Jump to content

The Ford Europe vs. Ford NA Thread


RichardJensen

Recommended Posts

Isn't the Mondeo D-class sized now?

 

Anyway, the last car they brought over without changing much was the Contour/Mystique. It did well in Europe, but not so well over here. One thing, the backseat was next to non-existent which didn't seem to upset very many Europeans.

Actually, Mondeo is classed as Large Mid Sized or a large C car.

rear seat room same as Fusion but front seat travel is 44"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tweener = CD as in A (Ka) B (Fiesta) C (Focus) CD (Fusion/Mondeo) D (Taurus)... E (Town Car L)

 

The Camry, Fusion, Altima, Malibu, and until this year Accord were all 'tweeners' and they're the heart of the American sedan market.

 

If the Ka is an A Class vehicle, is there anything being sold in the U.S./Canada that is from the same class? I don't think a Smart car is from the A Class.

 

Isn't a Ka about the same size as the original Geo Metro?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tweener = CD as in A (Ka) B (Fiesta) C (Focus) CD (Fusion/Mondeo) D (Taurus)... E (Town Car L)

 

The Camry, Fusion, Altima, Malibu, and until this year Accord were all 'tweeners' and they're the heart of the American sedan market.

Falcon/Commodore are only just D sized cars, you'll see what I mean when Pontiac G8 arrives.

It's very hard to tell if they're any bigger than the names you listed off.

Probably a little wider internally, that's all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aussie Jac Nasser was deamonised and vilified by everyone in the USA but had his audacious plans worked Ford would

now be richer than GM and Toyota put together.

 

Nasser was a very smart guy in my opinion but Ford didn't have the money to see things through. Thing is Nasser had a long term vision, but what Ford needed was to fix immediate problems first.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nasser was a very smart guy in my opinion but Ford didn't have the money to see things through. Thing is Nasser had a long term vision, but what Ford needed was to fix immediate problems first.....

The Firestone tyre problem with Explorers came at the worst possible time for Ford.

 

It's all fish and chip wrappings now..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nasser was a very smart guy in my opinion but Ford didn't have the money to see things through. Thing is Nasser had a long term vision, but what Ford needed was to fix immediate problems first.....

 

This is from Wikipedia:

 

Throughout Nasser's tenure, there were serious concerns about his abrupt, sometimes abrasive management style and treatment of subordinates. It has also been said that Nasser's tough business practices and hard-nosed manners unsettled and alienated Ford's supplier network, dealerships, and most notably, its employees. Nasser diverted most of management's attention to new initiatives and lost focus on the core business of making great automobiles, critics argue. He also implemented a controversial management performance review system that alienated and divided the management.

 

Nasser (Wikipedia)

Edited by MarkFive
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The victors write history.

Nasser faced an up hill battle with feifdoms and chiefs that wouldn't support him. His vision of the future was flawed,

it was based on the assumption that the excesses of the 1980s gave him the time to develop a luxury performance

auto group that would rival FoE for profits. His preoccupation for acquireing other companies not of core value to Ford

resulted in his demise.

 

Mulally put the broom through feifdoms before he started, has the support of the board and is focused on Ford and its products.

A world of difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The victors write history.

His preoccupation for acquireing other companies not of core value to Ford resulted in his demise.

 

Good point about history.

I also believe he diversified the company way too much with his aquisitions. Now most everything acquired during his time is either already sold or on the block (except Volvo).

Edited by MarkFive
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The victors write history.

Nasser faced an up hill battle with feifdoms and chiefs that wouldn't support him. His vision of the future was flawed,

it was based on the assumption that the excesses of the 1980s gave him the time to develop a luxury performance

auto group that would rival FoE for profits. His preoccupation for acquireing other companies not of core value to Ford

resulted in his demise.

 

Mulally put the broom through feifdoms before he started, has the support of the board and is focused on Ford and its products.

A world of difference.

 

Didn't FoE go into the dumpster on his watch?

 

Nasser seemed to be as out of touch as GM's Proctor & Gamble execs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...