armadamaster Posted March 20, 2008 Share Posted March 20, 2008 (edited) Yep...red in the article and black on the cover. And I thought the 'auto rags' "hated" American cars... Nah....that's back before the "hate" began.....hell the 1991 Chevrolet Caprice was the 1991 Motor Trend Car of the Year. Of course word of mouth doesn't work for the 's. Word of mouth only works when people have GOOD things to say about something. Sure....because unmatched crash ratings, longevity, durability, and ride quality are such AWFUL things. Edited March 20, 2008 by Armada Master Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P71_CrownVic Posted March 20, 2008 Share Posted March 20, 2008 '95 models were cast aluminum (I had a '95 Mercury Mystique for 22 hours. Then the waterpump grenaded). They must've switched by '98, as that's when the SVT model came out. The interweb has no easily discovered photos of the cast aluminum intakes. Thats all I could find. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P71_CrownVic Posted March 20, 2008 Share Posted March 20, 2008 Sure....because unmatched crash ratings, longevity, durability, and ride quality are such AWFUL things. Well...this is the new Ford we are talking about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomServo92 Posted March 20, 2008 Share Posted March 20, 2008 The original Yamaha 3L engine made around 300 hp. Ford asked Yamaha to tone it down because a ) their transmission could not handle the power b ) they did not want a mere V6 making more ponies than their Mustang GT ... Yamaha's engine of course, was very high strung too .. so reliability probably would have taken a hit. My point is: the engine was very powerful for the time, but it really did not demonstrate the upper bounds of what Yamaha could truly do. I honestly do not doubt that Yamaha could surpass Ford's horsepower given any displacement size .. Yamaha makes some amazing motors. Like I said before, there never has been any positive proof (at least none that I've ever seen) of the initial power rating, just lots of rumors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomServo92 Posted March 20, 2008 Share Posted March 20, 2008 Thats all I could find. How about this: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P71_CrownVic Posted March 20, 2008 Share Posted March 20, 2008 How about this: Meh...it's got nothin' on this: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomServo92 Posted March 20, 2008 Share Posted March 20, 2008 Meh...it's got nothin' on this: Yep! BTW, I was only showing the aluminum manifold that RJ referenced. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P71_CrownVic Posted March 20, 2008 Share Posted March 20, 2008 Yep! BTW, I was only showing the aluminum manifold that RJ referenced. I know...but it does not hold a candle to the 3.0/3.2 beauty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted March 20, 2008 Share Posted March 20, 2008 (edited) SVT Duratec 25 made 195 hp for 78 hp/L. The SHO V6 made 73.3 hp/L. May not have been as pretty as the Yamaha intakes, but it got the job done. Lest we forget how good the Duratec was (engineered by Cosworth, originally for Porsche). Edited March 20, 2008 by RichardJensen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twintornados Posted March 20, 2008 Share Posted March 20, 2008 Great slogan.... ties in with the great campaigns of yore... "Quality is Job 1" "Have you driven a Ford lately" Now.... "Ford. Drive one." No begging, no false hope, just a simple statement, "Go sit in a Ford and take a LOOK at it" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted March 20, 2008 Share Posted March 20, 2008 SVT Duratec 25 made 195 hp for 78 hp/L. The SHO V6 made 73.3 hp/L. May not have been as pretty as the Yamaha intakes, but it got the job done. Lest we forget how good the Duratec was (engineered by Cosworth, originally for Porsche). Another nice thing about the SVT 2.5: You could swap the heads and intake onto a 3.0 Duratec block (with minor modifications) and bring power up to somewhere around 250 HP. External dimensions on the 3.0 and 2.5 were identical, so you couldn't even tell them apart under the hood. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OHV 16V Posted March 20, 2008 Share Posted March 20, 2008 I have kinda thought that the 2.5-liter, if it were possible, woulda made a better base engine in the Fusion than the D23. Having both more cylinders and a slightly larger displacement, the fuel economy trade-off I wouldn't think would have been that horrendous for the little bit of extra juice. Obviously, the upcoming D25 will have rendered it unnecessary, but still it would have helped in the meantime. All that being said, I'll admit right away to ignorance on whether the 2.5 would still be emissions-friendly or, now that I think about it, whether or not they're even still using that motor across The Pond. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted March 20, 2008 Share Posted March 20, 2008 Meh...it's got nothin' on this: isn't that the bad guy from the last installment of Pirates of the Carribean? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted March 20, 2008 Share Posted March 20, 2008 Ah... The way Dean worded it was confusing. I read it as you can have an engine that looks exotic, or you can have an engine that is 'blah' and outperforms. sorry, I re read and it was confusing...just stating or pertaining to the fact that the latest 3.5 looks blah, but really is a hell of a powerplant...can only IMAGINE if they TT it.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted March 21, 2008 Share Posted March 21, 2008 (edited) I think this slogan could work if it was tied back to a larger marketing initiative of test driving the new offerings. Maybe thats a $20 gas card. Don't know. That's Chris Farley's department. But the slogan on its own is bland and interchangable with every other automaker out there. I think it'll work....and as you said it should be tied to some form of larger marketing plan. That's what Bold Moves was supposed to do, but the marketing part never happened. And BTW, it's Jim Farley, not Chris Farley, the late actor/comedian. (I understand why you mixed them up, though). -------- to me sounds like an Army recruiting slogan....wheres Uncle Sam? Maybe Ford should make "I want YOU" their next slogan? Edited March 21, 2008 by rmc523 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted March 21, 2008 Share Posted March 21, 2008 Instead of judging an ad campaign on a couple of words, let's see what the whole message is and then we tear it apart. Or maybe we will have to praise Mr. Farley as the genius that he is suppose to be. I agree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Watchdevil Posted March 22, 2008 Share Posted March 22, 2008 I guess Ford had to drop Bold Moves because they really didn't make any... Drive One sounds as desperate as Have You Driven A Ford Lately... To me it communicates begging for customers to check out a Ford. If Ford just brings exciting well concieved product to the table and Ford wont have to beg anyone to buy them nor bribe people to buy them because of the availabilty of SYNCH. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P71_CrownVic Posted March 22, 2008 Share Posted March 22, 2008 I guess Ford had to drop Bold Moves because they really didn't make any... Drive One sounds as desperate as Have You Driven A Ford Lately... To me it communicates begging for customers to check out a Ford. Pretty much...they are desperate. Having morgaged EVERYTHING to the max, the new vehicles (and by new I mean the Ford xB and MK Taurus...not the fake new like the Focus and F-150) MUST succeed. If Ford just brings exciting well concieved product to the table and Ford wont have to beg anyone to buy them nor bribe people to buy them because of the availabilty of SYNCH. True...but they don't realize that. They think that selling mediocrity at a good price will bring in buyers...which it hasn't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furious1Auto Posted March 22, 2008 Share Posted March 22, 2008 (edited) Pretty much...they are desperate. Having morgaged EVERYTHING to the max, the new vehicles (and by new I mean the Ford xB and MK Taurus...not the fake new like the Focus and F-150) MUST succeed. True...but they don't realize that. They think that selling mediocrity at a good price will bring in buyers...which it hasn't. Mortgaged everything and still has more liquid cash on hand then before agreeing to the loan. Sounds like they are making progress when you compare it to what they have lost! (nothing they have regained #2 in sales while reducing capaity.) We have a better product whether you choose to recognize it or not! I've been spending my time wastefully in local politics lately instead of adderssing you idiots! Shame on my part, it looked like you were gaining an edge! Edited March 23, 2008 by Furious1Auto Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 Pretty much...they are desperate. Having morgaged EVERYTHING to the max, the new vehicles (and by new I mean the Ford xB and MK Taurus...not the fake new like the Focus and F-150) MUST succeed. Have you even seen a Flex or MKS? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inteller Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 A lot longer. It took Detroit years, decades, to trash their reputation from the 50s/60s/70s. which just happens to coincide with how long it took the UAW factory workers to get complacent and apathetic....amazing coincidence! NOT! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mlhm5 Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 As far as Ford's new management and the new "Ford. Drive One". IMO Ford cannot get people to come to dealers if consumers don't like Ford cars. If Ford had a hot model in the fuel economy class i.e. Prius, or in the tuner class, like Euro Focus hatchback, or the best built high resale class like the Honda Accord, or the young hip class like the Scion, the traffic would come based on the demand. They don't have a problem with pickups. Someone posted in another forum that the standard BMW 520d (50mpg) that gets better mpg than a Prius in a real world test. A 2L diesel that goes 0-60 in 8 seconds in a 5 series. I don't care if diesel is 50 cents more a gallon than gas, that car gets 50 mpg in real world driving. Where is Ford's 50 MPG car? Gas, diesel, flex fuel, electric, anything. That's a "Ford. Drive One" car. That lesson as well as a lot more seems to have been lost on Ford. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Critic Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 Someone posted in another forum that the standard BMW 520d (50mpg) that gets better mpg than a Prius in a real world test. A 2L diesel that goes 0-60 in 8 seconds in a 5 series. Your getting REALLY DESPERATE NOW! Now you copy and paste your same lame excuses to every thread. YOU POSTED IT AND YOU NEGLECT TO POST YOUR PIRUS DOES THE SAME IN 11+ sec. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edstock Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 (edited) Where is Ford's 50 MPG car? Gas, diesel, flex fuel, electric, anything. That's a "Ford. Drive One" car. Well, if you lived in the UK you could get a 2K8 Focus wagon TDI Price: £19,445 Engine: 2.0-litre 4cyl, turbodiesel Power: 134bhp Torque: 320Nm Economy: 50.4mpg CO2: 147g/km 0-62mph: 9.5 seconds Top speed: 126mph And that's the wagon. A 2dr should do better, and the diesel Fiesta and Ka should break 50 mpg with ease. It's unfortunate that you are too lazy to search for data to eradicate your ignorance. Now, a better question is, where are the 50 mpg cars in the US? Real 50 mpg cars, not press-release Prius economy, but real 50 mpg economy? Edited March 24, 2008 by Edstock Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papilgee4evaeva Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 Well, if you lived in the UK you could get a 2K8 Focus wagon TDI Price: £19,445 Engine: 2.0-litre 4cyl, turbodiesel Power: 134bhp Torque: 320Nm Economy: 50.4mpg CO2: 147g/km 0-62mph: 9.5 seconds Top speed: 126mph And that's the wagon. A 2dr should do better, and the diesel Fiesta and Ka should break 50 mpg with ease. It's unfortunate that you are too lazy to search for data to eradicate your ignorance. Now, a better question is, where are the 50 mpg cars in the US? Real 50 mpg cars, not press-release Prius economy, but real 50 mpg economy? That's about 42 mpg Stateside though. 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.