Jump to content

Did Ford make a mistake killing its sedans?


Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, fuzzymoomoo said:


Ranger is not a good example. They had a build schedule for Focus/C-Max to build out in order for them to be able to even start retooling the plant. Any sense of urgency was negated by that. Explorer is a better example. After it was delayed it was only about 2 years from the time the program was restarted to production trials. Newer programs are getting faster. That is one of the directives from Jim Hackett that's actually starting to take hold. 

You obviously know better than I. Thanks for that info.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, silvrsvt said:

 

Yeah that would make more sense, but if they knew almost 4 years before (2015), you'd think they would have made changes. 


I think it would have been worse to cancel those contracts in the middle of production. Not only would it have been more expensive but you risk relationships with your suppliers, which is why you hardly ever see production stopped in the middle of the cycle. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, fuzzymoomoo said:

Looking back, the biggest issue I have with how long it took for Ranger to arrive is how long it took to retool the plant. I don't understand why it took 6 months when it could have been done much faster.

The US Ranger was a piggyback of the final refresh or the Global Ranger which launched in September/October,

maybe supply contracts were timed with that and didn't really mesh with Focus EOP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, silvrsvt said:

 

Yeah that would make more sense, but if they knew almost 4 years before (2015), you'd think they would have made changes. 

Decision on Ranger was timed with final refresh or Global Ranger which began development in late 2016

right about the time Ford car sales had flattened out and Colorado crew cab sales were going well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, fuzzymoomoo said:

Looking back, the biggest issue I have with how long it took for Ranger to arrive is how long it took to retool the plant. I don't understand why it took 6 months when it could have been done much faster.

Any  chance that extended time was put to good  use to  insure a smooth start up vs. the CF that the Explorer launch turned into?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Bob Rosadini said:

Any  chance that extended time was put to good  use to  insure a smooth start up vs. the CF that the Explorer launch turned into?

 

The Explorer issue seems to be a plant issue-not a process issue. They did quick turn arounds at the F-150 plants without any major issues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, fuzzymoomoo said:

Looking back, the biggest issue I have with how long it took for Ranger to arrive is how long it took to retool the plant. I don't understand why it took 6 months when it could have been done much faster.


Maybe the development team couldn’t move any faster (drivetrain and suspension testing, tuning, epa and DOT certification, etc).

 

The real issue with Ranger is that it wasn’t considered in the initial T6 program and it and the Bronco project got started about 2 years too late.  Somewhat understandable though since there wasn’t any readily available factory space at the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, rmc523 said:

 

If/when they do revive a sedan-like vehicle, I also think they need to align themselves closer to the Toyota model of keeping the same underlying platform for longer than redoing it every redesign.  That seems to help them out.


Exactly.  Since C2 is global and hybrid capable I do t expect any major changes for the next 3-4 product cycles.  Just tweaks.  Same for CD6 and the other platforms.

 

Same for powertrains now that I think about it.  Focus on BEVs and top hats and features.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, akirby said:


Exactly.  Since C2 is global and hybrid capable I do t expect any major changes for the next 3-4 product cycles.  Just tweaks.  Same for CD6 and the other platforms.

 

Same for powertrains now that I think about it.  Focus on BEVs and top hats and features.

 

Yeah, people most notice the parts they see/feel.  Not necessarily what's underneath.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, rmc523 said:

 

Yeah, people most notice the parts they see/feel.  Not necessarily what's underneath.

 

It all depends-I know I was sitting in a 2017 Mustang GT while my wife was waiting on the financing on her Escape when we got it....the seating position and feel as more or less identical to my 2006 Mustang GT I had at the time.

 

The interior and what not was "different" but it didn't feel like that I was sitting in a brand new car that had a major update done to it. I'm sure the driving dynamics would have been better, but the overall feel "felt" the same. 

I had the same feeling when I got my 1998 Mustang GT-it wasn't a huge improvement over my old 1986 Escort GT I had years prior to it (I had it about 5 years prior-was in the Army for four years and got out and got the Mustang) the overall experience felt the same-something based out of the 1980s.

 

The 2006 Mustang GT was light years better in every way. I had a friend who had a 2004 GT Convertible and it felt like my 1998 GT...then she got a 2007 GT convertible...and it was a night and day difference...no cowl shake and the car felt 100% tighter. 

 

Going from the 2010 Escape to the 2017-same thing...quantum leap improvement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, silvrsvt said:

 

It all depends-I know I was sitting in a 2017 Mustang GT while my wife was waiting on the financing on her Escape when we got it....the seating position and feel as more or less identical to my 2006 Mustang GT I had at the time.

 

The interior and what not was "different" but it didn't feel like that I was sitting in a brand new car that had a major update done to it. I'm sure the driving dynamics would have been better, but the overall feel "felt" the same. 

I had the same feeling when I got my 1998 Mustang GT-it wasn't a huge improvement over my old 1986 Escort GT I had years prior to it (I had it about 5 years prior-was in the Army for four years and got out and got the Mustang) the overall experience felt the same-something based out of the 1980s.

 

The 2006 Mustang GT was light years better in every way. I had a friend who had a 2004 GT Convertible and it felt like my 1998 GT...then she got a 2007 GT convertible...and it was a night and day difference...no cowl shake and the car felt 100% tighter. 

 

Going from the 2010 Escape to the 2017-same thing...quantum leap improvement.

 

I'm talking average buyer.  "ohhh it got a new dash, pretty!!!!   I'll take it!"

 

vs. Ford's recent "we installed a rotary shifter, its new!"

Edited by rmc523
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In unrelated news, GM has formed an alliance with Honda and will share BEV and ICE platforms,

did GM just find a way to reenter car segments by outsourcing to Honda and also selling BEVs to Honda?

 

Should Ford be looking at its alliance with VW. and exploring more avenues to deliver  harder business plan  vehicles? 

What about an alliance with Toyota?

Edited by jpd80
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jpd80 said:

In unrelated news, GM has formed an alliance with Honda and will share BEV and ICE platforms,

did GM just find a way to reenter car segments by outsourcing to Honda and also selling BEVs to Honda?

 

Should Ford be looking at its alliance with VW. and exploring more avenues to deliver  harder business plan  vehicles? 

What about an alliance with Toyota?

 

Well...if he hasn't burned those bridges...someone who will have the top seat at Ford knows a thing or two about Toyota...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I supposed in fringe markets like South America or Australia a rebadged Golf may make some strategic sense. But honestly, I don't see why Ford needs to waste time selling rebadged Jetta in the US... sedan sales is basically over for Ford in the US (and large swath of the world). It's like minivan from 20 years ago... there is still volume but only enough for the top 3 players  and everyone will move on to something else. VW is not a top 3 player in sedans in the US... its fate is basically the same as Ford. 

 

In Europe, the competitive situation is different - there is only 4 volume players left in hatchback/sedans: VW, Ford, Stellantis, and Renault so they have achieves a kind of stable equilibrium. The war in Europe is on CUVs and EVs only. And Ford needs to add a bunch more CUVs very fast or it will get sidelined faster than you can say Fiat what. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, jpd80 said:

In unrelated news, GM has formed an alliance with Honda and will share BEV and ICE platforms,

did GM just find a way to reenter car segments by outsourcing to Honda and also selling BEVs to Honda?

 

Should Ford be looking at its alliance with VW. and exploring more avenues to deliver  harder business plan  vehicles? 

What about an alliance with Toyota?

 

Maybe VW is worth a try, but Toyota, no effen way! Toyota makes boring ass appliances. They suck so bad at building fun to drive cars that they have to outsource the design of their sports cars!

Edited by AGR
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, AGR said:

 

Maybe VW is worth a try, but Toyota, no effen way! Toyota makes boring ass appliances. They suck so bad at building fun to drive cars that they have to outsource the design of their sports cars!

All I'm saying is that the mid-sized car segment is basically controlled by Toyota and Honda,

GM is in bed with Honda for a sedan, so why not knock on Toyota's door and see what happens.

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...