akirby

Ford has moved a lot of the national incentives they used to offer to the local dealer associations and those aren't necessarily shown on the Ford website. This is where that FDFA advertising fee gets used. It allows local dealers to target different vehicles at different times based on local demands. Mine had an extra $750 available that wasn't advertised. This is why you really have to check with the dealer to see what Vincent says is available for your specific vehicle.

Never do $0 deductible - do at least $100. And why on earth would you buy the warranty from the same yahoo that tried to rip you off in the first place? But it from Flood Ford or some other dealer. It doesn't matter where you buy it - any Ford dealer can service it.

You need 10 posts before you can ask for vehicle tracking. You have 8 right now.

It crashed and that's what it says when it reboots. It's not really scheduled maintenance - it's a system crash. It used to just hang but at least now when it gets confused it reboots.

I already have an EB 2.0 with a 6 speed.

How many miles do you drive per year? If you really want coverage figure out how many miles you'll drive in 7 years and get the Premium Care plan for that length and mileage. A 7 yr/60K mile premium care from Flood Ford is only $740 with a $100 deductible. But remember you get a factory 3/36K bumper to bumper and 5/60K powertrain warranty and the ESP will only cover things not covered by the factory warranty. So your chances of having an expensive repair is minimal. I'd definitely skip the maintenance plan. Just get the stuff done that's required in the owner's manual (not the dealer's $300 we'll inspect everything ripoff service). I don't think it would cost you more than $400 over 60K miles. And you don't have to pay for it all up front - keep your money and only pay for services rendered (No more than $100 the first 3 years).

First find out exactly what coverage you have, then get a quote from one of the online places. Then take that to the dealer and ask why they tried to rip you off and demand a refund. If they won't give it to you then cancel it yourself and find a new dealer. Then if you still want to buy them get them somewhere else. A little extra profit isn't so bad but that sounded like a total ripoff. I'd complain to the sales mgr and GM/owner.

That's normal but it shouldn't happen a lot. If it happens a lot you may have a bad apim or bad software.

Is that a mustang or a seahorse?

Please tell me you didn't pay $2200 for a 7 yr 60K mile ESP plan. The factory powertrain warranty is already 5 yr 60K miles. I think you can get a 7/100K warranty for less than $2K. And you'll only need 6 oil changes and maybe an air filter or two in 60K. Is it too late to get your money back?

It's just semantics. Ford doesn't design cars around the EPA test. They don't say "how can we design this so it works on the EPA test" but not in the real world. Many people accuse automakers of doing something that only works on the EPA test and never works in real life. In this case it is possible to get the same results in the real world as the EPA test. Anything that Ford does helps fuel economy in both the real world AND the EPA test as opposed to something that only works on the EPA test. It may just be semantics but I'm a stickler for stuff like that.

Once again - that's not accurate. Ford designed the cars for maximum fuel economy. Anything that Ford did to increase fuel economy works just as well in the real world as in the test lab. The key is you have to drive it just like the EPA test. The difference is Ford's new hybrids can go faster in EV mode than any other hybrids and the EB engines are much more sensitive to throttle input than NA engines. As other mfrs start to do the same thing they'll have exactly the same problems with real world mpg. Ford has asked the EPA to adjust the window stickers to better reflect real world mileage so it's the same across the board for all mfrs.

They would be if people bought them when they were available.

That just makes it that much worse. I can't imagine any real Jeep fan liking it. Maybe that's their intention - bring in a totally new buyer but if that was it they should have used a different name.

Not bad although that third eye is distracting. I like the new GC also. I don't like the body on the Durango though - it just has odd proportions to me.

They didn't. They scheduled the MkZ launch 2 months later than the Fusion launch. But the Fusion launch was unusually delayed.

Let me try to simplify this for you. Let's say that there are 50,000 potential Ranger buyers out there but they all want to buy a used one that's 5-10 years old. Ford builds 50K Rangers and they sit on the lot because nobody wants to buy one new. YOU CAN'T HAVE USED CARS IF NOBODY BUYS THE NEW ONES! Can we make it any clearer than that?

On second thought - maybe I never actually said that out loud.

Bingo! That's exactly what I'm talking about. Guys tend to want something unique and different from what their friends drive. Women tend to want whatever their girlfriends have. When it was time to replace our Explorer the Expedition had just come out. I tried to get my wife to look at one but she said "it's too big! No way I want to drive something that big!". So we got a new Explorer. 2 years later her petite girlfriend got one and the next thing I hear is "how much are those?". So we ended up getting the Expedition 2 years after we bought the Explorer. And I managed to get in a few "I told you sos" on the sly without getting slapped.

I'm not defending Lincoln at all - ultimately it's their responsibility for not delivering cars. But that doesn't mean that everything that happens is within their control or preventable or just due to poor management. For example - there has been a nationwide railcar shortage for years. It affects all mfrs. There is a limited number of railcars available from the railroads and they're all shared by everyone. There really isn't anything that Ford can do about it unless you think they should open their own railroad and buy their own railcars. http://www.charlestonbusiness.com/news/44257-rail-car-shortage-hampers-automakers?rss=0 Parts are no longer warehoused in large quantities. They are shipped in to coincide with production demand (just in time manufacturing). If the vendor ships a bad batch of hood latches or headlamps then Ford is stuck until the vendor corrects the problem. If the vendor is unable to keep up with demand (no hood latches) then it's the same issue. Is Ford ultimately responsible? Yes. They pick the suppliers. But there is no way any mfr can ensure that a problem never happens. All Ford can do is try to catch these problems before the vehicles leave the factory and try to fix them quickly. Then they have to work with the suppliers to get better quality parts with no shortages or find a new supplier. If these problems continue to happen then it's a Ford management issue. If they fix these problems so they don't reoccur then they're doing a good job. There are a lot of similarities between something like this and large IT software projects and I've been on the other end of plenty of those with similar issues so I sympathize with the position that Ford is in. What usually happens is one thing goes wrong (missing or bad parts) and that screws up the normal process (inspect locally) which causes a change (ship to flat rock for inspection) which causes another problem (tracking system can't handle) which creates a workaround (ship via truck from Flat Rock) that gets derailed by rail and truck shortages and/or government regulations (maybe shipping a car with a Mexico VIN directly from FR is some kind of violation - not sure just saying it could happen). Every decision along the way is made to remedy the initial problem but it ends up causing a cascade of other problems. Let's just say I've been there, done that and got the tshirt many times so I'm more understanding than most customers. None of that reduces the impact to customers and Ford should compensate you guys for having to wait and put up with misinformation. And if they don't get these problems fixed before the next launch then that is a management failure.

R&D is responsible for engineering problems where one part doesn't work with another part or a properly manufactured part doesn't work. R&D has nothing to do with bad stamping dies, poorely cured headlamps from a supplier, lack of hood latches from a supplier, lack of seats from a supplier, lack of resources to do onsite inspections, etc. There could have been some engineering issues but it's mostly a production problem with bad parts, missing parts, poor processes and poor management. And I expect Ford to address all of those including the poor management. These vehicles were clearly not ready for production. There are several. There is a severe lack of rail cars for everyone right now and Ford can't control that. There could just as easily be a shortage of trucks as well. I'm not making excuses here, just trying to explain what is likely happening behind the scenes. Regardless of the cause this is a huge screwup and probably the worst launch in the last 20 years.

The Titanium is far better. You won't miss the blind spot mirrors or other features. No car has a blind spot if you adjust your mirrors properly and turn your head.

I don't think the Escape launch was anywhere near this bad from a delay standpoint.

Same plant. Same platform. Same issues. In fact the Fusion launch issues likely made the MKZ issues worse.

Don't discount the "I want one of those because my girlfriend has one" factor which goes back to the big embedded base of longtime satisfied owners who have no reason to look elsewhere. Now you could argue that ignorance is bliss, especially when you look at the interiors and features on the older Suburbans and Yukons compared to the Expedition, but it is what it is.