This right here is the summation of why Ford is the way it is. It’s also why the Premier Automotive Group was disabled. Mulally saw the culture at Ford and knew it couldn’t manage that much. That is still the case today.
    3 points
  11. I’ve been saying for years that Tesla was cutting costs by not doing regular refreshes and redesigns and eventually that would catch up with them.
    3 points
  12. The bigger tire size on your Corsair results in a 3% speedo and odometer error. Going from a 40 to a 50 on the same width on an Aviator would be 7% error. So when your actual speedo reads 60mph you are at 62mph in the corsair, but would be at 64mph in the aviator. My suggestion, if you want taller sidewalls, would be to find a downsize wheel, 19's (245/50R19) or 18's (245/55R18) on the Corsair and 20's (275/50R20) or 18's (275/60R18, +1%) on the Aviator. Or you can take them to the dealership to have the speedo recalibrated for the larger tire size. To check if you are going to have clearance issues, you would need to measure your clearance lock to lock from the tread surface to the nearest contact point with the suspension fully compressed. The biggest tire you could put on would be just less than 2x the smallest clearance. So the stock tires are 31" you would need 1" minimum of clearance to fit a 33" tire (the new one you are looking at) and get it to just barely clear.
    3 points
  13. But that’s just it - if you’re not interested in lap times on a track then this isn’t the car for you anyway. It’s not a daily driver. Think of it more like the cobra jet mustang drag cars. Or a 911 GT3 RS. You have to make huge compromises to maximize track performance. Everything on it is about maximizing performance not appearance.
    3 points
  14. I understand too - but it has seemed like those sorts of upgrades can be swapped out "on the fly" after production has started, rather than continually pushing back new product. As I pointed out above, it'd be a bit different story if ICE products weren't gutted for EVs, so now it's the worst of both worlds - EV product delays and limited new/updated ICE products until they can push both out.
    3 points
  15. I recently bought the 2024 Nautilus and follow issues related to the vehicle on a couple of Facebook sites. One thing I've noticed is that there seems to be three distinct groups buying the new Nautilus: (1) previous generation Nautilus owners (like me) -- and sometimes past Aviator owners or people who went into the Lincoln dealership thinking they wanted to buy an Aviator but didn't really need that third seat or towing capacity and found they liked the Nautilus better, (2) a variety of former Lexus/BMW/MB/Genesis owners, and (3) former Edge owners, especially Edge ST owners. Most of them are generally happy with their purchase and compare the Nautilus favorably to their previous vehicle. One common complaint among the Edge ST owners, however, is the lower off-the-line torque -- but only off-the-line -- with the 2.0 hybrid than with their previous 2.7, though they still like and prefer the new Nautilus overall. The odd thing is that you don't find former Nautilus 2.7 owners saying the same thing as much. I think it is because former Nautilus owners are established Lincoln buyers and understand the whole point of Lincolns is the quality of the drive and the luxury of the car, not its 0-60 number. Whereas Edge ST buyers often bought that ST specifically because from time to time they really liked to punch that accelerator from a standing stop. That said, while I think the new Nautilus is a great vehicle and wish its production had stayed in North America, it really isn't a full replacement for the Edge. While the lowest trim 2024 Nautilus gives you great value in a luxury mid-sized crossover, it still goes for a lot more than an Edge.
    3 points
  16. 30 day vacation for you. Your trolling has gotten ridiculous.
    2 points
  17. I doubt it's much... You're just trolling at this point. This is a ridiculous take.
    2 points
  18. It's not a matter of volume with the base models. The biggest value with the base models is for the marketing value to help drive showroom traffic and to offer customers a lower priced, more affordable vehicle which also helps lower the monthly payment where needed.
    2 points
  19. I agree. Right along the lines with what I was saying in the other thread that Ford needs to stop acting like they are a premium brand and offer more base models and lower pricing.
    2 points
  20. After the impact of the pandemic, we kept hearing that Ford was "right sizing" its inventory, moving to a more retail order focused system, etc. They had the opportunity to balance inventory vs. demand with the benefit to reduce the decades long dependence on incentives in order to move product. Now they've gone back to ramping up production, increasing inventory and resumed using incentives to varying degrees. In addition, there are no longer "entry models" with the exception of Maverick which easily exceeds $30,000. I'm not suggesting the return of coupes or sedans as has been argued so often. However, base models have been eliminated forcing customers into higher priced trims. Along with the substantial price increases, Ford and its competitors have priced themselves out of the market and forcing customers to buy pre-owned vehicles. Short term thinking doesn't solve long term issues.
    2 points
  21. I think your giving shape too much credit for aerodynamics-just look at some of the older cars (that don't have the best Cd numbers) that have aerodynamic improvements from people trying to eke out MPG gains. The vast majority of them are impractical from a design or manufacturing perspective with a new car. Not to mention if easy charging (5-10% to 80% in 10-20 minutes or so) is available, overall range issues become a moot point if typical 2 box CUV gets 10-20% less range then an "ugly" sedan type vehicle.
    2 points
  22. No plant yet, but given how price sensitive apparently they are, the smart money says Mexico, but there are a bunch of if and buts with that. Then don't discount the reporting conflating information that is being put out. Facts at the moment: There is a skunkworks small/affordable EV being worked outside of Detroit. How small/cheap is the unknown. Louisville is supposed to get a new product in 2027 or so to replace the Escape/Corsair-what is replacing it is anyone's guess-but leaning towards an EV There is no additional plans at the moment for another Mexican assembly plant-but given how militant the UAW is going to be in the coming years, I'd say is a possibility that will happen. The Mach E is built in Cuautitlán Assembly, so it will be worth watching what Ford does with it. One of the big reasons it is built there is due to Mexico having favorable trading rights with the EU and other parts of the world. The new Explorer EV being built in the EU costs slightly more then the Mach E but I'm not 100% sure how different the are going by size etc. That would make that plant a good target to build the affordable EVs in. What is Ford's long term plans with the Mach E? One thing that might be possible is that the Mach E and the Mustang EV coupe merged together early next decade. I'd say that Louisville would be a good fit for that, if Ford decides to close Flat Rock.
    2 points
  23. In other news, entitled billionaire wonders why Tesla buyers don't like him anymore after he started calling them woke…
    2 points
  24. https://carbuzz.com/shelby-american-teases-s650-ford-mustang/ I'm liking it already from that teaser. They need to offer that raised deck lid as a standalone part, it improves the rear of the car substantially. Between that, and the concaved deck lid, it gives off strong modern day '67 fastback vibes.
    2 points
  25. Leadership has a major impact on a company like Ford. It really is amazing how one person can literally influence and control direction and strategy so much. I honestly have reasonable hope for Lincoln moving forward. There are a few different silhouettes that will join (or at least they were supposed to) in the next couple of years that should make the faithful much happier.
    2 points
  26. It's even worse when you consider what Tesla's head of design was putting out earlier in his career. From working at Mazda, the best Japanese car brand for design by far, to putting out a triangle. Talk about a downgrade.
    2 points
  27. Based on initial feedback from Lincoln Nautilus Facebook groups and forums, your assessment is correct. Most don’t know, most of the ones who know don’t care and only a few who were actually planning to buy one are backing out.
    2 points
  28. As I said before, Musk’s ego - which is the only reason the thing ever made it past the prototype stage to begin with - will keep it around at least a year, maybe more.
    2 points
  29. 1. You asked and I provided and answer... Yes different brands do different things but we are talking about Ford being in a segment they have been in forever and just dropping it all together because they apparently made no profit on it at all. 2. Taurus used basically the same chassis since 1986 to 2007 with it being revised in 1996. I am not confusing profits with sales I am willing to bet the development for the chassis was already paid off I am sure they were making profit on the Taurus and Sable. Granted by 2003 it was long in the tooth and in dire need of an update but it would be silly to state they made no profit on it. Fusion did a far better job when it was introduced because it was spread across 4 brands as opposed to 2 (Yes I know Continental was also on the Taurus chassis but it was a very different vehicle). 3. I never said Ford CANT sell higher priced vehicles but I am stating they need more value oriented products. They are missing the mission statement of Henry Ford wanting to build a car everyone could afford. I am in NO WAY suggesting they make no profit but come on they only have 1 product that starts under 25k and that's the Maverick. I can't tell you how many people I have talked to that said they love the idea of a Maverick but they are not spending that kind of money a small vehicle. Also to be clear I am not blaming a company because they are "not building what I like" I am criticizing them for giving up on products they sold here in the US but still sell elsewhere in the world. I read the book American Icon which was about Mulally's time as Ford's CEO and one part of the book that really stuck out in my head was when Mulally sat on the floor and made a huge chart of every Ford product and what platform they were built on and it was a mess. They had products like the Falcon that had its own dedicated platform in Australia and it was shared with nothing else. He had them consolidate so much and it really helped turn the company around. I am sure you know this and don't need a history lesson but my point that I am trying to get across here is if they should be selling products they build elsewhere here as well it would help lower costs and drive up profits while retaining customers and not losing them to foreign brands. Look Chevy still sells the Malibu they sold 130k of them in 2023 up from 115k in 2022 those numbers aren't huge but it's better than 0. Are we going to say the Malibu makes 0 profit? If so why does Chevy keep making it and selling it here? Mondeo is only sold in China now, they sold 59,868 in 2022. Is there enough profit there to justify that? What if they sold it in the US as well and managed to sell 100k of them? Wouldn't that make it better? I want Ford to succeed but I want them to stop leaving segments just cause "Not enough profit" They have the ability to make it work but I feel like they don't want to do it and just focus on their trucks. Aside from sedans Edge is another example of them giving up on a segment. And in terms of big profits I really think Ford needs to start taking Lincoln seriously again and put an effort into giving them more product. To go back to what I was saying before about Ford acting like a premium brand... you can sell Lincolns at a higher price than Fords and get away with it. When you see Fords with 70 to 80k price tags you get sticker shock and hear people say "that much for a FORD?".
    2 points
  30. Ill never forget the backlash from Enviromentalists regarding the Excursions "size"...somehow the Suburban got a hall pass.....
    2 points
  31. Completely missed the point. Kia would kill to be able to sell 900k vehicles at the kinds of margins that Ford gets with F series. But they can’t because they don’t have the experience or expertise nor are they willing to make the huge investment required. A company has to play to its strengths and what works for one doesn’t work for another. Companies that aren’t US based evolved differently. And companies have to prioritize their resources. They cancelled Continental, Taurus, Fusion, MKZ, Focus, Fiesta and Ecosport. But they added Ranger, Bronco, Maverick, Bronco Sport, Aviator, Mach-e, E-transit and Lightning. And they’re working on at least 4 more new vehicles. Escape isn’t going anywhere now and I think Edge will be back. It’s a zero sum game unless you’re willing to build new plants and hire more people.
    2 points
  32. Sales of large luxury sedans declined significantly as well. Has nothing to do with drivetrain. Simple market shift over the last 3 decades. And while a few people would pay a premium for a great midsized family sedan, the vast majority of sales is still people looking for a cheap appliance to get them from a to b. That’s the market whether you like it or not. As for why Ford doesn’t sell certain vehicles but competitors do, answer this question. Why don’t Kia, Hyundai, Volkswagen, Honda, BMW, Audi, Mercedes, Jaguar, Porsche, Land Rover, Volvo or Mitsubishi sell full sized body on frame pickups or SUVs? Thats a 3M+ market they’re just ignoring. Toyota and Nissan tried with minimal results.
    2 points
  33. Fusion was #3 behind Accord and Camry and selling close to 300K. Hermosillo was near capacity. There were 8 competitors at one time and at least 3 of those (Kia, Hyundai and Nissan) were cutting prices to gain sales. There was nothing to distinguish one from any other and outside of brand loyalists it was all about price. Ford thought they could sell $30k Titaniums but buyers wanted $25k SEs with a $4K rebate. That is the definition of commodity when the o ly way to get volume is to out cheap the competition. Nobody beat Taurus or Continental. The market just went away.
    2 points
  34. On my morning commute, my exit is a lane that turns into an off ramp, so it's usually moving at highways speeds until it actually diverges from the highway itself. It never ceases to amaze me how many people will come screaming up in the lane next to it, then expect me to slow down so they can get in front of me, when there was literally a quarter mile of empty lane behind me THAT THEY JUST WENT SCREAMING PAST. Year, sorry buddy, but poor planning on your part does not constitute emergency on my part.
    2 points
  35. Check the tire pressure. May not have been lowered after shipment.
    2 points
  36. Maybe I'm missing something here, and if so, clue me in. But, if the cars are already sold by invitation only, why does the dealer deserver more than 5% of the cost of this thing for the privilege of selling it? I'm sure the customer gets to pick the dealer they want to deliver it, correct? I mean, how much work does the dealer put in? Something like this, I would imagine the PDI is minimal since it's likely already done. What does the dealer do to "earn" that $15k and why do they deserve more?
    2 points
  37. And that’s exactly my point, Ford took off with large design teams developing their key vehicles but, the efficiencies from the skunkworks aren’t just this type of battery or that control system…Ford compared what was done between the developments and discovered that much of the efficiency gains comes from not doing the conventional development way that Ford did…they need someone to think outside of the box and show them where all the unnecessary, redundant steps are in the process and look at new way to do everything…..especially cutting the time to make vehicles. An ex Tesla engineering manager is the perfect person to show them how it’s done.
    2 points
  38. They rushed to kill Edge and Nautilus too early just to meet an anticipated demand that now isn’t happening and apparently with the wrong kind of product. They could have brought a C2 edge and nautilus to Oakville and decided later if it made sense to convert to EVs. I think it started with the 5 EVs from VW’s platform and pending government mandates to go EV quickly around the world. But then the VW platforms didn’t work out. And then the market cooled off and govts backed off the EV mandates, but by the time that happened it was too late to save Nautilus and Edge and there was no suitable Edge to import either. And now the direction is cheaper EVs and a whole factory sits idle. All because they rushed to get EVs out.
    2 points
  39. In my county, people regularly get stopped for "No Tail Lamps Displayed" that are driving with only the DRLs at night. Often results in other offenses like suspended or revoked licenses, OWI, etc. And there is the opposite; people running their high beams 100% of the time. "I am a much safer driver than you. I know you can't see me, so I have my hi beams on in order to stand out from the commoners like you."
    2 points
  40. I think his point is that there are always going to be improvements that they find....and if you keep waiting for things to be "perfect", you'll never get there, and have endless delays because they're always finding something better. I think they should've kept the Rivian Lincoln product to gauge reaction and to give them an EV product until their in-house stuff was ready.
    2 points
  41. They didn’t rush T3. They didn’t rush Mach-E or Lightning - they are good first effort vehicles and learning experiences and they’re doing ok with proper pricing. The only thing rushed was Oakville.
    2 points
  42. They're not in denial they just announced hybrids for every gasoline vehicle. They just overreacted to the EV sales boom and pending government regulations and tried to do too much too fast. T3 was the right move and timing. I think Mach-E and Lightning were the right moves at the time and they learned a lot. But the mess with Oakville and VW and Rivian was a cluster F of epic proportion. And I don’t understand why you keep harping on design. They didn’t create a skunkworks team and delay projects to just work on design. It’s all about lowering the cost of EVs from battery type, source, design and size/range to vehicle design to electronics to manufacturing processes and suppliers. They obviously identified improvements for T3 in addition to new vehicles and that made the ones planned for Oakville obsolete.
    2 points
  43. The sad part is I would have never considered the first gen Edge as a commodity product by any means. The first gen was way more of a passion product. There was nothing else quite like it at the time outside of the Nissan Murano. Yes, perhaps the second gen is more of a commodity product. But its popularity is amazingly still pretty good for a decade old design. Only one person decided that the Edge was a commodity and it should be dropped. Farley really only loves the Mustang family, Bronco family, F-Series and Maverick.
    2 points
  44. Don't be obtuse, I find the triangular design to be rather adorable, acute even.
    2 points
  45. I had a '72 Pinto Squire wagon, fake woodgrain, chrome roof rack and all. I bought it in '73 when gas prices shot up. It had just over 6k miles and was a 2.0L 4-speed, red w/black vinyl interior. After a couple of years I pulled the drive train out and replaced it with a 289 with a C4 auto trans and 8" rear axle assembly, all from a '65 Mustang. Fit surprisingly well and the fuel mileage wasn't bad either. I ran it that way for a few more years before replacing the 289/C4 combo with a 351W 4V and toploader 4-speed from a '69 Torino GT. Now that was a true sleeper and a really fun little car.
    2 points
  46. Agree a redesign is due, but have no idea of when that might happen. I don’t follow expensive BEVs closely because they don’t make as much sense to me, but recently read that Models 3 and Y account for 96% of Tesla auto sales (not sure if that percent was US, Europe, or worldwide), so I would guess Tesla will not prioritize an S or X redesign. Perhaps it will make most sense when new technology supports a major update. I’ve seen speculation that new batteries like 4680 or faster-charging battery design may be catalyst for a redesign. It seems to me that they presently have bigger issues to solve, though I understand the Model S is their flagship and needs a new and bigger image.
    1 point
×
×
  • Create New...