akirby Posted May 5, 2014 Share Posted May 5, 2014 Yes, but that's not to say they will always arrive first at the dealer. If Ford is producing a particular configuration one day, they aren't going to throw a retail order of a significantly different configuration in there just to make sure it gets done first. Then there could always be parts delays for a particular configuration. Plenty of reasons a dealer will get dealer stock before a custom order. But the point is Ford does everything possible to ensure retail orders are built and delivered before dealer stock. Suffice it to say that a dealer stock order from a specific dealer would never be built ahead of a retail order from the same dealer unless there was a parts hold. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted May 5, 2014 Share Posted May 5, 2014 These are just growing pains from switching to global platforms and suppliers as quickly as possible. The benefit is huge cost savings. The downside is a lot of quality issues. This should go away as platforms mature. If they have these problems on the new CD4 based platforms then that will be very troubling and could mean that Ford has cut too many corners. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted May 5, 2014 Share Posted May 5, 2014 But the point is Ford does everything possible to ensure retail orders are built and delivered before dealer stock. Suffice it to say that a dealer stock order from a specific dealer would never be built ahead of a retail order from the same dealer unless there was a parts hold. actually thats not true, when a new model is first released they build stock uniits first, then they go into a batch and hold...stock units arrive first....drives me crazy, one would think Retail orders would take priority...they dont...its REALLY frustrating... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoonerLS Posted May 5, 2014 Share Posted May 5, 2014 actually thats not true, when a new model is first released they build stock uniits first, then they go into a batch and hold...stock units arrive first....drives me crazy, one would think Retail orders would take priority...they dont...its REALLY frustrating... Pssst--see post #90. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted May 5, 2014 Share Posted May 5, 2014 actually thats not true, when a new model is first released they build stock uniits first, then they go into a batch and hold...stock units arrive first....drives me crazy, one would think Retail orders would take priority...they dont...its REALLY frustrating... Dean - I already explained that a few posts ago. If they were to build the Retail orders first they could end up sitting at the factory for weeks or months waiting for inspection and repairs. I think this actually happened with the mustangs a few years ago. By waiting until the OK to Buy is given to start building retail orders they can ship retail orders directly off of the assembly line without further delay. So it might be a 2-3 week delay but that's far better than a 2-3 month delay. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
351cid Posted May 5, 2014 Share Posted May 5, 2014 Taking the Blue I.V. out of my veins... I am a little concerned with Ford's future. Not meaning going out of business , but keeping their new customers and maintaining sales volume. Here's my opinion or should I say my experience. My last two new Ford's ( 2011 F-150 FX4 and 2014 Fusion Titanium) have been the worst I've ever owned. Both have been back to the dealer more than my previous 10 new Fords. Let's also not count my 2008 F250 6.4L because that also saw the dealer way too much and had quite a few recalls along with a oil leak they couldn't find or fix. My F-150 still has a driveline clunking issue that can't be fixed even when they had the truck for over a month. Being on F-150 forums this is a MAJOR problem even through the new 2013's. The Fusion rattles like a '89 Hyundai and has electrical glitches. Another HUGE problem will be with the EcoBoost engines. That's pretty much all they offer now and the vast majority of owners on forums and in public talk about how miserable their mileage is. Yes, driving habits make a difference, but even when we try to get close to the EPA figure, it doesn't happen. Even keeping up with traffic should net you pretty close, but I'm 6mpg off in my truck and the fusion is barely averaging the city claimed mpg with 60% freeway and 40% city driving (22mpg). Our Fusion which has been on three road trips has only managed 25 MPG on all highway runs with very little city driving. Mind you, this is keeping up with traffic in the fast lane so speeds vary between 68-80 mph. Our last Fusion with the 3.0L averaged 31.5 MPG going even faster around 75-85 mph on those trips. I wish they still offered that engine. These boosted motors do crap mpg wise with keeping up with traffic or being a little aggressive. Word of mouth is getting out to stay away from the EB unless you want great power, but crap MPG. Just this past weekend 4 people at the resort we were staying at complimented the car and asked about the engine. I didn't lie and once they heard what I said, they said "we've heard the same thing". This is the future engines which Ford is heading and has we worried. I will not buy another EB engine. They do nothing MPG wise with my driving style and I'm not alone. So if Ford doesn't offer non boosted power plants that make good power I'll be leaving. Just a couple of responses to your post. I have a 2013 Fusion with EB2.0L. We have a lifetime average of 26.8 mpg on this car with 19,800 miles (+/-). We regularly average 31-34 on the highway staying at 70-73 mph. I'm a truck driver so I know what a turbo does in relation to fuel usage. Driving habits make a huge difference. My Fusion also rattled. I took it to the dealer and they found that the headliner supports weren't wrapped during the build. They fixed it and now it sounds solid. You may have seen my thread on the seats, so I won't go into that. I've not had any issues with electrical gremlins, so no comment there. I too have some concerns about quality. This car does not seem to be up to the standard that our 2005 Five Hundred was / is. My son bought that car from us and it now has 185,000 miles on it. It's as solid as it was when we bought it in August 2005. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted May 5, 2014 Share Posted May 5, 2014 Dean - I already explained that a few posts ago. If they were to build the Retail orders first they could end up sitting at the factory for weeks or months waiting for inspection and repairs. I think this actually happened with the mustangs a few years ago. By waiting until the OK to Buy is given to start building retail orders they can ship retail orders directly off of the assembly line without further delay. So it might be a 2-3 week delay but that's far better than a 2-3 month delay. sorry mate....didnt see that...the whole process is a NIGHTMARE for sure, each of my last 5 cars was factory ordered and they took FOREVER.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpinedaddy Posted May 5, 2014 Share Posted May 5, 2014 My Fusion is not a pre-order though. It's a 2014 that for some reason isn't even scheduled to be built until week of May 26th. I see this as bad since the 2015 is set to begin being built last part of May as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minx88 Posted May 5, 2014 Share Posted May 5, 2014 While the ecoboost engines seem to fool the EPA very well I think they need to take more of a Mazda approach to get repeat customers regarding gettting the gas milage they expect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackHorse Posted May 6, 2014 Share Posted May 6, 2014 Nothing against the ecoboost stuff but I'm just wondering if Ford wouldn't have been better off going with superchargers as opposed to turbo chargers. They are less prone to mechanical failure than turbos and they boost the power across the whole power band as opposed to having to spool up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted May 6, 2014 Share Posted May 6, 2014 There is NO spool up on an ecoboost engine. Not even a hint. Reliability problems are a thing of the past. Superchargers rob engine power - turbos do not. The only thing wrong with the ecoboost engines is the first gen had cooling issues which compromises the fuel effficiency and the programming is not mature. The 2nd gen engines (1.0L, 1.5L, 2.3L and 2.7L) should not have the same problems. It's also a fallacy to think these are "fooling" the EPA test. They're just more sensitive to variations in driving style than NA engines. So whereas a NA engine might have a real world range of 22 - 26 mpg city the ecoboost might be 20-28. It's possible to get better mpg on the top end but it's also easier to get less on the low end. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CurtisH Posted May 6, 2014 Share Posted May 6, 2014 (edited) Nothing against the ecoboost stuff but I'm just wondering if Ford wouldn't have been better off going with superchargers as opposed to turbo chargers. They are less prone to mechanical failure than turbos and they boost the power across the whole power band as opposed to having to spool up. Superchargers have greater parasitic losses. I believe the turbos used with Ecoboost engine are very small and they spool up very quickly. That said, I do like superchargers. Edit: Akirby beat me to it. And did a better job of explaining it. Edited May 6, 2014 by CurtisH Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackHorse Posted May 6, 2014 Share Posted May 6, 2014 Superchargers have greater parasitic losses. I believe the turbos used with Ecoboost engine are very small and they spool up very quickly. That said, I do like superchargers. Edit: Akirby beat me to it. And did a better job of explaining it. I see. Well thanks anyway as I have akirby on ignore and don't really care to read anything he has to say. I was just wondering why they chose turbos over superchargers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrewfanGRB Posted May 6, 2014 Share Posted May 6, 2014 I see. Well thanks anyway as I have akirby on ignore and don't really care to read anything he has to say. I was just wondering why they chose turbos over superchargers. LOL. You're a real piece of work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted May 6, 2014 Share Posted May 6, 2014 I have akirby on ignore because I don't care about facts or common sense or the truth about anything. Well, at least you're honest about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bdegrand Posted May 6, 2014 Share Posted May 6, 2014 63k F-Series 16.6k Explorer 26k Fusion Focus down, C-Max down, MKZ down. Not a bad month. Why does the news media always attack Focus sales like this past month yet not mention a negative word about Chevy Cruz which was down considerably more from the previous month? I'm just saying... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasonj80 Posted May 6, 2014 Share Posted May 6, 2014 My Fusion is not a pre-order though. It's a 2014 that for some reason isn't even scheduled to be built until week of May 26th. I see this as bad since the 2015 is set to begin being built last part of May as well. Fusion Job 1 isn't until mid-June for FRAP, and mid-July for Hermosillo. Order banks opened on April 14 but I haven't seen either the '15 Fusion or MKZ posted. There were some roomers that the '15's would receive a new interior center stack. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted May 6, 2014 Share Posted May 6, 2014 Speed plays a huge role in Ecoboost MPG ratings, well at least in the 2.0L case... My parents FWD Escape can get 32 MPG on I95 if they keep their speed at 65 MPH when they visit me in MD...it starts creaping down to high 20s once you start going faster then that. A buddy of mine has a Ecoboost F-150 and he can get around 20-21MPG on the highway...he lends the car to his wife (with a bit of a lead foot) and it goes down to 16-17 MPG. My SHO (which isn't a good real world case since I have a tune on my car), gets about 19 MPG driving 15 miles of highway with traffic lights to work. Best MPG I got was 25 MPG on the PA Turnpike going out to Carile for the Ford Nationals. I got about 23 MPG a few weeks ago driving mostly highway in Jersey. I have a buddy who has a SHO has more mods then I do and I've seen his display show 26 MPG+... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted May 6, 2014 Share Posted May 6, 2014 But the point is Ford does everything possible to ensure retail orders are built and delivered before dealer stock. Suffice it to say that a dealer stock order from a specific dealer would never be built ahead of a retail order from the same dealer unless there was a parts hold. That could very well be, behind the scenes. But customers don't see that. They see the months worth of stock orders that were already allocated being delivered after their order was placed. Either way, the dealer isn't going to be particularly concerned about a custom order not being delivered quickly as long as their dealer stock remains full. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted May 6, 2014 Share Posted May 6, 2014 While the ecoboost engines seem to fool the EPA very well I think they need to take more of a Mazda approach to get repeat customers regarding gettting the gas milage they expect. The Mazda approach to ever-shrinking sales? They may get the gas mileage right, but it seems almost everything else is going wrong for them lately. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackHorse Posted May 6, 2014 Share Posted May 6, 2014 The Mazda approach to ever-shrinking sales? They may get the gas mileage right, but it seems almost everything else is going wrong for them lately. I hadn't heard the skyactive engines were having issues. What's going on with them? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted May 6, 2014 Share Posted May 6, 2014 I hadn't heard the skyactive engines were having issues. What's going on with them? I was speaking more about the strength of the brand overall, not anything specific of the engines. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasonj80 Posted May 6, 2014 Share Posted May 6, 2014 I hadn't heard the skyactive engines were having issues. What's going on with them? Haven't heard anything bad about the Gas versions, but the new Diesel has been a disaster. (Why it hasn't launched here) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackHorse Posted May 6, 2014 Share Posted May 6, 2014 I was speaking more about the strength of the brand overall, not anything specific of the engines. Got it. I had a Mazda 3 for awhile and it was a pretty good little car. Had a nice interior, decent motor, got pretty good mpg. Traded it for the Wrangler. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted May 6, 2014 Share Posted May 6, 2014 Got it. I had a Mazda 3 for awhile and it was a pretty good little car. Had a nice interior, decent motor, got pretty good mpg. Traded it for the Wrangler. Yeah my Mazda6 was a solid car as well, but it was a 5-speed. Just got kinda tired of driving a manual every day with traffic getting ever worse around here and they bloated up its replacement with the redesign and I lost interest. Figured if I was gonna go with a bloated car I'd get one that actually had some utility to it. 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.