Grand C-Max revealed!

[richardmayo]

I love it, although I own a Mazda5.

[Bored of Pisteon]

Sorry, too small and the back seating looks like you are cramming sardines in a can.

 

NEXT!

[NickF1011]

The Rondo is a compact MPV just like the 5 and C-Max.

 

Exactly. I wouldn't call the C-Max or the Grand C-Max a minivan at all.

[RichardJensen]

The Rondo is a compact MPV just like the 5 and C-Max.

Rondo has no sliding doors, therefore it is manifestly NOT like the Mazda5. It is like the C-Max, though.

 

Rondo sells for $18-22k: Cheaper than the Escape. You think Ford can pull enough volume off a market that scrawny in that narrow a price range?

 

You see anyone else clamoring to make a tall compact wagon? I don't.

 

Depending on how you slice it, there must be over 30 vehicle segments--are we going to assert that Ford needs to be in every single one of them?

 

- 2 seat A

- 4 seat A

- 3 door B

- 4 door B

- 5 door B

- B wagon

- B CUV

- 2 door C

- 3 door C

- 4 door C

- 5 door C

- C wagon

- C CUV

- C 'tall wagon'

- C minivan

- 2 door CD

- 4 door CD

- 5 door CD

- CD wagon

- CD CUV

- CD 'tall wagon'

- CD minivan

- 4 door D

- D CUV

- D minivan

- compact truck

- midsize truck

- halfton truck

- ≥3/4 truck

- midsize SUV

- fullsize SUV

- small van

- fullsize van

- cutaway van

- cab/chassis van

- cab/chassis truck (in standard, extended, and crew cab variants)

 

Is it that big a deal if Ford opts not to play in marginal segments in this country?

[twintornados]

I hear what you are saying Richard, but my elderly parents bought a Mazda5 as it was much easier to maneuver, and my disabled father can get into it much better than the Camry they traded it in for.....and when they were shopping, they were selling reasonably well.....one dealer lost out since they wouldn't accept X-Plan on it due to the popularity of the car.

[RichardJensen]

And there are people out there buying Minis, Siennas, Kubes, tCs, and so on and so forth.

 

A mature company in a mature and complex market will not compel itself to compete in every segment.

[V8-X]

Overall I like the style, simply too small for my tastes.

 

Sorry, too small and the back seating looks like you are cramming sardines in a can.

 

NEXT!

Did you see that 3rd row leg room? That's not even enough legroom for my 5yr old daughter. Heck my 3yr old son may feel cramped back there.

[silvrsvt]

A mature company in a mature and complex market will not compel itself to compete in every segment.

 

But the point is that bringing over the Grand C-Max is a minimum risk venture for Ford...the primary market is over in Europe, not North America. If it does fail in NA, its not going to kill the company off.

[Ovaltine]

I think the true viability of the segment will lie with the price of gas.

 

If it ever approaches the $4.20+ range again, people will buy vehicles like this because they have *no* choice. So... it might not hurt Ford to have one in the stable, since high gas prices are only one terrorist attack away.

 

-Ovaltine

[NickF1011]

But the point is that bringing over the Grand C-Max is a minimum risk venture for Ford...the primary market is over in Europe, not North America. If it does fail in NA, its not going to kill the company off.

 

And it would likely only need to sell at a relatively miniscule volume (compared to many of Ford's other vehicles) in the U.S. to pull a profit.

[RichardJensen]

But the point is that bringing over the Grand C-Max is a minimum risk venture for Ford...the primary market is over in Europe, not North America. If it does fail in NA, its not going to kill the company off.

1) Ford doesn't need another failed minivan

 

2) It can't be 'brought over' it needs to be engineered with US customer input--there is no substitute. Maybe it has been, and maybe customer response has been through the roof. But somehow I doubt that.

[RichardJensen]

people will buy vehicles like this because they have *no* choice.

huh?

 

Big minivans do maybe 10% worse on gas (cf Mazda5 vs. Toyota Sienna).

 

That's like $300 a year in gas @ $4.20/gallon.

 

Don't see that being a major obstacle.

[ANTAUS]

I will laugh if GM brings the Orlando, before Ford brings out the C-Max here. I have mentioned in the past that while Ford has the idea, GM will execute it quicker...watch this be one of them.

 

I dont think it'll lose any money because it's already based on a Focus platform...They are giving people the option, "Would you like 5, or 7 passenger?" Just as you would with Expy and EL. You can make a viable business case when all you have to do is stretch the vehicle a bit and add sliders.

 

As it stands, I believe the Mazda5 and Rondo are the only vehicles that can sit 6-7, for starting under $20K, something Ford should tap into.

[2b2]

...I dont think it'll lose any money because it's already based on a Focus platform...They are giving people the option, "Would you like 5, or 7 passenger?" Just as you would with Expy and EL. You can make a viable business case when all you have to do is stretch the vehicle a bit and add sliders...

thanks for the segue

 

maybe we could look at this from another direction?**

 

the 2 C-Maxeses means there's 2 sizes already engineered for the structure

so

could there be other vehicles that will make use of this distinction? ...maybe even be more important to the two sizes than the C-Maxeses?**

 

I've wondered about Ford having its new Focus and Mercury having a slightly roomier sedan on the same platform -and- the possiblity that the longer one could be used for a Hybrid/BEV/Extenz whitespace vehicle too

(then perhaps the SWB version could yield a Comet/Capri sporty Merc too)

 

might be more wishful thinking but imho I might be getting my wish :D

 

 

 

** ie the C-Maxeses might be the "tail of the dog" just getting wagged first

Edited September 11, 2009 by 2b2

[NickF1011]

I will laugh if GM brings the Orlando, before Ford brings out the C-Max here. I have mentioned in the past that while Ford has the idea, GM will execute it quicker...watch this be one of them.

 

Quicker does not always mean better. And well, didn't GM already announce that the Orlando would be coming here? Ford has yet to say such a thing about the C-Max, so I would assume the Orlando (what a weak name for a car, by the way) would arrive here first.

[old_fairmont_wagon]

As someone that currently drives a SWB dodge caravan and most certainly WILL be shopping in this segment in the next two-three calendar years, I like what I see in the grand C-MAX. I currently have the Mazda5 penciled in as the next vehicle that I purchase, but the grand C-MAX MAY replace it. There are a few things that concern me...

 

1) Third row leg room looks to be even less than the Mazda5. The Mazda5 pretty much defines what I consider to be a bare minimum in what I am looking for. I will have to actually get some real measurements or see one in person before I change to this.

 

2) Fuel economy. The Mazda5, with the 2.3L and the old 4AT was not that great on gas. On the highway, it was passable, being a few mpg better than some of the more efficient full sized minivans. ITs city mpg was a real letdown. With mazda soon debuting advanced engine start-stop and having recently switched to a 5AT and maybe going to a 6AT, both of those mileage figures may improve. If ford uses a powertrain similar to the 2.5L 6AT combo that's in the Fusion, then this could be a VERY compelling vehicle. If they instead go with a 1.6L EB, it could only get better.

 

3) That center stack does look a bit busy to me, while its definitely not a show stopper, I'll have to get some seat time to see if it really is that busy in function.

 

As for the competition out there, lets look at the players in that segment...

 

Dodge/Chrysler has indeed dropped the SWB caravan, but replaced that product with the Dodge Journey. The Journey, as you know, is a small to midsized three row CUV. It is roughly the same size as the outgoing SWB caravan, but dropped the sliders for rear doors. To this day, while having a very similar asking price, it has yet to make the same sales levels as the SWB caravan it replaced. To me, this indicates that buyers abandoned that manufacturer at least partly due to that change. In addition, currently, Chrysler has reduced the purchase price of the base Caravan down to a level that crosses into the territory that was occupied by the higher end SWB caravans. So, there is a full sized minivan available in the market at the small minivan price.

 

Kia/Hyundai has been a mess with their minivan lineup, first offering a single WB Kia Sedona, then updating the platform and vehicle including offering a SWB model that was NOT a good solution as well as a Hyundai version. When you actually look at the SWB Sedona, you realize that it lost a few things that made the Sedona at least competitive: The third row seat no longer folded into the floor, there was less storage behind that seat than the Dodge caravan SWB, it wasn't that much cheaper than the LWB model, it still got the same below average gas mileage. So, claiming that the segment doesn't exist based on Kia dropping the SWB Sedona is a falacy as the product was poor to begin with. The othe reason that the SWB van was dropped was specifically the release of the Rondo, which can be had with 3 rows. Those two products would have competed with each other almost directly and Kia bet on the cheaper to produce and more efficient rondo in an era of rising gas prices.

 

GM has gone the CUV route with the Equinox and Vue. Their minivan was completely uncompetitive in the market due to MANY defficiencies. It wasn't efficient, it was poorly packaged, the buying public had a poor view of its reliability, it most certainly didn't look modern in any of its 3 or 4 iterations. Its midling size didn't do it any favors in any market being large enough to have poor fuel economy numbers, but smaller than other vans that were as or more efficient. Its last generation was a face lift of the previous generation and started with the little loved Chinese 3.4L engine. After the public was thoroughly soured on it, it moved to the actually quite good 3.9L VCT engine, but not soon enough to save it.

 

Honda has their Odyssey which is one of the two anchors of the market. They'd never mess with that. Their last smallish minivan (the gen I US odyssey which was also sold as the Isuzu Oasis) also lacked rear sliders and was small. For a while there, it was popular in the used car market due to its efficiency and size, but, was poorly packaged for US desires. They currently only compete with themselves with the loosely platform shared pilot.

 

Toyota has the Sienna, the other anchor in the market. They compete with themselves with the Highlander 3 row and now the RAV-4. They see no need to offer a small van due to having both of those products. For those looking for utility but not neccessarily needing the third row, they have the Venza now.

 

Mercedes has experimented with the R-class, but is priced out of this range. VW sells an overpriced Caravan clone and is considering resurecting the VW microbus concept from a few years back.

 

Mazda moves the Mazda5 well enough, especially considering their rather small dealership network. The base model is cheap enough, but the higher end model gets into full sized van territory. Mitsubishi doesn't even try anymore.

 

So, saying that there is any real competiton in that market aside from the Mazda5 and maybe the rondo (without sliders) and RAV-4 (with its completely unusable third row) is rediculous. Ford would be selling into a relatively open market against competitors that have a far smaller dealership footprint and a poorer overall market perception. Saying there is no market with how poorly that the prospective market has been handled by the competitors is rediculous too.

 

I personally know many families that are starting out with having children. Many don't want a full sized minivan. They want something fuel efficient, but with three rows and lots of utility. Of the one's I've had the chance to talk to, most DIDN'T EVEN KNOW THAT THE MAZDA5 EXISTED. Once I pointed it out to them, all were very interested and one has actually bought one. This is one of Mazda's problems, they still don't advertise many of their products that well. How many of you have even seen a Tribute ad recently? Ever seen a Mazda5 ad aside from the original zoom-zoom release adds from its first year? If you didn't have kids then, you probably wouldn't have even paid it any attention then.

 

Ford, on the other hand, can actually advertise products from time to time (Ford 500 and definitely the Freestyle/taurus x not withstanding). If they can get this over here, and that third row is usable by human beings that aren't contortionists, and actually market it, I'm sure that they will have a decent market for it.

[xr7g428]

Comparing what is going to sell with what used to sell, or even sells today is a dangerous proposition. America is rapidly becoming a much less prosperous place. We are going to be more like Europe whether we want to be or not. Face a few facts: oil (all energy really) is going to be higher either through market forces, cap and trade, or both. Jobs are not going to come back. Health care reform is going to increase the cost of employees, and the large number of unemployed puts a cap on raises, if not outright downward pressure on wages. We have blown our wad on the government stimulus program, and the tax burden on those still working is going to be tremendous. Add in the insecurity of the majority of those still employed, but afraid to spend and you have an economy resetting to probably 1976 levels.

 

Ford is moving wisely to bring as many low end products to the market as possible. Brands like BMW, Lexus, Infinity, Acura, Mercedes, and any other brand that depended on the customer feeling hopeful or prosperous are truly screwed. On the other hand, the table is set for the Chinese to come in and clean house if they can deliver a passable product at game changing prices.

 

Thinking in terms of what used to sell, is like preparing to win the last war.

[RichardJensen]

I disagree emphatically:

 

- Jobs will come back--in different sectors, as they always have.

 

- 'higher energy costs' have been tossed around as long as I can remember, and undoubtedly longer than that. I've yet to see any long term negative impact on the economy because of them.

 

- Ford's low end products are decidedly not low end. The Fiesta & Focus carry modest entry prices, but like the Fusion will see more sales on higher trim models.

 

The world, in short, isn't coming to an end, and China is no greater risk to take over the US than Japan was twenty years ago.

 

---

 

And as far as what 'used' to sell, minivans, for one, used to sell. They don't any more. Unless the demographic trend of smaller families begun later in life has suddenly reversed, there is no broad based demand for 'affordable' minivans, and that's why there are no products in that segment besides the Mazda5.

 

Look: Are Chrysler, Honda, and Toyota so stupid as to actually abandon a product that their (in this instance) far better market research suggests is viable?

 

I'm thinking NO.

[xr7g428]

I disagree emphatically:

 

- Jobs will come back--in different sectors, as they always have.

 

What is different this time around is the rate at which this will occur. For employers, there is a huge incentive to decrease the number of employees. It is idiocy to believe that making employees more expensive is going to do any thing but reduce the number of employees.

 

 

- 'higher energy costs' have been tossed around as long as I can remember, and undoubtedly longer than that. I've yet to see any long term negative impact on the economy because of them.

 

Short memory? I take it you are too young to remember what happened following the 1973 oil embargo, and the stock market crash that followed, or even perhaps 1979? Any connection between $147 barrel oil and our current economic situation? Which happened first, oil at $147 or the global economic collapse? Which happened first, oil at $147 or the bankruptcy of the big three? Long lasting? It took pretty much the entire decade of the '80's for us to recover back when we had the reserves to do so. High energy prices for US produced energy is one thing, importing the energy is another. Export $25 billion a month, like we did in August, from our economy for energy and see how that goes.

 

- Ford's low end products are decidedly not low end. The Fiesta & Focus carry modest entry prices, but like the Fusion will see more sales on higher trim models.

 

All I am saying is that this vehicle is cheaper than Flex. Everybody turns the knob down by a click or two...

 

The world, in short, isn't coming to an end, and China is no greater risk to take over the US than Japan was twenty years ago.

 

Yeah, those Japanese car companies sure got their butts handed to them ... . What? In 1975 the US speed limit was 55MPH. At that speed a Toyota did not feel like a death trap. We set the stage pretty well perfectly for the Japanese to enter the market: gas was rationed an or expensive, and we made their products more suitable for our roads with the 55MPH limit.

 

If we pass cap and trade or carbon taxes and then see market pricing drive oil to $4+, I would say that the stage is set for any one that can take the cost of ownership equation down a notch or two. And this time, I think the Japanese will be the ones losing the biggest slice of market share, just as they currently are to the Koreans.

 

---

 

And as far as what 'used' to sell, minivans, for one, used to sell. They don't any more. Unless the demographic trend of smaller families begun later in life has suddenly reversed, there is no broad based demand for 'affordable' minivans, and that's why there are no products in that segment besides the Mazda5.

 

Look: Are Chrysler, Honda, and Toyota so stupid as to actually abandon a product that their (in this instance) far better market research suggests is viable?

 

I'm thinking NO.

 

Are we sure we know what their future plans are? I am not arguing that what they did at the time they did it didn't make sense, only that the future looks different from the past.

 

All in all, I would prefer your version of the future, but we have to act based on what we think will happen, not what we wish might happen.

 

If we sack energy, health care, and consumer spending, which sector is going to produce the new jobs? Government?

[RichardJensen]

I take it you are too young to remember what happened following the 1973 oil embargo, and the stock market crash that followed, or even perhaps 1979

I do know that the economic theory connecting inflation with interest rates was barely getting its legs under it in the late 70s.

 

The 70s were still run on primitive and wrongly conceived Keynesian models. Energy prices, yes, provided a shock to the system, yes, but the sustained downturn was due more to ineffective monetary policy than anything else. Price controls? Who in their right mind would suggest price controls as a viable solution for problems today?

 

those Japanese car companies sure got their butts handed to them

How's the Japanese economy doing these days? What aspect of cozy business relationships and active government intervention are the Chinese doing differently than Japan? Japan's reckless capitalism set the stage for its current near two decade long recession as surely as the close-knit poorly overseen murky waters of US capitalism set the stage for the first and second Great Depressions here.

 

---

 

There are only rumors that Honda -may- be bringing over a 'tall wagon', and Chevrolet is doing the same with the Orlando. Nothing else is even being hinted at, caught testing, etc. And as well as Honda & Toyota have done with the minivan market, I think they can sniff out a trend at least as quickly as Ford can.

[Bored of Pisteon]

Think about it... I think this vehicle would be perfect for customers like these:

 

[joihan777]

I think the C-Max is PERFECT for smaller families in TIGHT living arrangements.

 

The first thing that little microvan reminded me of was the TINY garages in San Francisco and other mass urban areas. As an owner of Sienna, I know some people simply can't have a car too wide or too long.

 

However, those same people who may benefit from this vehicle are likely sold anything that starts with Toy- or Hon-.

Ford will have to prove themselves mightily to these folks if the C-Max is to become a success.

[retro-man]

Well, we have again the age-old conflict between those who believe that the U.S. market is so freakishly unique that everything has to be Americanized to sell here. Invariably the Mercur XR4-ti is brought up - which may have done better if they had just sold it as the German made Ford Sierra. The various BMWs, Mercedes, most Volkswagens, Volvos, and for that matter the vast majority of the Japanese offerings that are sold much as is, or identical to, their counterparts in their domestic markets (as was the case with the first several generations of the Accord that vaulted Honda to market preeminence here) are never brought up. This is the same thinking that has kept the Fiesta and Ka out until now, that resulted in us getting a Cadillac Catera instead of an Opel Omega; that kept the Ranger crew cab out of the US market for 20 years after it should have been introduced, leaving us instead with the Tupperware Tonka sizzle of the Explorer Sport-Trac for "American tastes" (with apologies to any owners). I'm a "vive la difference" kind of guy, but I'm also a more choice is good kind of guy. I don't want the market sanitized for my protection. Or yours.

 

Personally, I like the C-Max a lot. To the point of thinking I would be seriously interested in shopping it. Given the experience I am currently having with my T-Bird, Ford damned well better be interested in what I would be willing to shop. (Then again I'm broke now, so in reality I'm of no further use to Ford.) I had occasion at least 3 years ago to ride in the Toyota equivalent of this vehicle in Japan, and I liked it a lot then. I like the Mazda 5 (though the Toyota was a good deal more polished as I recall). It is no surprise to me that the 5 isn't lighting the sales charts on fire. If automotive merit were the only thing driving sales, the Mazda 6 would be selling in much closer numbers to the Camry and Accord. Mazda has roughly the same brand presence in this market as Mitsubishi (but better product overall - I know, I know .. the EVO). As for Toyota and the others being too smart to bring such a car here, well, they weren't too smart to build a huge plant in Texas to crank out Exxon Valdez sized Tundra's, were they?

 

You know which side of this argument I am coming down on. I'm glad they brought the Transit Connect here, and I think they should absolutely bring the C-Max here as well.

Edited September 12, 2009 by retro-man

[02MustangGT]

So if the C-Max comes to the USA, will they rename it? The car itself is nice, but I absolutely hate the name "C-Max".

[RichardJensen]

I don't like finding myself on the opposite side of a debate with retro-man & xr7g428--two people I highly respect. And I mean that in a real sense, not the age-old "if my distinguished colleague, the dunderhead, I mean, senator representing the state of ....." sense.

 

However, I would like to point out that Honda & Toyota got their toeholds in a different environment:

 

1) consider that market research & the willingness of Detroit executives to listen to >snort< customers when it came to such matters as feature content & reliability were very different in the 70s & early 80s.

 

Toyota & Honda, yes, basically sold JDM content with the steering wheel & pedals rejiggered, and that was key to their success, but what were they competing against? Bad iron from Detroit and a scattering of cult cars from Europe.

 

Toyota & Honda leapt to center stage in the US market when they released US spec midsize cars. To this day, the best selling cars in the biggest segment in the US are all-but exclusive to the US market (Camry & Accord).

 

2) While VW has established that there is a fringe that is willing to put up with the abuse that goes along with owning a European car simply for the cachet of owning a European car, such cachet cannot be the stock and trade of a brand that is as American as mom, apple pie and baseball. I would posit that a Ford Sierra would suffer from all but one of the maladies that afflicted the Merkur--it at least would have a pronouncable name.

 

3) Do recall that the US has had no shortage of B cars over the years.

 

Of them only the Toyota Tercel lasted long enough to have even two Chilton books dedicated to it.

 

---

 

The bottom line is that the American market would not be so freakishly unique if it were not so zealously studied and scrutinized and analyzed by companies looking for an angle, an advantage, a hook, etc.

 

The American public, too often, perhaps, suffers from getting exactly what it wants. The result being that anything not tailored to whatever segment is targeted will be passed over for something more exquisitely matched to that lowest common denominator.

 

Why does Pizza Hut serve a pizza with string cheese baked into the crust? Because people will buy it.

 

Surely the pizza chefs in Naples cringe at such an excess, but let's be realistic.... How well would gen-you-ine Neapolitan pizza sell here?

 

The thing is, you can't build ethics, aesthetics, or a moral code out of capitalism. If you try, well, you end up thinking that string cheese baked into the crust of a pizza is one of the highest achievements of man.

 

And while I admit it is tasty from time to time, it's certainly nothing you can hang your hat on.