Jump to content

Midcycle updates grow more extensive, more expensive


Recommended Posts

 

Why?

Why isn't there a pie in the sky? If you want to have and opinion make sure it makes sense. If you think Ford is cheap/lazy how can you use Toyota as example of cutting edge tech when they've been lagging since the start of this decade. GM has been hit or miss on the last 5 gens of malibus how can the keep conquest from previous versions when the can't keep consistent with a mid size that works. Then Honda has finally stop hanging on to vtech and released a new engine family and a cvt after sticking with 5spd up til the most recent full accord redsign. Ford isn't behind if they are they could be doing a lot worse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why isn't there a pie in the sky? If you want to have and opinion make sure it makes sense. If you think Ford is cheap/lazy how can you use Toyota as example of cutting edge tech when they've been lagging since the start of this decade. GM has been hit or miss on the last 5 gens of malibus how can the keep conquest from previous versions when the can't keep consistent with a mid size that works. Then Honda has finally stop hanging on to vtech and released a new engine family and a cvt after sticking with 5spd up til the most recent full accord redsign. Ford isn't behind if they are they could be doing a lot worse.

 

We will agree to disagree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't understand all the fuss about platforms and this desire to change them every five years.

That to me is a sure sign that the previous development was shortsighted and lacked the ability

to evolve. If a platform cannot be made to last seven to ten years then IMO, that's wasted effort..

 

the secret lies in the incremental improvements at each refresh, there's nothing wrong with

doing rotational improvements to appearance, power trains, interior/trim provided that the

buyer see enough change between the various versions.

Edited by jpd80
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Toyota had a plan to consolidate platforms into the TNGA archtecture, they weren't

 

 

How do you know this will be true in 2 years?

 

 

 

 

2002

2002-2004_Toyota_Camry_1.jpg

 

+5

2007

2007-toyota-camry-hybrid-photo-40326-s-1

+5

2012

Toyota-Camry-2012-1.jpg

+3

2015

2015-Toyota-Camry-1.jpg

A counterpoint is GM and Ford had done the same thing for years with the rwds then GM with the W-body and Ford with D186 and got ragged on. Toyota is getting away with it because of execution (updates that includes new engines and parts) and not having major parts fail that bang-in on reliability scores.

 

A new platform is good but money is wasted making new parts for the new platform and certifying them for the nations and standards isn't cheap as well as making vehicles on them desirable to buy.

 

Lexus rwd line-up dates back to the 90'-91' model year, the fwds from 02' but they still kicking ass.

 

Theoretically the current retail Impala could still been on the W-body since no awd is offered, the rwd Zeta version was zapped and its GMs standard fleet car as long as the vehicle can pass impact standards.

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

New engines for Camry? They're using the same 2.5L I4 and 3.5L V6 they've been using since 2006.

We know some motors are old as dirt but as long as it can run and perform well people will buy btw the Toyota 3.5 isn't a pushover even to today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We know some motors are old as dirt but as long as it can run and perform well people will buy btw the Toyota 3.5 isn't a pushover even to today.

 

I never said it was and quite frankly, if it ain't broke don't fix it. But you said they kept things fresh with new engines and that hasn't been the case for Camry at least. And certainly not a good example of continuous refreshes compared to Fusion which will get its 3rd all new engine in the last 4 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I never said it was and quite frankly, if it ain't broke don't fix it. But you said they kept things fresh with new engines and that hasn't been the case for Camry at least. And certainly not a good example of continuous refreshes compared to Fusion which will get its 3rd all new engine in the last 4 years.

 

 

In my mind Ford must have a long term plan for It's aging B, C, and CD architectures, all of which have roots in the 2004 C-1 platform, which itself was a upgrade of the C170 platform.

 

FNA caught a break by using existing EU platforms for the last 5 years, but these Architectures are at their ends, and someone at Ford must realize that the competition is moving towards consolidated Architectures and Eventually Ford must do the same.

 

So 2017-2019 is a critical period for Ford.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We know Ford is working on CD6 which is rumored to be modular and support both FWD and RWD vehicles if you believe the media article from awhile back.

 

A new C platform is logical as well.

 

I realize you want Ford to publish all these long term plans but they're simply not going to do that, nor should they. Nor should you assume lack of any public announcement means that Ford isn't working on it.

 

As for a new platform being required - Toyota disproved that theory with the Camry platform.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We know Ford is working on CD6 which is rumored to be modular and support both FWD and RWD vehicles if you believe the media article from awhile back.

 

A new C platform is logical as well.

 

I realize you want Ford to publish all these long term plans but they're simply not going to do that, nor should they. Nor should you assume lack of any public announcement means that Ford isn't working on it.

 

As for a new platform being required - Toyota disproved that theory with the Camry platform.

Toyota announced TNGA 18 months before it's debut.

 

VW annouced MQB in 2011 debuted in 2013.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"I don't understand all the fuss about platforms and this desire to change them every five years."

 

Agree, some car fanatics will call anything "dated" if its 3 years old! Expect "all new gee whizz" every year, practically, and they dont even buy!

I used to be that way in the 90's, but then there were some really dated domestic cars back then, like Tempo and Cavalier. But cars today are far from those ancient times.

 

Some need to find other hobbies instead of "hoping and praying" for new car designs every year.

Edited by 630land
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Toyota announced TNGA 18 months before it's debut.

 

VW annouced MQB in 2011 debuted in 2013.

 

I would posit that Ford became much more tight lipped about its plans and future products when Mulally took charge, and that legacy remains today with Mark Fields. So it's possible that they are at work on a new global C chassis, as well as other things but are not ready for their existence to see light (yet).

 

Regarding new chassis, somewhat interlaced in that development work could perhaps be the need to build in hybrid/PIH capability. Remember that Ford said there would be a total of 19 (I think) electrified models in the next few years. Given regulatory requirements for MPG that hit late this decade and early next decade, it wouldn't be a huge stretch to imagine that Ford might design the C chassis (and maybe the CD) to be hybrid/PIH capable across all products, as this would get them to the number of electrified products they have indicated will be offered.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And? How did it benefit them and how does the lack of a new platform announcement hurt Ford?

As a shareholder it allows me to judge how profitable the company will be in the future.

 

Both companies are looking to reduce development costs by 30% per product. Which allows them to react faster and at lower l to changes in market preference and demand.

 

As an investor I would see this as positive, a company invests in growth and cost reduction as opposed one that simply cuts costs.

Edited by Biker16
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

In my mind Ford must have a long term plan for It's aging B, C, and CD architectures, all of which have roots in the 2004 C-1 platform, which itself was a upgrade of the C170 platform.

 

FNA caught a break by using existing EU platforms for the last 5 years, but these Architectures are at their ends, and someone at Ford must realize that the competition is moving towards consolidated Architectures and Eventually Ford must do the same.

 

So 2017-2019 is a critical period for Ford.

Food for thought, you might think Ford is spending billions for new platforms for a few years but that's not the case. For One Ford the new platforms must align with not only N/A and Euro cycles but the rest of the world.

 

IMO one these "world platforms" hit the market then you'll see gradual Toyota-like improvements for each market but still on the same virtual platform and powertrains thus more profitable operation.

 

The Asians have this down-pact, US FCA only have the CUSW to play with, GM is slightly ahead with the D2xx an E2xx cars and CUVs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

still on the same virtual platform and powertrains thus more profitable operation.

 

Um, that's not a "virtual" platform, that's a real platform made from real metal. You wouldn't want it to run over you. Virtual platforms exist as bits and bytes produced by CAD software. :)

  • Like 2
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...