Predicting 2009 Ford F-150 (Autosavant.net)

[TomServo92]

Your twisting your answers...You bashing Ford when ever you can isn't going to change anything...

 

I've always been a firm believer that the people with the most right to criticize a company are those employed by it. I work for one of the most successful companies in the world and I don't hold back the criticism when they do something moronic (which, surprisingly, is quite often).

Edited October 5, 2007 by TomServo92

[Pioneer]

I've always been a firm believer that the people with the most right to criticize a company are those employed by it. I work for one of the most successful companies in the world and I don't hold back the criticism when they do something moronic (which, surprisingly, is quite often).

 

Wow. Thanks for the support.

 

And, for the record. I don't totally hate this company. I just think most of their decisions as of late have been boneheaded.

[igor]

Ford has been working on the BOSS engine for how long now? They better not have a single recall throughout the life of that engine. They've been working on that motor forever. Any failures like Toyota had would be simply unacceptable.

since about the last ice age

Igor

[TomServo92]

Wow. Thanks for the support.

 

And, for the record. I don't totally hate this company. I just think most of their decisions as of late have been boneheaded.

 

No problem. My employer compensates me very well and I appreciate the opportunities I've been given. However, when somenone at the top makes an idiotic decision, I feel like they're jacking with my livelihood and I'll speak my mind about it. I'm sure it's the same with you.

[FordBuyer]

Because Ford doesn't need anymore new vehicle launches with carry-over powertrains.

 

It's pretty simple, I don't expect people here to understand though..

 

It won't be carry over in that it will have 6 speed auto and more horsepower...specualtion is 325 hp for now until new engines come in about a year from launch. An all new trans is not SAME drive train.

[Pioneer]

325 HP from what? The 5.4L?

 

Hope so. Combine that with a head that can keep the plugs in, and it should make a lot of people happy.

[ShockFX]

No problem. My employer compensates me very well and I appreciate the opportunities I've been given. However, when somenone at the top makes an idiotic decision, I feel like they're jacking with my livelihood and I'll speak my mind about it. I'm sure it's the same with you.

 

I hate when my pimp screws me too...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Just kidding.

[TomServo92]

I hate when my pimp screws me too...

 

That's alot more information about you than I ever cared to know...

[ShockFX]

That's alot more information about you than I ever cared to know...

 

I know, firm proof even college degrees can take the whore off the street, but not the street out of the whore.

[ANTAUS]

There's not many trucks being released in a yearly basis, so I wouldn't be surprised if the F-150 because "Truck of the Year" in a few circuits, but really...if someone else does something substantial with their trucks, you gotta think "Well, Ford asked for it"...

 

I really wished that Ford would actually get the drivetrain family right from the introduction of a vehicle. I mean, it's GETTING rediculous and Ford is getting negative comments from the media over it.

[Ford-150]

um most truck buyers will be more than happy with a 325hp/380tq 5.4L with a 6 speed trans

 

especially if it is in the most solid built truck out there, did we forget that a truck starts with its frame and how strong it is

 

not saying i do not like hp, but majority of the public wants something that is built to last

 

and i think the engine roll out will keep the F-150 fresh along with the little gadgets they throw in it as well(but it might affect the resale value of the 5.4L ones in the future)

 

but hell, i bet the 5.4L will still be the #1 engine sold in the F-150

[atomaro]

Ugh...I should have kept on driving to the bar instead of work today. I would need to tie a good one on before reading through the redundant complaints and arguments. Jager bombs anyone?

Edited October 5, 2007 by atomaro

[RichardJensen]

Wow. This was a waste of time.

 

I ask 'why' Ford should hold back launching a truck that is ready to go for a year, and I'm told, essentially, "because."

 

And then we've got the usual 'sunshine and roses' gang who have conveniently forgotten that the 'wimpy' 5.4L powers the best tow and payload ratings in the business.

 

All under the 'we just want the company to do better' banner--always short on specifics, always with the assurance that 'if I approve of what they do, what they do will be successful', in other words, a whole host of tin-pot Nassers.

[ShockFX]

Wow. This was a waste of time.

 

I ask 'why' Ford should hold back launching a truck that is ready to go for a year, and I'm told, essentially, "because."

 

And then we've got the usual 'sunshine and roses' gang who have conveniently forgotten that the 'wimpy' 5.4L powers the best tow and payload ratings in the business.

 

All under the 'we just want the company to do better' banner--always short on specifics, always with the assurance that 'if I approve of what they do, what they do will be successful', in other words, a whole host of tin-pot Nassers.

 

It's not so much Ford should hold back as that new engine should be there from day one. You only get one chance to make a first impression. ONE CHANCE. How many reviews are going to be made with the 4.6L or the 5.4L and then people set their minds on it. It's not whether that 5.4L powers the best tow and payload ratings, it does, that's not the dispute. But when the reviews are filled with phrases like "old carryover engine until the new one is ready", "venerable 5.4L that's been around forever", "old engine that trails the HP and torque of trucks like the old Titan, Tundra, and Silverado", "stalwart 5.4L is still sufficient, but lacks oomph of the competition".

 

You always want the top line of a vehicle to be the one reviewed, the average person doesn't take the time to associate trim lines or which engine was tested. They just see F-150, 3rd place, comments: great new features/content, same old engine.

 

The problem is when the new engine is released a year later, the trucks are not reviewed again, and if they are, it's with much less frequency and enthusiasm. Why? Because it's old news, media isn't going to give the truck full coverage twice.

 

It seems like the people most hated on here are the only people that understand why this is important. It's because when Ford doesn't do this we criticize, but if they do we have no reason to, and our praise is lost and unnecessary so the only thing people see is the criticism. That, and when Ford does get the right engine in from the start (MkX, Edge, ....I think that's it,....oooo, 2005 Mustang with 3v 4.6L) sales are terrific. Does that parallel make sense?

[RichardJensen]

I wasn't talking about you, Shock.

 

As far as 'first impressions', the F150 is celebrating it's 60th anniversary. It's a 'known quantity'. It needs to retain its key strengths which have never included raw power--rather usable power (class leading payload and towing, durability). The idea that a 2009 F150 debuting with standard 6-speed transmissions and (likely) better power, and retaining class leading capabilities will be looked at askance by people that buy and use trucks on a regular basis is somewhat farfetched.

 

We are not talking about the F150 remaining 'competitive', we are talking about the F150 retaining leadership, and in fact extending its leadership in three core areas of truck-dom: payload, towing, and configurability.

 

These areas have long been, and will continue to be key strengths of Ford, and as long as Ford continues to deliver them, they will retain their customer base.

[ShockFX]

I wasn't talking about you, Shock.

 

As far as 'first impressions', the F150 is celebrating it's 60th anniversary. It's a 'known quantity'. It needs to retain its key strengths which have never included raw power--rather usable power (class leading payload and towing, durability). The idea that a 2009 F150 debuting with standard 6-speed transmissions and (likely) better power, and retaining class leading capabilities will be looked at askance by people that buy and use trucks on a regular basis is somewhat farfetched.

 

We are not talking about the F150 remaining 'competitive', we are talking about the F150 retaining leadership, and in fact extending its leadership in three core areas of truck-dom: payload, towing, and configurability.

 

These areas have long been, and will continue to be key strengths of Ford, and as long as Ford continues to deliver them, they will retain their customer base.

Agreed, but the part I bolded merits discussion. Is it simply enough for Ford to retain its customer base? Why can't we get the people that buy Dodges and say "Hey, you like the Hemi? This has got better." Why not the people that buy GM and say "This truck has professional engineering too". Target the morons buying Tundras and say "This truck won't fall apart on you". Housing is down, construction is down. It will probably be another 3-4 years until they tick back up. Ford cannot afford to simply retain its current customers, it must acquire new ones.

[RichardJensen]

Agreed, but the part I bolded merits discussion. Is it simply enough for Ford to retain its customer base? Why can't we get the people that buy Dodges and say "Hey, you like the Hemi? This has got better." Why not the people that buy GM and say "This truck has professional engineering too". Target the morons buying Tundras and say "This truck won't fall apart on you". Housing is down, construction is down. It will probably be another 3-4 years until they tick back up. Ford cannot afford to simply retain its current customers, it must acquire new ones.

If you look at long-term trends in the truck business, since 1994 (launch of the competitive Dodge Ram, as opposed to the crap-heap they were selling before) market share has been very stable among the Big Three. From one year to the next, mfrs. may gain or lose a few percentage points, but the total distribution has been remarkably stable. GM & Ford sitting at roughly 35-40%, Dodge at 20% or so.

 

Truck buyers are, as has been noted, notoriously brand-loyal. No truck launched into the foreseeable future will represent as dramatic an improvement over an existing model as the '94 Ram, ergo, dramatic shifts in market share are just not going to happen--therefore they shouldn't be sought.

[ShockFX]

If you look at long-term trends in the truck business, since 1994 (launch of the competitive Dodge Ram, as opposed to the crap-heap they were selling before) market share has been very stable among the Big Three. From one year to the next, mfrs. may gain or lose a few percentage points, but the total distribution has been remarkably stable. GM & Ford sitting at roughly 35-40%, Dodge at 20% or so.

 

Truck buyers are, as has been noted, notoriously brand-loyal. No truck launched into the foreseeable future will represent as dramatic an improvement over an existing model as the '94 Ram, ergo, dramatic shifts in market share are just not going to happen--therefore they shouldn't be sought.

 

No one will ever buy those Japanese cars either.

[atomaro]

It's not so much Ford should hold back as that new engine should be there from day one. You only get one chance to make a first impression. ONE CHANCE. How many reviews are going to be made with the 4.6L or the 5.4L and then people set their minds on it. It's not whether that 5.4L powers the best tow and payload ratings, it does, that's not the dispute. But when the reviews are filled with phrases like "old carryover engine until the new one is ready", "venerable 5.4L that's been around forever", "old engine that trails the HP and torque of trucks like the old Titan, Tundra, and Silverado", "stalwart 5.4L is still sufficient, but lacks oomph of the competition".

 

You always want the top line of a vehicle to be the one reviewed, the average person doesn't take the time to associate trim lines or which engine was tested. They just see F-150, 3rd place, comments: great new features/content, same old engine.

 

The problem is when the new engine is released a year later, the trucks are not reviewed again, and if they are, it's with much less frequency and enthusiasm. Why? Because it's old news, media isn't going to give the truck full coverage twice.

 

It seems like the people most hated on here are the only people that understand why this is important. It's because when Ford doesn't do this we criticize, but if they do we have no reason to, and our praise is lost and unnecessary so the only thing people see is the criticism. That, and when Ford does get the right engine in from the start (MkX, Edge, ....I think that's it,....oooo, 2005 Mustang with 3v 4.6L) sales are terrific. Does that parallel make sense?

 

 

Yeah, releasing a vehicle with the engine that has consistently been on Wards 10 Best Engine list for the last 10 years is such a bad idea.

[RichardJensen]

No one will ever buy those Japanese cars either.

Different matter entirely, and accounted for by the reference to the '94 Dodge Ram.

 

 

 

 

 

The 94 Ram upset the balance in the truck market, as it was a dramatically superior product to its predecessor.

 

Compare with the '92 Camry, a similarly superior product which upset the balance of the market.

 

There is simply not room for a 'earth shaking' improvement to the half-ton--the major competitors have pushed each other hard for the last decade and a half and there simply are no weak players that can change the game by offering a significant upgrade to a previous offering.

[goingincirclez]

If you look at long-term trends in the truck business, since 1994 (launch of the competitive Dodge Ram, as opposed to the crap-heap they were selling before) market share has been very stable among the Big Three. From one year to the next, mfrs. may gain or lose a few percentage points, but the total distribution has been remarkably stable. GM & Ford sitting at roughly 35-40%, Dodge at 20% or so.

 

Truck buyers are, as has been noted, notoriously brand-loyal. No truck launched into the foreseeable future will represent as dramatic an improvement over an existing model as the '94 Ram, ergo, dramatic shifts in market share are just not going to happen--therefore they shouldn't be sought.

 

But see, you just contradicted yourself. Share was largely stable between Ford and GM, UNTIL Dodge redid the Ram for 1994 and jumped to a 20% share... which has continued to be something they can (and have to) rely on.

 

Look. I'm not saying that the current F-150 is a "crap-heap". Far from it. But your post is proof-positive that the release of a product that leapfrogs the competition and represents real sea-change in product philosophy can do wonders for a company.

 

So Ford is going to retain and perhaps improve its leadership in the areas where they have always maintained it. Big deal; that's the bare minimum acceptable in this market and anything less should get people fired.

 

But with more players trying to carve out the pie, why should Ford NOT come out of the gate, throw down the gauntlets and say "Here, check THIS on for size? Gotcha b***hes!"

 

 

You just proved that this could be done, vis-a-vis the '94 Ram, which also proved that loyalty is always for sale. If it weren't then that Ram would have done jack squat, and Toyota couldn't sell Tundra one.

 

If Ford could come up with a similar coup, they could go from 35% share to 45% or better, instead of pandering to the same ol' same ol'.

[Deanh]

Different matter entirely, and accounted for by the reference to the '94 Dodge Ram.

The 94 Ram upset the balance in the truck market, as it was a dramatically superior product to its predecessor.

 

Compare with the '92 Camry, a similarly superior product which upset the balance of the market.

 

There is simply not room for a 'earth shaking' improvement to the half-ton--the major competitors have pushed each other hard for the last decade and a half and there simply are no weak players that can change the game by offering a significant upgrade to a previous offering.

I think we will all be pleasently surprized....can't wait.....hopefully they raise the bar on the styling front too.....mimicing areas of the Supercheif would be a good thing...at least in my opinion....

[igor]

Different matter entirely, and accounted for by the reference to the '94 Dodge Ram.

The 94 Ram upset the balance in the truck market, as it was a dramatically superior product to its predecessor.

 

Compare with the '92 Camry, a similarly superior product which upset the balance of the market.

 

There is simply not room for a 'earth shaking' improvement to the half-ton--the major competitors have pushed each other hard for the last decade and a half and there simply are no weak players that can change the game by offering a significant upgrade to a previous offering.

except for tundra ..

 

we have not seen the last of that tuck yet - unfortunately .. with addition of more mid-grade models .. the Truck will continue to gain momentum .. I predict it will chip away market share until evens out Dodge. Unfortunately, Ford with the oldest truck will probably have the hardest time not losing share to Toyota.

 

Igor

[RichardJensen]

your post is proof-positive that the release of a product that leapfrogs the competition and represents real sea-change in product philosophy can do wonders for a company.

Where such a release is possible.

 

The Dodge Ram was woefully out of date, it was far behind the competition. I don't think it had a single selling point over Ford & GM--worse fuel economy, worse payload, worse style, worse ride, worse everything---

 

The F150 isn't, the GMT900s aren't, and today's Ram isn't that far off what could be considered 'best in class'

 

The space to make that leap doesn't exist. Certainly not for Ford.

[ShockFX]

Different matter entirely, and accounted for by the reference to the '94 Dodge Ram.

The 94 Ram upset the balance in the truck market, as it was a dramatically superior product to its predecessor.

 

Compare with the '92 Camry, a similarly superior product which upset the balance of the market.

 

There is simply not room for a 'earth shaking' improvement to the half-ton--the major competitors have pushed each other hard for the last decade and a half and there simply are no weak players that can change the game by offering a significant upgrade to a previous offering.

 

You don't know that. Complacency is terrible for business.