Harley Lover

Iosis Concept:

Unless everyone has a subscription to Automotive News, you won't see anything. Do you prefer to know or not?

News from Europe:

No disrespect to you intended, but I think you should give this article to your professor. Frankly, I buy into the analysis quoted in the article much more than the simplistic analysis the prof proffered to your class. If "Hitachi Automotive supplies about 60 percent of the airflow sensors used by leading automakers" it seems obvious that there will be some supply problems if they can't get production going very soon. Another example: GM's truck plant that has already gone down due to parts shortages. GM is not a Japanese company. I expect Ford will weather this storm better than GM or Chrysler, because Mulally's discipline of weekly management meetings will have already pushed this concern to the top of the charts. I remain concerned about Ford's ability to avoid disruptions to its manufacturing operations.

Akirby's point (correctly so) is that Ford is no longer chasing volume at the expense of profit. Ford's strategy is to maximize output at each plant while having transaction prices (and margins) as high as possible. Put another way, Ford doesn't really care if it outsells GM in terms of units sold; Ford's goal is the highest profit possible from its plant's capacity. 2010 results demonstrate this discipline: Ford made significantly more profit than GM, while selling fewer vehicles and carrying significantly more debt (and debt service). That's a recipe for long term success. GM appears to be repeating past mistakes. Akerson is a fool if he's steering them down that path.

It's hard to determine if this story is simple sensationalism, or more serious. Everything I read here makes sense, so I think the potential impact is real.

IIRC, Bob King did a really good job when he was the UAW's Ford rep. I want to to believe that the quotes we're reading are mostly him speaking to his base, particularly right now since they are having their convention in Detroit. I think it's necessary in his job to tell the people what they want to hear, even though he might very well realize it's wrong. Don't forget he agreed to an additional round of concessions for Ford (which would have made Ford even with the BK concessions granted to GM and Chrysler), but the union membership voted the addtitional concessions down. My point being that King's actions are perhaps wiser and more savvy than his words. I hope he is only shooting off his mouth, because as has been noted ad nauseum here, Ford is not out of the woods, nor is the economy as a whole.

The 2 C-Max hybrids are the smaller C-Max, so we're getting both C-Max models.

The C-Max is coming in hybrid and plug-in hybrid versions isn't it?

Do a quick search of VW TDI HPFP failures" and you'll see that VW diesel buyers have a crap shoot to even get to 10,000 miles without major repairs. VW's abysmal quality record is what steered me away from VW and to BMW. Diesel ownership in the era of urea and DPF's is not the same as just a few years ago (prior to all the pollution add ons). The jury is definitely out regarding the longevity of the new generation of diesel cars that are festooned with the afore mentioned pollution equipment. The early returns (VW and its HPFP fiasco) are not encouraging.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- BMW sold 3,802 335d's in the U.S. in 2010 out of total sales of 100,910. That is not a "high take rate". I drive a 335d, I love the car. BUT - as much as I hate to admit it, I think Ford is probably right. The average, Camry-buying consumer has a head full of misconceptions about diesel and diesel cars. For the diesel car to gain broad acceptance among the Camry buyers, a company is going to have to undertake a significant advertising and education effort for the buying public. If I'm Ford, I'm very happy to let VW undertake that effort. If VW are successful, I have technology on the shelf that I can deploy to gather in sales should it be opportune to do so. VW needs diesel to be successful in the short term, because they are behind the 8 ball in developing and selling hybrids and electric cars to satisfy pending fuel economy regs. So let them plow the ground with the American consumer. Trying to build a compelling business case for a diesel car is almost impossible for Ford, especially when Ecoboost delivers almost the same efficiencies by using the same technologies (DI/ turbo).

Until the Ka migrates to a Ford chassis, it's a moot point. The OP doesn't seem to understand that the Ka shares a chassis with the 500, and therefore Ford could never build a business case for building a production line over here for only the Ka. If the next generation Ka moves to a global chassis (Fiesta based, perhaps?), then it would be more reasonable to present a case to build it on a flex line.

I hope that was a sarcastic post.

The older diesels were indeed longer lasting. The new generation with DPF/urea might not be any better than their gas counterparts. The technology applied for emission compliance has not improved longevity, that's for sure.

All the current diesels are using urea and DEF's to address this issue. The biggest downside is the technology causes a hit on fuel effieciency.

Ford has already stated that future Lincolns will have bespoke bodywork. No one call tell that the Flex and MKT share a chassis because the bodywork is unique for both. That will be the norm going forward with each new vehicle (note I'm leaving out refreshes, as obviously the sheet metal won't change for those). So therefore we should expect an Escape-based Lincoln to have unique sheet metal in addition to all the upgraded content and hopefully engines. I really think Ford has some great ideas for differentiating Lincoln with technology (and I don't mean limited to electronics). Ford has access to all sorts of capabilities on a global basis; if Ford can offer DCT in a Focus and Fiesta, imagine what they might be willing to offer at Lincoln's price point!

Read about VW and their problems with the TDI fuel pump and the NHTSA investigation. Then go to TDIForums, and read about the issue there. That will make you swear off any VW product permanently.

They are DRLs, not fog lights.

Every time Ford makes one of these moves, it reminds me all over again how proud I am that Ford is paying back its debts, not relying on the U.S. government to write debts off. The fact that GM is now using its debt advantage to cut prices in the market and screw up the price discipline that has been built just makes me sick.

I like to think of this as a nice homage to Henry II. I enjoy the idea of Ford getting to tell Ferrari to shove it one more time. It's been almost 50 years since it played out at Lemans, but this Ford victory will be just as enjoyable.

To your point, BMW have also announced a line of FWD vehicles that will be positioned below the 1 series; the line of FWD vehicles will have at least as many models as Mercedes have announced for their FWD line, and we will definitely get them in the U.S.. The BMW fanboy base is quite atwitter about this.

"Taurus and Falcon replacements are next in the queue in Ford's global car strategy -- after the next generation mid-size car [Mondeo] is complete." "The next generation Ford Taurus -- the car that threatens to eventually replace the homegrown Falcon sedan -- could be designed in Australia. Ford Australia's design department will be one of seven styling studios in the Ford world to submit a blueprint for the carmaker's new global large sedan, which is it is speculated will share much of its structure and componentry -- and possibly become an identical twin -- with the next all-new Falcon. Under the 'One Ford' global car policy, both the Taurus (pictured) and Falcon are likely to become much more closely related when the new models for both vehicles come on line some time in 2016 or beyond." http://www.carsales.com.au/news/2011/large-passenger/ford/falcon/ford-oz-bids-to-design-next-taurus-23428

From a macro perspective, I wonder if Ford's strategy is to offer the market virtually everything it has on the C platform - all in the pursuit of the best possible MPG ratings for its fleet to offset the sales of lower mpg models.While there is obviously a cost to offer the various models, the cost is mitigated in the sense that the cost of designing the models is already sunk, and thus the investment is only for the 'hardware'.

Published reports are that the product will be the Transit Connect. Lots of scepticism on this board.