goingincirclez

The Mopar guys have always been into woodies. I remember quite a few 1st-gen Caravans with woody kits (they didn't look too bad actually). But who could forget (or forgive) the 600 / T&C Woody? The Flex has WAAAAAY more design cred to pull off a true "modern woody" than some of the other monstronsities foisted on us over the years. I mean, there's a New Beetle Woody kit fer crhissakes...

I was more surprised to read that their Brazil operations are so significant and profitable. It seems like all we've heard for years is how China was going to save GM, and is Buick's sole reason for continued being. But then I'm not really a business guy. So then that's far for this latest GM course... just like all their alleged product hits (which are very credible in many areas)... the "facts" are not as rosy as what they would have us believe. It's nice to have someone acknowledge this. Everyone said Ford was simply following GM but I always felt that to be false. Quality still needed to be Job 1 and Ford started there... and you hear relatively little about GM consolidating its operations, despite getting a big jump on Ford. One wonders how much backstepping resulted from canceling the Sigma (or was it Zeta?) program...

Key point of the article: It's too bad Ford can't fix this perception problem. The Fiesta, Flex and updated Fusion can't arrive fast enough. The EDGE is solid but probably only has a year or so of "cutting edge" left in it. The Escape and Focus are middling efforts: credible improvements for the most part but lackluster without the shine of SYNC, which expires in a year. Meanwhile Ford has state-of-the art Perfection in the Taurus and X that simply rot on the vine for lack of advertising. Although perhaps that is the price paid for working on the fundamentals first? Maybe that will afford us believers that "fun ride back up" that Mullaly was talking about... *EDIT* Meant that the Edge has a year or so of "fresh" left. Added the FLEX to the upcoming list

There WASN'T anything wrong with them... Ford just let it become the Panther of Minivans. From 1986 thru 1997 - 12 years without any major bodywork or ongoing enhancement, and only one minor interior revision. They were utilitarian and basic, but took everything we threw at ours. The only trouble we had was the dashboard on our first-gen would rattle like crazy. The people that bitch about the CD# and Mustang interiors have obviously never seen an 86-91 Aerostar. They may as well have made the dash out of Legos - at least it wouldn't have rattled then. Oh, and the rocker panels were made out of rice paper or something... the rest of the van was fine but for some reason the rockers would just disintegrate. But I loved ours and am still pleased to see that out of all the first- (and even second-) gen minivans, Aerostars are about the only ones you ever still see... except for the random Astro of that vintage.

Wow... how could I forget that motor. And now that you mention it, I think if you include all the cars that POS was installed in, it could well be THE #1 F-up. Taurus, Thunderbird/Cougar, Mustang, Windstar.... Virtually ALL the cars that started and sustained Ford's "glory roll" in the 80's and through the 90's were populalry equipped with that engine... And multiple extensively-documented failures later, most of those customers probably swore off Ford for good and the roll came to a halt. If not for the 3.8 (and their piss-poor handling of it), than for some the infamous transmissions it was usually paired with, for a near-assured "one or the other" punch. You really couldn't blame someone for ditching. I was one of the "lucky" ones. I knew that motor was cursed when I got my '88, so I did all I could to maintain it properly. Got 144K out of it before the gaskets went with a minor (driveable) leak, which I have been told is quite a feat for a 3.8 of that vintage. And it's a shame really, because it otherwise wasn't a bad motor for its time. The 88 model year had a balance shaft added, and it ran as smooth as silk, only down 10hp to the 5.0 that year, and got 33mpg highway as documented on numerous occasions. But the FWD 3.8 / tranny combo in the Windstar probably burned more bridges for Ford recently than any other vehicle. America's best-selling minivan when it came out... and you don't see any of them today. In fact, you still see more old Aerostars soldiering on, rusted-out rocker panels and all.

On the 9" rear no less. Which has served to make a serviceable Versailles all but impossible to find today. <Homer Simspon voice> *grumble* Stupid Mustang guys *grumble* </simpson>

Have to agree with the Merkur line. What great-looking cars those were, I would STILL love to have an XR4Ti sometime. I'd probably even prefer the Scorpio but geez, I think I've seen one of those maybe like TWICE in my whole life. My favorite Ford Failure (hey - an "F" name!) is the Lincoln Versailles, aka the Lincoln Zephyr's forgotten older brother. Summed up thusly: Hmm, let's take a stodgy 4-door Granada, stick a Town Car grille on the front, a Continental hump on the back, and call it a day. Then sell it next to the Mercury Monarch for a low, low, upsell of $4000 more. Brilliant!!! It bombed so bad, it actually became a decent car in 1979 when they restyled it a little, and included nearly every damn technological feature you could want in a car that year. Still didn't help sales though. Lincoln Zephyr, we already knew ye.

Love it. Would definitely consider one if we needed a small gofermuter-type vehicle. The greenhouse seems a little stodgy in the front to me, but it's still a great looking car for its class. Reminds me a lot of the original Focus in that regard. As an aside... given all the infinite possible combinations, that's an interesting fake Vanity plate they put on there. Like a spelled-out "Boston dialect" pronunciation of "Verve", with the model year "0-10". ^_^

Actually, GM did indeed make the bubble-back G-body in limited production: (Sweet looking car if I may say so) http://www.pontiacserver.com/gph3_9.html I remember seeing those a couple times back in the day... but with less than 1200 of the Pontiacs built most people probably never saw one. I want to say there was a Monte 2+2 but am not certain. I've seen at least one in person in addition to photos of others, but those could have been conversions. I do agree with what you're saying though. It only got worse with the FatBody Monte in 1995 - that started the whole new era of bitching and whining that led to the COT. Boo. FWIW the T-Bird was the last "true"/"almost stock" car that raced in Nascar - over 10 years ago.

Au Contraire: The Festiva hit in the late 80's but as it happened this was just in time for the first Gulf War, with its tandem recession and "mini" fuel crisis, and that is when it finally took off. Remember it doesn't take much to get Americans to bitch about fuel prices. (remember how in 2000 the world was going to end because it was pushing $2.00/gal? Quaint). And fuel crisis or no... you are again proving my point. Given the choice between the Festiva / Aspire that people allegedly "loved" so much... Yeah, they chose the SUV. Oops. The Japanese B's were available because they never quit building and selling them in Japan, unlike the US. Over here, it took $3.00 gas to make them tolerable once more. As well as the Hey, look - an old Festiva reappears too! In the US B cars had always been crap that people never drove unless they HAD to. And that may well be changing. MHO is that sticking the "new guard" of modern B cars with a moniker from the "old guard" of crap was a dumb move. But really, I'm not losing any sleep over it. It's just a fascinating decision. And that's the last I will say.

Oh heavens, I've "lost all credibility" with someone who lacks reading comprehension, whatever shall I do. Nice try. I wasn't comparing the Freestar and Windstar, I was comparing the Freestar and FreeSTYLE. Thanks for proving my point if not dodging it altogether. Moron. Go back and reread my post. I don't have a problem with the name. But plenty of other people WILL. And that is STUPID but it is something Ford could have avoided altogether. You and I know what the Verve/Fiesta look like and don't give a shit what it's called. Hooray. But how many Joe Morons out there will overhear someone talking about a "Fiesta" and dismiss it offhand without bothering to find out what it looks like? Do you get all excited when someone talks about their new Suzuki Aero? Or Chevy Aveo? Chances are your past bias or preconceived notions cause you to dismiss it altogether without a moments' thought. And don't make this an issue of semantics... if not for those specific models, then surely another one. Everyone here is guilty of this. And by the way, if people "loved" their Festivas so much, they wouldn't have been just a flash in the pan during the last perceived fuel crisis, dumped for the Aspire which itself barely lasted 4 years - and Ford wouldn't have been caught with their pants down lacking a B car today. I may not be God, but you sir are delusional. Good Day my blessed moron.

The name thing really was retarded. And I'm right there with you on the styling and price... Peter Delorenzo even printed an email from me when it was first unveiled in 2004 that basically said the same thing as you. "30K for a bloated Escort Wagon? I think not!" That said, having bought one used for a more reasonable price, it really is a nice vehicle and it's a shame it didn;t find a stronger niche, or that people couldn't get past the looks. I love it. More versatile than an SUV without the piss-poor ride, handling, and mileage. It does everything my family needs, and while the D30 is loud, it gets along just fine (besides, I always said my lead foot could use a proper foil, heh heh). I truly believe the styling deal was just a case of bad timing. When you look at it, it truly is like a lowered Explorer from that generation - all the cues are there. When it was designed, this surely seemed like a sure-fire bet. Nobody would have argued. Then by the time it hit the lots, that style just fell way out of favor - as reflected by the dive in Explorer sales. Typical murphyism for Ford. It sounds like they addressed all the faults with the Taurus rename and it's a damn shame it didn't pay off. Although Ford is certainly reaping what their lousy / absent marketing has sowed. Morons. And yeah, as long as CAP has the capacity, why not throw Mercury a bone? All we hear around here is how "it costs nothing to keep Mercury, and it sells more cars to people who do';t want a Ford, so they should keep it". Well, here's a situation that pokes holes in THAT argument. In that sense, the Freestyle / Taurus X will go down as something of an enigma: A wonderful vehicle that should have sold well but never did, for reasons nobody will ever fully understand. Hopefully when the time comes to replace ours, the Flex will be the answer.

I don't have a problem with the Festiva name in Europe. It has established cred and a certain bit of cachet over there. It makes sense. And yes, a getting hung up about a name is stupid. But you of all people should know that nobody ever went broke underestimating American stupidity. On the flipside of that coin, to Ford's potential detriment, the name "Festiva" will call up instant flashbacks in the minds of many people who stupidly will never give the car a chance beyond that. Joe Public's loss maybe... but another loss that Ford can ill afford. I don't have a problem with the name in Europe. I don't have a problem with the cars being the same. And as a matter of fact, I _personally_ don't have too much issue with the name Festiva myself... I love the car and would consider one, and I'm not concerned about the "image" a chrome nameplate would portend (but then I am one of the idiots who owns a Freestyle LOL). But remember, image is everything and that's why America mortgaed itself subprime to but all kinds of stupid shit because of a name with perceived "cachet". (Coach handbags? Williams-Sonoma cookware? Puh-lease!) And with that being said, I do think that name is a big mistake for the American market. But that's just MHO and I would love to be wrong.

Yeah, the piece of shit worst-in class minivan was renamed to sound almost identical to the brand-new segment creating vehicle. Brilliant! Consumers couldn't keep them apart. Journalists couldn't keep them apart. Hell, even auto writers, and plenty of the so-called "experts" HERE got them confused more often than not. The bad product clouded perception of the new one before the new one ever had a chance. Yeah, but people won't have issues keeping "Fiesta" and "Festiva" apart. Right. Who in their right mind ever wanted to be seen in a US Festiva? IIRC You're not from here. I can tell you virtually all of them were dead and buried and unseen within 5 years, until the new fuel price spike a few years ago made them resurrected accessories of necessity. Trust me, plenty of the people who could AFFORD the upcoming B-car remember the Festiva... and most of them would have chosen the Geo at that time. I do remember the US Fiesta, I had a friend who had one. The person who compared it to a go-kart wasn't far off the mark, it was a lot of fun for what it was. Unfortunately, I remember the super-thin doors and panels with exposed painted interior metal. Didn't leave a comforting impression. But then that was a car from 30 years ago so it's an apple to a modern orange. I'm not actually worried about that. You are right that the car SHOULD sell on merits regardless of name. Key word is "should". It might not though. Consumers are fickle. And you are absolutely delusional if the think the prevailing US sentiment of the name "Festiva" is favorable. Plus, rightly or wrongly there's also a lot of anti-hispanic sentiment in the country now so a car with a "Mexican" name would be seen as another attempt to sell out. I counter the Ford should avoid any and ALL potential negativity where they can, and the name was a freebie! Verve or even some stupid made-up word with no track record would have been better. The fact that we're (the forum) even having this discussion proves this is one more small stupid hurdle that a new Ford product didn't need to have to overcome.

The word being confused (fiesta <> festiva) is a matter of semantics. The _confusion_ itself is a true concern. Fiesta is a terrible name, not in the least because it DOES readily look and almost sounds like Festiva. And any negative connection is something that should be avoided. People who downplay this are kidding themselves. I mean we all know how well Freestar - Freestyle worked out, right?

The '79-97 style F-150 was always my favorite; especially the "aero" refined 91+ versions. Just a classic design: boxy yet refined, all-business yet friendly at the same time. Good smooth clean lines with bold edges that said "tough". I too find the new trucks (by everyone) to be excessively overwrought. Stupid chrome gew-gaws, excessive step-in heights and and goofy taillight shapes are just so much bad form usurping function. Still it must be pointed out that however bad the new F-150 may seem, it is still more rationally understated than the Tundra and Titan - the latter two trucks are nothing short of hideous. In contrast I think the new Ram to be a good cohesive design... nothing really new perhaps but definitely regains a good look by toning down the cartoonish proportions of the '03-07 front end. The new GMs are a styling mismatch to eyes, but are not as bad as the Japanese trucks. I think the Ford straddles the line pretty well, depending on the trim level. Regarding logo size: Instead of a silly oversized oval that looks like a bumper wart or tailgate zit, Ford really SHOULD revisit the embossed lettering of old. That's one of my favorite features of the old trucks. It was matter-of fact yet classy and tough at the same time. It fills the space without looking out of place, and today could even pass as a suitable "retro" touch since that's all the rage. It could even save costs since the name is embossed in the panel stamping, and not some separate trim piece. Imagine: instead of that silly metal "Built Ford Tough" plaque falling from the sky to crack concrete, they change that commercial tag to show a big "F O R D" getting stamped into the truck... the TRUE badge of toughness.

Here's one from my house just for you Rich: Note the slogan... has any vice ever been better targeted to the religious set? No pious Chicago Catholic would be caught imbibing anything else! :beerchug: File under: Best. Fleamarket find. Ever.

Those are two different cars. The first two pics show white spots on a black car... the third has black spots on a white car. And it's not just schizophrenic paint on different sides... because if you look closely at the roofs, they are different also. Now... "how do you see a zebra?" :D

Oh, and one more amusing thing about FWD / RWD: It's sort of a cruel paradox: it might be easier to cross up a RWD car... but it's a lot more forgiving and easier to save. There's a bigger gray area to play in. With FWD... there's a fine line. It might be harder to reach it but once it's there.... you're done, son.

Tires really do make a big difference in snow. When I had the Pirellis on my T-Bird... man, that thing would stick like gorilla glue on dry and even wet... but sucked ass in the snow. May as well have been on ice. Now, it wasn't "impossible" to drive. Tricky at times? Why yes, certainly. But really nothing I couldn't handle. I was able to commute 35 miles each way across numerous hills and twisties, unplowed, without incident. I learned to DRIVE and thus was able to adapt to the conditions and handle them. Eventually I had to replace the tires so I went with some basic Goodyear all-seasons. Not a week later, we had an ice storm. I was able to drive 89 miles, mostly on ice / snowpack, carefully but without incident, and the experience was MUCH better with appropriate tires. I also once saved my '88 from spinning sideways into the ditch on a black-iced stretch of I-65. The dozens of cars in the median and ditches were a mix of FWD and RWD. It can happen. I was shocked as shit to suddenly be facing the median in a split second... but I was able to save myself, because I learned what to do in a RWD car.... in short, I knew (know) how to drive. Is FWD better in snow? Based on my sole experience with a FWD minivan during the Lexington Ice Storm of 2003... I would say yes, unequivocally. MUCH easier going than my RWD Thunderbarges... I simply can't deny it. BUT... I will NEVER let concerns over "driving in the snow" dictate the drivetrain layout of my vehicles. I had driven RWD in the snow. My parents did. My Grandparents did. People managed and survived it all the time. Without ABS and Traction Control even! It's really not that big a deal if you know what you're doing. Bad things can happen regardless of F/RWD. People still f up even with ABS and TC. It's all about driving choices. But if you'd rather not learn to drive, and reply on the car to do all the work for you, well by all means load that sucker up with every appliance known to the insurance industry.

Ha ha, the very first Versailles I saw - in a southern KY Wal-Mart parking lot in 1998 (key point, no?) - brought a similar reaction. As it turned into a parking space it was "Ah goody, and old Granad- ! - How the hell did they shrink a Town Car front en- ! - WTF did they do to the trunk?!?" Needless to say I was all around that car once the owners left. Oh the horror! Lincolns darkest days for sure. And yes indeed, the Versialles survives in more Mustangs (courtesy of that rear end) than it does as a Granada clone... Some Granadas also had the 9" coupled to a 351. .... The styling of the 80's Fox Conti never bothered me much, until the suspension bags inevitably broke. Then it was just a garden slug.

Meh... for all the work that went into that Town Camino, it just seems so piontless. I mean, why do they not show any pics of the bed? It looks carpeted.... And the craftsmanship on the tailgate should be better. For an "astronomical cost" I'd expect flush hinges, not some exposed things that force the corner taillights to bow outward (the bumper seams are not flush). Passenger door looks to have some issues at the rocker panel too. I had forgotten, however, how silly front seats used to be. Can you say "sofa"?

Indeed; it would be a Ford Farce for sure.

Wow... I can't decide which is uglier, the Town Car or that Aston concept. :eek5: Pretty please Richard: Is death an option? (BTW just curious if you see the "Sentinel" in "Art & Science"? I have to say with humility that it always seemed familiar to me, but I was shocked when I only just yesterday bothered to find those pics at the same angle and put them side by side. Did GM hire that designer?)

To that you can add the last Thunderbird... which looked like a melty cartoonish version of the classic. The other problem with revived designs and even just names (GTO) is that the originals persevere through enthusiasts, who are often hyper-critical and unwilling to flash a candle toward the new. You have to really nail every facet of the mystique that an original seems to possess. Ironically, Ford has experienced some success with this, as the new Mustang is maybe the only revival that has worked. Although it may be approaching thin ice, there are still possibilities. The problem with a revival is the esoteric question: what makes a classic design, a classic design? What design makes a Lincoln, a Lincoln? After all, the original Contis were gorgeous cars. But then the faux-Rolls grilles, and padded oval opera windows were very much everything Lincoln stood for 10-15 later and were incredibly popular in their time. Which holds more wieght? But I think most would agree... a Lincoln that looks like a Japanese car, while respectable on its technical merits, is perhaps not what a Lincoln should be.