jpd80

Would the bidders be better off running the clock down and buying Opel at a GM Bankruptcy fire sale? Maybe Opel's $4 billion debt (financial needs) gets wiped out then too?

Hi Scape, I see in previous posts, you mentioned a bit of legal work. How do you see GM's bankruptcy panning out, like - is it going to descend into a messy dog fight? Are GM & the Gov'mt painting too much blue sky assuming the Good GM could emerge from this quickly? It all sounds too good to be true having so many complex issues cleared and GM sterilized in record time.

Two things: The government made GM go back and redo their viability plan. The government wants its money back so in order for that to happen, GM must become viable.

Are the big fish about to claw back lost income, could this be the start of other companies doing the same? Does this signal the start of a market revival in the second half of the year?

The angry amongst you might want to reconsider after reading this: I bet GM doesn't play by this rule book when it cuts workers and dealers. Maybe you guys should go play over on GMInside news website......

No, that's the Transit Connect. I believe the Transit is still built at Southampton.

For all intents and purposes they are roughly parallel to each other. I don't believe the EUCD skim door technology would be an impediment in US crash tests Volvo S80 is "using it" and the doors will be on the next GEN Mondeo/Fusion.

Carbon fiber air resevoirs now makes this a much safer option, in a crash they tend to split more progressively releasing the kinetic energy without catastrophic failure. One good thing is they side step the whole issue of battery technology and weight, could be a simple add on for conventional gas vehicles - anyone say launch assist?

GM isn't really suffering, bankruptcy wipes away their debts while others are left to clean up the mess.

The big difference with Ford was both the outsider CEO and the will to support him, take away either one of those elements and not much is likely to change. Dollinger is right about replacing GM's top brass but his plans for recovery are terminally flawed, they may have worked 10 years ago but GM is way past the point of saving brands and dealerships.

The money involved is expected to be $1,000/buyer max - you could get similar deals from other brands. I think this topic has already been discusses at length in another recent thread.

2011 Focus Dead end platforms will not receive EB I-4 engines.

Ford is not kicking GM and Chrysler the nuts. Rather than offering disillusioned GM and Chrysler customers disgusting low ball trade in figures, Ford dealers are converting these people to Ford by doing the right thing and offering fair trade in prices. That is not predatory, that is good business.

Since when has Ford made derogatory remarks about GM or Chrysler in its advertisements? None so far and they probably never will. It's all about Ford's products and services to customers, not about rivals' misfortunes.

Jim Dollinger sure is a typical salesman and I know a lot of other dealers must think like he does. When he says that the problem with GM is not products and Brands, it's leadership and unless that changes bankruptcy won't save GM. So is he right?

1) Hip room is approximately 1.5" less with the Mondeo Compared to the Taurus. Hip room is approximately 2.5" less with the Taurus Compared to the Falcon. 2) Falcon uses EUCD Slim door technology, this would free up a lot of space in the Taurus making the front and rear hip width measurements huge. 3) Replacing D3 Taurus was suggested and rejected by Ford on the grounds that FWD/AWD offers better handling for customers driving in the snow belt states in winter It worth looking at how the Falcon packs in so much space in a car barely 4" longer than a Fusion, the Falcon is a great package but comes with RWD strengths and weaknesses. Maybe when Ford are back on their feet it can partner up with Mustang production in North America.

Direct Injection and Turbocharging is expensive and it will be interesting to see whether Ford's mantra of technology to the masses holds up over time, maybe the step up in CAFE makes it imperative now.....

It strikes at what is needed in a car. For the past 100 years or so, people have been putting big reciprocating engines, gearboxes and transmissions into cars, the framing to support these items takes up a fair bit of real estate and quite a portion of the vehicle's weight. If auto manufacturers were to think more like aerospace and design a passenger compartment first and then add the power train and wheel systems around it, I'm sure they could kill a lot of weight without making cars look like golf carts.

With GM expected to enter bankruptcy in the next week to ten days, GM and the government have a decision to make with continuing development of the Volt. GM expects to lose money on every vehicle sold for the first four to five years. Expected to sell for about $40,000, the Volt will attract a government rebate of $7,000 so in effect, the government will be footing a $7,000 to $10,000 loss on every Volt sold. Seeing as the government will be losing significant money on every Volt sold, should they be questioning the whole viability of the Volt business plan?

Prius sneaked over the line by being a "sports wagon". I really wish Ford would build the Focus hybrid and give Prius a hiding.

No doubt, cars are slowly being transitioned from internal combustion to electric. I would love nothing better than to see a manufacturer replace the conventional power train and gearbox with a mini turbine and generator that feeds power to a smaller set of batteries and motors on all four wheels. With Aluminum construction, such a vehicle would revolutionize the way we look at cars an what can be done.

Isn't the real problem here the lack of dilligence on the pension fund manager's part. It's not as though this has all occurred in a veil of secrecy, they have had months or years to get out. Blaming the government, bankruptcy judge or whoever for dropping the hammer is a little rich when the pension managers have taken money for overseeing the investments, they should be accountable.

I wonder, if the Flex gets 24 mpg hwy now, could the I-4 EB get that up near 29-30 mpg? That would be a staggering increase, especially if the performance was similar to the regular 3.5 V6.

I'll agree but I like to use empirical data to compare space efficiency because measurements don't lie. From memory, the side glass tumblehome on the FH/Taurus is more vertical than Falcon/Mondeo/Fusion, I'm thinking that the Taurus roof line extends further outboard increasing canopy area and feel. I've sat in a Fivehundred, FG Falcon, Mondeo and 2006 Fusion, the Mondeo blows people away for space. If you're tall like me, the Mondeo's 44" front seat travel allows you to really stretch out behind the wheel. I'm over to the States again in September so I'm looking forward to a sit in at least in the new Fords. Actually, Deanh was on Holidays in New Zealand recently, he may be able to give us his appraisal.

You're welcome, I did it just to help people's frame of reference, not to disparage the Taurus or any other US Fords. I'm thinking I might compile some CUVs/SUVs in another thread Territory/Kuga Vs Edge/Flex/Escape