SoonerLS

I've seen too many newer vehicles--particularly those that use clear lenses and amber bulbs or reflectors--where it's impossible to tell from the front that they're using their turn signals in broad daylight. I can't tell you how many people I've cussed for turning in front of me at an intersection without using their turn signals, only to see from the side that their turn signals were flashing...

The Wikipedia article on the '32 Ford looks reasonably good, and you might try the Early Ford V8 Club's Web site: http://www.earlyfordv8.org/ There's also Hemmings (http://www.hemmings.com/).

Amber turn signals have come and gone many times over the last 30 years. The Taurus is a notable example; one generation will have ambers, then the next generation has all-reds. Hell, the 2nd Gen LS had all-reds on the LSE and ambers on all the other variants. As for lawsuits, I doubt Ford is at all worried about them. Not to say that some scumbag ambulance-chasing shyster wouldn't try to sue them (after all, Blitz Products just closed their doors because of them), but there are lots of other frivolous lawsuit magnets in every car. It's hard to sue someone for negligence when they're clearly in compliance with regulations.

At least it doesn't have the fat-ass haunches of most of the renderings...

The Fiesta and Focus are already sold in the US as hatchbacks; the Fusion is not. It doesn't make sense, IMHO, to go through all the expense of introducing a new body style for what will likely be a very limited production variant. It makes sense if it's going to bring you some kind of corollary advantage (as the C-Max does with CAFE, etc), but I don't see that being the case for a Fusion ST. It could be a way to test the waters, I guess, but it seems to me that the kind of person who would buy a Fusion ST is, by and large, not the same kind of person who would buy a "normal" Fusion hatch.

The article says they're also talking to Menards, and it sounds like they want to build a store there.

I'd imagine that it'll depend on the success of the Fusion and the Focus ST; if they're both successful, that should bode well for a Fusion ST. As for the powerplant, I'd guess a D37, but with the apparent enforcement of "Lincoln-exclusive" powertrains in the Fusion/MKZ, I wouldn't bet money on it.

Well, they're not doing it out of the goodness of their hearts; they're in business to make money, so if costs go up, their prices will go up, too. The petroleum industry learned long ago something that the Detroit 3 (well, at least Ford) have only recently figured out--if it costs you more money to produce something than you get when you sell it, you don't produce it...

I wouldn't be surprised to see NG prices rise, but, IMHO, a dramatic increase would require some kind of external force (eg, gov't regulations). We have HUGE reserves of natural gas, and we keep discovering more--and there are some rather large gas fields where we've barely scratched the surface (no pun intended) when it comes to production.

That's really not the question, anyway--the question is how profitable they are. If Ford is making a decent profit, I doubt they really care where they are in the sales charts.

From the B-pillar forward it could be a Mustang, but from there back it's all Hyundai Tiburon...

If you look at Ford's Web site, the Fiesta is listed at 29/40 and the Focus is listed at 28/40 (I didn't delve into the models to see which variants get what mileage). That's basically a wash on the mileage issue, so the issue likely comes down to "can I swing the extra $$$ for the Focus." The Fiesta's position as the inexpensive Ford probably helps Focus sales quite a bit as the Focus becomes the "step up" car instead of the "this is all I can afford" car.

We're starting to see an increase in CNG availability; Love's Travel Stops, f'rinstance, just opened new CNG stations at six of their stores, and plan to have a total of eleven open by the end of the year, so it may not be all that long before you no longer need a centralized fleet fueling station for CNG to make sense.

Not that he needs defending, but I've known akirby for years, and he's the farthest thing there is from an asshole, and I've been on the opposite side from him before on actually contentious issues. Back on topic, the deals on the outgoing MKZ must be as good as I've heard; their sales are up quite a bit, year-over-year, even with a brand new car coming in to replace it. The MKS seems to have tanked, though, and I'm pretty sure I've seen the new ones on the street (I still don't like the styling, so I haven't really kept up).

Here's the quote I mentioned above:

I don't have time to track it down at the moment, but I remember reading something recently about Mulally saying something about using more aluminum (how's that for definitive?) in the construction of upcoming Fords, possibly in Automotive News. For all I remember, the link could be somewhere in this very thread. I know the rumors in GM circles are that the next Sierraverado will use a lot of aluminum construction, so Ford can't be very far (if at all) behind.

I don't remember if the 5R55W is the same family of transmission as the 5R55N and 5R55S, but the latter two are actually direct descendants of the slushbox found in the Pinto...

The SHO, Boss, and the forthcoming ST line would seem argue against that. There's not a bean counter who would allow those vehicles to be green-lit.

Lincoln did it over a decade ago (at least on the "driving machine" front), and look what it got them.

When two-speed slushboxen were the rage, most people were totally happy with a manual transmission...

Apparently, this needs repeating. Again.

Are you serious? There are plenty of reasons to release regular updates to software. Sometimes you're fixing problems, but sometimes you're adding features, or heading off potential problems, or simply making something easier to use. What about the vast majority of MFT owners who aren't having problems and would recommend vehicles with MFT? Or the ones who are looking at Fords simply because of MFT? Do you just say "screw them" because you have a unit with a problem?

I'm pretty sure that's been true since Henry Ford left what was then known as the Henry Ford Company... :bag:

That's an...interesting revision of history. Mulally was there primarily to make sure that GM and Chryco weren't allowed to fail outright, as most analyses indicated that the likely result would have been that the entire automotive industry in the US would've come to a screeching halt as GM and Chryco dragged many, if not most, of the automotive suppliers down with them. (The more dire predictions were that you'd not have seen a car built in the US for at least five years afterward if both of them had failed.) Mulally did say that Ford would like to have a line of credit available if things got worse, but he also said that things would have to get much worse than they expected for them to actually need it. And, in the end, they neither needed nor attempted to access any such funds. As for the loans Ford did get, were Elon Musk and Carlos Ghosn also "panhandling" when Tesla and Nissan (respectively) accepted DoE loans under that same program?

I'm not saying he was necessarily the genius behind everything that happened, either, but the Ford family controls Ford; if Bill Ford hadn't recognized the problem (regardless of who brought it to his attention or whose ideas were actually implemented), it wouldn't have gotten corrected.