Ford.com Website hints at 3 Former Vehicles Returning..Maybe?

[BORG]

I still have a hard time picturing Ford making a Wrangler Knock-off when the Bronco was never that in the first place...are they just rebadging an Everest or are they trying to make a Ford Troller? A resurrected Bronco has a fraction of the potential of a Wrangler, the Bronco was just early form of SUV with very little perosnality. The Wrangler is not a Midsize SUV, it's something totally unique with a built-in customer. I don't mind if Ford is interested in creating a new niche icon for itself, but it would be out of character for them. It's still a very distant and unconfirmed product so we'll see what actually happens.

 

Flex was a sales flop and a CEO pet project (Field's), it's just a reminder to Ford that it can't make cars based on concepts, concepts need to be based on cars for which Ford knows there are customers.

 

I think the minivan customer has been a constant problem which they haven't been able to resolve. Flex was touted as a minivan replacement but failed to convinced those customers (That's because Ford didn't know how to market the Flex in the first place). They tried the Grand C-Max and cancelled that last minute, and now they are onto the Transit Connect wagon which is a niche product smaller than Flex.

 

Ford has been quick to exit certain segments (minivans, smaller trucks), slow to enter new ones (B-Segment Crossover, EVs). And right now that leaves them noticeably thin on product diversity for a company of its size in the US, at least on the retail side. It's hard to grow or even maintain marketshare if you have to do it with fewer vehicles. Ford is just very slow and reluctant to make investments unless they are certain about them.

Edited May 13, 2016 by BORG

[RichardJensen]

 

Lets see...the big problem with the G8 and SS is that they have styling that is leftover from the 1990s and it didn't help that G8 was a Pontiac that died shortly after it came out.

 

300/Charger/Magnum sales over the years:

 

Charger was never the retail hit that the 300 was. A lot of that is fleet & PI volume.

 

Additionally, what kind of volume do you think better styling would have added to the G8/SS? Even if it increased sales by 500%, you'd still be looking at pretty thin volume for a unique product.

Edited May 13, 2016 by RichardJensen

[RichardJensen]

It's hard to grow or even maintain marketshare

 

Pretty hard to grow market share when you're running at over 100% nameplate capacity.

 

Ford, wisely (IMO) considers current market conditions to be peak, not normal, demand, and they're not equipped to continually increase market share.

[BORG]

 

Pretty hard to grow market share when you're running at over 100% nameplate capacity.

 

Ford, wisely (IMO) considers current market conditions to be peak, not normal, demand, and they're not equipped to continually increase market share.

 

 

I'm sure it's a balance but Ford seems chronically afraid of net growth with greater dependency on fewer model names, it's now more dependent on F-Series than ever before.

Edited May 13, 2016 by BORG

[fordmantpw]

 

it's now more dependent on F-Series than ever before.

 

How ya figure? They are selling Escape, Fusion, Mustang, Explorer, and Edge just as fast as they can build them, and ATPs are on the rise. Not to mention, Ford has repeatedly stated that they won't make a vehicle if it doesn't make a profit on its own. Does the F-Series bring in a ton of money? Sure it does, and they are selling like gangbusters, but that doesn't mean the others aren't holding their own.

 

That statement is a bunch of BS.

[RichardJensen]

 

 

it's now more dependent on F-Series than ever before.

 

I can't accept that statement at face value.

[SoonerLS]

Bronco was historically a VERY small SUV

That is not true for most of its life and the VAST majority of Broncos built.

 

From '66-'77, Ford built a shade more the 225K "mini" Broncos.

 

From '78-'80, Ford built more 226K "full size" Broncos. Over its '78-'96 lifespan, Ford built over 900K full-size Broncos, or nearly four times as many as the early models.

Edited May 13, 2016 by SoonerLS

[mackinaw]

I still have a hard time picturing Ford making a Wrangler Knock-off when the Bronco was never that in the first place...are they just rebadging an Everest or are they trying to make a Ford Troller? A resurrected Bronco has a fraction of the potential of a Wrangler, the Bronco was just early form of SUV with very little perosnality. The Wrangler is not a Midsize SUV, it's something totally unique with a built-in customer. I don't mind if Ford is interested in creating a new niche icon for itself, but it would be out of character for them. It's still a very distant and unconfirmed product so we'll see what actually happens.

 

 

 

We just got back from ten days in the American Southwest (Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico). I was amazed at the number of 1966 - 1977 Bronco’s we saw running around. All have been lovingly restored, many outfitted with big tires, roll cages, etc. So yes, there are people out there who want a serious off-roading “small” 4X4.

[probowler]

Bronco Driver

 

We even have our own 4X4 magazine.

[timmm55]

 

Charger was never the retail hit that the 300 was. A lot of that is fleet & PI volume.

 

Additionally, what kind of volume do you think better styling would have added to the G8/SS? Even if it increased sales by 500%, you'd still be looking at pretty thin volume for a unique product.

They were imported from Australia, like the Mercury Capri (FWD convert.) none have sold well. I don't think it's an apt comparison for that and other reasons. It's how GM deals with all it's import connections: Geo, Opel, etc. they just die on the vine.

 

If Lincoln had a large RWD chassis, a cut down one for the Thunderbird and a smaller version for the Mustang it could be spread over three models and even several markets: China, US and Europe. If they can make a case for a China only Taurus certainly three niche products that share common chassis could make sense.

[timmm55]

RWD is not going away. Hyundai/Genesis has new RWD versions in the wings.

 

A Korean report states that Genesis will kick off with a new version of the Equus, set to launch next month, called G90. The rest of the lineup will follow suit with that naming structure (Infiniti isn't using it anymore, after all). The Genesis sedan as we know it will be called G80, and a new midsize model will be G70. A luxury SUV and sport coupe will round out the range, and all six models will launch by 2020. The rear-wheel-drive, midsize sedan is expected to debut in the second half of 2017.

http://www.autoblog.com/2015/11/03/hyundai-genesis-sub-brand-official/

 

When Ford was on a tight budget they made do with an aging RWD Mustang chassis and a lot of borrowed FWD platforms. Other than the F series and Mustang, Ford became a virtually FWD mass market car manufacturer.

 

The future is in China and luxury cars.

 

 

[silvrsvt]

RWD is not going away. Hyundai/Genesis has new RWD versions in the wings.

 

In the grand scheme of things people really don't care if its the Front or Real wheels driving the car.

 

The vast majority of people don't know/don't care about it, outside of this place and other car enthusiasts groups.

 

The 2005 Mustang was done on the cheap (maybe too cheap with IRS getting ripped out of it at the last minute) but then grew in price as people where more comfortable with spending "real" money on it. It was kind of a shock to see a Mustang GT Convertible about 5 years ago listing at $46K when I paid 29K for my almost loaded Mustang GT coupe 4 years prior to it.

[RichardJensen]

They were imported from Australia, like the Mercury Capri (FWD convert.) none have sold well. I don't think it's an apt comparison for that and other reasons. It's how GM deals with all it's import connections: Geo, Opel, etc. they just die on the vine.

 

If Lincoln had a large RWD chassis, a cut down one for the Thunderbird and a smaller version for the Mustang it could be spread over three models and even several markets: China, US and Europe. If they can make a case for a China only Taurus certainly three niche products that share common chassis could make sense.

 

I think it's an apt comparison for this reason:

 

If the G8, say, represents the floor in that segment and the 300 represents the ceiling (in the more car-oriented 2004 environment when large cars sold in higher numbers), then where do you plan on hitting with this putative Thunderbird? You surely can't plan on exceeding the 300's mark, especially since, as bzcat pointed out, Chrysler had no other sedans to speak of and the whole segment is significantly smaller now.

 

If the business case requires almost unprecedented success, then it should be shelved.

 

Additionally, you can't just cut length off of a large car chassis to make a sporty car. Unless you want something overweight & oversized (Zeta Camaro, LX Challenger).

[blksn8k2]

Howdy All,

 

I was poking around on Ford.com last night and came across a new page that they recently added, "Ford Discontinued Vehicles". On this page they had 3 specific vehicles listed:

 

1. Bronco

2. Ranger

3. Thunderbird

 

https://www.ford.com/vehicles/discontinued/

 

I find it very interesting that these 3 particular vehicles are listed, especially with the rumors that the first two (Bronco and Ranger) are most definitely making a return in the 2018/2019 timeframe. The reason I believe it's a hint is so that they don't fall too far out of people's memory.

 

I mean if the goal was to list just "Ford Discontinued Vehicles" then why not list the other most recent discontinued products. Seeing that these products were all discontinued long after the Bronco.

 

1. Escort

2. Excursion

3. Explorer Sport Trac

4. Crown Victoria

5. Five Hundred

6. Freestyle

7. Freestar

8. Windstar

 

Just some food for thought and for a friendly discussion. Anyone have any thoughts on the subject?

 

Hey, the picture Ford has of the early Bronco is the exact same color as my '75, Grabber Green with a white top! The Grabber Green they used on trucks was different than what you might remember on Mustangs, Mavericks, etc. The truck color of the same name was more of a jade green with a silver metallic mixed in as apposed to the pastel green on the cars.

[fordmantpw]

 

Hey, the picture Ford has of the early Bronco is the exact same color as my '75, Grabber Green with a white top! The Grabber Green they used on trucks was different than what you might remember on Mustangs, Mavericks, etc. The truck color of the same name was more of a jade green with a silver metallic mixed in as apposed to the pastel green on the cars.

 

That's a sweet Bronco!

[timmm55]

 

I think it's an apt comparison for this reason:

 

If the G8, say, represents the floor in that segment and the 300 represents the ceiling (in the more car-oriented 2004 environment when large cars sold in higher numbers), then where do you plan on hitting with this putative Thunderbird? You surely can't plan on exceeding the 300's mark, especially since, as bzcat pointed out, Chrysler had no other sedans to speak of and the whole segment is significantly smaller now.

 

If the business case requires almost unprecedented success, then it should be shelved.

 

Additionally, you can't just cut length off of a large car chassis to make a sporty car. Unless you want something overweight & oversized (Zeta Camaro, LX Challenger).

No you can't just cut off length.....but it's a lot easier than stretching a smaller platform. Ford has been doing this for decades with the Lincoln/Thunderbird from the 61s to the more recent Thunderbird/Lincoln LS/Jaguar S. Then there's Javelin/AMX, And the FOX platform that went from a Fairmont, shortened to a Mustang, then extended to a Mark VII and even a Town Car.

 

As for the Alpha Camaro it is now lighter than the Mustang by 50 lbs. You can't live in the past, Ford realizes this, hence the new architecture. For that business case it would be an absolute waste to expend huge amounts of money on a niche vehicle like the Mustang ALONE. There have been many business cases to abandon the Mustang RWD platform, see the Probe. It's not an "almost unprecedented success" (almost AND unprecedented? You can't establish an almost new precedent!) platform sharing is utterly common. But now it's over several continents.

 

 

The Taurus D3 platform spawned several other cars and another platform. The Taurus never came close to 300/Charger sales.

 

In the grand scheme of things people really don't care if its the Front or Real wheels driving the car.

 

The vast majority of people don't know/don't care about it, outside of this place and other car enthusiasts groups.

 

The 2005 Mustang was done on the cheap (maybe too cheap with IRS getting ripped out of it at the last minute) but then grew in price as people where more comfortable with spending "real" money on it. It was kind of a shock to see a Mustang GT Convertible about 5 years ago listing at $46K when I paid 29K for my almost loaded Mustang GT coupe 4 years prior to it.

While I met a Baretta owner who thought his car was RWD, most do seem to know. And FWD is acceptable to most. An octogenarian may not know his last 4 Mercedes were RWD, but he knows what character his Merc has vs a Camry. Most luxury cars are RWD and will continue to be.

 

Or it could be, by the time Lincoln gets to it, RWD will be passe! And Acura has been right all along LOL.

[silvrsvt]

The Taurus D3 platform spawned several other cars and another platform. The Taurus never came close to 300/Charger sales.

 

While I met a Baretta owner who thought his car was RWD, most do seem to know. And FWD is acceptable to most. An octogenarian may not know his last 4 Mercedes were RWD, but he knows what character his Merc has vs a Camry. Most luxury cars are RWD and will continue to be.

 

Or it could be, by the time Lincoln gets to it, RWD will be passe! And Acura has been right all along LOL.

 

Might want to check your facts again..the Taurus has out sold the 300 for the past 5 years except 2012. It also helps that Chrysler/Dodge don't offer a reasonable midsize car either.

 

As for the Octogenarian not knowing what his Merc has...the vast majority of people over 55 own small CUV's, not sedans....plus if someone was buying 4 mercedes over the years, I'm sure they have never driven a Camry either.

[timmm55]

 

Might want to check your facts again..the Taurus has out sold the 300 for the past 5 years except 2012. It also helps that Chrysler/Dodge don't offer a reasonable midsize car either.

 

As for the Octogenarian not knowing what his Merc has...the vast majority of people over 55 own small CUV's, not sedans....plus if someone was buying 4 mercedes over the years, I'm sure they have never driven a Camry either.

Ummm not at all. The Charger alone has outsold the Taurus every year by wide margins. The 300 is just behind the Taurus. Using the 300 as the supposed target is disingenuous. http://www.goodcarbadcar.net/2015/09/usa-large-car-sales-figures-august-2015-ytd.html

 

Notice that the RWD cars above have weathered the Large Car market better. The 300 was down 5.1% and the Charger only .3% compared to the FWD Large Cars down 27% (Taurus) and 35% (Maxima). 300/Charger on a RWD platform from a Mercedes 2003 W211, only refreshed once in 2011.

 

If you argue against a more modern new RWD platform you are arguing against the Mustang continuing. It's already a borrowed platform dating back to the LS/Jaguar to 2000.

[bzcat]

Ummm not at all. The Charger alone has outsold the Taurus every year by wide margins. The 300 is just behind the Taurus. Using the 300 as the supposed target is disingenuous. http://www.goodcarbadcar.net/2015/09/usa-large-car-sales-figures-august-2015-ytd.html

 

Notice that the RWD cars above have weathered the Large Car market better. The 300 was down 5.1% and the Charger only .3% compared to the FWD Large Cars down 27% (Taurus) and 35% (Maxima). 300/Charger on a RWD platform from a Mercedes 2003 W211, only refreshed once in 2011.

 

If you argue against a more modern new RWD platform you are arguing against the Mustang continuing. It's already a borrowed platform dating back to the LS/Jaguar to 2000.

 

The whole segment is down. That's the point. And you cheery picked a month that supports your argument about RWD weathered the large car market better. Let see another month...

 

http://www.goodcarbadcar.net/2016/04/usa-q1-march-2016-car-sales-by-model.html

 

Hey look, Charger sales are up 11% YTD, Maxima sales up 139% YTD, Impala sales up 28% YTD, Taurus sales up 24% YTD. Silly conclusion: FWD large cars have more lasting power in the large car market!

[RichardJensen]

the Alpha Camaro

 

The Alpha platform does not underpin a full size vehicle

[timmm55]

 

The whole segment is down. That's the point. And you cheery picked a month that supports your argument about RWD weathered the large car market better. Let see another month...

 

http://www.goodcarbadcar.net/2016/04/usa-q1-march-2016-car-sales-by-model.html

 

Hey look, Charger sales are up 11% YTD, Maxima sales up 139% YTD, Impala sales up 28% YTD, Taurus sales up 24% YTD. Silly conclusion: FWD large cars have more lasting power in the large car market!

No i didn't cherry pick a month. look at the YTD to the right...it gives 2014 and 2015.

 

END YEAR 2015 (last available) the Taurus is 4000 units behind the 300, and nearly 1/2 of Charger sales. http://www.goodcarbadcar.net/2016/01/usa-large-car-sales-figures-december-2015-year-end.html

Edited May 19, 2016 by timmm55

[timmm55]

 

The Alpha platform does not underpin a full size vehicle

Cadillac ATS and CTS midsize.

[92merc]

IIRC, the Impala sales numbers include both the new Impala, and the fleet queen Impala Classic...

[akirby]

Cadillac ATS and CTS midsize.

 

And both CD4 and CD6 are midsized even though Conti has a longer wheelbase.

[BORG]

Taurus sales may also be restricted by Ford because of production constraints around Explorer, they probably don't want to give them away as aggressively when they can sell Explorer with much higher margins. Even though it's the least expensive large sedan by a pretty significant margin, it's coming from a brand with allot of strong alternatives like Fusion, Edge, Explorer. Full-size sedans are loosing popularity because there are better alternatives for those costumers, it's the same reason wagons are gone for good. There are certain vehicle segments which lost popularity and Ford abandoned them, but some of those have stabilized like minivans and smaller trucks. These are vehicles that have a limited but still significant customer base which can't be fulfilled by alternatives. Full-size sedans make more sense for luxury brands but I think Ford holding onto Taurus should be short-term. Fusion will only continue to get larger and more richly appointed.

Edited May 19, 2016 by BORG