2005Explorer
-
Posts
3,078 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
21
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Downloads
Store
Posts posted by 2005Explorer
-
-
21 hours ago, jpd80 said:
Wow that looks awesome! Let's see what happens when Ford in North America gets done with it. They have been very busy with changes to the current generation since 2019 so I can't imagine what exciting new features they will be adding to the Ranger.
1. no rear folding headrest
2. no hood struts(as of 2022)
3. no PRNDS light
4. no glovebox damper
5. no RANGER embossed into the Lariat seats
6. no console (pen) cubby
7. no 12V outlet in the console without 110v option
8. no bright trim rings on the 12v covers that matched the radio knobs
9. only 4 bed tie downs instead of 6 (as of mid 2019??)
10. no engine cover
11. no key slot on tailgate lock
12. no owners manual cover
13. no power folding mirrors on XLT 302A
14. Eco badge on tailgate
15. no plugs in the rocker panels
16. no ignition bezel (has always been missing)
17. steel front fenders (aluminum before) estimated after March 2021 and all 2022
18. no bright button on parking brake
19. no color keyed tailgate handle on Lariat just black plastic without chrome pkg.
20. no aluminum spindles, they're now steel
21. rear passenger doors no longer have external touch lock
22. front seat headrest tilt adjustment
23. (2) 4.2" productivity screens instrument cluster replaced with (1) 4.2" screen in Lariat 500ALike I said very busy! ?
-
1
-
-
17 minutes ago, rperez817 said:
Thanks for the recommendation but Jim Farley is a good businessman and is properly taking the lead on Ford's restructuring nowadays. He's the right man for the job.
But is he really? He seems to think ICE still plays a role in the market. I believe you want all ICE products cancelled in the next year or two. I bet you could do much better then him.
-
2
-
2
-
-
25 minutes ago, rperez817 said:
That would be a massive understatement. Fortunately, Jim Farley's decision regarding the business unit separation is a great start to making "major structural improvements on the inside" that Ford desperately needs.
Well maybe you should apply for a job at Ford since you're a corporate restructuring expert. Go fix them instead of being a keyboard warrior.
-
2
-
-
51 minutes ago, rperez817 said:
Good point 2005Explorer about the continual crises at Ford forcing the company to make hard decisions just to survive. However, Ford's competitors have to contend with the same industrywide issues (for example computer chip shortage), so it's not exactly "going perfect and on cruise control" for them.
All automakers have their strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats. The big difference between Ford and the others is organizational culture. Ford's has long stood out for its tolerance of making the same mistakes over and over.
Well 120 years later they are still in business as the original company. The only legacy US automaker that has survived out of this...
"Starting with Duryea in 1895, at least 1900 different companies were formed, producing over 3,000 makes of American automobiles."
So even though you are extremely critical of Ford and consider them the poorest run automaker they seem to survive and thrive. I'm not saying they don't need some major structural improvements on the inside, but your whole "Ford death watch" is getting old around here.
-
1 hour ago, rperez817 said:
Your explanation is perfect 7Mary3. Ford's dysfunctional culture is a key reason why the company is under a lot more pressure than VW, Toyota, or GM, and ultimately is why Farley took the lead among incumbent automakers to separate BEV/advanced technology operations from ICE vehicle operations.
Last year shortly after Ford announced its Ion Park battery R&D facility, Autoextremist came to his senses and provided a 100% accurate description of the latest "looming crisis for Ford". TIME: THE CRUELEST ENEMY. - Rants - Autoextremist.com ~ the bare-knuckled, unvarnished, high-electron truth...
Crisis is the only thing that has kept Ford in business for almost 120 years. If everything was going perfect and on cruise control like it is at every other automaker I'd be very concerned about their future.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Footballfan said:
I remember the glory days of Ford in the 1980s and 1990s. Every vehicle they launched during that time- with the exception of the Countour and Mystique was a hit in the marketplace. Why? Cutting edge styling, "Quality is Job One," offering customers good value, and listening to customer needs. Quite simple when you think about it. Obsession with profit margin usually means the customer is shortchanged and will look elsewhere for better value. Meanwhile market share erodes and when we have a recession- which is all but certain now- you'll have to offer gobs of cash to move the metal. There goes your margins and now you've lost customers to boot.
Well you have a point to a certain point. The 1986 Taurus and Sable were products that no expense was spared on and it showed. At the time they offered features and cutting edge design that no one else was doing. However they were slowly decontented until 1995 and many of the little touches that made them what they were started to disappear. When the controversial 1996 model appeared it too offered a lot of neat touches, but then they took decontenting to the next level. The same happened with the 2000 model. The original generations of Taurus could provide a whole case study on decontenting.
There are other quite ingenious products that came from Ford during that era and many were done with limited resources. The Tempo and Topaz was one of the best selling compact cars and all it really was is a stretched Escort. The 1983 Thunderbird and Cougar took a very unappealing car and turned it into something really stylish with better performance and quality on the same Fox platform.
However there were also products that suffered from cost cutting during the same period. The Yuma small truck platform brought the Ranger, Bronco II, and later Explorer, however Ford cost cutting created a dangerous vehicle on the BII and to a lesser extent in the early generations of Explorer. Sure Ford made tons of money, but do some research and the engineers knew the Ranger platform when serving in SUV duty had extremely poor stability. The management said build it anyway because they were not paying money to improve it. What happened next was a lot of lawsuits. It took Ford until 1995 to finally get rid of the archaic twin I beam front end on those products and until 2002 to actually build the Explorer chassis properly to give it better stability.
So even going back to the 80's and 90's you can find examples of Ford doing great things and doing some very questionable things too. The products of the era sold well, but that is more because Ford was way ahead of GM and Chrysler at that time when it came to design and quality. The imports although a large factor at the time were not a factor like they are today.
-
2
-
-
Speaking of Bronco check out this mint '78 Free-wheelin' Ford I spotted in Spearfish, SD today. Watch the ad... Same truck.
-
4
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, jpd80 said:
Thailand production of PX3 Ranger ends in March, Everest follows in May, so new models for Asia Pacific customers are not far away. North America will probably switch over the end of year break but may be sooner fingers crossed…
https://www.drive.com.au/news/current-ford-ranger-production-to-end-this-month-everest-in-may/
Pretty sure North America isn't switching over until late Spring 2023 from everything I have read.
-
2 hours ago, jpd80 said:
Consider what you’ve just said, GM gets a massive chunk of highly profitable ICE business as another sales channel, complete with dealer network. That combined with existing ICE sales and profits is gravy for the next +10 years.
The other side of that is Ford would immediately get the Model E EV business paid for and set up exactly like Tesla with little or no dealerships….something Wall Street and investors thought might be happening?
It sounds far fetched I know but I bet this is exactly what Wall Street is hoping happens, a bunch of suits have probably done the analysis as a what if, the big stopper is probably the Fords and what that split would project about grandfather’s company.
The telltale is Farley has made himself captain on the surviving team and one of his senior VPs in charge of the ICE business. Both share body design and assembly tech that’s still controlled by Ford Blue. Of course Farley is not committing to anything more than annexing the BEV business but these could be the essential pre-steps to a larger exit strategy before they get stuck with stranded assets.
So they are going to sell away the Ford brand name and oval, trademarks like F-150, Mustang, Bronco, Ranger, Explorer, production capacity and dealer network to GM? So GM will be building and selling Fords and FoMoCo will be selling some new Brand X, building them in new factories, and come up with a new sales channel? Why would GM want Ford dealerships when they already have their own in the same markets? Why would GM want Ford's ICE technology when they already have the same thing? Why would the Ford family who still controls the company want any name but Ford on the vehicle they produce?
Exactly what is GM getting for $30 billion? They are going to build and park an F-150 next to a Silverado and an Explorer next to a Traverse? Ford honestly is going to sell away their brand? Because without the Ford brand, all trademarks and patents, the ICE business is worth little to nothing. The dealer network isn't worth crap to GM because they would have to shut down 80% of it anyhow because of market overlap. They could easily sell Fords and Chevys at the same dealership. I'm not a business guy, but none of this makes business sense to me.
Selling away a brand that ranks #15 on most recognizable brands... Great idea!
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, akirby said:
I think you’re overestimating BEV demand in general for reasons we’ve been through over and over. ICE and BEV are going to co exist for quite some time.I'm still purchasing new ICE vehicles, but I also live in a place considered "the boonies" to most people. A plug-in hybrid would really be a better solution for someone like me, but I am not sure the manufacturers want to go too far down that path when a full BEV is likely cheaper to produce.
-
15 minutes ago, silvrsvt said:
I think it will be at least 10-15 years...I don't see certain segments that BEVs don't do well in like heavy duty trucks transiting till the very end. Just look at the specs of the new Hummer and how much it weighs and how it will translate into a HD pickup.
I agree for a very few commercial segments it might be closer to 15 years, but I doubt there will be much of a market for ICE with typical customers in the next 6-8 years. Everyone seems to want BEV when it comes to the general market. The few ICE trucks or large SUVs that Ford is still making after 2030 can simply be a very small division within Ford. There is no reason to split if off because it will soon go away on it's own.
-
1 hour ago, FordBuyer said:
Wall Street seems to think Ford will spin off the BEV business eventually, but not short term. Farley has some time to convince the Ford family to execute it. The climate crisis is accelerating and Clay Jr. certainly believes it. So looks like Ford is going full bore into this new business model. Everyone is scrambling to get the best seat as Tesla sits at the head of the table. Farley is obsessed with Tesla.
There isn't much reason to spin off the BEV business since the legacy ICE business probably only has 8-10 years left at most anyhow. I figure by 2030 they won't be selling any ICE vehicles except for very limited special use markets. It won't be enough to support a split-off company. Sure there will be necessary support for the ICE vehicles still on the road, but that will be more dealer focused support.
-
2 hours ago, jpd80 said:
So if Ford Model e and Ford Blue are separate business units, will Ford be game to report their respective profit/loss/ debt position each quarter…….or is this move just froth and bubble to impress Wall Street and investors. The way I see it, Model e currently has a $30 billion debt that will take years to work down, or does that become Ford Blue’s yoke of oppression?
Hypothetically, if GM offered Ford $30 billion for Ford Blue, would Farley recommend that the board take it?
I don't know why GM would pay Ford $30 billion for something they already have. It's not like Ford would sell the Ford brand or dealer network, so it would be pointless.
-
35 minutes ago, jpd80 said:
The new global Ranger and Everest are getting dazzle free high beam technology, I wonder if that’s something US authorities will look favourably upon, I know they take a lot of convincing but maybe Ford has done some legwork on a case for their use…
What exactly is "dazzle free high beam technology"?
-
2 hours ago, jasonj80 said:
Don't forget the heated wiper park and front parking sensors on XLT's, If it follows the F-150 the Ranger loses the glove box light, color changing ambient lighting and storage compartments like the F-150 has over model years. Honestly the cost cutting is just as bad if not worse under Farley that it was under previous CEO's. But until people don't buy the product and ripping Ford apart on surveys they will continue to do it. I won't own another vehicle that doesn't have touch sensors on the back doors so at this rate it isn't going to be a Ford as they have decided to remove them.I forgot about the front parking sensors that my 2019 XLT has. I added the Technology Package on the 2022 I ordered and if they are telling the truth they should come included in that package. My 2019 doesn’t have a glove box light, but at least it dampened. I guess the new ones just fall open. I also forgot to mention the removal of door insulation so the doors sound extra tinny when you shut them. I’m still looking forward to my new Tremor, but disappointed how much they have cheapened up the truck over the past few years. Heck you don’t even get a little owners manual pouch any longer.
I mention all of this because I question how nice the next one will be if they decide to go cheap. Ford wants to be a “premium” brand that people will pay more for, but after awhile people are going to stop paying more for less.
-
2
-
-
16 minutes ago, rperez817 said:
In light of the discussion about Ford's annual de-contenting tradition affecting U.S. market Ford Ranger, blksn8k2's question in the original post is worth repeating. How much of the feature set for European market 2023 Ranger will be eliminated in the U.S. market Ranger?
If I were to take a guess the very first thing will be the all digital instruments across the entire line.
-
1
-
1
-
-
34 minutes ago, rmc523 said:
That was specifically for chip shortages, though. Ford's done the late-in-lifecycle feature dropping well before chip shortages were a thing.
Yes. If you want a next gen Ranger buy quickly to get all the nice stuff, because it'll lose it sooner or later. I thought Ford learned their lesson with decontenting all to hell back in the late 90's with the Taurus, but I guess not.
-
1
-
-
34 minutes ago, akirby said:
To be fair though Ford has traditionally had more features and content than a lot of competitors, so the competitors have less to take away. Not defending it but you need to keep it in perspective.
That's true, but some of the stuff they have removed on the Ranger goes beyond just little trim pieces or moving items to another package. Replacing the aluminum front fenders secretly sometime in 2021 with steel is not product improvement. It makes you wonder how long the 100% aluminum body panel F-Series is going to last when Ford is going backwards on other models.
-
43 minutes ago, tbone said:
I’m a long time customer, and I’m noticing. It’s an issue that really bothers me. It makes no sense to have the first year model be the most feature rich, and then take content away as the model ages. What kind of logic is that?
What I need to research is if this is a common practice for all manufacturers or just Ford. I really want to know the answer to this question.
Oh and I forgot to add no manual override key lock on the tailgate anymore. I believe the F-Series still has it. The current Ranger has been hit very hard by the bean counters.
-
I’ll be interested to see how nice the next gen Ranger actually is because the current one has been the victim of some major decontenting since first coming to North America.
1) Lariat no longer gets an engine cover.
2) Hood struts replaced by prop rod.
3) Headrests no longer fold.
4) Chrome accents removed in certain interior areas.
5) Power fold mirrors removed from certain trim packages.
6) Lariat painted tailgate handle replaced with a black plastic one.
7) Removal of lighted shift indicators on console.
8) Removal of rear door touch sensors on Lariat.
Now this all seems to go back to former CEO Jim Hackett when he said they would try to cut costs by decontenting where the customer won’t really notice, but those little things matter when it’s a competitive market. It’ll be interesting to see if the next gen Ranger ends up like the current one where the first year is the most feature rich and they start removing features after that.
-
1
-
-
13 hours ago, GearheadGrrrl said:
The real purpose might be to establish a separate BEV brand which can be sold direct to customers, bypassing the problems of the some of the current dealer network. Or start a whole new BEV dealer network that Ford has better control over...
Edsel? ?
-
The dealers who are charging these large market adjustments especially on large SUVs and trucks better get their vehicles sold quickly because this war in Ukraine is likely to drive gas prices way up. Even "hot" vehicles like the Bronco which doesn't have that great of fuel economy will suffer. If the market falls out on vehicles that get relatively poor fuel economy there are going to be a lot of people who paid these huge market adjustments upside down big time. Heck even if auto sales don't collapse as bad as they did in 2009 there are still going to be a lot of people upside down and upside down.
If this keeps up maybe Ford needs to open a second Maverick plant.
-
Next gen Ranger isn't starting production until Summer 2023 so add a few months to that. If they start building it December 2023 technically that's next year.
Hopefully these predictions of $7 gas are wrong because that's going to put a damper on sales of specialty 4x4s, ICE large trucks and SUVs in general.
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, HotRunrGuy said:
Yeah, used. 13 miles on it, the window sticker is a customer special-order. Tell me somebody didn't get screwed-over when his Bronco came in,,,,
HRG
They probably ordered it thinking they would pay MSRP and when they were informed the dealer was going to throw a $30k mark-up on it they probably walked. I am sure the dealer is thrilled with all the money they are making totally ripping people off, but it could backfire on them.
Ford February 2022 Sales Results
in Ford Motor Company Discussion Forum
Posted
The biggest problem with gas prices out of control is if they stay too high for too long like in 2008 it can be a factor in a recession starting. I'm convinced these out of control prices especially with real estate can't go on forever without the bubble popping.
Ford needs to find a way to build more Mavericks because if a recession hits that and other small affordable fuel efficient vehicles will be what sells. I remember all the big expensive trucks and SUVs piling up on dealer's lots in 2009.