TomServo92 Posted January 2, 2010 Share Posted January 2, 2010 You know what's interesting? The dinosaur BOF Explorer SUV that nobody wants anymore regularly outsells the hot new Flex CUV that everybody wants these days. I don't know about the rest of the country, but around here Explorers are carrying more incentives than Flexes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlRozzi Posted January 2, 2010 Share Posted January 2, 2010 You know what's interesting? The dinosaur BOF Explorer SUV that nobody wants anymore regularly outsells the hot new Flex CUV that everybody wants these days. first 11 months of 2009 Explorer 45,578 Flex 34,083 Grand Cherokee 46,231 Wrangler 75,246 People want offroad-capable 4X4s Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atvman Posted January 2, 2010 Share Posted January 2, 2010 (edited) first 11 months of 2009 Explorer 45,578 Flex 34,083 Grand Cherokee 46,231 Wrangler 75,246 People want offroad-capable 4X4s The GC is proof that a uni-body SUV can be a decent off road vehicle. I'm betting that the 2011 Grand Cherokee sells around 100K units its first year on the market, which is impressive for a semi-luxury SUV. Edited January 2, 2010 by atvman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted January 2, 2010 Share Posted January 2, 2010 (edited) first 11 months of 2009 Explorer 45,578 Flex 34,083 Grand Cherokee 46,231 Wrangler 75,246 People want offroad-capable 4X4s That's only one manufacturer, add in all the other CUVs and soft roaders from GM and Toyota/Honda/Hyundai. edit, Having said that, Jeep is exceptional in the market place, I doubt any other manufacturer could have that type of 4WD sales pull, it comes for decades of reputation off road. Edited January 2, 2010 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted January 2, 2010 Share Posted January 2, 2010 You know what's interesting? The dinosaur BOF Explorer SUV that nobody wants anymore regularly outsells the hot new Flex CUV that everybody wants these days. I'm sure the Explorer's lower price (not to mention it's incentives) has NOTHING to do with that... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2005Explorer Posted January 3, 2010 Share Posted January 3, 2010 first 11 months of 2009 Explorer 45,578 Flex 34,083 Grand Cherokee 46,231 Wrangler 75,246 People want offroad-capable 4X4s WRONG! People are moving in larger numbers back to cars. That is what is happening here. SUV's and CUV's are still part of the equation, but over the next decade the sedan will become king again. BTW I see you left out Escape. The Escape is closer to the size of the Wrangler. Escape 153,888 Your theory about people only wanting offroad-capable 4x4s is wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlRozzi Posted January 3, 2010 Share Posted January 3, 2010 Your theory about people only wanting offroad-capable 4x4s is wrong. I didn't say "only." I said they want them, that there is a market for them and I fear Ford may abandon it. The days of folks buying these vehicles as commuter cars is over, but there always has been a market for them. Ford really could use a vehicle like the original Bronco. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted January 3, 2010 Share Posted January 3, 2010 (edited) Here's the thing. The Wrangler is in a class by itself. It's not as though you could make a Wrangler-esque vehicle and sell another 75k of them. Nor does it seem likely that there are many Wrangler buyers who think, "man alive, I sure wish Ford made one of these." Jeep buying is, I think, a congenital defect. Jeep buyers breed Jeep buyers and thus is the brand sustained. I don't think there's much growth potential with the Wrangler 'form factor'. Edited January 3, 2010 by RichardJensen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ausrutherford Posted January 3, 2010 Share Posted January 3, 2010 There isn't enough money, a job good enough, or a house big enough, to make me live in CA. Sorry. Nice place to go to visit................ then come home. However, to each his/her own. As for the Natural Bridge................. yes, it is fantastic. Due to budget woes, the Town of Payson will probably take over the Natural Bridge, from the state. Especially considering that they kind of ran it into the ground. I love living here.............. btw. They need to advirtise it more. All you ever hear about AZ in Grand Canyon this, Lake Mead that...time for the Nat. Bridges shine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atvman Posted January 3, 2010 Share Posted January 3, 2010 (edited) I'm sure the Explorer's lower price (not to mention it's incentives) has NOTHING to do with that... I'm sure the fact that it hasn't seen any updates since 2006 isn't helping it though. If Ford were to replace the engines (drop the 4.0L for the 3.7L, drop the 4.6L for the 3.5L EB), update the chassis, give it an F150 grade interior, and give it fresh styling I bet it could sell very well without having to go FWD. Edited January 3, 2010 by atvman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted January 3, 2010 Share Posted January 3, 2010 Total Explorer sales for 2009 won't even crack 50,000. Looks like the whole buying demographic is moving elsewhere and it seems to be a permanent trend so I'm wondering whether the D4 Explorer will stem the tide or not. Maybe Ford is happy to settle for about another 5,000 vehicles/month being built at CAP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted January 3, 2010 Share Posted January 3, 2010 I'm sure the fact that it hasn't seen any updates since 2006 isn't helping it though. If Ford were to replace the engines (drop the 4.0L for the 3.7L, drop the 4.6L for the 3.5L EB), update the chassis, give it an F150 grade interior, and give it fresh styling I bet it could sell very well without having to go FWD. Oh, I agree with you to an extent. I've felt all along that with Ford's new, modern powertrains and an upgraded interior and exterior that the Explorer would sell a lot better. The problem is, though, that it's on it's own platform, so it still can't share a lot of parts with the rest of the lineup - that, I feel, is a big, if not the biggest reason for Explorer moving to D3/4, not so much that Ford wants to make it FWD/AWD. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlRozzi Posted January 3, 2010 Share Posted January 3, 2010 Here's the thing. The Wrangler is in a class by itself. It's not as though you could make a Wrangler-esque vehicle and sell another 75k of them. Nor does it seem likely that there are many Wrangler buyers who think, "man alive, I sure wish Ford made one of these." Jeep buying is, I think, a congenital defect. Jeep buyers breed Jeep buyers and thus is the brand sustained. I don't think there's much growth potential with the Wrangler 'form factor'. Actually Richard, I sort of see it another way. Markets can be shared or expanded, it depends on the quality of meeting the needs of a particular market. For example, GM didn't say Mustang is in a class by itself and can't be beat, but rather met the Mustang at its own game with the new Camaro and improved on performance, which is primarily what the buyers in that market niche are looking for. Today Camaro not only shares sales in the segment, but has expanded the segment and even outsells Mustang, causing Ford to improve on the Mustang's performance features next year. With regard to the original Bronco, if Ford had honed the vehicle's features over the years and met the needs of buyers within the niche, it's possible Bronco could be the Wrangler of today. Ford did just that with Explorer when they redesigned the Bronco II. Ford did such a great job at going beyond what buyers expected that Explorer was a huge hit in the '90s and outsold Grand Cherokee. In fact Ford has attempted to redefine the minivan segment by first abandoning a head-on battle with Chrysler in the segment and instead is trying to expand or redefine the wants and needs of the minivan niche with the Flex. Whether it is a successful strategy or not, it is at least an interesting marketing twist for Ford. Personally, I don't care what happens in the offroad vehicle segment, but it will never go away. It likely will settle at a level of market share more similar to historical averages. I also see an opportunity for Ford to perhaps use the Troller platform and do something along the lines of a small Bronco with that. If Ford could somehow out-Wrangler the Wrangler, by offering better features or expanded features coveted by the offroad-vehicle crowd, including perhaps better performance or fuel mileage, styling - whatever - then Ford could not only take sales from Wrangler, but maybe even expand the offroad vehicle market. It is more likely that Ford would not even consider doing anything like this until the overall market recovers and industry sales reflate to a sustainable level and until cash flow levels and profitability are restored for the industry as a whole. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted January 3, 2010 Share Posted January 3, 2010 (edited) I won't concede the Camaro/Mustang comparison as the Camaro was originally launched in 1967 in a far more fluid, immature, and open marketplace. I would love to see the percentage of Camaro buyers who DIDN'T know about the previous Camaro. --- While there are no shortage of Bronco enthusiasts, you are looking at both a more significant interval of time since the last Bronco and the Bronco as historically a far less important source of volume for Ford (vs. the Camaro & GM). IMO the Wrangler is the sole survivor of a niche that was never very big (Wrangler + Scout + Bronco < Mustang), and the cost of entering the segment coupled with the volume likely to be obtained does not justify the investment. Yes, the Bronco may have become the Wrangler, but arguably it couldn't because there was not enough that the Wrangler was doing 'wrong' for Ford to capitalize upon. --- Further, I would certainly hope that Ford, in the salad days to come, will not invest in marginal or unprofitable vehicle lines, as the past is full of instances of Ford taking its eye off the ball when it hit the top of its game (PAG & Edsel are fantastic examples). If you can't make a business case for the Bronco in these days, then I certainly hope a fat wad of cash lying around doesn't change the decision. Edited January 3, 2010 by RichardJensen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F250 Posted January 3, 2010 Share Posted January 3, 2010 (edited) I won't concede the Camaro/Mustang comparison as the Camaro was originally launched in 1967 in a far more fluid, immature, and open marketplace. By comparison the Bronco was originally launched in 1966. Edited January 3, 2010 by F250 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F250 Posted January 3, 2010 Share Posted January 3, 2010 IMO the Wrangler is the sole survivor of a niche that was never very big (Wrangler + Scout + Bronco < Mustang), and the cost of entering the segment coupled with the volume likely to be obtained does not justify the investment. Yes, the Bronco may have become the Wrangler, but arguably it couldn't because there was not enough that the Wrangler was doing 'wrong' for Ford to capitalize upon. --- Further, I would certainly hope that Ford, in the salad days to come, will not invest in marginal or unprofitable vehicle lines, as the past is full of instances of Ford taking its eye off the ball when it hit the top of its game (PAG & Edsel are fantastic examples). If you can't make a business case for the Bronco in these days, then I certainly hope a fat wad of cash lying around doesn't change the decision. Yes, Ford should ignore the estabished Wrangler,Bronco,FJ40 market and invest resources in the vastly more profitable commercial minivan market. :rolleyes: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted January 3, 2010 Share Posted January 3, 2010 By comparison the Bronco was originally launched in 1966. Thanks for the selective quotation. Yes. The Bronco was launched in '66, but it never outsold the Camaro. The car it was being compared with. Also, the Camaro was discontinued for seven years, and only four years elapsed between its cancellation and the announcement of the new model. By contrast the Bronco has been gone for thirteen years. So who cares when the Bronco was launched? It cannot be compared with the Camaro without the following caveats: - The Camaro was more important for GM than the Bronco was for Ford - The Camaro was off the market for only 7 years (and thought to be dead for only 4 years) - The Camaro was launched, as a new product with no antecedents in '67. Due to the length of time the Bronco has been off the market (13+ years), any new Bronco would have to take market share from the Wrangler, rather than draw replacement volume from Bronco owners. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted January 3, 2010 Share Posted January 3, 2010 Yes, Ford should ignore the estabished Wrangler,Bronco,FJ40 market and invest resources in the vastly more profitable commercial minivan market. :rolleyes: Transit Connect = sold around the world, Bronco = US only. The US is incremental volume for the Transit Connect, but would have to furnish nearly 100% of the volume for the Bronco. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F250 Posted January 3, 2010 Share Posted January 3, 2010 Transit Connect = sold around the world, Bronco = US only. The US is incremental volume for the Transit Connect, but would have to furnish nearly 100% of the volume for the Bronco. So you think a Bronco type vehicle would not sell in...South America? Troller... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlRozzi Posted January 4, 2010 Share Posted January 4, 2010 (edited) Jeep and Land Rover are examples of such vehicles sold internationally, Bronco could be too. Now that Ford has no internationally sold luxury brand, they are going to spend who knows how much to turn Lincoln into an internationally marketed luxury line. I think Bronco...or whatever such a vehicle may be named...could cost less to develop internationally than Lincoln could ever be. Ah, one more thought - edit - why not produce Bronco/or whatever in Brazil alongside Troller and import it here? Edited January 4, 2010 by AlRozzi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ausrutherford Posted January 4, 2010 Share Posted January 4, 2010 So you think a Bronco type vehicle would not sell in...South America? Troller... Someone thinks like i do! :happy feet: Also Middle Easterners love SUVs as well! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted January 4, 2010 Share Posted January 4, 2010 Total Explorer sales for 2009 won't even crack 50,000.Looks like the whole buying demographic is moving elsewhere and it seems to be a permanent trend so I'm wondering whether the D4 Explorer will stem the tide or not. I think this is what Ford is thinking: Trailblazer 2008 November sales 70791 2009 November sales 8715 Traverse 2008 November sales 4521 2009 November sales 82210 There is still a market out there for a Large CUV/Mid sized SUV type vehicle Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted January 4, 2010 Share Posted January 4, 2010 So you think a Bronco type vehicle would not sell in...South America? Troller... What might sell in SA, might not fly in US...it might be too crude for our market. I don't think Ford needs to be chasing the bottom end of the market again Now that Ford has no internationally sold luxury brand, they are going to spend who knows how much to turn Lincoln into an internationally marketed luxury line. I think Bronco...or whatever such a vehicle may be named...could cost less to develop internationally than Lincoln could ever be. Does it really matter if Ford needs a internationally marketed Luxury line up right now? They had a whole bunch of them and they didn't or couldn't do anything with them. I'd rather see Ford be a successful car maker and get Ford right and then worry about bringing Lincoln into the Big leagues internationally Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pioneer Posted January 4, 2010 Share Posted January 4, 2010 Total Explorer sales for 2009 won't even crack 50,000. Neither will the Flex, and probably the Taurus too. Guess they are both failures and should be discontinued too, huh? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PREMiERdrum Posted January 4, 2010 Share Posted January 4, 2010 Neither will the Flex, and probably the Taurus too. Guess they are both failures and should be discontinued too, huh? You know the answer to this one. Explorer: Dedicated platform with minimal shared components Flex/Taurus: Shares platform and many components with MKS, MKX, Edge, Upcoming Explorer... 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.