Automotive News interviews Mark Fields

[bzcat]

We discussed this before... Ford doesn't need another 100k+ Escape... it can use another 30k or so.

 

Having a full blown overflow plant will cause inventory bloat and then the math becomes how much discount and rebates you need to keep the line working. In another word, You need Escape overflow + another vehicle to share the capacity.

 

And rather than adding Escape in another plant, in the short to mid term, it is probably logistically easier to move MKC (which will give Ford an extra ~30k Escape at LAP).

 

The long term solution is obviously to have 2 full blown C car plant with enough flexibility to build all the different versions. And that's what Ford is working on... moving Focus/C-Max/something else to Mexico plus Escape at LAP.

[Biker16]

 

you have to include the height with the hood and decklid raised as well. most of the manufacturing process is done with the hood and decklid (or hatch in this case) raised.

 

I see what you are saying, but the Body, hood and hatch of the escape and C-max, are withing inches of each other. my opinion is that there are liberties taken with the Escape and MAP that make it more difficult than it ought to be to build it at MAP.

 

While it looks like LAP can't make enough Escapes, inventory at Dec 1 was over 70,000

so it's not like Ford is desperately short, just very busy making as many as possible.

And I betcha Ford would pick that any day over an overflow plant.

 

Given the unprecedented rise in Utes and a corresponding easing of car sales,

I'd think that Ford is crying all the way to the bank and could care less about

losing some Focus sales, the gains in Utilities more than makes up for that.

 

Bottom line is that slowing production at MAP and redeploying staff

is the cheaper option than changing everything around.

 

We're already to 2016, Ford is not going to renegotiate supplier contracts

and vehicle production changes this late in the product cycle.

Next gen Fiesta arrijves first at Cuautitlan in 2017 and then

Focus will joint it there in 2018, vacating MAP.

 

My last comment on this, why is Adding a product on the same platform at a "flex" plant "changing everything around."?

[jpd80]

My last comment on this, why is Adding a product on the same platform at a "flex" plant "changing everything around."?

Because a "flex" plant doesn't mean what you think it does.

Edited January 3, 2016 by jpd80

[fuzzymoomoo]

Because a "flex" plant doesn't mean what you think it does.

I've tried explaining that before but it keeps falling on deaf ears

[jpd80]

I've tried explaining that before but it keeps falling on deaf ears

Exactly.

Just because a plant is prepped to make the changes easier does not mean you avoid all the changes.

 

You'd be going through all of that adding Continental to Fusion/Mustang assembly at FRAP.

Tell us how easy that is....

Edited January 3, 2016 by jpd80

[fuzzymoomoo]

Exactly.

Just because a plant is prepped to make the changes easier does not mean you avoid all the changes.

 

You'd be going through all of that adding Continental to Fusion/Mustang assembly at FRAP.

Tell us how easy that is....

Eh, not exactly. When they say MAP is a "flex plant", they mean it can build FHEVs, PHEVs, BEVs and conventional drivetrain vehicles in any sequence at any time (though they typically don't build multiples in a row because of job flow and ergonomic reasons)

 

But yes, it's a damn nightmare adding a new model to the process. It's been causing a bunch of different problems in my work area.

[jpd80]

Eh, not exactly. When they say MAP is a "flex plant", they mean it can build FHEVs, PHEVs, BEVs and conventional drivetrain vehicles in any sequence at any time (though they typically don't build multiples in a row because of job flow and ergonomic reasons)

 

But yes, it's a damn nightmare adding a new model to the process. It's been causing a bunch of different problems in my work area.

Gotcha.... That's Flexible manufacture between the already chosen vehicle types...not ability to add a new one.

Edited January 3, 2016 by jpd80

[Biker16]

Because a "flex" plant doesn't mean what you think it does.

 

No Ford FLEX isn't A true Flex plant.

 

I've tried explaining that before but it keeps falling on deaf ears

 

It's not like toyota and honda aren't building RAV4s and CR-Vs in their respective Compact car plants.

 

Stop making excuses for this company.

 

 

Eh, not exactly. When they say MAP is a "flex plant", they mean it can build FHEVs, PHEVs, BEVs and conventional drivetrain vehicles in any sequence at any time (though they typically don't build multiples in a row because of job flow and ergonomic reasons)

 

But yes, it's a damn nightmare adding a new model to the process. It's been causing a bunch of different problems in my work area.

 

You do realize Ford Promoted this plant as being able to build what the market Demanded including 2 platforms up to 8-10 variants.

Edited January 5, 2016 by Biker16

[sullynd]

It's not like toyota isn't building RAV4s and CR-Vs in their respective Compact car plants.

Ugh, when did Toyota start building CR-Vs?

[rmc523]

It's not like toyota isn't building RAV4s and CR-Vs in their respective Compact car plants.

 

Stop making excuses for this company.

 

I can agree with you that it's potentially short sighted to not be able to make Escape there (if there isn't an otherwise good reason for it), but come on, this argument is pathetic....

 

Since every plant is exactly the same and has the necessary space to build for every vehicle out there?

[fuzzymoomoo]

 

Stop making excuses for this company.

 

It's not making excuses when it's the truth. It's not my fault you refuse to accept it.

[grbeck]

Ugh, when did Toyota start building CR-Vs?

Right after it started building Civics.

[silvrsvt]

Is there a really good reason to spend extra on larger paint booths, e coat baths, etc just because you may want to build an Escape where the Focus is built?

 

For better or worse Ford has a larger plant footprint then Honada or Toyota and I'd think that building a single product in a plant that can fully support it is much better then fitting it in with a plant that builds two-three different product just to keep it busy. Far easier logistics.

[Biker16]

I can agree with you that it's potentially short sighted to not be able to make Escape there (if there isn't an otherwise good reason for it), but come on, this argument is pathetic....

 

Since every plant is exactly the same and has the necessary space to build for every vehicle out there?

 

it not that every plant is the same it's just seems like poor planning.

 

Is there a really good reason to spend extra on larger paint booths, e coat baths, etc just because you may want to build an Escape where the Focus is built?

No changes to the paint shop would be required, the Escape body is the same as the C-max without the chassis.

 

It could be the door hinges on the Escape making it difficult to fit at MAP either way Escape sales were up .1% while RAV-4 sales up 17%.

 

For better or worse Ford has a larger plant footprint then Honada or Toyota and I'd think that building a single product in a plant that can fully support it is much better then fitting it in with a plant that builds two-three different product just to keep it busy. Far easier logistics.

 

For cars Toyota has larger footprint than Ford with 1.1 million cars sold Excluding Lexus, to Ford's 760,000.

[silvrsvt]

 

it not that every plant is the same it's just seems like poor planning.

 

No changes to the paint shop would be required, the Escape body is the same as the C-max without the chassis.

 

What are you talking about? The Escape is LARGER then the C-max!!

 

For cars Toyota has larger footprint than Ford with 1.1 million cars sold Excluding Lexus, to Ford's 760,000.

And your twisting facts around again....In North America...

[Biker16]

And your twisting facts around again....In North America...

 

yes, in north america for cars.

 

http://pressroom.toyota.com/sales-financial/releases/tms+december+2015+sales+chart.download

 

Toyota division sold 860,000 NA built cars.

[silvrsvt]

 

yes, in north america for cars.

 

http://pressroom.toyota.com/sales-financial/releases/tms+december+2015+sales+chart.download

 

Toyota division sold 860,000 NA built cars.

In how many plants? That's the point your obliviously missing.

[Biker16]

In how many plants? That's the point your obliviously missing.

I guess so.

 

 

They have 5 car assembly plants in north America.

 

Kentucky makes 450,000 units on 2 lines.

[jpd80]

Toyota sells 860K cars to Ford's 760K cars, most of that difference is due to Camry

 

Camry is built in USA where most Fusions are made in lower cost Mexico,

so I wonder if Ford makes slightly more per car than Toyota, enough to

improve the ROI by avoiding the need to build as many vehicles.

but then there's absolutely no way to prove that..

Edited January 9, 2016 by jpd80

[Biker16]

Toyota sells 860K cars to Ford's 760K cars, most of that difference is due to Camry

 

Camry is built in USA where most Fusions are made in lower cost Mexico,

so I wonder if Ford makes slightly more per car than Toyota, enough to

improve the ROI by avoiding the need to build as many vehicles.

but then there's absolutely no way to prove that..

 

Not to belabor the point.

 

They imported another 250,000 cars from Japan, including Lexus you can add 170,000 more.

[jpd80]

 

Not to belabor the point.

 

They imported another 250,000 cars from Japan, including Lexus you can add 170,000 more.

Agree that TMC's sales favors cars more heavily than Ford but keep in mind that

by 2018 Ford will probably be down to about three car plants in Nth America

while the rest are all Trucks and Utes, something Toyota simply can't match

 

Also, about one quarter of TMC's pre-tax profit is generated by North American operations

which in recent times is about one quarter of $20 billion pre-Tax, so around $5Billion for NA.

That is still a long way below Ford NA's pre-Tax profits ($8 Billion)

 

The importation of all those cars from Japan is probably a way that TMC keeps more

of those profits at home in Japan than on North American books.

Edited January 10, 2016 by jpd80

[Biker16]

Agree that TMC's sales favors cars more heavily than Ford but keep in mind that

by 2018 Ford will probably be down to about three car plants in Nth America

while the rest are all Trucks and Utes, something Toyota simply can't match

Its like 1999 all over again.

 

Also, about one quarter of TMC's pre-tax profit is generated by North American operations

which in recent times is about one quarter of $20 billion pre-Tax, so around $5Billion for NA.

That is still a long way below Ford NA's pre-Tax profits ($8 Billion)

Math is powerful.

 

20 billion is greater than 8 billion

 

see below to why Toyota's NA profit are only 5 billion.

 

v

v

V

 

The importation of all those cars from Japan is probably a way that TMC keeps more

of those profits at home in Japan than on North American books.

Toyota imported vehicles

Trucks

Toyota 219,531

LEXUS 80,623

 

Cars

Toyota 250,377

LEXUS 169,349

 

Toyota in importing their high margin products from Japan and booking those profits there instead of NA. it doesn't mean Toyota NA is weaker than Ford NA its just that Toyota accounts for profit differently than Ford does.

[fuzzymoomoo]

by 2018 Ford will probably be down to about three car plants in Nth America

while the rest are all Trucks and Utes, something Toyota simply can't match

 

One. Mexico shouldn't count towards that total because of the massive advantage