JagXFRGuy Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 Two disappointments...first, where's a concept? I mean, Auto Shows are partly about the future and fun..no Ford concept? And for years, J Mays was the presenter at NAIAS...no room for him today? Farley for that matter as well. So does that mean that we get a Lincoln concept or is the Volvo S60 the only real concept car for FMC at NAIAS? That sucks..sorry.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoldwizard Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 No money = no concepts As for Mays, I have never been impressed with him anyway. IMHO, he like to surround himself with "yes men". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 I thought Ford was dealing with getting new product to the market instead of concepts that disappoint the public because they can't have it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
battyr Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 Ford does not want to annouce everything at once. Something won't get the attention it needs. The question is, will Ford show the next gen Focus this later this week, at another auto show or next year? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ANTAUS Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 Yeah I myself don't care for concepts if they won't make production. I mean, if they wish to design a vehicle, then make off a concept off it a bit more streamlined to tease people of whats coming, thats great...but if it's a concept for the hell of it with a "maybe" attached to it, then screw it. Divert your energy and resources to something that will see the light of day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RaZor Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 What on earth would the point of spending $ on (future) concepts today? Getting product to market is what is needed - the sooner the better (esp for Ford - with what they already have in the works) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomServo92 Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 What on earth would the point of spending $ on (future) concepts today? Getting product to market is what is needed - the sooner the better (esp for Ford - with what they already have in the works) Regardless of money being tight, I'd prefer to see production cars or near-production ready "concepts" rather than pie-in-sky vehicles that will never see production. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JagXFRGuy Posted January 11, 2009 Author Share Posted January 11, 2009 You guys are missing the point of my argument (spoken like a true lawyer..LOL) Ok, for years and years Auto Shows were the stage for demonstrating the future of the automobile. While I get the whole BEV and plug-in technology, which does hark back to the past where OEM's would get up and talk about the future in almost buck rodgers style, they also used the shows to capture the imagination of the public. Hell, even a few years back Ford would have 3-4 even five concepts at the show. And the money argument is dumb. My god, Ford has more than enough cash to make a few fun loving, dream-making concepts...I mean, GM had a few, (ugly as hell, but at least they had them). So my point is this. Auto Shows are part fantasy, part reality. I get the reality part..but where's the fantasy part? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 A while back two Mustang based concept cars, the Interceptor and MKR were presented at NAIAS. The s**t hit the fan when Mulally asked when were they expected to go into production. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edstock Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 A while back two Mustang based concept cars, the Interceptor and MKR were presented at NAIAS.The s**t hit the fan when Mulally asked when were they expected to go into production. That could have been the most important question he could've asked. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 That could have been the most important question he could've asked. Another detail was that "NO" was the most important development word used with the new Taurus. I think behind the scenes Mays and Horbury were brought into line with commercial reality and style. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike_in_va Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 We haven't seen Lincoln/Mercury yet. Maybe they have the concept. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PREMiERdrum Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 We haven't seen Lincoln/Mercury yet. Maybe they have the concept. This is something I wanted to bring up... On all of the auto show schedules I've seen the timeslot for tomorrow is listed as "Lincoln Mercury." Do you think they'd bother with both names if only Lincoln vehicles were to be shown? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waymondospiff Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 I'm perfectly fine without concepts this year - this has been a good auto show for Ford, no doubt: 2010 EB Flex (announced for MKT & MKS.) 2010 Taurus 2010 MKT 2010 Fusion EPA announcement (not necessarily autoshow, but the timing sure was advantageous.) 2009 F-150 Truck of the Year Last chance for a concept: Monday 9:05-9:30 Lincoln/Mercury Scott Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snooter Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 That could have been the most important question he could've asked. i agree....personally i would hope ford would display and promote the ecoboost at this years detroit auto show....especially MPG increase with these new PT's...they should also shut up on any performance capability unless they are making presentation to the performance crowd Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MKII Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 Were is the "post Kinetic" global design DNA that Mr.Mays was quoted in articles back in December to debut at this show? Mays said production of this vehicle is more then 1 year away, which read to me that it could not be the Taurus. Yes/No?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 No. Post Kinetic is 2011 CY for rollout (next gen CDs) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BORG Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 I'm hoping Ford finds some more talented design leadership, I'm seeing excellence in everything but design (kinda like Toyota). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 I'd like to see the design talent given a bit more freedom. I think certain cues on the Taurus were dictated to the staff, and I don't like it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fords#1Fan Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 Aww I was looking forward to seeing the production Fiesta. oh well I geuss ill see what the LincolnMercury shows tomorrow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BORG Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 (edited) I'd like to see the design talent given a bit more freedom. I think certain cues on the Taurus were dictated to the staff, and I don't like it. I like the Taurus quite a bit, so I'm very pleased, but you can see the design compromises here and there. They started with several different ideas and found ways to get it to work on the car and it's not quite consistent. I think one of the best designs I've seen this year is actually over at Buick with the LaCrosse, although I'm not a fan of the interior. It's rare to see an all new Ford design to begin with, most of the time they are trying to salvage sheemetal or hardpoints so the end result is naturally compromised and not ideal. I'm still looking for that killer Ford design and it remains elusive. Edited January 12, 2009 by BORG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LSFan00 Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 I think the 'killer Ford design' is the Fiesta... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2b2 Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 DARN - this is the BEST thread I've seen here for quite a while and I don't have the time to reply to every post (maybe tomorrow!) but Another detail was that "NO" was the most important development word used with the new Taurus.I think behind the scenes Mays and Horbury were brought into line with commercial reality and style. jpd, came you provide a link or more details about this "NO" business? ...for the 2010 Taurus?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 (edited) DARN - this is the BEST thread I've seen here for quite a while and I don't have the time to reply to every post (maybe tomorrow!)but jpd, came you provide a link or more details about this "NO" business? ...for the 2010 Taurus?? Horbury and Mays efforts on the 2010 Taurus didn't go unsurveiled this time by Mulally and Kuzak How Ford remade Taurus sedan - LINK The new Taurus was supposed to be a 2011 model, but with the company fighting for its survival, Ford ordered an unprecedented acceleration of the program, trimming an entire year off the product development process. Executives also sent designers back to their drawing boards more than once because their sketches did not go far enough -- a real change for a company that has seen many good designs nixed by financial executives because they went too far and cost too much. Advertisement "The most effective word we used in the design reviews was, 'No,' " Fields told The Detroit News. "Our mantra these days is 'Good is not good enough.' We can't be as good as Toyota and Honda. We have to be better." It was not hard to make the Taurus better. It was a good car, lauded for its quality and safety, but lampooned for its lackluster looks. "The current Taurus is a great, rational car, but it never excited customers," said Derrick Kuzak, Ford's global head of product development. He told the design team that the next-generation model had to be nothing short of "jaw-dropping." Ford's original plan called for major changes, but stopped short of a complete redesign. The roof was not supposed to be touched. There simply was not money in the budget.The initial redesign stayed within those limits and still outscored all of its competition when Ford showed it to prospective buyers 15 months ago. But that was not good enough for Fields and Kuzak. "It isn't just numbers," Kuzak said. "It's also the words that customers use." The adjectives were not dramatic enough. So, he told the team to tackle the roof, too. "That was refreshing, because nobody wanted to stop there. It's no use just being ahead. You have to be way ahead," said Ford's American design chief, Peter Horbury. "It took some bravery to say, 'That's good, but it's not yet there.' " Now then, The Falcon cost AUS$500 million or USD$350 million - in the overall scheme of thing that is chicken feed!!! By comparison, Ford NA spent a fortune on the Taurus - it better pay off of Taurus is down the tubes!! Edited January 12, 2009 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noah Harbinger Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 Never been a fan of concepts myself... But then I'm not a dreamer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.