New Fusion to be Engineered in North America

[mackinaw]

From today's Automotive News. Article by Amy Wilson and Richard Johnson:

 

"Ford Motor Co. will use a platform developed in Europe for its global mid-sized car, but the engineering work will be done in North America.

 

Ford assigned the car to its Dearborn engineering center late last year, said Joe Bakaj, Ford vice president of global product programs and Ford of Europe product development.

 

"We're trying to balance the workload between the engineering centers, and so the cars are going to be led out of North America but with a global team," said Bakaj, who has oversight of the project from Europe.

 

In addition to North American engineers, representatives from Europe and Asia, including China, are on the team, Bakaj said. They are charged with developing a single mid-sized car that can be sold in multiple regions around the world with slight modifications for particular markets."

 

Full article on the Automotive News website (but you'll need a subscription).

[2005Explorer]

Wasn't the current Fusion engineered here as well?

[rkisler]

Wasn't the current Fusion engineered here as well?

 

Yes, and no.

 

CD3 primary engineering was done by Mazda for the Mazda 6. But Fusion and siblings had unique, longer wheelbase and sheet metal. That engineering was done in the US. And of course the US and Japanese teams were in close contact.

 

Mondeo was done in Europe; Mondeo is a derivative of the Focus.

 

We don't have full details on the composition of the next-gen platform, but it won't be strictly EUCD for a number of reasons.

 

This team has a big job. There are a lot of users with conflicting demands. But if timing is 2012, then the preliminary planning work is pretty much done, and they are into implementation mode.

 

The Focus has been returned to Europe for workload balance.

[Critic]

OH GAWD, Don't let Pioneer hear the Japanese and American were in bed together on this one.

[Footballfan]

If I were Granholm, I'd get off my ass to see that this car is built in Michigan as well. Remember that Ford said it will give the UAW first dibs over a product over Mexico.

[Pioneer]

OH GAWD, Don't let Pioneer hear the Japanese and American were in bed together on this one.

 

 

Who cares, as long as an American builds it.

[RangerM]

Whatever happened to the Mondeo?

 

Weren't they bringing it here?

[PREMiERdrum]

Whatever happened to the Mondeo?

 

Weren't they bringing it here?

 

The next Fusion / Mondeo will be the same vehicle.

[rkisler]

If I were Granholm, I'd get off my ass to see that this car is built in Michigan as well. Remember that Ford said it will give the UAW first dibs over a product over Mexico.

 

There is no reason to move the primary manufacturing site for CD cars from Hermosillo.

 

It would seem logical, however, if Louisville were capable of producing both C and CD platforms when it is reconfigured after the Explorer goes down.

 

Other than the work begin done to make MAP (old Wayne and MTP) a flexible small car plant, I wouldn't count on Michigan ever securing another major Ford assembly plant, and that has nothing to do with Grandholm. If Ford needs added capacity, it's so far over the horizon you can't see it.

Edited March 24, 2009 by Austin

[twintornados]

Whatever happened to the Mondeo?

 

Weren't they bringing it here?

No.... because Ford Jellymoulds used a shamwow on the design team and soaked up all their smarts!!!

[theoldwizard]

Who cares, as long as an American builds it.

Current Fusions are built in Mexico.

 

I have not heard of any change to that in the future.

[LSFan00]

Not really news. Where the team goes to bed at night doesn't really matter so much as who is on it.

 

Who builds mid-size cars here also designed in the United States anymore anyway? Isn't that just Toyota/Honda? I suppose the Malibu fits but the epsilon is really the Euro. platform anyway for GM. Chrysler doesn't really count since they'll be gone in a few months anyway (plus I think the world has seen enough Sebrings. No mas, por favor.)

[twintornados]

Current Fusions are built in Mexico.

 

I have not heard of any change to that in the future.

Wow Wiz....thanks for clearing THAT up.....

 

Now, to the point...."engineered" and "built" are two different things altogether...let me explain it in terms you can understand....the replacement for E-Series will be "engineered" here in the good ole USA using a platform that is shared with full size Transit in Europe....hopefully, when it is "built", the Twin I Beam front suspension on the current model will be replaced.

 

:poke:

Edited March 24, 2009 by twintornados

[Critic]

hopefully, when it is "built", the Twin I Beam front suspension on the current model will be replaced.

Ouch, still really using that? I paraphrase an engineer once saying: You give it a name like Twin I Beam Suspension and turn a deficit into an asset.

Marketing at it's finest potential.

[twintornados]

Ouch, still really using that? I paraphrase an engineer once saying: You give it a name like Twin I Beam Suspension and turn a deficit into an asset.

Marketing at it's finest potential.

Yeah, well....every E-Series made has it....except Wiz's......right Wiz? Wiz?? Wiz????

[twintornados]

Ouch, still really using that? I paraphrase an engineer once saying: You give it a name like Twin I Beam Suspension and turn a deficit into an asset.

Marketing at it's finest potential.

I have a great new name for the tried and true Econoline front suspension....the iTwin beam-o-matic....hah?? hah???

[battyr]

I have a great new name for the tried and true Econoline front suspension....the iTwin beam-o-matic....hah?? hah???

 

How do you use common engineering on all your vehicles around the world using engineering teams from around the world that are currently using different engineering.

 

The answer is to start all designs in Europe so all plants and parts are common and compatible. The design of both the Focus and Mondeo are fixed and use the same engineering and manufacturing technology. This is the technology that Ford should use on most their vehicles. Ford of North America only has to adapt them to world wide needs and modernize them. Once you have "One Ford" world wide Then Ford of North America can start redesigning vehicles from scratch.

 

I would argue that when the Taurus gets a complete redesign or the GRWD gets designed, they should both be designed out of Europe. This would make them use the same engineering as the Focus and Mondeo.

[White99GT]

Wow Wiz....thanks for clearing THAT up.....

 

Now, to the point...."engineered" and "built" are two different things altogether...let me explain it in terms you can understand....the replacement for E-Series will be "engineered" here in the good ole USA using a platform that is shared with full size Transit in Europe....hopefully, when it is "built", the Twin I Beam front suspension on the current model will be replaced.

 

:poke:

[NickF1011]

How do you use common engineering on all your vehicles around the world using engineering teams from around the world that are currently using different engineering.

 

The answer is to start all designs in Europe so all plants and parts are common and compatible. The design of both the Focus and Mondeo are fixed and use the same engineering and manufacturing technology. This is the technology that Ford should use on most their vehicles. Ford of North America only has to adapt them to world wide needs and modernize them. Once you have "One Ford" world wide Then Ford of North America can start redesigning vehicles from scratch.

 

I would argue that when the Taurus gets a complete redesign or the GRWD gets designed, they should both be designed out of Europe. This would make them use the same engineering as the Focus and Mondeo.

 

 

The entire point of bringing in engineers from around the globe is to basically do what you are saying. However, I don't think anyone can argue specifically that Europe's engineering is in any way quantifyingly better than anyone else's. For example, do you think Europe should also engineer the next F-150?

[Harley Lover]

Guys, could you clarify something for me? Does the new S80 use the current EUCD platform or an updated version of EUCD? I ask because the S80 offers a V8, so if it rides on some version of the EUCD, wouldn't that suggest that much of the engineering work for a V6 to fit the chassis has already been done by Volvo?

Edited March 25, 2009 by Harley Lover

[rkisler]

How do you use common engineering on all your vehicles around the world using engineering teams from around the world that are currently using different engineering.

 

The answer is to start all designs in Europe so all plants and parts are common and compatible. The design of both the Focus and Mondeo are fixed and use the same engineering and manufacturing technology. This is the technology that Ford should use on most their vehicles. Ford of North America only has to adapt them to world wide needs and modernize them. Once you have "One Ford" world wide Then Ford of North America can start redesigning vehicles from scratch.

 

I would argue that when the Taurus gets a complete redesign or the GRWD gets designed, they should both be designed out of Europe. This would make them use the same engineering as the Focus and Mondeo.

 

Sorry, but you are starting from an incorrect premise.

 

Ford has global Product Development procedures and timelines.

 

Ford has global engineering design standards.

 

Ford has global engineering tools, and global CAD/CAM systems.

 

Ford has global standardization of test procedures and calibration of testing equipment including test track calibration/conversion.

 

Ford has a common global manufacturing order of assembly -- and that includes Mazda and Volvo (actually it also includes Land Rover and Jaguar).

 

Ford has common worldwide manufacturing simulation tools including virtual reality build.

 

Ford works with the same suppliers around the globe for components

 

Ford works with the same suppliers around the globe for assembly tooling

 

 

Ford expended a lot of effort on all of the above -- you can't believe how tedious, time consuming, and tiring meetings can be when you are covering Japan, US, Australia, and Europe engineering or manufacturing and going through every small item to ensure everyone is in alignment. But when you've done the hard word, the fruits are that you can move engineering or manufacturing work literally anywhere around the globe depending on resource requirements and availability.

 

So starting all designs in Europe wouldn't make sense as they aren't staffed for it. What you would actually have to do is to send a bunch of US engineers to Europe on foreign service ($$$$).

 

But being able to shift the next-gen Focus engineering from the U.S. to Europe and shifting the next-gen C/D car engineering to the U.S.or having FoA pick up a worldwide truck program is a perfect example of being able to swap resources without missing a beat. PD and manufacturing resources are a factory, and you want to make sure you are at capacity in each and every location.

 

And...you are also making what I think is an improper assumption that all cars from Europe will be better suited for the U.S than cars done here. And also an improper assumption that the EUCD is "fixed"; it will most certainly be modified.

[battyr]

Guys, could you clarify something for me? Does the new S80 use the current EUCD platform or an updated version of EUCD? I ask because the S80 offers a V8, so if it rides on some version of the EUCD, wouldn't that suggest that much of the engineering work for a V6 to fit the chassis has already been done by Volvo?

 

I am a little confused to because the EUCD was design not to take a V-6 because Volvo wanted to use their i-6 for improved crash worthiness, yet the S-80 uses a V-8.

 

I suspect that the XC60 would not take a V-6 and an S80 would. I suspect their would not be a problem to make any future EUCD V-6 compatible.

[battyr]

 

The entire point of bringing in engineers from around the globe is to basically do what you are saying. However, I don't think anyone can argue specifically that Europe's engineering is in any way quantifyingly better than anyone else's. For example, do you think Europe should also engineer the next F-150?

 

I am not arguing that Europe is any better at engineering than the US. If that was the case, then I would take all engineering away from the US.

 

What I am saying is that the Fiesta, Focus, Modeo and Galaxy Van all share common engineering and are sold around the world. The US has the Fusion and the Taurus. They are both use very modular and flexible engineering but are different. They have the Panther, F-150 and US Focus. All these vehicles have completely different engineering and are only made in North America.

 

I can see logic in Trucks or any body on frame vehicle being designed in the US first. As long as they share many parts and components with the cars. If you give Europe responsibility for designing cars, then give the US responsibility for designing the components that go into the cars. Or for developing technology for future cars.

[NickF1011]

I am not arguing that Europe is any better at engineering than the US. If that was the case, then I would take all engineering away from the US.

 

What I am saying is that the Fiesta, Focus, Modeo and Galaxy Van all share common engineering and are sold around the world. The US has the Fusion and the Taurus. They are both use very modular and flexible engineering but are different. They have the Panther, F-150 and US Focus. All these vehicles have completely different engineering and are only made in North America.

 

I can see logic in Trucks or any body on frame vehicle being designed in the US first. As long as they share many parts and components with the cars. If you give Europe responsibility for designing cars, then give the US responsibility for designing the components that go into the cars. Or for developing technology for future cars.

 

The whole point of Ford's new global engineering effort is to avoid problems that exist on vehicles like the Fusion, Crown Vic, Mustang, etc. All vehicles moving forward are going to have the same engineering criteria applied to them, regardless of where they are designed. That's truly a monumental change in the way Ford used to do things. The end result? You don't have to rely on "Europe for designing cars", or the US for "designing the components". They can both be designed and engineered by whomever has the most resources available at the time.

Edited March 25, 2009 by NickF1011

[battyr]

Sorry, but you are starting from an incorrect premise.

 

Ford has global Product Development procedures and timelines.

 

Ford has global engineering design standards.

 

Ford has global engineering tools, and global CAD/CAM systems.

 

Ford has global standardization of test procedures and calibration of testing equipment including test track calibration/conversion.

 

Ford has a common global manufacturing order of assembly -- and that includes Mazda and Volvo (actually it also includes Land Rover and Jaguar).

 

Ford has common worldwide manufacturing simulation tools including virtual reality build.

 

Ford works with the same suppliers around the globe for components

 

Ford works with the same suppliers around the globe for assembly tooling

 

 

Ford expended a lot of effort on all of the above -- you can't believe how tedious, time consuming, and tiring meetings can be when you are covering Japan, US, Australia, and Europe engineering or manufacturing and going through every small item to ensure everyone is in alignment. But when you've done the hard word, the fruits are that you can move engineering or manufacturing work literally anywhere around the globe depending on resource requirements and availability.

 

So starting all designs in Europe wouldn't make sense as they aren't staffed for it. What you would actually have to do is to send a bunch of US engineers to Europe on foreign service ($$$$).

 

But being able to shift the next-gen Focus engineering from the U.S. to Europe and shifting the next-gen C/D car engineering to the U.S.or having FoA pick up a worldwide truck program is a perfect example of being able to swap resources without missing a beat. PD and manufacturing resources are a factory, and you want to make sure you are at capacity in each and every location.

 

And...you are also making what I think is an improper assumption that all cars from Europe will be better suited for the U.S than cars done here. And also an improper assumption that the EUCD is "fixed"; it will most certainly be modified.

 

I don't disagree with you. Ford has been working on this since the first Escort in the early 80's. I am just saying that old habits are hard to break. The US will design the next Focus, but they will copy the engineering already done on the European Focus. The US will design the next C/D car, but it will copy the engineering already done on the European EUCD.