So now that the Taurus flopped.

[suv_guy_19]

Sheesh I like you SUV, even though you're a Canuk. LOL, But seriously, you just laid out all the cliche reasons the car companies gave us for FWD. It's easier to pull, easier to drive in the snow and so on. I once drove an 85 Nissan pickup with an empty bed over roads that literally had an inch of ice on them. Up hills, both ways. lol No seriuosly there were some pretty serious hills involved. I had no problem.

Oh yeah, that was a RWD pickup by the way, not like that Honda shit.

 

 

LOL, well I like you too, but I still think your wrong this time :P lol.

[focus05]

I can think of one positive the Taurus adds to the lineup even if it is not a huge seller - it allows Ford to keep its safety perch (highest number of 5-star rated vehicles). So, it could help the brand overall.

 

I could also see it helping the brand if quality has been good since the launch. JD Power will tell us more later, but the Five Hundred and Montego were running top 3 in their categories. So, it could help their quality image as well.

 

I still think it needs a marketing campaign, and without it, the Taurus will just kind of flop around the sales charts not really getting anywhere and not dying (sort of like a fish out of water for a while). It's not a bad car. The exterior appearance is its greatest detractor - everything else is very well executed from what I've experienced.

 

Ford just cannot seem to market it. And that baffles me. It will only fail as badly as Ford lets it fail at this point. I hope more effort is put in for the 2010 relaunch.

[Edstock]

RWD does not automatically equal bad gas mileage. When you throw in a big V8 into the equation is when you see the mileage issues. A I4 or V6 powered RWD sedan can be just as economical as their FWD counterparts.

 

IIRC, when GM introduced the FWD X-cars, GM info stated that the transverse FWD layout was 3% more efficient in getting power to the tires than a RWD lay-out.

[NickF1011]

IIRC, when GM introduced the FWD X-cars, GM info stated that the transverse FWD layout was 3% more efficient in getting power to the tires than a RWD lay-out.

 

Well, there is bound to be some rotational inertia that is lost when you stretch out a drivetrain and increase the rotational mass. Of course, a mid- or rear-engine design would negate that in a RWD vehicle.

Edited December 12, 2007 by NickF1011

[P71_CrownVic]

The D3s ARE climbing every month, and with less fleet involvement.

 

You got a link to the D3s fleet percentage?

 

 

anyway, now that the panther is dead.... :P

Where did Ford say that?

 

He is certainly wrong about one thing, FWD is better in the snow.

 

Yeah...if you don't know how to drive.

[ironhorse]

The biggest problem with the 500/Taurus is that it's as attractive as a baboon's ass. People buy cars based on looks.

[Edstock]

Well, there is bound to be some rotational inertia that is lost when you stretch out a drivetrain and increase the rotational mass. Of course, a mid- or rear-engine design would negate that in a RWD vehicle.

 

I believe it had to do with power loss inherent in a traditional RWD differential, but it was a long time ago.

Edited December 12, 2007 by Edstock

[suv_guy_19]

Yeah...if you don't know how to drive.

 

IT really doesn't have that much to do with knowing how to drive. I can drive RWD in the winter, but it is more difficult. you have to feather almost every launch and your back end often slides out. It is also not as stable on icy surfaces. RWD is fine, its just not as good in the snow.

[suv_guy_19]

Physics will tell you otherwise. If that were true, all the truckers would be pushing their trailers...

 

 

Wouldn't that support what I said.....

[P71_CrownVic]

you have to feather almost every launch and your back end often slides out.

Thats the best part. When you lose it in a FED, there is no recovery. With a RWD, there is a MUCH better chance of recovery. Plus, you learn car control, which could save your life someday.

[papilgee4evaeva]

Well, there is bound to be some rotational inertia that is lost when you stretch out a drivetrain and increase the rotational mass. Of course, a mid- or rear-engine design would negate that in a RWD vehicle.

 

Yeah... but in a family sedan? Seriously?

 

I doubt any automaker in this day and age would go for that idea. It seems like it would be too expensive to mass-produce (mid-engine) and flat-out impractical (rear-engine).

Edited December 12, 2007 by papilgee4evaeva

[Deanh]

Didn't know you were a Ford Dealer. Can you give me a break down of monthly sales. How many Focuses, Fusions, F-Series, Explorers, Edges, Escapes, and so on do you sell individually each month? I'm really curious of what draws people to the lot, and what they walk away with.

Edges and f-150's here....next up Superdutys and work trucks, next fusions...and then the rest....don't rightfully know %'s

[AlRozzi]

Sales numbers aside, I agree with Alan that Taurus is a good looking car and Sable is even better.

 

The new Taurus could and should be selling 20,000 per month, it's a good enough car, but consumers aren't informed as the general theory would have us believe. Consumers tend to go with the flow of the latest trend or "buzz." If Farley can create some attention, Taurus will sell well- heck, it's much nicer than the new Malibu.

Edited December 12, 2007 by AlRozzi

[P71_CrownVic]

Sales numbers aside, I agree with Alan that Taurus is a good looking car and Sable is even better.

 

The new Taurus could and should be selling 20,000 per month...

Pffttt...the Fusion and Taurus together can't even sell that many.

Edited December 12, 2007 by P71_CrownVic

[AlRozzi]

Pffttt...the Fusion and Taurus together can't even sell that many.

 

...but again, I fault the consumer!

[BlackHorse]

damn consumers always mucking everything up!!! lol

[suv_guy_19]

Thats the best part. When you lose it in a FED, there is no recovery. With a RWD, there is a MUCH better chance of recovery. Plus, you learn car control, which could save your life someday.

 

 

It is very easy to recover in a FWD car...Who is the bad driver again? :P. As long as you don't touch the brakes in a FWD car when you get into trouble you'll usually be just fine.

[FordBuyer]

Pioneer sees no bright side. Of course, I probably wouldn't either if I had such a dismal opinion of the company that signs my paychecks.

 

Yeah. if Pioneer is the norm at Ford as far as their employes go, then Ford is surely in trouble. He must be a lot of fun on Ford property everyday spouting his negative line. It would get kind of old after awhile just as it has here. Constructive criticism is needed, but not this constant negative slant on every Ford move. I don't think I could work for an entity I was so negative about. Pioneer needs to get his resume out and move on to a company he believes in. Attitude is so important to being a valued employe and such a detriment when you have bad one.

[BlackHorse]

It is very easy to recover in a FWD car...Who is the bad driver again? :P. As long as you don't touch the brakes in a FWD car when you get into trouble you'll usually be just fine.

 

 

 

SUV-GUY, there's something Blackhorse never told you. It was I who invented the front wheel drive car. FWD is from the dark side. I got front wheel drive and Al Gore got the Internet. Together we have taken over the world and poisoned your mind, muahahahahaahahahaaa!!!

 

 

You are my little FWD puppet. A helpless fool. You Canadians are so easy to trick. I didn't have to use the Jedi mind thing.

[suv_guy_19]

SUV-GUY, there's something Blackhorse never told you. It was I who invented the front wheel drive car. FWD is from the dark side. I got front wheel drive and Al Gore got the Internet. Together we have taken over the world and poisoned your mind, muahahahahaahahahaaa!!!

You are my little FWD puppet. A helpless fool. You Canadians are so easy to trick. I didn't have to use the Jedi mind thing.

 

 

:boring: yeah yeah...play artist killdozer.

[papilgee4evaeva]

...but again, I fault the consumer!

 

I for one fault marketing.... yeah, I know, it's :beatdeadhorse: ... but they gotta figure out how to get the cars in everyone's minds just like they have with the Edge.

[FordBuyer]

With CAFE going to 35 mpg, GM is re-thinking the whole "return to RWD'. Next Impala is in limbo. So, looks like the "RWD comeback" knee jerkly predicted when the Mopar 300 debuted was a eye watering dream.

 

Yeah, I think the RWD platform is in trouble also. It will be hard justifying the billions needed to bring out new, big, RWD vehicles that will just bring fleet average down. In future, Taurus will be as big as you can go and meet new fleet averages. The average vehicle will be no bigger than Fusion with most I4's and many vehicles will be smaller including trucks. All bigger trucks will be diesel.

[BlackHorse]

 

Take the red pill SUV Guy. When you wake up, you'll be back in the real world where any man caught driving a FWD car is subjected to chemical castration and given a job at the 24 hour cosmetic tips hotline. Don't be that guy SUV guy.

[jpd80]

Yeah, I think the RWD platform is in trouble also. It will be hard justifying the billions needed to bring out new, big, RWD vehicles that will just bring fleet average down. In future, Taurus will be as big as you can go and meet new fleet averages. The average vehicle will be no bigger than Fusion with most I4's and many vehicles will be smaller including trucks. All bigger trucks will be diesel.

The Zeta RWD has been mostly paid for by Holden in Australia, GM NA bought the intellectual property for US$250 Million.

RWD Impala is almost impossible to cancel now and Lutz has admitted as much, it's nearly at product confirmation stage

because it was held back until after the Commodore Ute and Station Wagon, and then Camaro. As Camaro Mules are out and about

in Australia, the first few hand built Impalas are about to happen. Impala is on an unique wheelbase compared to the other Zetas so

Holden has had headaches sourcing unique parts for it but now that's basically done.

 

As to FWD, Yoda said it best:

"You must unlearn what you have learned."

"Once you start down the dark path (FWD), forever will it dominate your destiny, consume you it will..."

Edited December 13, 2007 by jpd80

[FordBuyer]

Yeah that is most of the answer. In slippery conditions it is also often easier for the wheels to pull than push.

 

 

Yeah, being 59, I didn't own a FWD vehicle until I bought a 1997 Taurus. And RWD vehicles are not good in the snow. The rear end moves around and won't stay planted. I'm sure traction control has helped, but still they are no fun to accelerate from stop light in heavy snow. Whenever I get next to RWD vehicle off stop light in snow, I can pull away from the RWD vehicle very easily as they fight for grip. FWD vehicles are great in the snow. You really don't need AWD, they are that good.

 

Another big advantage to FWD is much more space inside. Look at a GM and rear seat room and look at Sable and it's rear seat leg room. No contest. The rear seat in Sable looks like limo compared to GM. FWD's are more space efficient. Maybe that's why all the mid sized family cars are FWD. Families want space and that advantage goes to FWD. Being able to assemble for less cost is important too as it keeps the prices to consumer down. There has to be lots of good reasons for FWD to be dominant drive system.

 

That being said, there certainly is place for RWD in auto company's lineup, as they do have advantages when it comes to high performance and towing. I also like the light steering feel of RWD and not the heavy feel of FWD. But I don't miss the white knuckle days of driving RWD in snow for 35 winters.