jpd80

Today's Mondeo suffers from being too big for the European market and I'm pretty sure that's the reason why Granada and Scorpio didn't sell as well either. Even if you make a great car, the market has to want it.

That would be when F Truck was selling between 700,000 and 900,000 units per year. Both the F Truck and Explorer did extremely well for Ford and brought in the bulk of profit. Unfortunately, the market went away from them in the mid 2000s and now Ford has to concentrate on making profit on every vehicle sold. They'll do it but it just takes a change of mindset. +1

Another stupid article from Jalopnik, they didn't do any research whatsoever. If they had, they would realize that the new fuel economy regs are based on uncorrected economy test data, not the MSRP highway mpg sticker.

There's usually three modes in a fuel system: Lean burn, Stoichiometric and Full power. Big advances in fuel injection mean that DI has an Ultra lean cycle where A/F goes to 65:1. They can support those mixtures with a Stratified charge - rich near the plug and lean further out. With the increased amounts of EGR used these days, hot running cylinders don't usually occur.

The current F150 is about 21 mpg highway, before correction this is actually 26 mpg. Not far to the 27.5 mpg target from there....... Like I said before, this is trickery with numbers.

Is this statement true or another of Reuters inaccurate reports?

That's compaed to the 4.6 V8. Unfortunately, Ford chose not to fit the V8 to the Taurus or the MKS so we'll never find out. And the 4.6 will be replaced soon in the F150 as well, maybe comparing it to the new 5.0 V8 is better?

If anyone bothers to read my post and follow the LINK to “Bulking Up” Tom Cackette from the CARB was trying to explain to John McElroy on Autoline Detroit TV how the sticker on your car is discounted roughly 20% from the actual test results. He explains some interesting points on CO2 and fuel economy in gasoline, Diesel and ethanol. Yes and I confess the figures are confusing to me - I wonder if that is kinda "politically deliberate"....

The current Global Ranger has a 1 tonne carrying capacity and can tow 6,600 lbs. That makes for a pretty usable little truck...

Corporate Average Fuel Economy - the name should give you a hint. It's the (harmonic) average of all sedans or all trucks as applicable.

I already covered that above:

I'm thinking Ford may have another surprising Q2 result, it could be a small profit or tiny loss, something to stun the market and kick the stock up over $6. If that happens watch for more debt bond swaps, I think that Ford is shadowing GM/Chrysler's every move without needing government money, bankruptcy or slashing dealers. Watch the American public switch camps on the back of some good new from Ford, everyone likes a winner and Ford is looking like that month by month.

It's all politicians playing with numbers to make themselves look better. The amount of confusion on these boards regarding the vehicle mix needed to meet the 2016 CAFE limits will tell all of you that the avarage non car follower will be totally amazed at how manufacturers met the targets with ease.......

Ford hasn't confirmed any of the power and torque figures or even the 5.0 engine capacity. Jaguar can't even get 400 hp and 400 lb ft from its PFI 5.0 V8, I doubt Ford will without DI.

One thing is for sure, the motor companies will be forced to meet specific CAFE targets each couple of years, the biggest non conformers are not Ford GM or Chrysler, it's the likes of Mercedes, BMW and others who just prefer to pay the fines and pass the costs onto their customers.

I think Ford has the right regional mix of technology for the various divisions. It seems like where there's an obstacle preventing one technology like diesel, there are several others to take it's place. There's not too many other major manufacturers that can spread across the globe with that ability.

I read that some dealers with the luxury brands were building Taj Mahal show rooms before the crunch, experts are now saying there's no way these dealerships can survive as they were barely sustainable with good sales levels.

I read that a lot of luxury brands were building Taj Mahal show rooms before the crunch, experts are now saying there's no way these dealerships can survive as they were barely sustainable with good sales levels.

Nah, he had a golden parachute a while ago before everything went South for GM. I think they retain him as a "consultant" - team mascot would be a more apt title.

It suits Ford's purpose to adapt a supplier's existing system than to try doing it in house. You also get economy of scales by plugging into FoE and Ford Global major contracts with Bosch.

Ford dealers are more likely to be in a rural areas vacated by Chrysler dealers. Toyota and Honda don't really do that many rural dealerships by comparison.

The GMNA play book is: 1) Overproduce 2) ? 3) Profit

It's trickery with numbers. The uncorrected CAFE test figures are roughly 20% higher than what's posted on windshields.

Link Into the arms of Ford, Mercury and Lincoln....

Thanks Richard, this is what Tom Cackette from the CARB was trying to explain to John McElroy (Ritchie Cunningham) on Autoline Detroit TV. - LINK to “Bulking Up” He explains some interesting points on CO2 and fuel economy in gasoline, Diesel and ethanol.