NY Times: Ford-- the Great New American Company?

[PREMiERdrum]

Why does the new model lose so much rear legroom?

 

Rear seat pushed forward to gain headroom / due to new roofline?

 

::totally guessing here::

Edited May 24, 2009 by PREMiERdrum

[TomServo92]

Rear set pushed forward to gain headroom / due to new roofline?

 

::totally guessing here::

 

I was about to post the same thing!

[rmc523]

Rear set pushed forward to gain headroom / due to new roofline?

 

::totally guessing here::

 

Ah, you're probably right, dodn't think of that.

[Noah Harbinger]

Why does the new model lose so much rear legroom?

 

They probably realized that almost no one cares about rear leg room

[rmc523]

They probably realized that almost no one cares about rear leg room

 

:lol:

[RichardJensen]

One note jpd80:

 

Interior volume. Point by point measurements have merit, but they don't tell the whole story.

[suv_guy_19]

Glad they added hip room to the new car. That was one things that I didn't like about the old one.

[jpd80]

One note jpd80:

 

Interior volume. Point by point measurements have merit, but they don't tell the whole story.

I'll agree but I like to use empirical data to compare space efficiency because measurements don't lie.

From memory, the side glass tumblehome on the FH/Taurus is more vertical than Falcon/Mondeo/Fusion,

I'm thinking that the Taurus roof line extends further outboard increasing canopy area and feel.

 

I've sat in a Fivehundred, FG Falcon, Mondeo and 2006 Fusion, the Mondeo blows people away for space.

If you're tall like me, the Mondeo's 44" front seat travel allows you to really stretch out behind the wheel.

 

I'm over to the States again in September so I'm looking forward to a sit in at least in the new Fords.

Actually, Deanh was on Holidays in New Zealand recently, he may be able to give us his appraisal.

Edited May 24, 2009 by jpd80

[Noah Harbinger]

One note jpd80:

 

Interior volume. Point by point measurements have merit, but they don't tell the whole story.

 

Interior volume is what qualifies the Prius as midsized, and midsized it ain't.

[jpd80]

Interior volume is what qualifies the Prius as midsized, and midsized it ain't.

Prius sneaked over the line by being a "sports wagon".

I really wish Ford would build the Focus hybrid and give Prius a hiding.

[MKII]

One note jpd80:

 

Interior volume. Point by point measurements have merit, but they don't tell the whole story.

Good point RJ, as close as the numbers look when comparing rear paxs space Fusion and Mondeo, to me the Mondeo feels much roomier.

And having both C170 and C1 Focus , the C1 Focus seems much larger then what the numbers say.

 

Agree with jpd80 comment about how spacious the Mondeo is.

Edited May 24, 2009 by MKII

[WC-MAN]

So the Taurus is about to give up one of its major advantages for a sloping roofline? That makes sense. My next car needs to seat four tall adults, and I could give a damn about a sloping roofline.

 

I agree with Fords new position, if the government doesn't drive them out of business, they may emerge from this in the drivers seat as THE American car company.

[RichardJensen]

Interior volume is what qualifies the Prius as midsized, and midsized it ain't.

Well, it's -barely- over the generally arbitrary line the EPA draws between 'midsize' and 'compact'.

 

Kind of like how the Accord is now a fullsize car.

 

--

 

And from personal experience riding occasionally at 4-5 in a car, hip room may also be a pretty good indicator of 'spaciousness.'

Edited May 24, 2009 by RichardJensen

[dante hicks]

I own a 08 Taurus X, which is basically the wagon version of the Taurus. It is a wide car but the doors are very thick reducing the interior width substantially. I just took a look and would guess the doors are a good 8 to 9 inches thick, the window sill is wide enough that you could put a soda can on it and it wouldn't fall off. It was however the first and possible the only car to get a 5 side impact rating without side air bags. My previous car was a Sable Wagon and on the interior the width felt the same even though the exterior was narrower.

 

 

All Taurus Xs have side airbags.

[UltimateX]

All Taurus Xs have side airbags.

 

The Taurus and the Taurus X were not crash tested, all the results are carry overs from the Five Hundred and the Freestyle which had optional side airbags in 2005. Notice the results below for the Five Hundred were without side air bags.

 

 

2005 Five Hundred Crash Result

[battyr]

In case any of you are interested in seeing how some of the US and global Fords stack up,

I've complied this little spread sheet.

Internally, Falcon, Taurus, Mondeo and Fusion are similar but this is the key to interior feel:

1) Hip/Shoulder room sets Falcon apart from Taurus

2) Hip/Shoulder room sets Taurus apart from Mondeo and Fusion.

Ford seems to be comfortable with about 38" to 39" head room and rear leg room figures.

Falcon, Mondeo and C1 Focus sedans all have approx 18.9 to 19.0 cu ft Trunk capacity.

 

What the chart does not show is the space between the driver and front passanger. This is a measure of luxury. That will be the difference between the Taurus and the Mondeo. The penalty would be added weight in exchange for a higher price. Something you need in a Lincoln.

 

Note that the Taurus is bigger than the Falcon and has less space in it. I have 2 theories.

1. The Taurus wastes space to achieve Safety, Flexibility, and using large wheels or

2. This type of car can achieve better rigidity at a lower weight by putting steel in the transmission tunnel rather than the door rocker panels.

 

Maybe they Should replace large wide vehicles like the Taurus with RWD?

Edited May 24, 2009 by battyr

[jpd80]

What the chart does not show is the space between the driver and front passanger. This is a measure of luxury. That will be the difference between the Taurus and the Mondeo. The penalty would be added weight in exchange for a higher price. Something you need in a Lincoln.

 

Note that the Taurus is bigger than the Falcon and has less space in it. I have 2 theories.

1. The Taurus wastes space to achieve Safety, Flexibility, and using large wheels or

2. This type of car can achieve better rigidity at a lower weight by putting steel in the transmission tunnel rather than the door rocker panels.

 

Maybe they Should replace large wide vehicles like the Taurus with RWD?

1)

Hip room is approximately 1.5" less with the Mondeo Compared to the Taurus.

Hip room is approximately 2.5" less with the Taurus Compared to the Falcon.

 

2)

Falcon uses EUCD Slim door technology, this would free up a lot of space in the Taurus

making the front and rear hip width measurements huge.

 

3) Replacing D3 Taurus was suggested and rejected by Ford on the grounds that

FWD/AWD offers better handling for customers driving in the snow belt states in winter

 

It worth looking at how the Falcon packs in so much space in a car barely 4" longer than a Fusion,

the Falcon is a great package but comes with RWD strengths and weaknesses.

Maybe when Ford are back on their feet it can partner up with Mustang production in North America.

Edited May 24, 2009 by jpd80

[blksn8k2]

How do side impact standards compare between the US, Europe and Australia?

[rmc523]

How do side impact standards compare between the US, Europe and Australia?

 

Maybe it's a stupid question, but I wonder if they use the same crash tests/standards we do? In other words, would the ratings be equal, even if they both were the top ratings available.

[blksn8k2]

If the ratings systems are different that could explain why the Taurus needs a thicker door than the Falcon and thus have less hip room even though it is a wider vehicle.

[jpd80]

Maybe it's a stupid question, but I wonder if they use the same crash tests/standards we do? In other words, would the ratings be equal, even if they both were the top ratings available.

For all intents and purposes they are roughly parallel to each other.

I don't believe the EUCD skim door technology would be an impediment in US crash tests

Volvo S80 is "using it" and the doors will be on the next GEN Mondeo/Fusion.

[rmc523]

For all intents and purposes they are roughly parallel to each other.

I don't believe the EUCD skim door technology would be an impediment in US crash tests

Volvo S80 is "using it" and the doors will be on the next GEN Mondeo/Fusion.

 

Ok, thanks.

[Fordowner]

I sat in the 500 once, it seemed very large, far larger than the 3rd gen or jelly bean Taurus my ex had as a company car and definately bigger than the first gen Taurus.

 

But the largely equivilant if not larger 2010 is not big enough to be a family sedan? True its not big enough to run car pool but that true of any sedan. But big enough to routinely carry a family of 5 or less? Yes. Though I have a 00 Focus and 07 Mustang and think the Fusion is a family sedan.

 

Oh well maybe not big enough for a family where the average height is 6 and 1/2 feet or the average waist is 40 inches.

 

But big enough to carry 4 6 and 1/2 footers in style? definately.

Edited May 26, 2009 by Fordowner