Field Fires Back at Trump

[fuzzymoomoo]

I dunno the alternative isn't much better either.

[sarcasm]What about Gary Johnson?[/sarcasm]

[jniffen]

Now, where did Obama put that nuke button.....

[MY93SHO]

Now, where did Obama put that nuke button.....

He's probably having an "EASY" button installed with "NUKE" stenciled over it.

[BORG]

No. That border is secure.

 

Well, if you can swim it's not.

 

well, you're car is from there....lol

 

Yep, I've bought allot of cars from Canada.

 

Canada really is a place I want to live, has been for years and I hope to make that move in a few years.

Edited September 21, 2016 by BORG

[Biker16]

Alright guys.

 

Biker, you're already on notice.

 

For what?

[akirby]

 

For what?

 

http://www.blueovalforums.com/forums/index.php?/topic/62109-chevy-bolt-ev-to-carry-epa-certified-range-of-238-miles-gm-says/page-4&do=findComment&comment=984752

[PRM]

I guess I'm confused. Fields did say they were moving small car production to Mexico. However, he also stated they would build other vehicles (crossovers and pickups according to article) at the plants now producing small cars, thus those people would not be fired. It appears to me the net jobs is shifting to Mexico, unless some vehicles are being moved from Mexico to the US. I would have preferred Fields said they were producing small cars in (insert US location here). Where are the crossovers or pickups that are going to be built at the former small car plant being built now? Or, is that new production of the Bronco/Ranger?

Edited September 22, 2016 by PRM

[akirby]

It's brand new vehicles presumably Ranger, bronco and one other new vehicle.

[PRM]

So, good news, Ford will hire more workers. Bad news, the net gain will take place primarily in Mexico. Seems to be elements of truth on both sides. I'd like to have heard Trump say he'd change the business climate in the US to enable Ford to profitably keep those jobs in the US. Likewise, Fields isn't telling the story of the jobs going to Mexico, rather just countering the idea that those particular worker in Michigan won't be losing their jobs.

[Biker16]

 

http://www.blueovalforums.com/forums/index.php?/topic/62109-chevy-bolt-ev-to-carry-epa-certified-range-of-238-miles-gm-says/page-4&do=findComment&comment=984752

[Bob Rosadini]

Big question in my mind is if you look at MAP as a roughly 150,000 a yr. facility (fair statement?) Will Ranger/Bronco equal those numbers? Plus with new engine and transmission plants going up in Mexico, I find it hard to believe some US plants will not feel a loss because of that. ?????

 

Plus when Fields talks about inability to compete in US in low cost vehicle production, how does he explain the 6.7 Mexican production. This motor goes into Fords most profitable vehicles and yet it is sourced in Mexico.

 

I would not want to be in his shoes spinning this story.

 

Then again I would not want to be in Trump's shoes spinning his story.

 

I'm just waiting for him to start making his suits in Brooklyn! Or let's see...perhaps his clothing line is not sufficiently high end so as to justify production in US

[silvrsvt]

Big question in my mind is if you look at MAP as a roughly 150,000 a yr. facility (fair statement?) Will Ranger/Bronco equal those numbers? Plus with new engine and transmission plants going up in Mexico, I find it hard to believe some US plants will not feel a loss because of that. ?????

 

Plus when Fields talks about inability to compete in US in low cost vehicle production, how does he explain the 6.7 Mexican production. This motor goes into Fords most profitable vehicles and yet it is sourced in Mexico.

 

As for the 6.7L...boils down to having a plant being able to build it. Ford was getting Diesels from Navistar prior to this and the 4.4L Diesel was being built there already for Jag and Land Rover.

 

Given what the GM twins are doing, I don't see any problems with the Ranger selling in 80-100K range...the wildcard is the Bronco...it might be able to double that if its wildly successful...I'm thinking 40-80K a year is more reasonable.

[Bob Rosadini]

 

As for the 6.7L...boils down to having a plant being able to build it. Ford was getting Diesels from Navistar prior to this and the 4.4L Diesel was being built there already for Jag and Land Rover.

 

Given what the GM twins are doing, I don't see any problems with the Ranger selling in 80-100K range...the wildcard is the Bronco...it might be able to double that if its wildly successful...I'm thinking 40-80K a year is more reasonable.

thx-not aware the 4.4 was a Mexican sourced engine.

 

Aside from any Bronco number, I'm hoping we will also see Everest in the mix. Assuming the Ranger will in fact be the world Ranger, the Everest would be a good fit and I would not see it as a threat to existing Ford platforms-to me they are are derivatives of the same crossover theme. Everest would offer Ford a clear alternative to a crossover to those who want a true off road vehicle.

[fuzzymoomoo]

thx-not aware the 4.4 was a Mexican sourced engine.

 

Aside from any Bronco number, I'm hoping we will also see Everest in the mix. Assuming the Ranger will in fact be the world Ranger, the Everest would be a good fit and I would not see it as a threat to existing Ford platforms-to me they are are derivatives of the same crossover theme. Everest would offer Ford a clear alternative to a crossover to those who want a true off road vehicle.

Everything I've heard Everest = Bronco

[ANTAUS]

I wonder why Ford wouldn't use the "Ranger" name...not that Bronco is a bad name, but I think Ranger would be a bit more relevant marketing wise than the Bronco.

[tbone]

I hope you are wrong about Everest = Bronco.

[Bob Rosadini]

I wonder why Ford wouldn't use the "Ranger" name...not that Bronco is a bad name, but I think Ranger would be a bit more relevant marketing wise than the Bronco.

Well if FuzzyMM is correct, Everest will be the SUV variant build as "Bronco" and "Ranger" will in fact be the small truck.

 

In any case if that means we get the World Ranger and the Everest I'm ok with that- as a Ford buyer and a stockholder.

[fuzzymoomoo]

I wonder why Ford wouldn't use the "Ranger" name...not that Bronco is a bad name, but I think Ranger would be a bit more relevant marketing wise than the Bronco.

What are you talking about? They are. Bronco and Ranger are two separate entities that just happen to be sharing platforms.

[fuzzymoomoo]

I hope you are wrong about Everest = Bronco.

I hope it's not the current Everest. I sincerely hope (and believe) it will be an updated/upgraded next generation model.

[rmc523]

I hope it's not the current Everest. I sincerely hope (and believe) it will be an updated/upgraded next generation model.

 

yeah, the current model would be a waste of time and money.

[Bob Rosadini]

 

yeah, the current model would be a waste of time and money.

Not sure what you guys are talking about-everything I've read about it is positive. I have a friend who works overseas-in the heavy truck world- His opinion is one of the best Fords ever.

[fuzzymoomoo]

Not sure what you guys are talking about-everything I've read about it is positive. I have a friend who works overseas-in the heavy truck world- His opinion is one of the best Fords ever.

That may be, but by the time it launches here it's going to be so old it's not going to even be worth it. It's not launching here until at least 2019 and that's on an expedited timetable.

[rmc523]

That may be, but by the time it launches here it's going to be so old it's not going to even be worth it. It's not launching here until at least 2019 and that's on an expedited timetable.

 

Not to mention I don't think it'd be up to US standards - mainly buyer preferences, let alone crash standards.

[jpd80]

 

Not to mention I don't think it'd be up to US standards - mainly buyer preferences, let alone crash standards.

You'd be very surprised at the vast difference between Ranger /Everest and Global Colorado/Colorado 7

The GM products need /needed massive reworking to be acceptable in Nth America but my own experience

with Ranger and Everest tells me that the latest evolutions are right on par with what you're seeing with the US

versions of Colorado and Canyon in term sof options and features - they're truly amazing products.

 

 

Although not directly tested to US standards, well over 200 crash tests were performed on the T6 Ranger

to cover all permutations across global markets. Even though it was not designed specifically for Nth America,

Ford's internal protocols are such that the vehicle could be adapted and delivered there in short time if required.

 

The Everest followed a similar development process, so while not corporatized for USA sales, it could be

reconfigured rather quickly as the design covers that possibility.

 

Most likely see next gen Ranger Everest as an evolution - not unlike how like EUCD became CD4

and covered North American requirements as well as all other global applications...

In fact this article for 2015 says Ford is already deep into development of next gen Everest..

.LINKhttp://www.johnhughesford.com.au/?mga_story=1DC05FCF81B42BCBCA257E96007DC4F0&mga_make=Ford&mga_model=Everest&mga_category=future&mga_category=future&mga_make=ford

 

When asked if it was the same team working on the Everest as the first-generation version, Mr Worthington said: “Yep, same team. We have learned all these lessons from the development of this vehicle and now we are working on the next one, as you would expect that’s kind of the process.”

 

As GoAuto reported from the Bangkok motor show in March where the facelifted Ranger pick-up was unveiled, Ford deep into development of the next-generation Ranger, a model that is sold in more than 200 markets.

 

However, Mr Worthington would not be drawn on further development of the T6 architecture beyond Ranger and Everest.

 

According to the product development chief, there are about 1150 engineers and 250 mechanics working at Ford’s Australian design and engineering centre. He added that the number “waxes and wanes” depending on the workload, but the Blue Oval is looking to expand the numbers, given the growing number of development programs in which it is involved.

 

“We are in the process of growing a bit just because of the work that is ahead of us, the cycle plan would say we need a few more people so we are looking now to grow the team,” he said.

 

When asked whether the completion of the Chinese-market Taurus program freed up those engineers to work on similar projects, Mr Worthington said the aim was to grow expertise by having people work on a variety of programs.

 

“I am not buying or selling how much we did on Taurus, but there are a stack of programs we work on and you … look across the skill sets and look across the total and it kind of moves over time,” he said.

 

 

From that article, you can take away that next gen T6 Ranger is well under way and you can

put money on North America having strong input on their versions as well as Bronco being

a unique North American Top Hat developed on that platform.

 

Ford has seen an increase in interest for more "rugged Utilities" and intends pursuing

those needs...so there's a great opportunity to have a rugged Ford Bronco and maybe

an Aviator (Lincolnized Everest "Vignale") while having Ranger as the volume product.

Edited September 24, 2016 by jpd80

[silvrsvt]

 

Ford has seen an increase in interest for more "rugged Utilities" and intends pursuing

those needs...so there's a great opportunity to have a rugged Ford Bronco and maybe

an Aviator (Lincolnized Everest "Vignale") while having Ranger as the volume product.

I still think the Aviator is still going to be a Explorer based RWD product. Too much overlap otherwise.