June 2007 Midsize Sedan Sales

[BlackHorse]

The Fusion is a Mazda made over. The only "Ford" item in it is the the radio... Ford even put a Mazda engine in it. :shades:

 

The Honda Accord is all Honda and it's from a company that is < half the size of Ford........ and it's made in the U.S. of A. too.

 

IMHO, if anyone thinks that the Fusion family (CD3) is a "Ford".... They're wrong. The Fusion/CD3 is a Japanese car made in Mexico.

The 500 twins are a Volvo.

 

The only cars that are true Fords are the Crown Vic and the Focus.

 

All of which has nothing to do with nothing. Also last I checked the 3.0 V6 is not a Mazda motor. But thanks for trolling through.

[mettech]

All of which has nothing to do with nothing. Also last I checked the 3.0 V6 is not a Mazda motor. But thanks for trolling through.

 

:reading:

 

Incapable of understanding my post?

 

'All of which has nothing to do with nothing..."

 

Yes... the 3.0L is a Ford engine... I have one in my car.. My reply to the topic is with regards to the 4 banger engine.

 

"nothing to do with nothing..." ...Troll?

[BlackHorse]

:reading:

 

Incapable of understanding my post?

 

'All of which has nothing to do with nothing..."

 

Yes... the 3.0L is a Ford engine... I have one in my car.. My reply to the topic is with regards to the 4 banger engine.

 

"nothing to do with nothing..." ...Troll?

 

Yeah, as in you have no point and made not point. Did you think you were telling us something we didn't already know about the Fusion and Honda mettech? Oh my gosh the Fusion is made in Mexico!! :o Yeah thanks we knew that. I think maybe you skipped over some things though in your effort to convince us all how American the Honda is compared to the Fusion. Where again is the transmission that powers the CD'3's made? Oh that's right America. Gee that kinda shoots down your radio comment buddy.

 

How about some other trivia while we're at it. The very impressive Mazda 3 is nothing short of a, what was the phrase you used, "made over" I think? Yes a made over Volvo S40. Gee does that make it less of a Mazda or is it more of an insult to Volvo? When the Mazda 6 V6 is being pushed around by the Ford 3.0 liter engine is it less of a Mazda or more of a Ford? Don't forget that tranny while you're at it. Now lets switch to the V6 powered Mazda B series pickup and Tribute, same question. Whoops a Ford motor again. Heck in the case of the B series and Tribute it's just the same notion you pushed about the Fusion only in reverse. Let me know if I'm moving too fast here.

 

I don't know if you're aware of this mettech, but we live in a world that has a global economy. Platform and component sharing is common place now. I can go on for hours pointing out example after example of this from all the auto companies. Maybe you should take a look at the the Toyota Matrix, I mean Pontiac Vibe, no Matrix. See what I mean? So yes we all understood your post perfectly well. It was just an attempt to stir up a bunch of nothing. You pointed out that the Fusion is a car that is the result of a global economy. Thank you, we all knew that already, therefore pointing it out was pointless. It's been covered here so many times we lost count about a billion times ago.

 

I expected better from an Air Force guy.

Edited July 10, 2007 by BlackHorse

[mettech]

Yeah, as in you have no point and made not point. Did you think you were telling us something we didn't already know about the Fusion and Honda mettech? Oh my gosh the Fusion is made in Mexico!! :o Yeah thanks we knew that. I think maybe you skipped over some things though in your effort to convince us all how American the Honda is compared to the Fusion. Where again is the transmission that powers the CD'3's made? Oh that's right America. Gee that kinda shoots down your radio comment buddy.

 

How about some other trivia while we're at it. The very impressive Mazda 3 is nothing short of a, what was the phrase you used, "made over" I think? Yes a made over Volvo S40. Gee does that make it less of a Mazda or is it more of an insult to Volvo? When the Mazda 6 V6 is being pushed around by the Ford 3.0 liter engine is it less of a Mazda or more of a Ford? Don't forget that tranny while you're at it. Now lets switch to the V6 powered Mazda B series pickup and Tribute, same question. Whoops a Ford motor again. Heck in the case of the B series and Tribute it's just the same notion you pushed about the Fusion only in reverse. Let me know if I'm moving too fast here.

 

I don't know if you're aware of this mettech, but we live in a world that has a global economy. Platform and component sharing is common place now. I can go on for hours pointing out example after example of this from all the auto companies. Maybe you should take a look at the the Toyota Matrix, I mean Pontiac Vibe, no Matrix. See what I mean? So yes we all understood your post perfectly well. It was just an attempt to stir up a bunch of nothing. You pointed out that the Fusion is a car that is the result of a global economy. Thank you, we all knew that already, therefore pointing it out was pointless. It's been covered here so many times we lost count about a billion times ago.

 

I expected better from an Air Force guy.

I am going to say it again, the Fusion needs a better 4 cylinder engine...It is a good looking car, very comfartable... It needs refinement, it needs to sound like you are not torturing it when it goes over 3k rpm...

Just give me the accord 4 cyl engine and trans in the Fsuion, and we have a perfect mid size car.

 

The above statement is one of my points. The other being the sales numbers.

 

The Fusion is a very good car, but the total sales figure of the CD3 doesn't come close to the Accord even when the Mazda 6 is added.

 

I have purchased many new Ford products and I have some money invested with the company.

 

Ford brings out the Fusion (CD3) that is a global car (Mazda6), makes many of it parts and assembles it outside of the USA because it's cheaper.

 

Inversely, Honda uses their own designed and produced platform, makes most of the Accord parts in North America and assemblies it the USA. And then they sale twice as many Accords compared to the CD3 and Mazda6. This comes from a company that is less than half the size of Ford. If Honda can make a car dependent on no other company and make it in the USA, why can't Ford?

 

It is also my understanding that Honda exports Accords made here in the USA too.

 

Buying companies to use their platforms is not going to save Ford. Ford needs to make their own products like they did with the Mustang. And just like Honda does.

 

And who are you kidding to say that the Matrix/Vibe twins is a Pontiac.

That's like calling the Aveo a Chevy?

 

Ford is in deep trouble, and the only way out of the trouble is to make a true American product that is world class with the UAW that we can export.

 

Cutting corners will not save Ford. It will only bring them down to a second class level.

Edited July 10, 2007 by mettech

[NickF1011]

Ford is in deep trouble, and the only way out of the trouble is to make a true American product that is world class with the UAW that we can export.

 

Cutting corners will not save Ford. It will only bring them down to a second class level.

 

Building the CD3's in the US likely would have little to zero effect on its sales numbers. The CD3's are selling "average" because Ford has had zero presence in the midsize sedan market for nearly a decade. They aren't going to instantly return to huge volume after abandoning a segment for so long. Look at how long it is taking the imports to make a dent in the fullsize truck market. Is it because Nissan's and Toyota's fullsize pickup are so completely incompitent compared to the ones offered from GM, Dodge, and Ford? No. It's because they aren't proven in the segment, just like Ford and midsize sedans. After ignoring a segment so long, it will take a LONG time for people to even put a Ford product on their shopping list again. The quality is top-notch and the pricing is solid. Those are the only two ingredients Ford needs for it to succeed in the long term. It doesn't matter where it's built or what platform it uses. If people find it to be a high quality car at an affordable price, they WILL eventually come to look at it. It's just going to take time. I'm sorry, but most consumers really could care less where their products are built.

[wescoent]

The above statement is one of my points. The other being the sales numbers.

 

The Fusion is a very good car, but the total sales figure of the CD3 doesn't come close to the Accord even when the Mazda 6 is added.

 

I have purchased many new Ford products and I have some money invested with the company.

 

Ford brings out the Fusion (CD3) that is a global car (Mazda6), makes many of it parts and assembles it outside of the USA because it's cheaper.

 

Inversely, Honda uses their own designed and produced platform, makes most of the Accord parts in North America and assemblies it the USA. And then they sale twice as many Accords compared to the CD3 and Mazda6. This comes from a company that is less than half the size of Ford. If Honda can make a car dependent on no other company and make it in the USA, why can't Ford?

 

It is also my understanding that Honda exports Accords made here in the USA too.

 

Buying companies to use their platforms is not going to save Ford. Ford needs to make their own products like they did with the Mustang. And just like Honda does.

 

And who are you kidding to say that the Matrix/Vibe twins is a Pontiac.

That's like calling the Aveo a Chevy?

 

Ford is in deep trouble, and the only way out of the trouble is to make a true American product that is world class with the UAW that we can export.

 

Cutting corners will not save Ford. It will only bring them down to a second class level.

 

Where to start...

 

The reason the Accord sells so well in comparison to the Fusion is because they have nearly 30 years of a sterling reputation behind them, and millions of satisfied owners trading in all the time. The Accord may not have been a world beater, but it was always a good car, and it was ALWAYS a reliable car.

 

The Fusion is an all-new nameplate, that literally did not exist in this country before 2005. No one in this country has heard of it beyond the occasional commercial. It's made by Ford, which hasn't built a world-beating family sedan since the mid 1990's, and until recently, was not building consistently reliable cars.

 

Ford does not need to change the Fusion's formula. They need to keep it up to date, and keep it reliable. The Fusion is a match to the current Accord, without question, and is better in many ways. People need to see their friends buy Fusions, and hear them rant and rave about how nice it drives, how reliable it is, and how stylish it is. Then they'll think, well, if Bob and Mary like their Fusion, maybe I'll check it out, even though its a Ford. They test it, they like it for whatever reason, and buy it.

 

That's the ONLY WAY the Fusion is going to become a top-selling family sedan. There is no magic formula to going from zero to hero. Even the original Taurus didn't really catch on for a few years, and that was before the true rise of Honda/Toyota, and padded by massive fleet sales.

 

The MKZ is right now the highest quality vehicle in its class of entry-level luxury sedans, which includes Lexus. What does that say?

 

Since the beginning, people have been complaining that the Fusion is on a Mazda platform, and built in Mexico. You guys seriously need to get over yourselves. The Mazda 6 chassis was derived from the Ford Mondeo, for starters. Secondly, the platform is heavily modified for the Fusion and its kin. Finally, it doesn't matter at all where the car is built, as long as its reliable and can be easily shipped where its main sales are.

 

Ford's two goals with the Fusion and its kin are to establish Ford as a competitive RELIABLE player in the midsized sedan market, and to turn a profit on the operation. If Ford built the car in Atlanta, they might not have been able to turn a profit, and would be tempted to cut costs. Sooner rather than later, Fusion sales are going to start building as people see the Fusion around and hear their friends and family rave about them, and we're going to need more capacity. At that point, perhaps they'll move production to a US plant.

[Edstock]

The 500 twins are a Volvo.

 

Sure, the Volvo tech and the 80 chassis was a starting point for the 500, but even the 500 was vastly different from the Volvo 80, and with the massive re-engineering of the front of the 500 (motor mounts, front sub-frame, front suspension) to create the Taurus, there is even less similarity today.

[NickF1011]

Sure, the Volvo tech and the 80 chassis was a starting point for the 500, but even the 500 was vastly different from the Volvo 80, and with the massive re-engineering of the front of the 500 (motor mounts, front sub-frame, front suspension) to create the Taurus, there is even less similarity today.

 

Why the heck would you bother creating an all-new architecture if you already OWN one that will almost do the job anyway? I'd consider that a complete waste of money. I credit Ford for taking advantage of the global platform resources that they have at their disposal. I hope they do even more of it in the future.

[Edstock]

Why the heck would you bother creating an all-new architecture if you already OWN one that will almost do the job anyway? I'd consider that a complete waste of money. I credit Ford for taking advantage of the global platform resources that they have at their disposal. I hope they do even more of it in the future.

 

I agree. The reply was to Mettech's simple assertion that the 500 was a Volvo, and that's not the case; it was never a Volvo 80 with Ford styling. But the 80 platform was a great place to start.

[NickF1011]

I agree. The reply was to Mettech's simple assertion that the 500 was a Volvo, and that's not the case; it was never a Volvo 80 with Ford styling. But the 80 platform was a great place to start.

 

Oh I know. I was agreeing with you too. Should have been a bit more clear. I was just adding to what you had said.

[TomServo92]

Why the heck would you bother creating an all-new architecture if you already OWN one that will almost do the job anyway? I'd consider that a complete waste of money. I credit Ford for taking advantage of the global platform resources that they have at their disposal. I hope they do even more of it in the future.

 

Here's the problem with some of the negatoids: if Ford uses existing platforms from Mazda or Volvo, they scream "What's the problem? Doesn't Ford have the engineering know-how to design their own platforms?" If they don't use existing platforms, then the negatoids scream 'Why is Ford wasting money designing new platforms when they have already have excellent ones from Mazda and Volvo!"

Edited July 10, 2007 by TomServo92

[BlackHorse]

Here's the problem with some of the negatoids: if Ford uses existing platforms from Mazda or Volva, they scream "What's the problem? Doesn't Ford have the engineering know-how to design their own platforms?" If they don't use existing platforms, then the negatoids scream 'Why is Ford wasting money designing new platforms when they have already have excellent ones from Mazda and Volvo!"

 

Amen, thanks Tom. Everytime somebody starts it up about the Mexican Mazda Fusion we have to have this debate and they end up getting schooled. Now as for you mettech.

 

And who are you kidding to say that the Matrix/Vibe twins is a Pontiac.

 

I'm not sure how you got that I was implying both cars are Pontiac but if you don't understand the point I was making with the Matrix / Vibe on a debate that you started about platform sharing then I think maybe you should never have said anything about it to begin with.

[Former Ford ZM]

Sounds like somebody is using old fleet percentages to guess at Fusion retail sales for June. According to a former co-worker who still works as a zone manager and has daily access to sales reporting from the company sales reporting system Fusion sales were over 10K units.