Kris Kolman

I would doubt that is happening... Sounds like they are retooling on a vacant/unused part of the plant for the initial startup. Which should disrupt any of the current production capability. Thus thru a combination of phasing the shutdown and stocking up on the current model Lincoln will bridge the gap between the current and new MKX. Can't extrapolate the MKZ situation to this one as that was caused by initial production quality issues beyond what they planned for.

I was disappointed there was not mid-sized SUV styling concept at either Detroit or Chicago and its now clear why we didn't see anything. Ford is much further along than I thought they were, although something tells me this is still early in the design effort (seems photoshopish). As for my thoughts on the design... I'm liking that they are keeping the general proportions the same, which gives me hope they are avoiding the useless-3rd row just to have it syndrome. But what really stands out is how the front has been shaped to give a triangular base, which in turn visually lowers the front end. Just wish they would have stuck with an evolution of the current grill, which to me the best part of the current design. To me the Edge by being the middle-child would do best by standing out and not taking on the corporate face.

Which only illustrates why the fixation on fuel economy x fuel costs is at best simplistic... Cost to own is a highly complex analysis and it delves into all aspects of the vehicle. For example the F150 Ecoboost is a better choice if you carry a load only 20% of the time, but if you carry a load 80% of the time indications are the V8 is the better choice. And how and where you drive has a big impact... Are you at altitude like me, or at sea level? Do you travel mostly in stop and go or on highway? Problem with this vast array of technical solutions is that none are a magic bullet and each does better in a different application.

Issue with the Bantum and Courier are multiple fold... First off they were only FWD, which may have worked for a time but you can't call anything a pickup truck in NA without at least AWD. Secondly to meet Ford's internal truck standards (which are tougher than van standards) they would required completely bespoke structural stampings to incorporate the integral rails to transfer the load. My guess in the end you end up with a vehicle 400 or so lbm above the 2600 lbm Fiesta. Which would be a huge impact to performance for what isn't the fastest car in standard trim to begin with. I'm guessing pushing it down to the 10 sec 0-60 time. And that doesn't start to say how loading it up would turn it into the equivalent of an automotive slug. Business case isn't much better... Ford hasn't taken much of a sales impact in South America/Africa due to the them replacing the Bantum/Courier with the T6 Ranger. Rangers sales have appeared to increase from cancellation of the smaller truck. The opposite from what happened in NA where F-150 got little to no boost from abandoned Ranger buyers. If South America/Africa isn't beating the drum for the Bantum/Courier it seems the business case is barely there as all NA can promise is something similar to TC sales. Converting a Fiesta or EcoSport into a Bantum/Courier is a large effort with lots of bespoke parts... For what seems to be 100k worldwide ceiling. Compare that to a business case for a 30k CKD line in NA of the T6 Ranger from body and interior parts shipped from Argentina. Much less development money, and who's continued improvements are paid for by the 300k international sales. To me the T6 Ranger option while not Ford's ideal vehicle for the NA market would seem to have the better business case than the Courier/Bantam. This is the downside of One Ford... You don't get a vehicle laser targeted for each and every market, but a jack of all trades and markets.

Its going to take a heck of a jump in %sales for diesels to go from being a rarity as they currently are in the single %s. Included in this is a conversion of production capacity which you know is slow to realize. So for the foreseeable future diesels are going to be a rarity and as such even if the resale value is all about rarity my logic holds. And as you've said until the price differential is more favorable you won't see diesels in more numbers. And since production capacity is limited I suspect there will be lag between demand and supply. As such NA resale looks more like Europe and rest of the world where diesels become the favored vehicle of choice as it has a lower cost to drive. Its closer than you think... Diesels just do to energy density are ~20% more efficient than equivalent NA gasoline engines, and ~10% more efficient than the best turbos (Ecoboost). Gasoline to diesel prices are already getting close to making it a price advantage... Diesel being ~15% higher than gasoline (~10% for premium gasoline). You can see the tipping point in sight with the European luxury brands which are starting to see good trends on take rates from diesel SUVs. And there is clamor from various tiers of government and "think tanks" promoting increasing the gasoline tax to pay for the structural highway funding deficit. Winds are starting to blow and it is all within reason to suggest that diesel taxes might stay as is, due to the wide ranging economic impact to diesel costs. This isn't to say the diesel is there yet, but it is closer than some would make you think... And resale isn't some may up VW fanboy creation.

I've heard the same on the Ranger and the 3.2L diesel... But getting back to Dodge one has to wonder why they choose two different ~3L diesels... Seems an odd play. And I'm not sold at all on the talk of an amazing weight decrease on the F150 do to a recent history of over-promising and under-delivering... But time will tell.

Understood... But that doesn't negate the fact that diesels worldwide hold their resale higher than gasoline engines. And to dismiss this when doing a cost to own analysis is bias'd.

Its nice to see Ford is having on open mind... It seems to be the start of Ford backtracking and admitting that there is room below a full-sized truck. This is a turn-around from what they said when they announced the Ranger's death. Probably because their internals are showing Ranger buyers aren't buying F-150... Probably sitting on their hands waiting to see what GM is going to do. My comment was more about the same arguments that comes from this board again, and again, and again. The two sides are dug-in on the board and nothing new seems to be said.

Then how do you explain the higher resale for heavy-duty diesel trucks...

Agreed that half-ton retail buyers are more NVH sensitive, but I'm not sure it matters much to commercial buyers. I would think the diesel take rate for commercial buyers would be much higher than retail if I extend heavy-duty sales trend downward. If Ford were to go down this route I would suspect they would focus on their commercial customers first and foremost as that is their sales strength.

Sigh... Here we go again... Same old arguments... T6 Ranger is too big, even though T6 and F150 while when similarly equipped has same size difference between a Focus and a Taurus F150 V6 XL 2x4 Regcab is the same price and fuel economy as a T6 Ranger, ignoring the 4x4 and Supercrew equipment difference Bigger is better will rules, which seems contrary to the trends in every other vehicle segment where capability vs size is being weighted 4-cylinder Ecoboost truck won't ever be accepted, which seems in conflict with everything Ford has pushed on Escape and Fusion South America/Africa need replacements for their subcompact trucks without understanding that those markets have evolved beyond them As for the push for people wanting a return to the 1980 sized simplistic truck my concern is that the vast majority of people own a single vehicle. As such the truck "living space" needs to be comparable to the compact SUVs like the Escape. This is what I've come to believe what most smaller truck buyers are being cross-shopping against. It seems the rise in compact SUVs was the biggest impact to small truck sales. During the heydays of the 80's and early 90's smaller trucks thrived against large trucks. But as the first generation rough small SUVs (Cherokee, Bronco II, etc) were replaced by more modern versions starting with the RAV4 small truck buyers changed their buying habits. Compact SUVs became less crude and more comfortable, while small trucks remained as is. And one survived while the other withered on the vine... That isn't a coincidence.

You guys are missing a big factor in overall cost to own... Resale price! My research indicates diesels will resale ~75% of the initial cost invested into diesel, this holds for both heavy-duties and VW Golfs. Go out an look at the cost of a used SuperDuty diesel or Golf diesel compared to a gasoline version. As such the $5k initially invested is returned in $3+k price advantage when you turn in or sell back your vehicle. That doesn't say diesels are quite there... Just closer. A diesel is ~20% more fuel efficient than a normally aspirated gasoline engine of similar torque. But a gasoline turbo can cut that deficit in half. So using Denver costs diesel is ~15% more extensive, and yet only 10% more efficient than an equivalent gasoline turbo. What is interesting to me is that Ram is using the VW sourced 6-cylinder diesel from the GC, not the similarly sized Fiat 4-cylinder engine in the upcoming Van. Seems to be a strange decision to use the more expensive engine with less NVH in a truck market. You would think a truck market used to the relatively noisy heavy-duty diesels wouldn't be picky about NVH.

Remember total cost of ownership is not just initial sales price, but resale price... My research indicates diesel Golf's retain ~75% of the initial upfront cost of diesel, something hybrids and turbos can't match. As such when that is taken into account diesels are much closer than it would appear at first. The issue I see now is that it looks like diesels are ~10% fuel economy improvement over turbos, while diesel prices are ~15% higher. So as overall petroleum costs slowly increase the gasoline-to-diesel ratio becomes more adventagous. And the political winds could change too... As those in Michigan have seen there is building pressure on higher gasoline taxes to help fill the road maintenance budget gap nationwide. It is not out of the realm of possibility that diesel taxes are untouched as that has a higher impact in the overall economy (nearly everything is impacted by diesel costs).

Once again too simplistic... Are you seriously saying Toyota is making more overall profit off the Tundra, than Ford is making off the F-Series or GM off of their trucks? That is laughable. Learn to know the difference in the "fleet market" and the "commercial market"... After years of hearing how bad fleet sales are for cars the broad brush has been applied to the commercial customer. A commercial customer is any company that comes in and buys more than 1 vehicle at a time... Could be the local tree cutting company, or a big utility or construction company. Secondly a commercial customer also wears out and replaces their vehicles at 2-3x as fast as a retail buyer... Putting on 80,000 hard load carrying miles a year is not unusual. Finally commercial companies are more loyal than the retail buyer... They generally don't maintain multi-brand fleets. Sure they work a deal that results in less profit per sale, but in exchange that equalizes out with more sales over time and more profit as a whole. Nieman-Marcus vs Walmart

That's a simplistic extrapolation from an emerging story without putting it in context... Go listen to Autoline After Hours video on the Chevy diesel for a better appreciation for the context. Or go read the following link to a PickupTrucks.com article http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2013/02/consumer-reports-questions-turbo-claims-we-dont.html Those complaints are specifically for "small displacement" turbos... In particular John McElroy called out the under 1.6L turbo in the Fusion as not coming in as promised But its important to note that he also has called out the latest lithium ion battery powered hybrids. So don't go all hybrid ga, ga without understanding they have similar problems. There does appear to be fire with the CR smoke, and I think Ford and others will need to adjust. But its easier to adjust with the small turbos (add a CVT) that it is to fix the hybrid problems. Got to wonder how close a diesel coming out even in terms of fuel cost is... As of today Denver regular fuel $3.07, premium $3.25, diesel $3.59... As such to equalize out diesels need to be 16% more efficient than regular gas and only 10% more than premium. You can see why the Europeans have less of a bar because they all run premium gas. As for the cost of initial investment... Like hybrids its hard to justify them in terms of total cost to own. Although like diesel heavy-duty trucks there is an inherent resale return that should be accounted for... Just did a quick kbb evaluation on a 2010 Golf and the diesel was $16k, while the gasoline was $12k. Once again like everything its complicated and closer than some would make it seem.

You are completely missing the truck market... Sure there is some urban buyers, but the majority of truck buyers are "fleet" buyers. Toyota in Chicago said they have similar retail take rates for the Tundra as the Camary. So in that light the Toyota has been able to find a retail anchor by trying to "out F150 and F150". Once again Toyota's statement was that their retail take rate was similar to the Camry, and yet Tundra sales were only 141k last year. While Ford moved 645k F-Series, GM moved 575k Chevy/GM twins, and Chrysler moved 293k Rams. If that doesn't make clear what the pickup truck market is nothing will. Utility and truck segment is dominated by multi-vehicle fleet sales to companies who go to work everyday and wear their trucks into the ground. There is nothing that says that ranchers, construction companies, energy companies, and etc are at all interested in anything but what the Ford and GM are giving them.

Speculation in the extreme... Same type of speculation that claimed the death of the V8, or any number of anti-market claims... If this was truly the market direction why in the world does Honda struggle to sell the Ridgeline? Why in the world does Toyota struggle to sell the fairly capable Tacoma? One must respect the what the market is telling you before you make such grandiose claims.

Real world truck... Is there such a thing? I mean you have spectrum people that utilize the trucks capability a handful of times a month, but use it as an empty daily driver during the week. Then at the other spectrum you have the farm work truck that is loaded up each and everyday. And for me in in the southern suburbs of Denver I find that I get really close to highway mileage as lights are few and far between even on side streets. But then there are once again construction work trucks downtown that have to navigate thru stop and go while being loaded down everyday. This is a fundamental problem with the flawed logic that one tool is best for all applications. I have multiple screwdrivers of different sizes... And the same thing goes with engine and engine technologies. What works best for one person and their driving spectrum doesn't for another. That's what I like about Ford's multi level engine mix (small Ecoboost, mid NA, mid Ecoboost, and large NA) is that it gives the driver the best tool for the job.

Transit platform would need to redesign all of the hardpoints from B-Pillar forward to make it look like a SUV/CUV. Without it a Transit based SUV would look as out of place as the NV cargo looks out of place as a van. Expedition/Navigator sales are not there to justify such an expense... And they have enough trouble without giving them an ugly face. Expedition/Navigator will go back to being near identical to the F150 from the B-Pillar forward, and the $5-7k price differential will pay the differences aft of that. Once certified in US and Canada for the Transit certification into other vehicles is fairly strait forward. And a lot of the engineering challenges will translate to F-150 as they have similar engine availability. For comparison sake the 3.2L generates similar torque as the Ecoboost and 6.2L in the F-150 (see below), but at a much lower and narrow band (1500-3000).

Ford is watching and waiting on diesel... They were ahead of the curve on turbos and haven't wanted to dilute the Ecoboost message by adding diesels as well. But a massive advantage of One Ford is that some excellent diesels are available shortly if the market goes that direction. Even so they are slowly introducing diesels into utilities as the 3.2L diesel will be available in the Transit.

Still don't understand why they decided to pull out a SEMA car for Chicago... Is the Trackster a smoke screen designed to take some attention off the hot Dart and Beattle introductions? Or is it somekind of internal counterpoint to the Shelby Focus? If the latter why not slap the RS label on it. Kind of disappointed Ford has missed the chance at a forward looking mid-sized SUV styling exersize like the Evos for the upcomming Edge.

Apples to Oranges... Charger is comparable to the Taurus SHO which isn't a slouch and quite a smile generator.

I also don't understand why so many of you think a rear-mounted spare would be a sales killer... RAV4 has always had a rear mounted spare and it hasn't seemed to hurt its sales. Seems to me the bias is not based on a market/sales concern, but personal dislike... Same with the focus on the front clip styling. Also I don't understand the B-Max love... B-Max does not slot into the NA market and would be a unique, niche vehicle. If Ford and the other car makers haven't brought forward a C-Class minivan-ish vehicle why do you think a B-Class would work. Its not for lack of options, but because the sales aren't there... Look at the underwhelming sales of the Mazda5. The NA market favors their utilities to be SUV/Cross-Over based not minivan based. While there appears to be a momentum in the market for a vehicle slotted underneath the just enlarged Escape. EcoSport would fit right in with the current "mini" SUV market with the Jeep Compass and new Honda ute. Finally I’m having trouble with the "not good enough interior" comments... Every picture I've seen shows the EcoSprot interior to be very similar to the Fiesta, which is should be plenty for the $20k price point. What are you expecting? As long as the EcoSport interior matches the Fiesta that should be sufficient.

Honda has joined the sub-compact (smaller than Escape) cross-over market with the Uban SUV Concept. As this market expands it would seem to make the possibility of Ford introducing the EcoSport to NA more likely. Edmunds is predicting a $20k price tag... Which would be ~$5k over and above the Fit from which it is based. And right in line with it competitors: $19 Jeep Compass, $19k Mitsubishi Outlander Sport, $19k Kia Sportage, and $20k Nissan Juke.

Sad or not the European market is collapsing... Ford can't afford to continue accept billion dollar losses from FoE... If anything this simply speeds up the process to close Genk and the retooling of Valencia. Predictions are the European market will shrink further in 2013... FoE isn't done if the market trend doesn't recover. I read an article that said even VW is starting feel the pinch, putting its lack of success in NA at the forefront.