aneekr Posted December 16, 2011 Share Posted December 16, 2011 (edited) They don't seem to be able to make a business case for anything beyond vehicles that fit right into rental, government and commercial fleets. There is nothing wrong with this. FIN customers comprise nearly a third of Ford's U.S. sales so far this year. Kevin Koswick and his team at Ford's NAFLRO run a fine organization that is committed to its customer base. My employer's passenger car and light truck fleet is now up to nearly 90% Ford products. Edited December 16, 2011 by aneekr Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZanatWork Posted December 16, 2011 Share Posted December 16, 2011 So sick to death of the whining about Ranger, Panther and nit picky crap. Don't like Ford's offerings, go elsewhere, they will still find other buyers. The world isn't ending since the Grand Marquis is no longer sold. But, don't make up things like 'old Volvo bones' and conspiracy fears. Just get something else and move on with your life. Also sick of hearing about 'cramped seats', when it's really people have gained weight. You don't read well, do you? I mentioned my HEIGHT, maybe that word's kinda big for you? Put o Phonics Game on the Xmas list. I'm not pining for Panthers, either. I'd like Ford to come through with their own teases, especially the various rwd concepts we saw over and over again. It sucks that the other "Big 2" have CTSV (in two forms) and the Charger/300 available...with the rewarding drivings experiences that come with rear wheel drive, and a Ford guy can't get an equivalent. I HATE the recent Caddy styling, I'm no fan of Chrysler quality...but especially with the CTSV, you can get a rwd performance car to rival or better what the Germans offer. If Ford wants to actually play at that level, they need to bring the toys...or shut the f**k up and admit Lincoln is basically a blue-oval Buick. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stpatrick90 Posted December 16, 2011 Share Posted December 16, 2011 You don't read well, do you? I mentioned my HEIGHT, maybe that word's kinda big for you? Put o Phonics Game on the Xmas list. I'm not pining for Panthers, either. I'd like Ford to come through with their own teases, especially the various rwd concepts we saw over and over again. It sucks that the other "Big 2" have CTSV (in two forms) and the Charger/300 available...with the rewarding drivings experiences that come with rear wheel drive, and a Ford guy can't get an equivalent. I HATE the recent Caddy styling, I'm no fan of Chrysler quality...but especially with the CTSV, you can get a rwd performance car to rival or better what the Germans offer. If Ford wants to actually play at that level, they need to bring the toys...or shut the f**k up and admit Lincoln is basically a blue-oval Buick. Chrysler 300 Head Room (F/R) 38.6/37.9 Leg Room (F/R) 41.8/40.1 Hip Room (F/R) 56.2/56.1 Shoulder Room (F/R) 59.5/57.7 Buick LaCrosse Head Room (F/R) 38.0/37.3 Leg Room (F/R) 41.7/40.5 Hip Room (F/R) 55.2/53.9 Shoulder Room (F/R) 57.4/56.0 Ford Taurus Head Room (F/R) 39/37.8 Leg Room (F/R) 41.9/38.1 Hip Room (F/R) 56.3/55.8 Shoulder Room (F/R) 57.9/56.9 Toyota Avalon Head Room (F/R) 38.9/37.5 Leg Room (F/R) 41.3/40.9 Hip Room (F/R) 55.8/56.2 Shoulder Room (F/R) 59.4/58.2 Chevy Impala Head Room (F/R) 39.4/37.8 Leg Room (F/R) 42.3/37.6 Hip Room (F/R) 56.4/57.2 Shoulder Room (F/R) 58.7/58.6 The Taurus compares directly to its competitors in terms of interior dimensions Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZanatWork Posted December 16, 2011 Share Posted December 16, 2011 Chrysler 300 Head Room (F/R) 38.6/37.9 Leg Room (F/R) 41.8/40.1 Hip Room (F/R) 56.2/56.1 Shoulder Room (F/R) 59.5/57.7 Buick LaCrosse Head Room (F/R) 38.0/37.3 Leg Room (F/R) 41.7/40.5 Hip Room (F/R) 55.2/53.9 Shoulder Room (F/R) 57.4/56.0 Ford Taurus Head Room (F/R) 39/37.8 Leg Room (F/R) 41.9/38.1 Hip Room (F/R) 56.3/55.8 Shoulder Room (F/R) 57.9/56.9 Toyota Avalon Head Room (F/R) 38.9/37.5 Leg Room (F/R) 41.3/40.9 Hip Room (F/R) 55.8/56.2 Shoulder Room (F/R) 59.4/58.2 Chevy Impala Head Room (F/R) 39.4/37.8 Leg Room (F/R) 42.3/37.6 Hip Room (F/R) 56.4/57.2 Shoulder Room (F/R) 58.7/58.6 The Taurus compares directly to its competitors in terms of interior dimensions Yet the drive quality issue, which is what I started this with, seems to be avoided at all costs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted December 16, 2011 Share Posted December 16, 2011 (edited) Dimensions aside, I bet all those vehicles feel different when you sit in them.... Edited December 16, 2011 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted December 16, 2011 Share Posted December 16, 2011 Yet the drive quality issue, which is what I started this with, seems to be avoided at all costs. actually Zan, based on the 300s and Impalas and the odd Avalons that I get as Courtesy delivery turn ins, I would say the Taurus is a more solid piece athan any of them....drive an SHO and its game over.....havent driven the NEW 300 though, but based on numerous turn ins with usage, they FALL APART.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edstock Posted December 17, 2011 Share Posted December 17, 2011 Lincoln is basically a blue-oval Buick. Delightfully silly! For the last couple of decades, Buick has been a pretentious Chevrolet, faux "Bloatmaster" luxury at best, today, complete with rebadged Opels, or are they Vauxhalls? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted December 17, 2011 Share Posted December 17, 2011 (edited) IMO, Ford's Titanium trim level is a cut above Buick, a brand GM still treats very much like a trim level anyway... Edited December 17, 2011 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stpatrick90 Posted December 17, 2011 Share Posted December 17, 2011 Yet the drive quality issue, which is what I started this with, seems to be avoided at all costs. The posting of the interior dimensions was more in reference to your complaint of not being able to fit in the car...if you can't fit in the Taurus you are not going to fit into any of these cars as they essentially all mirror each other in terms of dimensions. As far as driving experience I can attest to the fact that the Taurus feels more solid, if not more agile than the LaCrosse, Impala, and Avalon. The 300 isn't as far ahead of the Taurus in driving dynamics as you would like to believe either from my experience with them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atvman Posted December 17, 2011 Share Posted December 17, 2011 RWD RWD RWD RWD RWD!!! BLAH BLAH BLAH!!!! The only people complaining about what Ford offers right now are those who buy the used ones for a dollar and a song. RWD > FWD I put my money where my mouth is and bought a brand new Charger R/T. The SHO simply isn't as good of a car. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AGR Posted December 17, 2011 Share Posted December 17, 2011 AGR, Akriby, FordByuer, TImm, thanks for all of your contributions from The Department of Irrelevant Sideline Commentators. lol You guys are obviously far more upset about the fact that I got rid of that POS than I am. I couldn't be happier about it. Get over yourself, I couldn't care less what you drive. Stpatrick90 had it right, my post was one of ridicule. If you post here, you are purportedly an auto(and more specifically Ford) enthusiast. Any enthusiast worth his or her salt wouldn't be caught dead in a Corolla. The brainless, boring masses buy Corollas because CR tells them to, and because they only want a car that gets them from point A to point B...so I guess we can put you in that category. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edstock Posted December 17, 2011 Share Posted December 17, 2011 RWD > FWD I put my money where my mouth is and bought a brand new Charger R/T. The SHO simply isn't as good of a car. Nice car, congratulations! As to its comparison with the SHO, you're entitled to your opinion. IIRC, the SHO is bigger and heavier. Sure wish the Fusion was available with the SHO powertrain. As to RWD > FWD, certainly, but AWD > RWD, which is one reason why it was banned in F1, and why the WRC top classes are AWD: it works better. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atvman Posted December 17, 2011 Share Posted December 17, 2011 Nice car, congratulations! As to its comparison with the SHO, you're entitled to your opinion. IIRC, the SHO is bigger and heavier. Sure wish the Fusion was available with the SHO powertrain. As to RWD > FWD, certainly, but AWD > RWD, which is one reason why it was banned in F1, and why the WRC top classes are AWD: it works better. A proper AWD set-up probably is the quicker way to get around a race track, especially when weight to power ratio is extreme (F1) or when surfaces are less than ideal (WRC). However, Ford's AWD system isn't a proper AWD system, it's FWD with the rear wheels kicking in every now and then. It's better suited to bad weather than performance. You have to look at Subaru or Audi if you want real AWD. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edstock Posted December 17, 2011 Share Posted December 17, 2011 You have to look at Subaru or Audi if you want real AWD. You're entitled to your opinion. Trouble is, nobody really knows what the Ford AWD system is really capable of, for high-performance through the twisties. That's because the only HO AWD sled is the SHO Taurus, which is big and heavy. The only EB 3.5 Fusions are secreted away in the Ford engineering parking, because, AFAIK, there are no HO powertrain parts available from other sources, short of buying the same sequential AWD gearbox that Pro-Drive and others use to replace the "real" AWD in the stock Subie for the WRC car. So, nobody outside Ford Engineering really knows how a 3,200 lb AWD Ford with 400 hp will do. Not me, not you. Be nice to find out; I think you will be surprised, even with Ford's improper AWD system, but that's just my opinion. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted December 17, 2011 Share Posted December 17, 2011 You're entitled to your opinion. Trouble is, nobody really knows what the Ford AWD system is really capable of, for high-performance through the twisties. That's because the only HO AWD sled is the SHO Taurus, which is big and heavy. The only EB 3.5 Fusions are secreted away in the Ford engineering parking, because, AFAIK, there are no HO powertrain parts available from other sources, short of buying the same sequential AWD gearbox that Pro-Drive and others use to replace the "real" AWD in the stock Subie for the WRC car. So, nobody outside Ford Engineering really knows how a 3,200 lb AWD Ford with 400 hp will do. Not me, not you. Be nice to find out; I think you will be surprised, even with Ford's improper AWD system, but that's just my opinion. Any FWD-AWD system that can divert 90% of the torque to the rear wheels on take off is pretty good in my books. The only quibbles you will get from people will be engine over hang or weight over the front wheels affecting dynamics. To what degree that is a deal breaker is anyone's guess, but I suspect it's acceptable to 90% of the market and enthuiasts have to look elsewher...and pay a lot more to get that satisfaction they crave at ten tenths driving.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted December 17, 2011 Share Posted December 17, 2011 A proper AWD set-up probably is the quicker way to get around a race track, especially when weight to power ratio is extreme (F1) or when surfaces are less than ideal (WRC). However, Ford's AWD system isn't a proper AWD system, it's FWD with the rear wheels kicking in every now and then. It's better suited to bad weather than performance. You have to look at Subaru or Audi if you want real AWD. What you don't know about Ford's AWD system would fill a warehouse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted December 17, 2011 Share Posted December 17, 2011 (edited) What you don't know about Ford's AWD system would fill a warehouse. You know what RJ, I'm simply amazed by people's impressions of Subaru and others. Because they have a switchable AWD system, it's seen as superior to Ford's system, a system that automatically chooses and constantly adjusts those parameters to get the best real time mix..... How does Ford break that negativity, a dial with Auto, 90-10, 50-50, 10-90? Do they really need to do anything at all? More education- informative advertisements? Edited December 17, 2011 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edstock Posted December 18, 2011 Share Posted December 18, 2011 You know what RJ, I'm simply amazed by people's impressions of Subaru and others. Because they have a switchable AWD system, it's seen as superior to Ford's system, a system that automatically chooses and constantly adjusts those parameters to get the best real time mix..... How does Ford break that negativity, a dial with Auto, 90-10, 50-50, 10-90? Do they really need to do anything at all? More education- informative advertisements? I would suggest that the complete absence of any high performance AWD Ford sedans except for the SHO might have something to do with it? Compared to say Subaru, Audi, VW, Volvo, Porsche, etc? The complete absence of AWD components from Ford Racing/Ford dealer parts counter for enthusiasts might also be slowing perception. Apparently legal considerations prevent some dude who wants to hop up his 4 year-old Fusion from buying those kinds of parts. Somehow, this doesn't seem to affect the ricers, though. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papilgee4evaeva Posted December 18, 2011 Share Posted December 18, 2011 Dimensions aside, I bet all those vehicles feel different when you sit in them.... I've sat in all of them, and they all feel markedly different. And for me, being average height (5'10"), it's all about the sightlines. You know what RJ, I'm simply amazed by people's impressions of Subaru and others. Because they have a switchable AWD system, it's seen as superior to Ford's system, a system that automatically chooses and constantly adjusts those parameters to get the best real time mix..... How does Ford break that negativity, a dial with Auto, 90-10, 50-50, 10-90? Do they really need to do anything at all? More education- informative advertisements? Part of Subaru's allure is the longitudinally-mounted flat engine, which has to help the handling characteristics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted December 18, 2011 Share Posted December 18, 2011 How does Ford break that negativity, a dial with Auto, 90-10, 50-50, 10-90? Do they really need to do anything at all? That sort of dial is impossible with Ford's Intelligent AWD system And no, they don't need to do anything at all. The people that compare Ford unfavorably with Subaru and Audi will never be satisfied with a Ford product, and should not be pandered to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GT-Keith Posted December 18, 2011 Share Posted December 18, 2011 (edited) A proper AWD set-up probably is the quicker way to get around a race track, especially when weight to power ratio is extreme (F1) or when surfaces are less than ideal (WRC). However, Ford's AWD system isn't a proper AWD system, it's FWD with the rear wheels kicking in every now and then. It's better suited to bad weather than performance. You have to look at Subaru or Audi if you want real AWD. What is a proper AWD system? Is it one with a 2-speed transfer case? Engine-torque vectoring? Brake-torque vectoring? Ford's engines are transversely mounted, so of course it will be FWD-biased. The comparison to Audi escapes me. Acura also uses transversely mounted engines and it's AWD system is arguably more sophisticated than Audi's. Heck, the complaint from Motor Trend was that the SH-AWD's limits where 'too high.'(at least for the road) SH-AWD v. Quattro: While the TL delivers slightly more vertical motion when driving aggressively, say, at 7/10ths, its limits are nevertheless higher than the A4's, always egging you on to approach another tenth. Much of that egging comes courtesy of the 3.7-liter V-6, whose racy rhythm above 5000 rpm is literally music to the ears. Problem is, for routine, public driving -- even of the spirited sort -- that slim window from 7 to 10/10ths isn't one normally entered. If, however, autocrossing or racetrack activities routinely make the calendar, then the TL is the better, more capable choice. My link Again, what is a proper AWD system and where is your proof that your version is superior? Edited December 18, 2011 by GT-Keith Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted December 18, 2011 Share Posted December 18, 2011 A 'proper' system is always operational, even if it means pointless parasitic losses, and is installed in a not-Ford product. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papilgee4evaeva Posted December 18, 2011 Share Posted December 18, 2011 A 'proper' system is always operational, even if it means pointless parasitic losses, and is installed in a not-Ford product. Wasn't the last such system by Ford used in previous Explorers/Mountaineers/Aviator(s)? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted December 18, 2011 Share Posted December 18, 2011 (edited) A 'proper' system is always operational, even if it means pointless parasitic losses, and is installed in a not-Ford product. LOL. But then you have the 4WD brigade with their switchable transfer cases and free wheeling hubs..... That's a different market segment I know but it points out that the expectations of the vehicle segment should govern what is acceptable and what is not ......by gauging buyer uptake of technology. Edited December 18, 2011 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted December 18, 2011 Share Posted December 18, 2011 Wasn't the last such system by Ford used in previous Explorers/Mountaineers/Aviator(s)? Yes, Ford used a fulltime system on some of those products. http://media.ford.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=24795 The V-6 Mercury Mountaineer uses a center differential that constantly splits torque 40 percent to the front wheels and 60 percent to the rear wheels. Unlike the part-time system, the wheels themselves turn at different speeds, eliminating the binding that part-time systems exhibit when cornering. The ControlTrac system powered world champion off-road trucks in '93 and '94. 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.