RichardJensen Posted January 16, 2007 Share Posted January 16, 2007 Ouch - that is actually a very good point. Zan's point was not the name as such, but that there was ZERO 2nd year advertising on the Five Hundred, and next to none on the Freestyle. The CTS got a ton of advertising, and a few of the rest of the examples were whitespace products (Murano, PT Cruiser) which got great buzz. They don't directly compare with the Five Hundred. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kyle Posted January 16, 2007 Share Posted January 16, 2007 I think everyone would agree though good cars need a hell of a lot less advertising. That being said, Ford obviously just launches and abandon's products like no other. I am glad to see them advertising the f150....good commercials...and they are obviously related to the new product offerings that are coming to market. And I actually like the car and driver ads. Think they at least say "we can compete with these guys...need to put us on your shopping list." Have not seen the lincoln mkx or whatever the edge companion is called. They really need to go back to names....this is to fucking confusing. At least with lexus it was only two letters. It will be interesting to see how ford plans on aligning all of these products.....I think the freestyle name will disappear. Don't see how you can have an upcoming crossover (fairlane), explorer to a car chasis and freestyle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted January 16, 2007 Share Posted January 16, 2007 LOL... did Nissan advertise the Murano 24/7 Zan? Caliber? Liberty? CTS? PT Cruiser? Do I need to go on? What about the Taurus? Would it've sold better if it was called the LTD? Yeah... I'm starting to see a pattern here. A pattern of excuses and self denial. Nissan had a very strong ad campaign for the Murano when it debuted. Caliber and Liberty commercials have been everywhere also. CTS was steadily featured in several of the "Art & Science" advertisements with accompanying Cadillac vehicles for a couple of years. PT Cruiser, not so much...but the first 3 (and generally the 4th) were definitely heavily advertised, both in print and television media. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted January 16, 2007 Share Posted January 16, 2007 Oh. OK. Brand identity. Make them all ugly, and everybody will know what not to buy. I know your not big on the Tri-bar Grill, but your statement lost any creditability due to that...not to mention styling is subjective. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HKGuns Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 (edited) One word...........BORING. What is the difference? It is still the same boring, May's influenced VW design. May's should be fired before he screws anything else up. If I hear "Step off a plane anywhere in the world and know it's a Ford" one more time, I'll jump off the plane. People should step off the plane, see one of our vehicles and say "What is that? I want one!" Don't you think that same grille on everything is a bit too much? Edited January 17, 2007 by HKGuns Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 (edited) OK. Let me ask you this. If having a "brand identity", and all of your vehicles looking the same, if it is such a great move, then why doesn't Toyota, Honda, or Nissan do it? I'm not against the three bar, I'm against it on every car Ford makes. Gee, there's NO family similarity there at all, is there? Those vehicles have the same grille, eh? (Same as Saturn, too, OOOPS!!) I could show you MB and BMW and Audi and Infiniti models, but it would just get old after that. It's not wrong to criticize Ford, but sheesh---not everything Ford does is wrong. Edited January 17, 2007 by RichardJensen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 All the Nissan's look the same, but examine it a little closer. The grille's are not identical. Same thing with the Honda's. At least they try a little harder instead of slapping three chrome plastic bars on the front of it and calling it a day. Oh geeeeeeeeeez. The chrome bars are hardly interchangeable either. Nor are the headlights which are different on the Edge, Fusion, and Five Hundred. Besides, the intended effect on the uninitiated is not, "oooooo--there's no lower indent on the central area of the Sentra badge, unlike the more upscale Maxima and Altima" The intended effect is, "Oh, that's a Nissan!" :rolleyes: It's typing stupid posts like this, in response to ridiculous debates about car design that remind me that I am from time to time, a thorough jack ass. Pioneer: You go ahead and say whatever you want about the Ford family of fine grilles. The rest of you too. Sorry I interfered. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 Oh geeeeeeeeeez. The chrome bars are hardly interchangeable either. Nor are the headlights which are different on the Edge, Fusion, and Five Hundred. Besides, the intended effect on the uninitiated is not, "oooooo--there's no lower indent on the central area of the Sentra badge, unlike the more upscale Maxima and Altima" The intended effect is, "Oh, that's a Nissan!" :rolleyes: It's typing stupid posts like this, in response to ridiculous debates about car design that remind me that I am from time to time, a thorough jack ass. Pioneer: You go ahead and say whatever you want about the Ford family of fine grilles. The rest of you too. Sorry I interfered. Thats the problem with most people, they have their own little options about things and when things don't go their way, they bitch and wine and have their own axe to grind. I admit that my personal tastes get in the way of my reasoning at times, but try to think objectively... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kyle Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 Thats the problem with most people, they have their own little options about things and when things don't go their way, they bitch and wine and have their own axe to grind. I admit that my personal tastes get in the way of my reasoning at times, but try to think objectively... that is the problem with styling because it is subjective and not objective. I agree with you that we tend to agree with things we like and the things we do not like much of it is based upon style. I understand what ford is doing. Will it work on all of their vehicles...probably not but think it is the right direction. If they polarize some of the public then they are least making a styling statement....instead of the boring water downed stuff they have put out the last 10 years or so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZanatWork Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 (edited) LOL... did Nissan advertise the Murano 24/7 Zan? Caliber? Liberty? CTS? PT Cruiser? Do I need to go on? What about the Taurus? Would it've sold better if it was called the LTD? Yeah... I'm starting to see a pattern here. A pattern of excuses and self denial. A fresh barrel of ducks! The Murano had SOME advertising, both in print and on TV. That said, golly, I don't see 'em too often. Caliber? Arey ou trying to make my point for me? The "stupid fairy" and "scared kids creatures" ads were CONSTANT. Thanks for making it easy...as always.... Jeep Liberty? I haven't seen one on the road yet...and I've seen maybe one ad. Again, it's too easy.... CTS? Not since the "Led Zep" ads...but I saw a constant flow of reviews and comparos of the CTS-V due to its 400 hp. PT Cruiser? Ads, commercials, road tests, TV appearances...and it sold a bunch! Thanks again...you're demonstating my point extremely well.... You could go on, but you've illustrated just how right I was more than I did...thanks ever so for playing! :happy feet: :happy feet: Edited January 17, 2007 by ZanatWork Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadrunner Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 But what styling cues would you recommend? Or should they all be different? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BORG Posted January 18, 2007 Share Posted January 18, 2007 (edited) The three bar grille is very inflexible and overly trendy. It's something that will not be able to survive further evolutions, at least not recognizably. It does not work well in every application so that is why you are seeing such extreme inconsistency in overal Ford design right now. The Ford Focus came out of nowhere! I'll be at the Autoshow on Friday to pass final judgment on the Focus; at least it's interesting. Ford is displaying the symptoms of an upstart company, trying to define is design language with its new product. They are making some colossal missteps along the way, but hopefully in 5 years they will have found something that works. Ford has a VERY hard time attracting attention in a positive way because they don't understand the customer as well as they should. The 500/Freestyle is a very good example of Ford's troubled corporate culture. I fear that the Fairlane is going to be another good example of a product that fits a designer's ideal far better than a customer. Edited January 18, 2007 by BORG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ANTAUS Posted January 18, 2007 Share Posted January 18, 2007 Actually the cars had the "floating oval" grill opening, with the emblem in the center. While the trucks had a chrome ovalular surround. Also, Aspire, Aerostar, Probe, Tbird were canned in 1997 because federal mandate required standard dual airbags, so Ford canceled them instead of retrofitting those vehicles. The Bronco was killed wwaaayyy before that.. And I believe it was 98-99 was when Ford was to surpass GM. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BORG Posted January 18, 2007 Share Posted January 18, 2007 (edited) I don't think Ford designers comprehend how poorly concept designs translate to real world production cars. When something looks good on a 427, that doesn't mean it will look just as good once it's been warped, softened, and slapped on a very standard looking product. A concept that celebrates the very extreme of craftsmanship and avant garde design looses everything once it's gone through committee and budgeting. There is nothing more ludicrous than seeing the Super-Chief inspiring a half-assed face-lift of the Super Duty. GIve me an F-ing break Ford, are they completely incompetent or are they just too cheap to commit to their future? J. Mays and Horbury are designers good at art, but not at application. Ford desperately needs new design direction that is less theory and more authentic. Despite Mays, Ford has not benefited at all from new design leadership. Ford was doing well for a while, now they have completely lost control and consistency. They have managed to sabotage many of their new products because of the cosmetic deficiencies. I mean it's pretty bad when I have people coming to me looking for an explanation for Ford's design issues. I am really worried about the next F-150, I can only imagine what the designers think will look good. They did well a few years ago, but it's clear those same people are no longer influencing current Ford design. Edited January 18, 2007 by BORG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted January 18, 2007 Share Posted January 18, 2007 I don't think Ford designers comprehend how poorly concept designs translate to real world production cars. What is your basis for making statements like this? What is your design background? On what grounds do you assert that you know more about design than people at Ford? Posts like yours that place your novice understanding of design ahead of Ford's professional design, in such contemptuous and self-arrogating tones are exactly what's wrong with the board. Are there problems with Ford's designs? Of course there are. Do you have all the answers? You certainly do not. It is questionable, be the subject marketing, manufacturing, engineering, design, or business management, whether most of the people on this board have the educational and professional background sufficient to justify the airs they assume here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LSFan00 Posted January 18, 2007 Share Posted January 18, 2007 Actually the cars had the "floating oval" grill opening, with the emblem in the center. While the trucks had a chrome ovalular surround. Also, Aspire, Aerostar, Probe, Tbird were canned in 1997 because federal mandate required standard dual airbags, so Ford canceled them instead of retrofitting those vehicles. The Bronco was killed wwaaayyy before that.. And I believe it was 98-99 was when Ford was to surpass GM. My 97 T'bird had dual airbags. '96 re-do of the interior was gorgeous. My '97 Mark also has dual airbags, but the interior wasn't as updated as the Tbird/Cougar. I believe they were killed (collectively) due to the platform not really being modern, huge overhangs, and decreasing coup sales in general around 1995. It needed a complete re-design to do modern crash-test standards really, but they were/are beautiful (and yes safe) cars. Ford hasn't had a great highway cruiser to beat those yet, especially in passing power. But, nothing the Toyota/Honda's of the world have ever built could match the T'bird/Cougar in those two aggregate categories either...I have 155,000 on my Mark VIII. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasonj80 Posted January 18, 2007 Share Posted January 18, 2007 Actually the cars had the "floating oval" grill opening, with the emblem in the center. While the trucks had a chrome ovalular surround. Also, Aspire, Aerostar, Probe, Tbird were canned in 1997 because federal mandate required standard dual airbags, so Ford canceled them instead of retrofitting those vehicles. The Bronco was killed wwaaayyy before that.. And I believe it was 98-99 was when Ford was to surpass GM. All but the Aerostar had dual airbags for years, (probe '94, aspire '95) Each had its own reason, the probe just became the next Cougar. The Tbird market demographic was headed toward SUV and was a shrinking market, Aspire was a Kia which went bankrupt in '97 and was bought by Hyundai who actually out bid Ford. The Aerostar was out dated 1986-1997 with no updates!!! Wait - flush headlights in '92... and all red tail-lights a few years later also they had the Windstar then that was one of the best minivan's on the market. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ANTAUS Posted January 18, 2007 Share Posted January 18, 2007 WelL i ment collectively, not on all vehicles, to be specific, the Aerostar, Probe, Aspire where the ones that needed standard dual airbags, and maybe 1998 was the federal mandate year then. I had a 98 Mark8, those were killed of that year because of what Ford said was an expensive platform (which that we know is true), but supposedly the Probe had my guess over 60+ unit sales a year when it died, and the Tbird/Cg/M8 collectively probably had over 200K sales. Their excuse was they weren't making much money. My question now is, "And you will out of 30K units of the MKZ"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loyalbutconcerned Posted January 18, 2007 Share Posted January 18, 2007 I always thought this would be a good nose for the Freestyle. They could still have the horizontal bars but with a different application. http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/News/articleId=108294 http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Media...y/photoId=23280 http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Media...y/photoId=23281 By the way, from what I've heard the Fusion will be the first to have a new grill treatment in the next update followed by the Edge in the Ford line up. The MKX will have a different nose as well and from what I was told by a good source, it will be totally awesome compared to the current grill. Think MKR cues. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasonj80 Posted January 18, 2007 Share Posted January 18, 2007 WelL i ment collectively, not on all vehicles, to be specific, the Aerostar, Probe, Aspire where the ones that needed standard dual airbags, and maybe 1998 was the federal mandate year then. I had a 98 Mark8, those were killed of that year because of what Ford said was an expensive platform (which that we know is true), but supposedly the Probe had my guess over 60+ unit sales a year when it died, and the Tbird/Cg/M8 collectively probably had over 200K sales. Their excuse was they weren't making much money. My question now is, "And you will out of 30K units of the MKZ"? It was the Nasser years they could have been making $2500 per unit but he/managers put that next to a Explorer/ranger/f-150 and would say these units are making $10,000 per unit as that what he thought every vehicle sold should make. You also had managers who's bonuses that were tied to how much they could cut, give the right facts at the meetings and you've got yourself a six figure bonus on "saving the company money" Plus the market was all about SUV's. 1998 was the year all cars (1999 trucks) had to have dual airbags, this was also the second generation airbag rules took effect. 1997 was the first big push for Side impact rules as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
630land Posted January 18, 2007 Share Posted January 18, 2007 (edited) "Ford's lineup was the Aspire, Escort, Taurus, Contour, Thunderbird, Crown Vic, Ranger, Explorer, Bronco, F-150, Windstar, and E150. NONE of them looked the same, nor did any have some sort of "brand identity"." Umm, I dont know how amny times people would mistake my old Contour for an Escort or Taurus. [Or just asked what??] Many also said then "all Fords have that boring jelly bean look" in the overrated 1990's. The 1992-present CV looks like a Taurus to an average person, too. Also, FLEET sales drove the rounded cars thoughout the 90's. It was the trucks that brought in the cash, and gee they had a family look also! As soon as the Japanese came out with car based Utes, Explorers were dumped nation-wide, and hence today issues. So, this supposed 'good old days' thinking of 1997 is :P. The Freestyle should be called 500 wagon, and Ford should not be afraid to promote it was a full sized car! Naysayers say it should be called Taurus, but it is not a mid szied car, and is priced higher. Edited January 18, 2007 by 630land Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BORG Posted January 19, 2007 Share Posted January 19, 2007 What is your basis for making statements like this? What is your design background? On what grounds do you assert that you know more about design than people at Ford? Posts like yours that place your novice understanding of design ahead of Ford's professional design, in such contemptuous and self-arrogating tones are exactly what's wrong with the board. Are there problems with Ford's designs? Of course there are. Do you have all the answers? You certainly do not. It is questionable, be the subject marketing, manufacturing, engineering, design, or business management, whether most of the people on this board have the educational and professional background sufficient to justify the airs they assume here. I've gotten this same lecture from you before and its still pedantic self-aggrandizing rabble! Design concepts get lost in translation and the trick is to find a design language that survives the process. Ford designers are competent designers, but the company is hopeless at execution. Blame the designers or company, I don't care...I have absolutely no respect for Ford design and you would be wrong if you think I am not entitled to a critique. There is nothing 'competent' about what they have done to date. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Extreme4x4 Posted January 19, 2007 Share Posted January 19, 2007 But that is your opinion, and your opinion only. Your tone, and delivery, attempt to pass this off as indisputable fact.................. which it is not. You do not care for Fords design direction. We get it. You could have said so in one sentence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted January 19, 2007 Share Posted January 19, 2007 (edited) There is nothing 'competent' about what they have done to date. And your basis for saying so is? Do you not see how ridiculously flawed your statements are "nothing 'competent' to date", which encompasses the entire 104 year history of Ford Motor. This kind of overblown language is not designed to do anything but challenge people that disagree. I mean, call it my 'pedantic' nature, but I want sources, I want some substance to back up what gets said here. I almost never see it, and it's one of the things that makes the 'discourse' on this board a joke. Edited January 19, 2007 by RichardJensen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kyle Posted January 19, 2007 Share Posted January 19, 2007 (edited) And your basis for saying so is? Do you not see how ridiculously flawed your statements are "nothing 'competent' to date", which encompasses the entire 104 year history of Ford Motor. This kind of overblown language is not designed to do anything but challenge people that disagree. I mean, call it my 'pedantic' nature, but I want sources, I want some substance to back up what gets said here. I almost never see it, and it's one of the things that makes the 'discourse' on this board a joke. Richard.....take a deeeeep breath....hope you were just having a rough day yesterday! Are you stuck inside because of the ice storm? How can someone site sources for this? I think the only way is to determine success is based upon sales...how else would someone determine if a design is successful or not. I know other criteria obviously come to mind...but we will see if their upcoming vehicles succeed in the market place. I hope they do. As for me...I think they have had some success but have obviously been very conserative in recent designs. They realize that now so you will see more people with an opinion about the product instead of none at all. I am still trying to figure out what "pedantic" is! Edited January 19, 2007 by kyle 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.