Watchdevil Posted October 21, 2006 Share Posted October 21, 2006 The Fairlane is a Freestyle correction. Ford understood it miscalculated on the Freestyle so the Fairlane is a new attempt. I'm not convinced they are getting it yet. The new GM Lamda utes are much more on the nose than what Ford has been able to do thus far. Ford doesn't know what they are doing anymore... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgey Posted October 21, 2006 Share Posted October 21, 2006 (edited) Ford doesn't know what they are doing anymore... I think the Fairlane is an example of designer indulgence, I dont think the average Ford consumer is going to be interested. They don't want a design, they need a practical hauler that happens to be attractive. People will see the Fairlane and wonder what the hell it is and if it will work as well as the Pilots, Pacificas, and Acadias of the world. Edited October 21, 2006 by Edgey Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swenson88 Posted October 21, 2006 Share Posted October 21, 2006 I think the Fairlane is an example of designer indulgence, I dont think the average Ford consumer is going to be interested. They don't want a design, they need a practical hauler that happens to be attractive. People will see the Fairlane and wonder what the hell it is and if it will work as well as the Pilots, Pacificas, and Acadias of the world. I'll have to disagree. At least the Fairlane is a risk. If the interior of the Fairlane can be as useful as a minivan I think it will do very well. For unknown reasons Ford simply sucked at making minivans, so they might as well try something else and see if it's a success. They really couldn't do WORSE than the Freestar has done. Also, I don't think Ford should keep aiming to please just the average Ford consumer, that's not going to get them anywhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted October 21, 2006 Share Posted October 21, 2006 People will see the Fairlane and wonder what the hell it is and if it will work as well as the Pilots, Pacificas, and Acadias of the world. Well, I guess their first clue will be the rough similarity in dimensions. I like how you've already lumped the Acadia in as a success. The Acadia's interior dimensions, for passengers, are hardly worlds above the Freestyle (in fact the Freestyle has about 4" more 2nd row legroom), and with seats folded flat, it provides only a marginally wider load floor, and one not significantly longer. Yet it weighs 800lbs more than the Freestyle. According to published speculation, its starting price is also going to be significantly above the Freestyle, so it will certainly be interesting to see what happens. To me, the success of the Lambdas is not a fait accompli. GM may, once they have a Chevrolet version, have enough work to consistently keep a factory running, but not before then, IMO. Especially since they're debuting two of these models from their smaller dealership networks (GMC and Saturn). I would say 4-5k monthly volume from GMC and Saturn and 3-4k from Buick is where these vehicles will settle in. Had they gone the Chevy route, they may have gotten volume equal to GMC and Saturn combined, but.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
range Posted October 22, 2006 Share Posted October 22, 2006 Well, I guess their first clue will be the rough similarity in dimensions. I like how you've already lumped the Acadia in as a success. The Acadia's interior dimensions, for passengers, are hardly worlds above the Freestyle (in fact the Freestyle has about 4" more 2nd row legroom), and with seats folded flat, it provides only a marginally wider load floor, and one not significantly longer. Yet it weighs 800lbs more than the Freestyle. According to published speculation, its starting price is also going to be significantly above the Freestyle, so it will certainly be interesting to see what happens. To me, the success of the Lambdas is not a fait accompli. GM may, once they have a Chevrolet version, have enough work to consistently keep a factory running, but not before then, IMO. Especially since they're debuting two of these models from their smaller dealership networks (GMC and Saturn). I would say 4-5k monthly volume from GMC and Saturn and 3-4k from Buick is where these vehicles will settle in. Had they gone the Chevy route, they may have gotten volume equal to GMC and Saturn combined, but.... The Acadia starts at $30K, the same starting price as the 5.4L V8 powered, six-speed auto, 9200# towing capable Expedition. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
630land Posted October 22, 2006 Share Posted October 22, 2006 I bet this "Mercury" is the freshened 2008 F-style. I don't think they will bother with any Merc version, and "Montecello"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Watchdevil Posted October 22, 2006 Share Posted October 22, 2006 I don't understand why Mercury wouldn't get a Freestyle. It probably wouldn't sell much better than the outgoing minivan, but it should at least sell above 1,000 a month. That's volume the Freestyle badly needs. I always liked the Monterey name.. And then they stuck in on a minivan... I think it would be better suited for the Freestyle variant... I don't like Monticello... I dont know why... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wescoent Posted October 22, 2006 Share Posted October 22, 2006 I like the idea of a Mercury Freestyle... makes way too much sense not to do. With the 3.5 and nice interior appointments, it'd be the perfect replacement for the Monterey minivan, assuming no Fairlane clone is coming to Merc. I think it's very unfortunate that Mercury won't be getting a Fairlane, considering how utterly amazing it's looking to be, even in Ford trimings. Naming-wise, I'd say Montego MX would be a good name, but Monticello would work just as well. Monticello does sound suitable for a large sedan, but I don't see Mercury stretching the Montego to replace the Grand Marquis, nor changing the Grand Marquis name. Younger buyers don't want a sedan any bigger than the Montego, and any younger buyers who want a large luxurious sedan would be loaded enough to spring for the MKS-L Lincoln that's eventually coming out. Therefore, why scare away older buyers who would be buying Grand Marquis sedans anyway? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
{CARD-SHARK} Posted October 22, 2006 Share Posted October 22, 2006 I like the idea of a Mercury Freestyle... makes way too much sense not to do. With the 3.5 and nice interior appointments, it'd be the perfect replacement for the Monterey minivan, assuming no Fairlane clone is coming to Merc. I think it's very unfortunate that Mercury won't be getting a Fairlane, considering how utterly amazing it's looking to be, even in Ford trimings. Naming-wise, I'd say Montego MX would be a good name, but Monticello would work just as well. Monticello does sound suitable for a large sedan, but I don't see Mercury stretching the Montego to replace the Grand Marquis, nor changing the Grand Marquis name. Younger buyers don't want a sedan any bigger than the Montego, and any younger buyers who want a large luxurious sedan would be loaded enough to spring for the MKS-L Lincoln that's eventually coming out. Therefore, why scare away older buyers who would be buying Grand Marquis sedans anyway? I'm in my 30's and I'll buy a Grand Marquis simply because it gets good gas mileage like the Montego does but for less money. I test drove several models by the way. And, I'm used to driving the traditional RWD vehicles anyway. Plus they are safer... Sorry, but you will not see me in a small car ever again. Not with the road hazards in this state... Namely potholes, bad drivers, and deer! Whoever mentioned about building the Colony Park. I can't understand why Ford decided to quit making station wagons (LTD/Country Squire/Grand Marquis/Colony Park) 15 years ago! I just don't understand their line of thought sometimes. They had their use and versatility while getting adequate gas mileage. These crossovers are nothing but chic mobiles that are puny and can't really tow anything. More like a yuppie status-mobile if you ask me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swenson88 Posted October 22, 2006 Share Posted October 22, 2006 I'm in my 30's and I'll buy a Grand Marquis simply because it gets good gas mileage like the Montego does but for less money. I test drove several models by the way. And, I'm used to driving the traditional RWD vehicles anyway. #1 ) Plus they are safer... Sorry, but you will not see me in a #2) small car ever again. Not with the road hazards in this state... Namely potholes, bad drivers, and deer! Whoever mentioned about building the Colony Park. #3) I can't understand why Ford decided to quit making station wagons (LTD/Country Squire/Grand Marquis/Colony Park) 15 years ago! I just don't understand their line of thought sometimes. They had their use and versatility while getting adequate gas mileage. #4) These crossovers are nothing but chic mobiles that are puny and can't really tow anything. More like a yuppie status-mobile if you ask me. Okay, here we go: #1) Not true, that's why we have crash test ratings. I don't know what makes you think a RWD vehicle is "safer" than any other type of driveline, but any vehicle can be made safe, not just RWD. #2) Are you saying the D3 cars are "small" or are you just saying you won't buy anything smaller than a Panther? I can assure you there's nothing small about the 500/Montego/Freestyle vehicles, they're just much more efficiently packaged on the exterior than the Panthers which have way too much overhang front and rear, relics in terms of their design and packaging. #3) Ford quit building station wagons for the same reason everyone else did - the public stopped buying them in large enough numbers to justify their existence. If you want to be specific, the Freestyle is very much a station wagon. #4) Status-mobiles they may be, but people looking to buy a status-mobile are much more willing to throw down lots of money compared with that average joe looking for cheap basic transportation. Cheap transportation means low profits and less money for Ford, not exactly a smart business plan. If you want cheap basic transportation that's where the Kias and other low-cost options come in, Ford needs to move above that mentality. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgey Posted October 22, 2006 Share Posted October 22, 2006 (edited) Well, I guess their first clue will be the rough similarity in dimensions. I like how you've already lumped the Acadia in as a success. The Acadia's interior dimensions, for passengers, are hardly worlds above the Freestyle (in fact the Freestyle has about 4" more 2nd row legroom), and with seats folded flat, it provides only a marginally wider load floor, and one not significantly longer. Yet it weighs 800lbs more than the Freestyle. According to published speculation, its starting price is also going to be significantly above the Freestyle, so it will certainly be interesting to see what happens. To me, the success of the Lambdas is not a fait accompli. GM may, once they have a Chevrolet version, have enough work to consistently keep a factory running, but not before then, IMO. Especially since they're debuting two of these models from their smaller dealership networks (GMC and Saturn). I would say 4-5k monthly volume from GMC and Saturn and 3-4k from Buick is where these vehicles will settle in. Had they gone the Chevy route, they may have gotten volume equal to GMC and Saturn combined, but.... This market segment is not bursting with fresh or competent competitors so we know that some of the first stylish and affordable entries are going to absorb the enormous initial demand. The Lamdas are probably the first vehicles of its kind designed to pick up where all of the others have missed the mark, from Pacifica to Freestyle. We know these vehicles will be a success for the same reason we know the Edge will be a success, they are the new "IT" vehicles with some very convincing advantages over the fading alternatives. In this case, the old Explorer and Trailblazer icons. I don't know why it's unreasonable to believe the Lamda will be successful. I believe the Fairlane is meant to be a niche player in the segment and this might be the reason why we haven't see a commitment to eliminate the Freestyle from the portfolio. I'm very concerned that Ford does not have an adequate alternative to the Explorer, which they continue to protect by not offering a proper CUV alternative. That is unless they intend to replace the Explorer with a Lamda competitor, but I really doubt it. The fact that the Fairlane is smaller than the Lamdas, even if minor by some estimations, is evidence that Ford will have a difficult time competing fully with the Fairlane alone. Indeed, GM may be asking for trouble by putting too many eggs in one basket, however Ford has to avoid asking their customers to chose between very dissimilar products even if they technically cover many segments. The person wanting an Fairlane is not going to want an Explorer, and the person wanting an Explorer is not going to want a Fairlane. The same is true of the Edge, the person wanting the Edge is not going to want an Escape so why assume both vehicles will cover the market spread? Edited October 22, 2006 by Edgey Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted October 22, 2006 Share Posted October 22, 2006 (edited) This market segment is not bursting with fresh or competent competitors so we know that some of the first stylish and affordable entries are going to absorb the enormous initial demand. The Lamdas are probably the first vehicles of its kind designed to pick up where all of the others have missed the mark, from Pacifica to Freestyle. We know these vehicles will be a success for the same reason we know the Edge will be a success, they are the new "IT" vehicles with some very convincing advantages over the fading alternatives. In this case, the old Explorer and Trailblazer icons. I don't know why it's unreasonable to believe the Lamda will be successful. I believe the Fairlane is meant to be a niche player in the segment and this might be the reason why we haven't see a commitment to eliminate the Freestyle from the portfolio. I'm very concerned that Ford does not have an adequate alternative to the Explorer, which they continue to protect by not offering a proper CUV alternative. What? Double What? Point by point: 'we know that some of the first stylish and affordable entries are going to absorb the enormous initial demand' First, the Acadia is hardly stylish. In plain air, it looks like a Freestyle. http://cwimg.us.publicus.com/apps/pbcsi.dl...AR&maxw=490 http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:20...d_Freestyle.jpg Secondly, its base price is $29,990: a whopping $4,125 more than a Freestyle, $4,260 over the 3 row Highlander, $2,895 over the Pilot, $4,575 over the Pacifica. It is, hands down, the most expensive product in the secondly. 'Lamdas are probably the first vehicles of its kind designed to pick up where all of the others have missed the mark, from Pacifica to Freestyle.' Please elaborate. The Lambda was clearly benchmarked against the Honda Pilot, but even there they offer slightly less interior room in several dimensions. Fuel economy is a toss-up, and the Lambda hp advantage disappears under its weight. 'they are the new "IT" vehicles with some very convincing advantages over the fading alternatives' Again, please specify Below are the comparable statistics on the vehicles in the Lambda segments, and the Lambdas themselves. They do have the most powerful available engine, but they are also beyond question the heaviest vehicles in the class as well. http://autos.yahoo.com/newcars/honda_pilot...tyle_specs.html http://autos.yahoo.com/newcars/chrysler_pa...tyle_specs.html http://autos.yahoo.com/newcars/ford_freest...tyle_specs.html http://autos.yahoo.com/newcars/toyota_high...tyle_specs.html http://www.autoblog.com/2006/07/12/2007-gmc-acadia-revealed/ As to the 'Fairlane' as a niche entry, I'm afraid I don't understand what or where you're coming from with that. You haven't defined what level of volume would constitute a 'niche entry', so your point can't even be discussed. Finally, I would like to see some external reference to prove that Ford is 'protecting' the Explorer by refusing to offer a competent CUV alternative. The Freesyle, rough around the edges, was on the market long before the Lambdas, and Ford is certainly committed to offering a CUV replacement for the Explorer. One might argue that the surest sign of that is the use of conventional rear doors on the Fairlane, a decision that certainly aims the Fairlane at the shrinking SUV segment, not the minivan segment. Edited October 22, 2006 by RichardJensen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ehaase Posted October 22, 2006 Share Posted October 22, 2006 Based on my limited knowledge, it seems that the Edge and Freestyle are the CUV alternatives to the Explorer and the Fairlane will be Ford's competitor for the Lambdas. I think Ford will have a good lineup of both SUV's and CUV's. 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.