Jump to content

MK Naming Scheme NOT Going Away


Recommended Posts

My counter is 1) that Ford hasn't done a hybrid in *any* ~4,000lb vehicle, so it is hardly remarkable that they are not doing one w/the Conti, and 2) that it is highly doubtful that Ford intends to chase the Germans. Money spent on performance Lincolns is money that has, IMO, been set on fire in the middle of the street. Not enough people with purchasing power want these things.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My counter is 1) that Ford hasn't done a hybrid in *any* ~4,000lb vehicle, so it is hardly remarkable that they are not doing one w/the Conti, and 2) that it is highly doubtful that Ford intends to chase the Germans. Money spent on performance Lincolns is money that has, IMO, been set on fire in the middle of the street. Not enough people with purchasing power want these things.

 

I think the issue with lack of hybrid beyond midsize sedan is simply an issue of priority so far. And the Continental PHEV by itself doesn't move the needle enough, despite it making plenty of marketing sense.

 

Ford's hybrid system is calibrated to work with 2.0 I4. If they want to use that system in bigger vehicles, they'll need a larger engine... probably naturally aspirated V6 hybrid like Lexus, or 2.3 EB I4 hybrid system. However, that's a big investment that Ford is not ready to make now.

 

Until they can come up with a business case for enough volume on FWD V6 (or 2.3 EB) hybrid or PHEV. How many Edge/MKX, S-Max/Galaxy, Explorer/MKT, Taurus/Contiental PHEV can Ford sell on worldwide basis? That's what I'm asking... essentially, how will Ford plan to meet post-2020 CAFE with this many large vehicles? Electrification is inevitable so is Ford waiting for next generation of clean-sheet design (CD6)? However the case, that doesn't jive with Imran Jalal's statement that is "not in the cards any time soon" - everyone will have PHEV on everything starting in about 3 or 4 model years.

Edited by bzcat
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I think the issue with lack of hybrid beyond midsize sedan is simply an issue of priority so far.

 

I don't agree.

 

Ford promised a hybrid Edge/MKX almost ten years ago, and any hybrid powertrain for those vehicles would be plug-n-play for a Continental/Taurus/whatever.

 

http://www.nwitimes.com/business/transportation/cars/ford-to-build-hybrid-edge-mkx-in-ontario/article_b3a4e1b3-fdee-5e78-9e5a-5a681cc29ff8.html

 

For reasons that haven't ever come out, that vehicle never made it into production, and I'm guessing that whatever technical/cost/performance obstacle existed back then is still being worked on.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I don't agree.

 

Ford promised a hybrid Edge/MKX almost ten years ago, and any hybrid powertrain for those vehicles would be plug-n-play for a Continental/Taurus/whatever.

 

http://www.nwitimes.com/business/transportation/cars/ford-to-build-hybrid-edge-mkx-in-ontario/article_b3a4e1b3-fdee-5e78-9e5a-5a681cc29ff8.html

 

For reasons that haven't ever come out, that vehicle never made it into production, and I'm guessing that whatever technical/cost/performance obstacle existed back then is still being worked on.

Trunk space? Maybe the issue is the battery taking up half of the damn cargo area.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trunk space? Maybe the issue is the battery taking up half of the damn cargo area.

Have you looked in the back of an edge? It is cavernous. The spare tire area could easily accommodate batteries (or were you talking Conti?

 

The 3.5 was designed with a hybrid in mind, I assume it was preserved for the 2.7 as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have you looked in the back of an edge? It is cavernous. The spare tire area could easily accommodate batteries (or were you talking Conti?

 

The 3.5 was designed with a hybrid in mind, I assume it was preserved for the 2.7 as well.

I haven't seen the inside of the new edge. Had the opportunity a few weeks ago when we were looking at cars but didn't bother since it's absolutely not on my wife's radar and the car is for her.

 

Even so, people bitch and moan that the batteries take up so much space, no matter what the car is. The only manufacturer immune to that is tesla but they use their own proprietary batteries.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ford really has slowly abandoned they Hybrid / Tech route. They have even said they will not be the first to come out with new technology anymore. They will let others do it first then "bring it to the masses in their words", They are a mobility company, though what is going on now that isn't even true as automated driving systems (Autonomous breaking, Lane Departure/assist systems) is available on one 2016 Lincoln model and is $48,500, where Honda/Mazda/Subaru/Toyota/GM/Mitsubishi/FCA all have them on $25,000 vehicles, Scion even has it on a Sub $20,000 vehicle. Ford also has no vehicles with a Stop/Go function even that $48,500 Lincoln can't do that where a Chrysler 200 or Subaru will.

Ford could have put Lincoln on a great track with a plug-in MKC (even if it was only FWD), launched the plug-in MKZ at the same time, and now be launching the new MKX plugin. Ford is back into the F-150/Explorer company and getting 1% more on margins is the most important thing as that's what the execs bonuses are based on future product be damned.

Back to topic though if it has a "Name" or "MK whatever" doesn't make people want to buy the car one way or the other. It comes down to the price point and the image the brand projects, Lincoln is working on changing that image, though where they are going with it is still TBD.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They have even said they will not be the first to come out with new technology anymore.

 

When were they *ever*?

 

Cripes.

First assembly line? Wasn't Ford: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ransom_E._Olds#Assembly_line

First monoblock V8? Wasn't Ford. https://history.gmheritagecenter.com/wiki/index.php/Viking:_Oldsmobile's_Higher_Priced_Companion

First OHV V8? Wasn't Ford: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oldsmobile_V8_engine

First automatic transmission? Wasn't Ford: http://ateupwithmotor.com/terms-technology-definitions/hydramatic-history-part-1/

 

Notice anything about those firsts? Every one of them was Oldsmobile. Where's Oldsmobile today? Where's Ford?

 

And that's just the start.

 

Here are over a dozen additional examples of Ford lagging in tech, trends, etc.

 

  • The B-Bodies came out two years before the Panthers.
  • Halogen headlights
  • ABS brakes
  • Air bags
  • Modern FWD sedans (Taurus/Tempo vs. J & A bodies)
  • MPFI
  • "Aerodynamic" vehicle design
  • Applied ergonomics
  • CUVs (compare the launch date of the RAV4 to the Escape)
  • Global platform integration
  • GTDI
  • Hybrids
  • Gear count in transmissions
  • Bluetooth/phone/media player integration
  • Push-button start

 

And that doesn't get to the ridiculous self-driving aids that you feel are so important to today's customer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And yet, somehow, Ford is doing just fine.

 

Late to the hybrid segment? Yep. Anyone doing hybrids more successfully than Ford? Just Toyota.

Late to the CUV segment? Yep. Anyone doing CUVs more successfully than Ford? Nope.

Late adopter of GTDI? Yep. Anyone selling more GTDI engines than Ford? Not by a long shot.

 

Being a 'fast follower' in an industry where the ownership cycle is as long as nine years is just not a problem.

Edited by RichardJensen
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right--there are areas where Ford has not been a 'fast follower':

 

* moving assembly line

* planetary gear transmissions

* the 'personal coupe' and product line expansion (which ultimately killed the Sloan model)

* flush headlights (US)

 

But even raging Ford successes were beat to market (Mustang vs. Barracuda, Explorer vs. Cherokee)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you for that Richard, I've been making that very argument to some coworkers for a while now. Some people just fail to believe their opinions could ever be wrong.

 

It's not always best to be the first to market. Especially when it comes to new technology, and in an industry where quality is scrutinized and publicized so much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That comes of using sports or art metaphors for business.

 

People who are 'fans' of a company want that company to be 'first' at this or that and/or 'best' at this or that.

 

Honestly, those metrics matter only if they benefit the bottom line.

 

People get caught up wanting Ford to be "the first company with blah-blah-blah", well, that's not going to happen very often.

 

Others want Ford to be the "best" at something or another (say, wanting performance Lincolns that will win magazine comparison tests), well, you can't deposit magazine reviews at the bank.

 

The bottom line is that what Ford does has to be sustainable. It doesn't have to be something that fans like, that magazine reviewers like, or that is the first or 'latest' or 'greatest' this or that. It has to be sustainable. Does it turn a profit? Will it be profitable even in a down market?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...