Edstock Posted October 7, 2014 Share Posted October 7, 2014 IMHO, CAFE means the Aviator is V-6 Explorer-derived, with a unique top hat, maybe track increase. Rumors have indicated that the next alloy Navigator should be rather special. After all, they've got the Cayenne Turbo "S" performance envelope to aim for, if SVT gets involved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted October 7, 2014 Share Posted October 7, 2014 I think Ford is doing one of its periodic business reviews, and as with the GRWD review back in 2011, proponents of certain plans are leaking those plans. Adding expense to the Explorer in order to provide an RWD Aviator when the MDX outsells its closest competitor by a 2:1 margin just----I can't fathom a world in which intelligent people acting in Ford's best interests pursue such a strategy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted October 7, 2014 Share Posted October 7, 2014 I think Ford is doing one of its periodic business reviews, and as with the GRWD review back in 2011, proponents of certain plans are leaking those plans. Adding expense to the Explorer in order to provide an RWD Aviator when the MDX outsells its closest competitor by a 2:1 margin just----I can't fathom a world in which intelligent people acting in Ford's best interests pursue such a strategy. I'm wondering if info is getting twisted around with the new Gator and Expedition that is getting worked on for 2017. The only thing RWD that would make a lick of sense is a Lincoln Coupe off the new Mustang, or even more outlandish, a Sedan based on the Mustang that would be the performance model slotted in-between the MKZ and MKS/Continental. Outside of the Explorers sales volume, making another RWD platform just for Lincoln or high end Ford products slotted above the Taurus makes no sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PREMiERdrum Posted October 7, 2014 Author Share Posted October 7, 2014 I think Ford is doing one of its periodic business reviews, and as with the GRWD review back in 2011, proponents of certain plans are leaking those plans. Adding expense to the Explorer in order to provide an RWD Aviator when the MDX outsells its closest competitor by a 2:1 margin just----I can't fathom a world in which intelligent people acting in Ford's best interests pursue such a strategy. Isn't the MDX also the cheapest entry in the segment? I'd anticipate this Aviator to be both larger and more expensive than the Acura. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted October 7, 2014 Share Posted October 7, 2014 (edited) The only thing RWD that would make a lick of sense is a Lincoln Coupe off the new Mustang, or even more outlandish, a Sedan based on the Mustang that would be the performance model slotted in-between the MKZ and MKS/Continental. Outside of the Explorers sales volume, making another RWD platform just for Lincoln or high end Ford products slotted above the Taurus makes no sense. This is my theory: If Ford is seriously considering a RWD range topping Lincoln sedan, Chinese volume is going to pay for it. The Chinese have a demonstrated appetite for large luxury sedans (large luxury CUVs, not so much). It's been several years since China became the #1 export destination for the 7-Series. I don't for a minute believe that you can pay for such a product with domestic volume: The US is full of old Town Cars. China is not. Ford can probably compete against BMW and MB's top line offerings in China. They absolutely cannot here. Any US sales would be 'gravy'. Edited October 7, 2014 by RichardJensen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted October 7, 2014 Share Posted October 7, 2014 (edited) Isn't the MDX also the cheapest entry in the segment? I'd anticipate this Aviator to be both larger and more expensive than the Acura. The MDX starts in the low to mid 40's and is roughly the size of the Explorer already. The RDX is smaller....roughly the size of the MKC/Escape. Edited October 7, 2014 by silvrsvt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted October 7, 2014 Share Posted October 7, 2014 Isn't the MDX also the cheapest entry in the segment? I'd anticipate this Aviator to be both larger and more expensive than the Acura. It costs about as much as the MKT, which should give you some idea just how much volume Ford is leaving on the table by having a poorly positioned FWD/AWD product. Volume that is probably more profitable on CD4.3 (or whatever they're calling it) than any ultra high end volume would be on a bespoke RWD chassis. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoonerLS Posted October 7, 2014 Share Posted October 7, 2014 The business case is still this: AWD on a RWD vehicle is significantly more expensive. RWD is more expensive, period. RWD presents more packaging difficulties in obtaining the same passenger volume from the same overall length/width. For a CUV, AWD availability is a requirement, so you really can't just consider FWD vs. RWD.How is RWD more expensive than AWD, and how does RWD present more packaging difficulties over AWD? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted October 7, 2014 Share Posted October 7, 2014 (edited) For a CUV, AWD availability is a requirement, so you really can't just consider FWD vs. RWD.How is RWD more expensive than AWD, and how does RWD present more packaging difficulties over AWD? First off, RWD is more expensive than FWD--that's why entry level cars are FWD--fewer parts, and I think, cheaper assembly. Secondly, if you're going to do FWD/AWD, the front drive shafts and differential are already placed relative to the engine. With RWD, they are not. RWD/AWD setups on trucks are simple: You just tuck the shafts/diff under the engine. With cars/CUVs, the differential typically has to be mounted to the side of the oilpan, and one of the halfshafts is connected to the differential via a complicated mechanism that involves sending output through the oilpan: http://media.caranddriver.com/images/media/51/2013-jaguar-awd-drivetrain-diagram-photo-499533-s-original.jpg Alternatively, the front axle output shaft can be integrated into the transmission, but this time you're routing output to the front wheels *through* the ATF oilpan---also, you have to move the engine far forward of the front axle centerline compromising driving dynamics.: The cost of doing this--coupled with the likelihood that a RWD Explorer would have a higher AWD take rate--suggests that you would rob the Explorer of significant gross margin in order to fund a low volume Lincoln derivative. Edited October 7, 2014 by RichardJensen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted October 7, 2014 Share Posted October 7, 2014 Can't you use the F150 Drivetrains including the 4x4/AWD components? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted October 7, 2014 Share Posted October 7, 2014 Packaging difficulties relate primarily to the location of the firewall relative to the front axle center line. FWD vehicles can move the firewall forward (as a general rule), thus increasing passenger volume relative to overall vehicle length. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted October 7, 2014 Share Posted October 7, 2014 (edited) Can't you use the F150 Drivetrains including the 4x4/AWD components? No. The F150 has a 4x4 system. It's not designed for continuous or high speed operation (for instance, it cannot be used to provide traction under acceleration, nor does it provide adjustable torque splits, AFAIK), and it runs under the engine. The closest alternative would be the SUV Explorer AWD system, which also ran under the engine. But you're not going to be able to sell a CUV with an SUV step-in height. Edited October 7, 2014 by RichardJensen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted October 7, 2014 Share Posted October 7, 2014 This the Grand Cherokee system. As far as I can tell the Ford system runs to the side of the engine just like GC, not under the engine. You can use the transfer case from the Expedition or Navigator and get full time AWD capability. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted October 7, 2014 Share Posted October 7, 2014 (edited) Yeah. That's going to work great on a sedan. Also, you'll note that the passenger side axle runs *under* the engine, which was what I meant in my earlier reference, not that the diff sat under the engine. And let me forestall a suggestion that the sedan would use a different AWD configuration: -- The placement of the engine in relationship to the front axle centerline plays a significant role in the location of the firewall and the crash mitigation strategy. -- In turn, the means used to power the front wheels plays a significant role in the relationship of the engine to the front axle centerline. With the Jeep solution demonstrated above, the engine is generally, but not entirely aft of the front axle centerline. With the more or less 'off-the-shelf' AWD transmission shown in my post, the engine is entirely ahead of the front axle centerline (and this in fact, is the reason why Quattro Audis still have massive front overhangs). -- Accommodating radically different AWD solutions for a CUV and a sedan would require severely compromised front structure, including a sizable gap between the back of the engine and the firewall for the CUV variant. -- Conversely, Ford could, a la BMW, engineer a unique AWD system that matches this putative CUV arrangement on a sedan, but if they go to that much trouble, it would make even more sense to use that solution on the CUV as well in order to increase volume for cost amortization purposes. Edited October 7, 2014 by RichardJensen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted October 7, 2014 Share Posted October 7, 2014 Why about a "hybrid" AWD setup....traditional RWD powering the rear wheels with electric motors up front. Or even vice versa for that matter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2b2 Posted October 7, 2014 Share Posted October 7, 2014 (edited) Why about a "hybrid" AWD setup....traditional RWD powering the rear wheels with electric motors up front. Or even vice versa for that matter. & "Virtual-Awd" Edited October 7, 2014 by 2b2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted October 7, 2014 Share Posted October 7, 2014 Why about a "hybrid" AWD setup....traditional RWD powering the rear wheels with electric motors up front. Or even vice versa for that matter. You'd have to force all Explorer AWD buyers to buy a hybrid and you'd be turning the hybrid into a no-cost option. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papilgee4evaeva Posted October 7, 2014 Share Posted October 7, 2014 So, I'm going to have to look up how Infiniti arranges the FM platform to accommodate ATTESA E-TS on everything (but the Z). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bzcat Posted October 7, 2014 Share Posted October 7, 2014 (edited) Why about a "hybrid" AWD setup....traditional RWD powering the rear wheels with electric motors up front. Or even vice versa for that matter. You are describing Lexus RX 400h and Toyota Highlander Hybrid. They are FWD powered by the engine and RWD powered by electric motor. Together, they are AWD. This is certainly something Ford should do on the next Explorer regardless of whether there is a Lincoln or not. Any vehicle coming out after 2017 model year without hybrid option is automatically DOA in my opinion. As for the whole RWD debate, I think someone pointed out all the way back on page 1 that the source is TTAC. Everything they ever reported turned out to be false. If TTAC says Lincoln has RWD CUV coming, I feel 99.999999999% confident in saying there will be no such thing. Edited October 7, 2014 by bzcat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ANTAUS Posted October 7, 2014 Share Posted October 7, 2014 Suddenly I don't feel a rush to make a run to the Tesla store to purchase my next vehicle...seems like Lincoln might have something for me... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted October 7, 2014 Share Posted October 7, 2014 So, I'm going to have to look up how Infiniti arranges the FM platform to accommodate ATTESA E-TS on everything (but the Z). They run a driveshaft through the oil pan which has a differential bolted onto one side of it. That solution is perfectly workable on most--if not all--RWD CUVs and sedans Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted October 7, 2014 Share Posted October 7, 2014 (edited) the source is TTAC They still running that Ford deathwatch series? Man, they must be up to 900 or a thousand by now. Edited October 7, 2014 by RichardJensen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted October 7, 2014 Share Posted October 7, 2014 (edited) So I read the TTAC article (rather, I skimmed it--it doesn't deserve close reading). Lead is this sentence includes this: "Thanks to TTAC‘s sources inside the Blue Oval (the same ones who scuttled rumors of a revived Ford GT)" Um. Yes. Elsewhere Kreindler has this to say about his sources at Ford: "Our sources are the people involved in these functions, and they were able to confirm that this program does not exist anywhere within Ford" Again: "Um. Yes." TTAC, which has pointedly savaged every Ford product released within recent memory, which had test fleet access revoked by Ford, has a cultivated network of Ford insiders feeding it -valid- information? Um. Yes. Whatever you say Derek. The outlet that has led the charge in snarkily ripping Ford Motor has friends in the highest echelons at Ford Motor. Sure. Oh, Derek finishes his column (which I'm not even going to post a link to) with this lame complaint about how TTAC has "to go outside official channels for vehicle reviews", because, I guess they don't write click-bait articles? Yes. TTAC's lack of access to test fleets has nothing to do with their incredibly unprofessional reviews. By the way, in that column, you'll find Derek talking about how TTAC believes strongly in journalistic principles. Except when it comes to insulting people, as in this lovely example from an earlier example of what TTAC considers "professional journalism": "We have a word in Ohio for “men” who behave in that manner, but insofar as TTAC is family-oriented to a certain extent I won’t mention it." Yep. That sure is high quality journalism right there! Edited October 7, 2014 by RichardJensen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 It sounds like their plans for Navigator and the "Continental" could position them at a point where the brand hasn't been in a long, long time. Sounds like Lincoln won't be in our future then. We will be stuck with lowly Fords. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 PremierDrum had the same info through a different source, so it's not *just* TTAC. 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.