Jump to content

Trenton New Jersey Police


97svtgoin05gt

Recommended Posts

A story in the Trentonian the other day indicated that the Dodge Chargers are not holding up well at all. To further exasperate the problem, parts seem to be almost impossible to get a hold of. Many of the Chargers are being parted out to keep others going. Trenton says they will promptly be switching back to Ford and GM products for police cruisers.

 

Dodge just can't seem to put together a reliable product. I don't see them lasting much longer.

 

 

 

http://www.trentonian.com/articles/2009/11...75604551291.txt

Edited by 97svtgoin05gt
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A story in the Trentonian the other day indicated that the Dodge Chargers are not holding up well at all. To further exasperate the problem, parts seem to be almost impossible to get a hold of. Many of the Chargers are being parted out to keep others going. Trenton says they will promptly be switching back to Ford and GM products for police cruisers.

 

Dodge just can't seem to put together a reliable product. I don't see them lasting much longer.

 

 

 

http://www.trentonian.com/articles/2009/11...75604551291.txt

serves the Municipalities right, its what you get for basing decisions PURELY on the botom line rather than established criterior and deserved reputations and track records....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dodge just can't seem to put together a reliable product. I don't see them lasting much longer.

 

With the pending death of the Crown Vic, let's just see what Ford is going to offer the Police market before we get all high and mighty. If it is a stripped down Taurus, I have a very strong feeling Dord won't have a reliable product either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure what would give you that feeling given Ford's recent success building reliable products.

 

Well, I have never really questioned Ford's products.

 

However, Police unit's are on a different level then "regular" vehicles. While the F150 is king (along with the other full size SUV's), building a car that can keep up with the wear and tear LEO's put it through is different then building a car for your average soccer mom. Considering the absolute tank the CV is, even if the replacement is very good, it still might not be as good to what LEO's are use to. And if the replacement isn't as good as to what they are use to, perception will be it is a bad vehicle. And until we hear more, going from a RWD V8 BOF car to a FWD V6 uni-body spells trouble IMO

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I've seen Chargers in NYC. I can't believe that Trenton uses equipment harder than NYC. I don't hear about that city's fleet falling apart. This sounds like a bit of mis-management in the maintenance or even purchasing departments. I know there are other municipalties that use the Dodge. What's the story with them? These cars are expected to live up to a promise made by the manufacturuer. How many other places have experienced this problem? Maybe Trenton abuses their equipment, I don't know. It's just very strange, that's all. Here's my solution to Ford. Drop the CV and GM. Make the TC as usual and also offer a PE unit, all with the 5.4L V-8. Consolidate and conquer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The same could have been said about the product coming out of Chicago.

 

The D3 is a far newer product and had less fleet sales then the Panthers, which have been 90%+ Fleet for a long time. Just took them 3 tries to get the D3 right ;)

 

Plus the D3 is sorta a cash cow now with the upper end Flex's and the upcoming Explorer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With the amount of investment the D3's have had, and where a few of them are being built, it will be a long time before they can be considered a cash cow.

 

In all seriousness, the first update prob cost next to nothing to do and the '10 update to the Taurus was shared with the MKS and was pushed up year. I don't think Ford was being stupid and blowing all sorts of money on the project trying to fix it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In all seriousness, the first update prob cost next to nothing to do and the '10 update to the Taurus was shared with the MKS and was pushed up year. I don't think Ford was being stupid and blowing all sorts of money on the project trying to fix it.

 

I wouldn't use the term "blowing", but they certainly spent a lot more money then they had planned. From everything I have seen, it looks like they have finally got it right. But it wasn't cheap getting to this point. And for a company that wasn't rolling in extra cash, those screw ups cost the company a lot.

 

Plus, lets see where they go with their new Police Interceptor. If it is a D3, I see Ford losing a huge portion of the LEO market. Not to mention unless they do enough (ie spend money) to make the PI look different than the Taurus, I see Taurus sales being effected negatively. And realistically, the extra money the D3's got, might have come from the GRWD program. And that's what could have killed it. So if the D3's were done right the first time, Ford has the money to go towards the GRWD, and then not only could the Taurus be a segment leader, Ford could keep it's strangle hold on the Police/Taxi market.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CV is old news, it will be gone. It has become a niche platform with nothing in common with other Ford cars. A dedicated platform, in low production, with a dedicated plant, is a script for losses. Ford has to get something that is on a good selling platform for the various markets the CV served if they want to be profitable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't use the term "blowing", but they certainly spent a lot more money then they had planned. From everything I have seen, it looks like they have finally got it right. But it wasn't cheap getting to this point. And for a company that wasn't rolling in extra cash, those screw ups cost the company a lot.

 

I don't agree, the only thing that was out of the ordinary for the Taurus/500 program was the 2010 was pushed up a year

 

Timeline:

 

2005- Ford 500 Launched

 

2008- Ford 500 Renamed Taurus, new Tribar grill, tail lights and bumpers, no sheet metal changes. Changing the name was unexpected, but it really wasn't advertised, so I'm sure it didn't cost much-Mid cycle refresh to bring it into the current Ford "look"

 

2010 Taurus-All new tophat with new sheetmetal, platform updated to D4 standard that the MKS and Flex are based on

 

if you look at what Ford has done since 2005, you'll see that it has a pattern of a Launch, Update 3-4 yrs later then a new Top hat 5-6 years after launch, not to mention the "One Ford" Plan has made some big changes as they streamline what they are building, with some models getting faster updates then others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CV losing it's grip on taxi cabs as they will surely go with hybrids like NYC is doing. NYC also has hybrid Altima on the force. Cv is irrelevant if Ford doesn't keep RWD and even make them hybrid in some applications.

 

I think you're a little late on that statement. NYC tried ridding itself of the CV about two years ago, but found out very quickly (about 5 months) the Hybrids didn't hold up very well, and switched back. Although Hybrid technology is getting better, for right now it's pretty useless. The amount of money saved on gas with a Hybrid will be lost on the extra cost of purchasing the vehicle, maintaining the vehicle, and days lost as the car is sitting in the shop. Prompting Hybrids as the answer is as dumb as running around screaming about MMGW. Neither is true.

 

 

I don't agree, the only thing that was out of the ordinary for the Taurus/500 program was the 2010 was pushed up a year

 

Timeline:

 

2005- Ford 500 Launched

 

2008- Ford 500 Renamed Taurus, new Tribar grill, tail lights and bumpers, no sheet metal changes. Changing the name was unexpected, but it really wasn't advertised, so I'm sure it didn't cost much-Mid cycle refresh to bring it into the current Ford "look"

 

2010 Taurus-All new tophat with new sheetmetal, platform updated to D4 standard that the MKS and Flex are based on

 

if you look at what Ford has done since 2005, you'll see that it has a pattern of a Launch, Update 3-4 yrs later then a new Top hat 5-6 years after launch, not to mention the "One Ford" Plan has made some big changes as they streamline what they are building, with some models getting faster updates then others.

 

I agree with what you are saying as far as when refreshes should have taken place, but the reality is, the new 500/Taurus didn't sell worth a shit. And not selling as many units as expected, does affect the bottom line. The money to pay for the refresh was expected to come in from the D3, but it didn't. Meaning it had to come in from somewhere else.

 

Like I said, I think Ford has finally got the D3 right. And I believe their new way of running operations (more shared platforms and parts) will be successful. But I do wonder what was cut in order to fix the problems Bill Jr made

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sounds like the Dodge Sprinter/UPS issue. UPS is already scrapping their sprinters while still have the old style UPS trucks in service from the 80's. The main issue here is the new caprice and ford interceptor MAY (or may not) be better quality than the charger but parts are still going to be impossible to get.

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...