It still seems like getting rid of the Fusion was a mistake.

[silvrsvt]

2 hours ago, akirby said:

But they could have easily standardized on cd3 instead of cd4. I understand the desire to sell more options and more expensive models but they misread the market.  Instead of buying more expensive sedans buyers went to crossovers.

 

Apparently the reason the EUCD (what eventually became the CD4) came about was the CD3 couldn't fit I5 from Volvo in it and it also shared parts from the C1.  

Also Ford started divesting itself of Mazda in 2008, but I'm not sure what impact to IP that would have for the continued use of the CD3 platform. 

[ice-capades]

1 hour ago, Chrisgb said:

On topic: IMO Mercury did its best when it was aligned structurally with Lincon rather than Ford, up to the Panther era IOW. Having said that, we had a 2006 Mercury Milan (CD3) and we chose it over the Fusion for its nicer interior and option package content. And of course the cute little analog clock in the dash that was in vogue at the time. Nice car, big enough for us, and at that time a fwd Lincoln MKZ didn't seem right; couldn't swing an LS either.

Off topic but within range: 20-20 hindsight; i think Mulally should have axed the Lincoln Division at the same time as Merc, and gone the EU Vignale route with One Ford. Make it a limited model above or instead of Titanium & Platinum trims, with exclusive options or available only on Vignale the first couple years. Maybe do a Lincoln-ish F/R clip treatment. The faded-in-the-public's eye Lincoln Motor Company can't be adding to the Blue oval's bottom line with a separate sales channel for 75,000-odd sales. I believe that that many Ford Vignales could have been sold with a lot less overhead even at a lower, "Mercury" price point.. Didn't envy "One Ford Alan's" job of trying to convince WCF to cut the Division. I wasn't there of course, but it would've been interesting to be a fly on the wall.

 

Alan Mulally expressed strongly that the Lincoln Division should be dropped. It was the Ford family members that insisted on keeping Lincoln and investing in new product to revitalize the brand. 

[akirby]

2 hours ago, 7Mary3 said:

Buick also manages to outsell Lincoln in North America....... 

 

Gee I wonder why?  Buick starts at $23K.  Lincoln starts at $38k.  

[akirby]

2 hours ago, 7Mary3 said:

 

No problem with GMC, it fits just fine and is very profitable. 

But that’s not the right question.  The question is what would happen if they made Denali trims on Chevys.  Same vehicle different badge.  Don’t tell me gmc buyers would buy a ford or ram or Toyota instead.  That makes no sense.

[akirby]

1 hour ago, Chrisgb said:

On topic: IMO Mercury did its best when it was aligned structurally with Lincon rather than Ford, up to the Panther era IOW. Having said that, we had a 2006 Mercury Milan (CD3) and we chose it over the Fusion for its nicer interior and option package content. And of course the cute little analog clock in the dash that was in vogue at the time. Nice car, big enough for us, and at that time a fwd Lincoln MKZ didn't seem right; couldn't swing an LS either.

Off topic but within range: 20-20 hindsight; i think Mulally should have axed the Lincoln Division at the same time as Merc, and gone the EU Vignale route with One Ford. Make it a limited model above or instead of Titanium & Platinum trims, with exclusive options or available only on Vignale the first couple years. Maybe do a Lincoln-ish F/R clip treatment. The faded-in-the-public's eye Lincoln Motor Company can't be adding to the Blue oval's bottom line with a separate sales channel for 75,000-odd sales. I believe that that many Ford Vignales could have been sold with a lot less overhead even at a lower, "Mercury" price point.. Didn't envy "One Ford Alan's" job of trying to convince WCF to cut the Division. I wasn't there of course, but it would've been interesting to be a fly on the wall.

 

I had a 06 Fusion.  Milan had the exact same interior.  MKZ was different.
 

They should have gone ahead with global RWD and 100% unique designs in the early 2000s,  I’ll say our Nautilus is the best vehicle we’ve ever owned as far as design, comfort and features.  The higher price is totally justified.

[Chrisgb]

59 minutes ago, ice-capades said:

 

Alan Mulally expressed strongly that the Lincoln Division should be dropped. It was the Ford family members that insisted on keeping Lincoln and investing in new product to revitalize the brand. 

"Didn't envy "One Ford Alan's" job of trying to convince WCF to cut the Division. I wasn't there of course, but it would've been interesting to be a fly on the wall".

[Chrisgb]

44 minutes ago, akirby said:

 

I had a 06 Fusion.  Milan had the exact same interior.  MKZ was different.
 

They should have gone ahead with global RWD and 100% unique designs in the early 2000s,  I’ll say our Nautilus is the best vehicle we’ve ever owned as far as design, comfort and features.  The higher price is totally justified.

The Fusion/ Milan layout was the same, but the center stack and steering wheel had more bling, vs Fusion and of course, an analog clock. 

but who cares now. Both of our cars are probably rebar in somebody's driveway.

[rmc523]

11 hours ago, fuzzymoomoo said:

Fusion is kind of the odd man out in that argument. Looks aside, they gave it just about every feature Ford had to offer at the time its last model year. 

 people want the latest and greatest looks wise.

tesla is an enigma in that regard.  Barely being able to tell it’s different didn’t help sales, but obviously the market was shifting too on top of that.

 

1 hour ago, akirby said:

 

I had a 06 Fusion.  Milan had the exact same interior.  MKZ was different.
 

They should have gone ahead with global RWD and 100% unique designs in the early 2000s,  I’ll say our Nautilus is the best vehicle we’ve ever owned as far as design, comfort and features.  The higher price is totally justified.

 

Even if they’re not the right decision, at least when GM gets an idea, they do it and stick with it until it fails and they drop it.  Ford stops and starts so many things it’s ridiculous.

what’s the phrase….paralysis by analysis?

[2005Explorer]

11 hours ago, akirby said:

I was impressed that Ford had hybrid and PHEV models and AWD and even offered a manual for awhile.  And fully loaded Titanium’s.  Then they added the 2.7Leb in 2017.  But the take rate on the more expensive models and options wasn’t very high.  Seems most buyers just wanted cheap basic transportation so Ford never recovered the cost of that expensive Mondeo platform.  From a business standpoint they would have been more successful following Camry and keeping the cd3 platform without all the bells and whistles and keeping costs lower.  But on paper it seemed like a good move to differentiate it from the competition.  Buyers just didn’t cooperate. 

The CD3 (Mazda 6) based Fusions (Milan MkZ) were some of the most reliable cars Ford ever built. I still see a ton of those cars on the road.

[DeluxeStang]

2 hours ago, ice-capades said:

 

Alan Mulally expressed strongly that the Lincoln Division should be dropped. It was the Ford family members that insisted on keeping Lincoln and investing in new product to revitalize the brand. 

It was smart to keep the brand alive. Scaling things back can obviously save billions of dollars in the long run.But if you keep hacking away, dropping brands and models, you end up like Chrysler, a brand that sells one model, the Pacifica. That's how a brand dies. 

 

 

That's what concerns me about Ford's product strategy these last few years. They're cutting most of their affordable, mainstream models, the edge, escape, obviously all their sedans and hatchbacks, they just keep scaling down in terms of overall sales volume, and lineup variety in the name of profitablity above all else. 

 

Not a terrible strategy, but I fear if Ford keeps doing that, in 20 or 30 years, they're going to be this irrelevant brand hardly any mainstream consumers know exists anymore. I don't want Ford to keep shedding sales volume until they get to the point where they're only making like a million cars a year, if that, a shadow of their former self. They seem to have forsaken sales volume, affordability, and mass appeal, the core tenants of the Ford brand. 

[DeluxeStang]

3 hours ago, 2005Explorer said:

The CD3 (Mazda 6) based Fusions (Milan MkZ) were some of the most reliable cars Ford ever built. I still see a ton of those cars on the road.

Weren't the newer fusions Mazda based as well? I've always heard good things about those cars. I believe some of Mazda's engines are still present in Ford's lineup, like the 2.5 duratec used on things like the escape/maverick hybrid. Such a shame that most buyers overlook Mazda, they're hands down the most appealing Japanese cars imo. 

Edited December 16, 2023 by DeluxeStang

[2005Explorer]

1 hour ago, DeluxeStang said:

It was smart to keep the brand alive. Scaling things back can obviously save billions of dollars in the long run.But if you keep hacking away, dropping brands and models, you end up like Chrysler, a brand that sells one model, the Pacifica. That's how a brand dies. 

 

 

That's what concerns me about Ford's product strategy these last few years. They're cutting most of their affordable, mainstream models, the edge, escape, obviously all their sedans and hatchbacks, they just keep scaling down in terms of overall sales volume, and lineup variety in the name of profitablity above all else. 

 

Not a terrible strategy, but I fear if Ford keeps doing that, in 20 or 30 years, they're going to be this irrelevant brand hardly any mainstream consumers know exists anymore. I don't want Ford to keep shedding sales volume until they get to the point where they're only making like a million cars a year, if that, a shadow of their former self. They seem to have forsaken sales volume, affordability, and mass appeal, the core tenants of the Ford brand. 

Henry Ford would be rolling in his grave if that happens because the Ford brand was always supposed to represent affordable transportation for average people. I know they want to push way upscale to focus on $85k+ large loaded trucks and SUVs, but we are one recession away from those rotting on the lots. It is important they remain a full line automaker. People are hungry for affordable vehicles and Ford needs to offer them along with their loaded $85k large trucks and SUVs.

[7Mary3]

4 hours ago, akirby said:

But that’s not the right question.  The question is what would happen if they made Denali trims on Chevys.  Same vehicle different badge.  Don’t tell me gmc buyers would buy a ford or ram or Toyota instead.  That makes no sense.

 

Of course they wouldn't.  It has a lot to do with the franchises.  The GMC brand allows Buick and Cadillac dealers to sell premium trucks/CUV/SUV's, along with Hummers.     

 

Since there really isn't any 'stand alone' Lincoln dealers anymore, it would make more sense for Ford to axe what's left of Lincoln than for GM to drop GMC.  Not saying I would like to see it, but I'll bet it would be easy to make the case to dump every Lincoln except for the Navigator and simply sell them at Ford dealers as an upper trim level to the Expedition.  

[silvrsvt]

1 hour ago, DeluxeStang said:

That's what concerns me about Ford's product strategy these last few years. They're cutting most of their affordable, mainstream models, the edge, escape, obviously all their sedans and hatchbacks, they just keep scaling down in terms of overall sales volume, and lineup variety in the name of profitablity above all else. 

 

9 minutes ago, 2005Explorer said:

Henry Ford would be rolling in his grave if that happens because the Ford brand was always supposed to represent affordable transportation for average people. I know they want to push way upscale to focus on $85k+ large loaded trucks and SUVs, but we are one recession away from those rotting on the lots. It is important they remain a full line automaker. People are hungry for affordable vehicles and Ford needs to offer them along with their loaded $85k large trucks and SUVs.

 

Uh the Maverick isn't affordable?! 

 

Market is moving away from sedans-they only make up 20% of total sales with the rest being Trucks and CUV/SUVs as of last month...

 

The market has changed over the past 30 years or so since I've started to drive-back in the 1990s you had fleet dumping and people would only keep cars for 5-7 years or so. That helped with keeping the used market pricing down. 

 

Fast forward to today, people are keeping cars far longer (12 years is the last thing I saw) and people don't mind spending more on a swiss army knife a vehicle like a pickup or SUV so they can "do more with it" then a sedan. The low end of the market is covered by the used car market or much older vehicles that still have a few years  of life left in them. 

[akirby]

3 hours ago, Chrisgb said:

The Fusion/ Milan layout was the same, but the center stack and steering wheel had more bling, vs Fusion and of course, an analog clock. 

but who cares now. Both of our cars are probably rebar in somebody's driveway.

Aluminum vs piano black was the only difference.  Both had the clock.

 

 

Edited December 16, 2023 by akirby

[silvrsvt]

10 minutes ago, 7Mary3 said:

Of course they wouldn't.  It has a lot to do with the franchises.  The GMC brand allows Buick and Cadillac dealers to sell premium trucks/CUV/SUV's, along with Hummers.     

 

In my area, we have stand alone Cadillac dealerships and GMC/Buick are together at the same dealerships.

 

If Ford got rid of Lincoln, there is no way they could command an extra $26K for a super high end Explorer that a Black Label Aviator can. That only works on the F-series lineup. 

[akirby]

15 minutes ago, 7Mary3 said:

 

Of course they wouldn't.  It has a lot to do with the franchises.  The GMC brand allows Buick and Cadillac dealers to sell premium trucks/CUV/SUV's, along with Hummers.     

 

Since there really isn't any 'stand alone' Lincoln dealers anymore, it would make more sense for Ford to axe what's left of Lincoln than for GM to drop GMC.  Not saying I would like to see it, but I'll bet it would be easy to make the case to dump every Lincoln except for the Navigator and simply sell them at Ford dealers as an upper trim level to the Expedition.  

I understand the dealer issue and the China issue with Buick.

[2005Explorer]

50 minutes ago, silvrsvt said:

 

 

Uh the Maverick isn't affordable?! 

 

Market is moving away from sedans-they only make up 20% of total sales with the rest being Trucks and CUV/SUVs as of last month...

 

The market has changed over the past 30 years or so since I've started to drive-back in the 1990s you had fleet dumping and people would only keep cars for 5-7 years or so. That helped with keeping the used market pricing down. 

 

Fast forward to today, people are keeping cars far longer (12 years is the last thing I saw) and people don't mind spending more on a swiss army knife a vehicle like a pickup or SUV so they can "do more with it" then a sedan. The low end of the market is covered by the used car market or much older vehicles that still have a few years  of life left in them. 

The Maverick, Escape and Bronco Sport are the currently affordable vehicles in Ford’s line up. The Escape is supposed to be cancelled next year. I wouldn’t be surprised if Ford doesn’t pull the plug on the Maverick and Bronco Sport soon after.

[sullynd]

10 minutes ago, 2005Explorer said:

The Maverick, Escape and Bronco Sport are the currently affordable vehicles in Ford’s line up. The Escape is supposed to be cancelled next year. I wouldn’t be surprised if Ford doesn’t pull the plug on the Maverick and Bronco Sport soon after.

You wouldn’t be surprised if they don’t?

[silvrsvt]

9 minutes ago, 2005Explorer said:

The Maverick, Escape and Bronco Sport are the currently affordable vehicles in Ford’s line up. The Escape is supposed to be cancelled next year. I wouldn’t be surprised if Ford doesn’t pull the plug on the Maverick and Bronco Sport soon after.

 

Huh?
 

The Escape/Corsair are sticking around till 2027 or 2028MY. I wouldn't be the least bit suprised to see it slide to right a bit, given how EV acceptance is over the next 24 months. There is money earmarked per the UAW agreement for updates at LAP, but I don't think any EV production won't start till the new contract in 2027/8...

 

The Bronco Sport should be due for a refresh in 2024 or 2025 and documents have that in production till at least 2029 or so. I think the Maverick is the same deal. 

 

Keep in mind Ford will keep ICE production going in some form till 2035 the last time they put out anything, that might change if EV acceptance grows and it doesn't make sense to. 

[Chrisgb]

1 hour ago, akirby said:

Aluminum vs piano black was the only difference.  Both had the clock.

 

 

This must be an LX or whatever was above the base Fusion. I just remember the one we looked at was not as nice as the Milan. Both were at an F-L-M dealer.and the Fusion didn't have the all important analog clock (happy wife happy life).

 

Edited December 16, 2023 by Chrisgb
webloc would not load properly

[akirby]

36 minutes ago, 2005Explorer said:

 I wouldn’t be surprised if Ford doesn’t pull the plug on the Maverick and Bronco Sport soon after.

Why would they kill vehicles with little to no competition selling at or above MSRP?

[silvrsvt]

11 minutes ago, akirby said:

Why would they kill vehicles with little to no competition selling at or above MSRP?

 

Seems like the Bronco Sport is getting rebates-the dealership I got my Bronco from was sending me stuff with $3-5K off, but I didn't look into it super close to see if they where clustering things together to get that amount that 99% of the car buying public wouldn't be able to get. 

[Rick73]

1 hour ago, 2005Explorer said:

Henry Ford would be rolling in his grave if that happens because the Ford brand was always supposed to represent affordable transportation for average people. I know they want to push way upscale to focus on $85k+ large loaded trucks and SUVs, but we are one recession away from those rotting on the lots. It is important they remain a full line automaker. People are hungry for affordable vehicles and Ford needs to offer them along with their loaded $85k large trucks and SUVs.

Excellent point.  I’m not sure when emphasis on affordability started to fade, but would guess it was around same time Japanese cars started to compete more directly with “affordable” American cars.  Regardless of reason, it does seem Ford no longer pursues lower-cost versions of vehicles like Pinto, original Maverick, Fairlane, Galaxie, etc.  And to be clear, I’m not referring to sedans versus SUVs and trucks.  I’m talking about simpler stripped-down versions of these vehicles.  I know current models also have less expensive variants, but in some cases they could be made cheaper still.  Obviously the argument would be that stripped down vehicles won’t sell at a price that makes them profitable enough.

[AM222]

16 hours ago, akirby said:

But the reason they let a model lag behind is usually that it’s already not very profitable.  You don’t see them doing it with F series.  

Failure to make a class leading model is the reason they lag behind (not profitable).  The CR-V,  Rav4, and Tucson for example sell well and are global models. They are more successful and most likely more profitable than the current gen Escape (something Ford sees as an unimportant commodity model). 

 

 

 

 

Edited December 16, 2023 by AM222