RichardJensen Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 (edited) You posted the link. And then there was the production version of the Concept C. I remember when Ausrutherford breathlessly "confirmed" that. Haven't seen that yet either. Tell you what: Ask your source to send me an email with a project code, the date the project was greenlighted, and the project engineer's name. If he doesn't have that info, he really doesn't have any info. Edited October 8, 2014 by RichardJensen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 It doesn't take Ford five years to launch a new platform anymore. I remember a 4 litre plus diesel that was pretty close to fully developed....maybe a platform WAS developed but then focus moved to more pressing issues... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 Ford has already engineered 90% of the new Explorer in the form of the new Edge. It's going to take a whole lot of convincing for me to think that the clear, obvious and most immediately profitable option is *not* the one Ford is pursuing in this instance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PREMiERdrum Posted October 8, 2014 Author Share Posted October 8, 2014 (edited) You posted the link. I post a LOT of links here... very few of them coincide with and match information that I have been given. And then there was the production version of the Concept C. I remember when Ausrutherford breathlessly "confirmed" that. Haven't seen that yet either. Everything I knew and repeated at the time was that there was no production Concept C, and later that the "MKC" name was for a compact crossover. Ask your source to send me an email with a project code, the date the project was greenlighted, and the project engineer's name. If he doesn't have that info, he really doesn't have any info. Do you honestly think I don't ask those types of questions? That isn't how this works. Tell you what: Tell you what: I can continue to share the bits and pieces that I get with the community here even if it doesn't gel with you concepts of "good or bad", or I can shut up and allow activity here to slow even further than it already has. Edited October 8, 2014 by PREMiERdrum 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 Ford has already engineered 90% of the new Explorer in the form of the new Edge. It's going to take a whole lot of convincing for me to think that the clear, obvious and most immediately profitable option is *not* the one Ford is pursuing in this instance. Saw the new Edge at the OC Autoshow...WAY more impressive in the flesh than in photos..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 Do you honestly think I don't ask those types of questions? That isn't how this works Okay, so you've got a guy repeating information about a program he is not involved with and has no first hand knowledge about. Sounds about right. allow activity here to slow even further than it already has I'd rather have five people on this board that understand the business contribute than a hundred people who think that car companies exist solely for wish fulfillment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PREMiERdrum Posted October 8, 2014 Author Share Posted October 8, 2014 Okay, so you've got a guy repeating information about a program he is not involved with and has no first hand knowledge about. Sounds about right. Surely you can distinguish between not knowing something and not sharing something. I'd rather have five people on this board that understand the business contribute than a hundred people who think that car companies exist solely for wish fulfillment. Noted, because my track record here definitely shows me to be the latter, right? Good grief, RJ. Get a grip. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 The Durango is going away, and the Grand Cherokee has solid axles front and rear. Should Ford copy that as well? The Grand Cherokee has not had SFA since 2004 and has not had a SRA since 2009. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 (edited) Surely you can distinguish between not knowing something and not sharing something. Let me see if I understand this correctly: Your source has no problem whatsoever with sharing confidential information for publication that tips off Ford's future plans--e.g. a RWD Lincoln crossover--but he feels it would be unwise to share a platform code that contains no useful information other than the size and type of vehicle? Edited October 8, 2014 by RichardJensen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PREMiERdrum Posted October 8, 2014 Author Share Posted October 8, 2014 The Grand Cherokee has not had SFA since 2004 and has not had a SRA since 2009. Thank you . Plus, wasn't the Durango's execution delayed until it is ultimately replaced with a 3-row Jeep? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 (edited) The Grand Cherokee has not had SFA since 2004 and has not had a SRA since 2009. Then how old is this picture? 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. Edited October 8, 2014 by RichardJensen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papilgee4evaeva Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 (edited) The Durango is going away, and the Grand Cherokee has solid axles front and rear. Should Ford copy that as well? Independent all around. Front went independent in 2005, rear went independent in (I think) 2011. (EDIT: 2009. Thanks, Intrepidatious.) Now, as for this: Then how old is this picture? Since it says WJ, it refers to the GC from 1999-2004. Edited October 8, 2014 by papilgee4evaeva Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 Thank you . Plus, wasn't the Durango's execution delayed until it is ultimately replaced with a 3-row Jeep? They actually might keep it now based on the recent higher sales. The Wagoneer would slot above it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 They actually might keep it now based on the recent higher sales. The Wagoneer would slot above it. Oh. So the Durango will be the "Will the last Dodge model please shut off the lights as it leaves?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 Independent all around. Front went independent in 2005, rear went independent in (I think) 2011. Was basing that off a pic akirby linked to yesterday that purported to be the current GC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 Then how old is this picture? The WJ Grand Cherkoee was 1999-2004 Then WK (IFS) Then WK2 (IRS) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PREMiERdrum Posted October 8, 2014 Author Share Posted October 8, 2014 Let me see if I understand this correctly: Your source has no problem whatsoever with sharing confidential information for publication that tips off Ford's future plans--e.g. a RWD Lincoln crossover, but he feels it would be unwise to share a platform code that contains no useful information other than the size and type of vehicle? Look... I deal with sources just about every minute of every day for my job... Sources in local government, in law enforcement, in some of the major corporations located here, in educational institutions, and others. One thing that's universal... They almost always want to give you just enough to get you started. There is a universal fear when leaking info to "the media", weather it's real or imagined, that the more detailed the info they give you, the easier it is to identify them as the leak. They actually might keep it now based on the recent higher sales. The Wagoneer would slot above it. Good to hear. I still can't fathom driving it back to back with the Lambdas and choosing the GM. But I "think that car companies exist solely for wish fulfillment," so WTH do I know? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 Okay, so you've got a guy repeating information about a program he is not involved with and has no first hand knowledge about. Sounds about right. I'd rather have five people on this board that understand the business contribute than a hundred people who think that car companies exist solely for wish fulfillment. Dude, he's not going to release his name, he's not going to send an email to someone unknown dude just because that unknown dude doesn't believe him. Sources don't generally reveal their true identity. Surely you know this. And what the hell is up with you jumping on PD? He's one of the 'good guys' here, and I appreciate his information, whether it's right or wrong. Surely you can distinguish between not knowing something and not sharing something. Noted, because my track record here definitely shows me to be the latter, right? Good grief, RJ. Get a grip. I think RJ is having a bad day (week/month/year/something). Don't listen to him, we want all the scoops you can provide us! 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papilgee4evaeva Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 Was basing that off a pic akirby linked to yesterday that purported to be the current GC. So I gathered. I was looking at the pic and thinking "but that's the old model!" I haven't been able to find a similar illustration of the current model's setup. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 So I gathered. I was looking at the pic and thinking "but that's the old model!" I haven't been able to find a similar illustration of the current model's setup. Not on the vehicle per se.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gnostic Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 (edited) RIchard Edited October 8, 2014 by Gnostic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papilgee4evaeva Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 Not on the vehicle per se.... Well, that works, I suppose. I guess I was trying to find a picture of the suspension as well as the drivetrain. And was failing miserably. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 (edited) I'm not "jumping on PD"--I'm asking for info, and if a guy who makes his living asking questions doesn't like being asked questions.............. This is the deal: I find this information *incredibly* hard to credit. The brand new Edge on a freshly modified CUV platform is almost the same width as the Explorer and it has almost the same wheelbase as the Explorer. And we're to believe that, instead of the Explorer migrating to a variant of this platform in the very near future, it is going to continue to soldier on using a platform that will probably be 13 years old when it's finally replaced (we haven't even seen mules of this putative new RWD platform), and that when it's replaced, it's going to be replaced with a platform that is less accommodating, more expensive to build, and which increases amortization costs for every AWD equipped vehicle in Ford's lineup? Again, when a source comes up with something that --odd-- I'm going to need, EVEN IF IT'S NOT FOR PUBLICATION, *something* more than "this program is well-known within Ford." And what the hell is up with you jumping on PD? Edited October 8, 2014 by RichardJensen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 A thought I had in the Ranchero thread was what if we see a new Sport Trac piggy back on this RWD Explorer architecture? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 Look... I deal with sources just about every minute of every day for my job... Sources in local government, in law enforcement, in some of the major corporations located here, in educational institutions, and others. One thing that's universal... They almost always want to give you just enough to get you started. There is a universal fear when leaking info to "the media", weather it's real or imagined, that the more detailed the info they give you, the easier it is to identify them as the leak. Good to hear. I still can't fathom driving it back to back with the Lambdas and choosing the GM. But I "think that car companies exist solely for wish fulfillment," so WTH do I know? My "source" is no longer In FMCs employ, now my favorite is tabasco.... 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.