fuzzymoomoo Posted November 29, 2016 Share Posted November 29, 2016 My experience with engineers is quite frequently they are far from the smartest people in the room, unless their textbook says they're smart. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted November 29, 2016 Share Posted November 29, 2016 I think there is a big difference between being conservative with product updates and new products and production volume and cheapening/decontenting existing vehicles. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted November 29, 2016 Share Posted November 29, 2016 Regarding those who voice concern - first, I'm not seeing where several current Ford platforms are behind those of the competition. Another factor regarding Ford plans to be a 'fast-follower' in tech segments: It is arguable whether they gained anything by being the first to market with MyFord Touch. Now, I think that people who are predicting the 'uberization' of transport--which is probably driving some of Ford's decision making for this market--is a silly conceit. Not as silly as self-driving cars, but still a very silly set of assumptions. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted November 29, 2016 Share Posted November 29, 2016 They lost their advantage with MFT because of all the problems. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted November 29, 2016 Share Posted November 29, 2016 I think there is a big difference between being conservative with product updates and new products and production volume and cheapening/decontenting existing vehicles. It's not a viable long-term strategy, but it's also not a terrible strategy to widen margins in a down market. I mean, if your assumption is that total vehicle sales are going to drop 15%, say, and that ATPs are going to drop by, say 5-8%, you're looking at a 20-23% drop in overall revenue in a market where in the best of the best of times your margin is going to be 12%. Say that you can add 1% to your overall gross by decontenting Titanium trims that you are forecasting will drop from 25% of total volume to, oh, say 15%. In the short term, that makes sense. But decontenting in good times? That's putting short term gains ahead of long-term sustainability. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted November 29, 2016 Share Posted November 29, 2016 They lost their advantage with MFT because of all the problems. That's exactly my point. I would argue that only some of those problems were preventable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted November 29, 2016 Share Posted November 29, 2016 Another factor regarding Ford plans to be a 'fast-follower' in tech segments: It is arguable whether they gained anything by being the first to market with MyFord Touch. Now, I think that people who are predicting the 'uberization' of transport--which is probably driving some of Ford's decision making for this market--is a silly conceit. Not as silly as self-driving cars, but still a very silly set of assumptions. If anything, I think MFT pushed them backward with all the issues it had being released before it was ready. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted November 29, 2016 Share Posted November 29, 2016 If anything, I think MFT pushed them backward with all the issues it had being released before it was ready. Trust me, it was an unmitigated disaster for 2011 Edge owners and I have the scars from the edge forum to prove it. For the first 8-12 months it was locking up twice per week requiring a fuse pull, crashing frequently and having all sorts of problems. It was borderline unusable. By the time it was stable in 2012 the damage was done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted November 29, 2016 Share Posted November 29, 2016 Trust me, it was an unmitigated disaster for 2011 Edge owners and I have the scars from the edge forum to prove it. For the first 8-12 months it was locking up twice per week requiring a fuse pull, crashing frequently and having all sorts of problems. It was borderline unusable. By the time it was stable in 2012 the damage was done. Yeah, between that and the Focus transmission, those are two big scars for the brand. Thankfully they've been stronger in other areas. With the little time I've had to play with SYNC3, it seems vastly better and much closer to the previous Clarion system (which I have and love how it works). Sometimes it's good to be first, like Ford with SYNC. Sometimes it isn't, especially when whatever it is is not ready. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BORG Posted November 29, 2016 Share Posted November 29, 2016 (edited) In recent years Ford was first with many standout features like Park Assist, the hands-free lift gate, capless fuel door, Sync/MyFord, inflatable seat belts and more. All of that happened under Mullally and was instituted corporate wide in a way I've never seen before from Ford, all their cars started sharing systems and were developed to share them. For me that was the most exciting part of Ford's transformation that there was finally some degree of continuity. Most recently Ford started catching up to some other automakers and leading many others with things like LTE radios for app control and standard push-button start. We also saw Sync 3 of course which pushed CarPlay and Android Auto company wide in a 12-month period which leapfrogged GM's early but slower rollout. Ford is also doing a good job adopting some features, although inconsistently, like LED headlamps as standard equipment. All of that is absolutely awesome and it's one of the reasons I like Ford. Then of course there is EcoBoost which has produced easily the best engines among the full-line automakers and available across a huge variety of products and prices, making them very accessible. And Aluminum, an incredibly brave but scary transformation for their most critical business. Although it may not have been worthwhile or necessary it is an important step toward the future. In any case, there is no question Ford is/was one of the industry's biggest influencers and that excitement helped drive their business and image. However there are features I would like to see more widely available, such as 360 cameras...no reason the Edge or Explorer shouldn't have these for example since they already have the cameras on the front. I'm not sure what the hold-up is with this but again they were also among the first in Detroit to put those camera on the front of their cars. Part of it might be Lincoln protectionism because of MKX. But carmakers like Nissan have these systems on everything and often with better camera stitching. Ford and Lincoln were extremely late on a few other things like LED DRLs but they are starting to catch up now and go a step further with LED headlights, although not quite as far as Honda has recently. The tech gap at Lincoln is a little more significant but they have made up for it in essential ways like seating and other thoughtful touches like push-button transmissions and theater lighting and excellent audio systems. The chasis also have technology that make a big difference despite the less sophisticated Ford hardware. Their biggest gap are the screens on the dashboard, either too small or the software is just too poorly designed to accommodate the feature controls that are needed. In any case, all of this is important for building a standout premium product that attracts younger more affluent customers who care about features (like me). I don't want them to lose sight of this. Edited November 29, 2016 by BORG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted November 29, 2016 Share Posted November 29, 2016 (edited) It doesn't matter who get there first with features, what matters is how many buyers like your product enough to purchase it. As far as i can tell Cadillac's venture into chasing BMW 3 and 5 series vehicles with a new dedicated platform has barely been a luke warm success and without teaming Camaro with Alpha, the whole thing would be hardly worth the effort expended on a dedicated RWD platform, GM could have simply reworked Zeta as a SWB Omega and delivered a new CTS and Camaro at a fraction of the cost. I think it funny as heck to watch GM contort Cadillac's cars while not fully capitalizing on Utilities. Lincoln on the other hand had utilities but failed miserably with not keeping navigator fresh and up to spec. That last issue is why Lincoln's APTs are a lot lower than Cadillac and very little to do with all those new cars.. To a degree, I agree with Borg's comment that Lincoln is still operating in the safe zone of controlled development to guarantee quicker ROI but I'm sensing that longer term, vehicles like Continental and Navigator are the sweet spots for least builds with highest profits, Lincoln needs to do better with its mid -sized vehicles, the MKX and MKZ both need more work on sheet metal changes to add a lot more cohesion with Continental and Navigator's styling direction, do that and things get better. Even as a late inclusion, adding a Explorer based Aviator and retiring the MKT would reap immediate benefits to Lincoln's presence in the mid to upper Utility segments. The sweet spot for Lincoln in Nth America is IMO, MKZ, MKX, Aviator and Navigator, MKC the outlier. In China, I suspect that priority would become MKC, MKZ, MKX, Aviator with Navigator as the outlier.. My one excess, I would do the Linc-stang, put it on a slightly longer wheelbase and add mini-siucide rear doors, offer 2.3 EB and 450 HP Raptor V6 &10AT - that would be my only performance car for Lincoln. Edited November 29, 2016 by jpd80 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BORG Posted November 29, 2016 Share Posted November 29, 2016 (edited) I actually have no problem with Lincoln's shared platforms, it's more of an intellectual exercise for auto critics than for customers who will definitely experience something very different from a mass-market car. I don't particularly like Lincoln's design direction right now, I know people seem to like it but for me it's just a duller version Audi or Jaguar design. I wanted something a little more progressive and less sedate and anonymous. But I wish them well with it. At least it's not ugly....just not alluring. It's appropriate for them and it's being done with some care which I can definitley appreciate, but it's clear it needs some iterations to sharpen up. Edited November 29, 2016 by BORG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted November 29, 2016 Share Posted November 29, 2016 In recent years Ford was first with many standout features like Park Assist, the hands-free lift gate, capless fuel door, Sync/MyFord, inflatable seat belts and more. All of that happened under Mullally When were those features added? And bear in mind that the capless fuel door was probably cheaper than the prior design. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2b2 Posted November 30, 2016 Share Posted November 30, 2016 (edited) It doesn't matter who get there first with features, what matters is how many buyers like your product enough to purchase it. As far as i can tell Cadillac's venture into chasing BMW 3 and 5 series vehicles with a new dedicated platform has barely been a luke warm success and without teaming Camaro with Alpha, the whole thing would be hardly worth the effort expended on a dedicated RWD platform, GM could have simply reworked Zeta as a SWB Omega and delivered a new CTS and Camaro at a fraction of the cost. I think it funny as heck to watch GM contort Cadillac's cars while not fully capitalizing on Utilities. Lincoln on the other hand had utilities but failed miserably with not keeping navigator fresh and up to spec. That last issue is why Lincoln's APTs are a lot lower than Cadillac and very little to do with all those new cars.. To a degree, I agree with Borg's comment that Lincoln is still operating in the safe zone of controlled development to guarantee quicker ROI but I'm sensing that longer term, vehicles like Continental and Navigator are the sweet spots for least builds with highest profits, Lincoln needs to do better with its mid -sized vehicles, the MKX and MKZ both need more work on sheet metal changes to add a lot more cohesion with Continental and Navigator's styling direction, do that and things get better. Even as a late inclusion, adding a Explorer based Aviator and retiring the MKT would reap immediate benefits to Lincoln's presence in the mid to upper Utility segments. The sweet spot for Lincoln in Nth America is IMO, MKZ, MKX, Aviator and Navigator, MKC the outlier. In China, I suspect that priority would become MKC, MKZ, MKX, Aviator with Navigator as the outlier.. My one excess, I would do the Linc-stang, put it on a slightly longer wheelbase and add mini-siucide rear doors, offer 2.3 EB and 450 HP Raptor V6 &10AT - that would be my only performance car for Lincoln. great post, Jpd my rant is to find a way to add electrified variant(s) to what I'm calling the STARstang Edited November 30, 2016 by 2b2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbone Posted November 30, 2016 Share Posted November 30, 2016 In recent years Ford was first with many standout features like Park Assist, the hands-free lift gate, capless fuel door, Sync/MyFord, inflatable seat belts and more. All of that happened under Mullally and was instituted corporate wide in a way I've never seen before from Ford, all their cars started sharing systems and were developed to share them. For me that was the most exciting part of Ford's transformation that there was finally some degree of continuity. Most recently Ford started catching up to some other automakers and leading many others with things like LTE radios for app control and standard push-button start. We also saw Sync 3 of course which pushed CarPlay and Android Auto company wide in a 12-month period which leapfrogged GM's early but slower rollout. Ford is also doing a good job adopting some features, although inconsistently, like LED headlamps as standard equipment. All of that is absolutely awesome and it's one of the reasons I like Ford. Then of course there is EcoBoost which has produced easily the best engines among the full-line automakers and available across a huge variety of products and prices, making them very accessible. And Aluminum, an incredibly brave but scary transformation for their most critical business. Although it may not have been worthwhile or necessary it is an important step toward the future. In any case, there is no question Ford is/was one of the industry's biggest influencers and that excitement helped drive their business and image. However there are features I would like to see more widely available, such as 360 cameras...no reason the Edge or Explorer shouldn't have these for example since they already have the cameras on the front. I'm not sure what the hold-up is with this but again they were also among the first in Detroit to put those camera on the front of their cars. Part of it might be Lincoln protectionism because of MKX. But carmakers like Nissan have these systems on everything and often with better camera stitching. Ford and Lincoln were extremely late on a few other things like LED DRLs but they are starting to catch up now and go a step further with LED headlights, although not quite as far as Honda has recently. The tech gap at Lincoln is a little more significant but they have made up for it in essential ways like seating and other thoughtful touches like push-button transmissions and theater lighting and excellent audio systems. The chasis also have technology that make a big difference despite the less sophisticated Ford hardware. Their biggest gap are the screens on the dashboard, either too small or the software is just too poorly designed to accommodate the feature controls that are needed. In any case, all of this is important for building a standout premium product that attracts younger more affluent customers who care about features (like me). I don't want them to lose sight of this. I concur with your assessment. Very positive I might add;) If Lincoln were to copy Cadillac on one aspect, I would like them to modernize the Lincoln logo. Cadillac's new logo is much better than the old one. Lincoln's logo looks very dated to me, which is why I like when they use the lettering and forgo the synbol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted November 30, 2016 Share Posted November 30, 2016 I concur with your assessment. Very positive I might add;) If Lincoln were to copy Cadillac on one aspect, I would like them to modernize the Lincoln logo. Cadillac's new logo is much better than the old one. Lincoln's logo looks very dated to me, which is why I like when they use the lettering and forgo the synbol. They did update the logo a few years ago. Notice the center cross doesn't extend beyond the outer ring now? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbone Posted November 30, 2016 Share Posted November 30, 2016 I actually did not notice that, in respect to the older version. Thanks for pointing it out. That certainly is an improvement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted November 30, 2016 Share Posted November 30, 2016 Another factor regarding Ford plans to be a 'fast-follower' in tech segments: It is arguable whether they gained anything by being the first to market with MyFord Touch. Now, I think that people who are predicting the 'uberization' of transport--which is probably driving some of Ford's decision making for this market--is a silly conceit. Not as silly as self-driving cars, but still a very silly set of assumptions. It's more like manufacturers casting a wider net just in case something with potential becomes an emergent trend, while it's nice to be class leading in everything attached to vehicles, we know that comes at increasing costs so I guess like most items for sale, benefit over competitors versus features desired by actual buyers necessitates a balanced approach.....sometimes you win, sometimes you lose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bzcat Posted November 30, 2016 Share Posted November 30, 2016 (edited) The sweet spot for Lincoln in Nth America is IMO, MKZ, MKX, Aviator and Navigator, MKC the outlier. In China, I suspect that priority would become MKC, MKZ, MKX, Aviator with Navigator as the outlier.. MKC is either the 1st, 2nd or 3rd best selling Lincoln depending on month... hardly an outlier. Compact CUV is a core product for any luxury brand in North America. Look at the volume of Audi Q5 vs. the rest of the Audi range. Or Acura RDX vs. the rest of the Acura range. If Lincoln can't make profit from MKC, it is not worth continuing the brand. In China, the future of Lincoln is going to be a compact sedan to compete with Audi A3 and the new FWD BMW 1 series. Local assembly of MKZ, MKC, and MKX are also inevitable once the brand is established. Edited November 30, 2016 by bzcat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BORG Posted November 30, 2016 Share Posted November 30, 2016 (edited) I think the ultimate goal of the aggressive feature add at Ford was to increase value without increasing costs, that is helped by the large scale distribution of these technologies. Ford was (and in some ways still is) a brand that is thought of as a 'low' brand with cheap bland products and those customers don't like to pay very much for them. The rapid redevelopment of the brand under Mullally helped to correct this to get bigger spenders, although the quality fallout has likely contributed to bigger problems for brand perception. And some products simply didn't do well with customers because of quality and substantive issues, the Focus is a text book case on how not to globalize a product (it actually always has been). I think Ford's focus on design and features has helped tremendously but I would not be surprised now if Fields doesn't see the need to continue this path on all products going forward. Edited November 30, 2016 by BORG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted November 30, 2016 Share Posted November 30, 2016 (edited) I think the ultimate goal of the aggressive feature add Again: When were those features added? I'll make it even simpler: Did Ford, under Mulally, aggressively add features: A) During the recession B) During the recovery This is not a hard question. Think back to what the market was like when you were routinely complaining about Ford/Mulally products lacking features. Edited November 30, 2016 by RichardJensen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
630land Posted December 1, 2016 Share Posted December 1, 2016 Lincoln sales are up this month, so all the gloom and doom is for nothing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted December 2, 2016 Share Posted December 2, 2016 Cadillac's new logo is much better than the old one. Lincoln's logo looks very dated to me Odd how country of origin affects opinions like this. I don't know if I've ever seen someone suggest that Porsche update its logo, and its logo is almost exactly the same in conception as Cadillac's logo minus the laurel wreath & crown. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbone Posted December 2, 2016 Share Posted December 2, 2016 Odd how country of origin affects opinions like this. I don't know if I've ever seen someone suggest that Porsche update its logo, and its logo is almost exactly the same in conception as Cadillac's logo minus the laurel wreath & crown. You have a valid point. Regarding the Cadillac logo, I felt the wreath gave it an old fashioned look, and I feel the new version looks more modern or prominent. Regarding Lincolns logo, the current version, as it was pointed out, with the star completely in the border is ok, but it just doesn't seem to stand out. Perhaps it's just me. Is the background within the border of the star always black, or is it not filled in? I couldn't tell for sure. I will say the current Lincoln logo is better than the old Cadillac logo though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted December 2, 2016 Share Posted December 2, 2016 (edited) I think they could've trimmed the crown and wreath and simplified the shape of the badge and done fine. But what's done is done. Of course, there is sound basis to believe that Antoine de la Mothe Cadillac was a scoundrel, and his arms were fraudulent. You have a valid point. Regarding the Cadillac logo, I felt the wreath gave it an old fashioned look Edited December 2, 2016 by RichardJensen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.