Well, no argument here.
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070418/AUTO01/704180425/1148
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070418/AUTO01/704180425/1148
Ford: Quality equal to Toyota
- Thread starter LouDawg
- Start date
- Status
Go Honda!
I like with Mr North, a co-owner of a Ford dealership has to say as well as Mr Champion from Consumer Reports.
Let's hope Ford rises to the occasion, not just for initial quality, but long term durability and higher resale values for their customers.
Let's hope Ford rises to the occasion, not just for initial quality, but long term durability and higher resale values for their customers.
badtic,
Ford has great control over resale value. Build cars that customers perceive as worth the sticker price so you do not need rebates and/or incentive financing and as was mentioned, exceed all others not only in initial quality but also durability.
It won't happen over night, but I'd really love to see domestic cars placed at the tops of many if not most of these quality, value and durability lists.
One cannot say that the entire public has been brainwashed by Honda, Toyota, Nissan and Mazda.
If you read the article, Ford has been learning from Mazda, which uses methods similar to Toyota. That must mean there is some benefit for desigining and building cars along those lines.
When and automakers biggest money maker is the financing arm, either Ford Credit or GMAC, one wonders why they even build cars from a business perspective.
You really cannot put the blame on consumers for the bad taste in their mouth left by the product.
Let's look at Ford. How long did it take for Ford to produce a 250HP 3.5L V6 when compared to Honda and Toyota? Honda had their 3L V6 at about 230 HP for about 5 years before Ford really caught up, and they've been tweeking this engine to make it bigger and more powerful. Nissan has been doing the same.
Toyota followed slowly after increasing the HP in their approx 3L V6 offerings. Ford kept soldiering on with the 3L Duratec ( a great engine, BTW ) at around 200HP. It's only been in the past 12 months that the 3.5L Duratec has been out in consumer offerings.
That certainly has not helped resale value of Fords.
Something else is happening. Rental car fleets are beginning to see more than just domestic cars. Last summer, my mom rented a Toyota Camry from a Hertz store in Ft Worth. So perhaps we'll see resale values of Toyotas and Hondas fall if more are dumped into rental fleets.
But you really cannot blame consumers for resale value in the big picture.
Sure, for individual cars, if they are not cared for, they will be worth less. However overall resale value is not impacted by consumers other than what they are willing to pay for a used car.
Of course, Ford could instruct their dealers to offer more for Ford trade ins, if they believe their cars are undervalued.
But we don't see this, so perhaps the market has the values pegged correctly.
Ford has great control over resale value. Build cars that customers perceive as worth the sticker price so you do not need rebates and/or incentive financing and as was mentioned, exceed all others not only in initial quality but also durability.
It won't happen over night, but I'd really love to see domestic cars placed at the tops of many if not most of these quality, value and durability lists.
One cannot say that the entire public has been brainwashed by Honda, Toyota, Nissan and Mazda.
If you read the article, Ford has been learning from Mazda, which uses methods similar to Toyota. That must mean there is some benefit for desigining and building cars along those lines.
When and automakers biggest money maker is the financing arm, either Ford Credit or GMAC, one wonders why they even build cars from a business perspective.
You really cannot put the blame on consumers for the bad taste in their mouth left by the product.
Let's look at Ford. How long did it take for Ford to produce a 250HP 3.5L V6 when compared to Honda and Toyota? Honda had their 3L V6 at about 230 HP for about 5 years before Ford really caught up, and they've been tweeking this engine to make it bigger and more powerful. Nissan has been doing the same.
Toyota followed slowly after increasing the HP in their approx 3L V6 offerings. Ford kept soldiering on with the 3L Duratec ( a great engine, BTW ) at around 200HP. It's only been in the past 12 months that the 3.5L Duratec has been out in consumer offerings.
That certainly has not helped resale value of Fords.
Something else is happening. Rental car fleets are beginning to see more than just domestic cars. Last summer, my mom rented a Toyota Camry from a Hertz store in Ft Worth. So perhaps we'll see resale values of Toyotas and Hondas fall if more are dumped into rental fleets.
But you really cannot blame consumers for resale value in the big picture.
Sure, for individual cars, if they are not cared for, they will be worth less. However overall resale value is not impacted by consumers other than what they are willing to pay for a used car.
Of course, Ford could instruct their dealers to offer more for Ford trade ins, if they believe their cars are undervalued.
But we don't see this, so perhaps the market has the values pegged correctly.
The facts are:
Ford had their 3L V6 at 220HP in 2003 in the Mazda 6.
Honda didn't up the horsepower on the 3L V6 (to 240HP, from 200HP) in the Accord till 2003.
Did they?
From:
http://www.detnews.com/2005/autosinsider/0508/17/A01-283759.htm
I've always found it very interesting why people think that because, from any given manufacturer, if an engine has a smaller displacement, but more power output, it's somehow "better"?
If two engines have the same horsepower, fuel economy, NVH, and one is a 4L and one is a 2L, what the heck makes people think the 2L is "better"? I always hear the argument that it is more "efficient". What the heck does that mean? If two engines get the same fuel economy, how is the smaller one more efficient? When I hear that an engine is smaller, all I think is its packed with more useless technology that the manufacturer claims does this and that, yet IMO, those are just more things to go wrong. I really fail to see the point of this trend to make engines small, yet powerful.
Give me the bigger engine (that often runs on regular, not premium) anyday.
If two engines have the same horsepower, fuel economy, NVH, and one is a 4L and one is a 2L, what the heck makes people think the 2L is "better"? I always hear the argument that it is more "efficient". What the heck does that mean? If two engines get the same fuel economy, how is the smaller one more efficient? When I hear that an engine is smaller, all I think is its packed with more useless technology that the manufacturer claims does this and that, yet IMO, those are just more things to go wrong. I really fail to see the point of this trend to make engines small, yet powerful.
Give me the bigger engine (that often runs on regular, not premium) anyday.
I think it's not just the power but the torque.
I'd rather have a turbocharged 2.0L I4 making 210HP than a VTEC 2.0L I4 making 210HP. The turbocharged engine will put out a lot more torque at lower engine speeds.
Incidentally, my turbocharged Saab 93 runs just fine on regular
I'd rather have a turbocharged 2.0L I4 making 210HP than a VTEC 2.0L I4 making 210HP. The turbocharged engine will put out a lot more torque at lower engine speeds.
Incidentally, my turbocharged Saab 93 runs just fine on regular
So far, I've had good long-term durability and reliability with almost every Ford product I've owned (except one '82 Escort - bought used with a POS 1.6L 4-cylinder in it). That, coupled with their consistently improving ratings I've read in numerous places, makes me feel reasonably confident in continuing to buy Fords. (I know...many have had different experiences. These are just mine and my opinions on it. I'm not bashing any other car makers, just praising Ford's efforts and their seemingly positive results.)
But I also have had good luck with Honda, and they also get consistent high quality marks. So I guess I kind of hedge my bets and have a foot in both the domestic and foreign markets. At this point, I'm comfortable with that.
But I also have had good luck with Honda, and they also get consistent high quality marks. So I guess I kind of hedge my bets and have a foot in both the domestic and foreign markets. At this point, I'm comfortable with that.
I believe this survey whole-heartedly, but I'm not much of a believer in surveys. We replaced a 2001 Focus with 150k miles with another Focus, an '06 because we were happy with the previous version. The 2001 wasn't perfect by any means, it warped brake rotors toward the end of the pad life (it was used for in-city business use and went through them relatively quickly), the A/C was getting weak, and there were some recalls but it was manuverable, the seats were very comfortable, the road noise was acceptable and it was significantly cheaper than other more-well-know-at-the-time vehicles. Plus it was fun to zip around in.
The 2006 Focus, other than getting creamed in the back needing $6000 of body work, has never been in for repairs. The sticker on the car was $17k, with all the incentives and discounts we got out the door for $14,000. It has everything but leather, sunroof and automatic transmission. I personally think this one is a little less fun to drive with the not-as-torquey Mazda engine instead of the Zetec but the road noise has improved, the brakes have improved DRAMATICALLY, and the fit-and-finish is pretty darn good. There isn't a single squeak or rattle, just like the 2001. The car DESPERATELY needs updating (which is coming for '08) but just for gettin' around, it's going to be a good vehicle.
What is so encouraging is IMPROVEMENT. They're not going to transform thier product (or people's perception of it) over night. But Ford is showing ALOT of effort, as is GM, in improving thier product and they'll eventually get there.
The 2006 Focus, other than getting creamed in the back needing $6000 of body work, has never been in for repairs. The sticker on the car was $17k, with all the incentives and discounts we got out the door for $14,000. It has everything but leather, sunroof and automatic transmission. I personally think this one is a little less fun to drive with the not-as-torquey Mazda engine instead of the Zetec but the road noise has improved, the brakes have improved DRAMATICALLY, and the fit-and-finish is pretty darn good. There isn't a single squeak or rattle, just like the 2001. The car DESPERATELY needs updating (which is coming for '08) but just for gettin' around, it's going to be a good vehicle.
What is so encouraging is IMPROVEMENT. They're not going to transform thier product (or people's perception of it) over night. But Ford is showing ALOT of effort, as is GM, in improving thier product and they'll eventually get there.
Quote:
I think it's not just the power but the torque.
I'd rather have a turbocharged 2.0L I4 making 210HP than a VTEC 2.0L I4 making 210HP. The turbocharged engine will put out a lot more torque at lower engine speeds.
Incidentally, my turbocharged Saab 93 runs just fine on regular
I'm with you there. Torque is a must-have for acceptable everyday driving. I guess I thought it was just an implied benefit of having more displacement.
My GM 3900 cranks out more torque at 1800 RPM than the Honda 3L does at its peak torque output of 5000 RPM. I'll take the GM.
Fix Or Repair Daily
"Ford: Quality equal to Toyota"
Not too long ago the automotive press would have crucified Ford for a statement like this. But now they can't. And I doubt Toyota will challenge Ford's claim either.
This is good news for the consumer. It's getting to the point where we can choose any make and model and get a good car at a good price.
Not too long ago the automotive press would have crucified Ford for a statement like this. But now they can't. And I doubt Toyota will challenge Ford's claim either.
This is good news for the consumer. It's getting to the point where we can choose any make and model and get a good car at a good price.
For many of us baby boomers who have switched to the dark side and will probably never go back to the big 3, it's a waist of time to continue trying to convince us that things are different now. It's like trying to convince us that the cattle prodder doesn't hurt too much anymore, so why won't you try being patriotic again?
If the big 3 want to get back on their feet, and it will take a long time, they need to focus on the next generation of drivers. They need to build the best looking, best handling, most powerful, best braking, most fuel efficient vehicle in their price range and then build on that. That generation of kids will become brand loyal and upgrade to the next class of vehicle of that brand without even thinking twice, and on and on and on, assuming that company is ready with a quality vehicle for them when their ready to upgrade.
BTW- our best allies in the world today are the Britts, Australians and Japanese...and it's not even close. If you don't believe me, go do some real world operational planning with some coalition forces sometime. It will be an eye opener!
If the big 3 want to get back on their feet, and it will take a long time, they need to focus on the next generation of drivers. They need to build the best looking, best handling, most powerful, best braking, most fuel efficient vehicle in their price range and then build on that. That generation of kids will become brand loyal and upgrade to the next class of vehicle of that brand without even thinking twice, and on and on and on, assuming that company is ready with a quality vehicle for them when their ready to upgrade.
BTW- our best allies in the world today are the Britts, Australians and Japanese...and it's not even close. If you don't believe me, go do some real world operational planning with some coalition forces sometime. It will be an eye opener!
Toyota has an ad on the TV with mid-90s Corolla owners at 120k, 220k, and 340k miles bragging about how nice the cars have been.
Ford needs to find a model they still make (sorry escort, contour, taurus guys) and people to blush over them. Maybe when the rename the 500 the taurus they could do an ad campaign like this.
I have great luck with used mid-90s American iron but noone who's car shopping ever asks my opinion.*
So they need to do some advertising.
* except one co-worker who was buying an old geezer's cutlass ciera and she asked about mine. She got out of an older honda accord for that. Not a car lady but I think she was happy.
Ford needs to find a model they still make (sorry escort, contour, taurus guys) and people to blush over them. Maybe when the rename the 500 the taurus they could do an ad campaign like this.
I have great luck with used mid-90s American iron but noone who's car shopping ever asks my opinion.*
* except one co-worker who was buying an old geezer's cutlass ciera and she asked about mine. She got out of an older honda accord for that. Not a car lady but I think she was happy.
Hmmm...the original link isn't working. Let me try again:
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070418/AUTO01/704180425/1148
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070418/AUTO01/704180425/1148
That's a pretty cynical view, but you are certainly entitled to it. However, I think there are probably as many or more baby boomers who would *never* switch to imports no matter how "bad" the domestic cars are or are perceived to be. If a person's mind is made up, it's made up. But there is a lot of pretty compelling evidence that Detroit is putting out some pretty good stuff now.
As for our Allies, I don't follow the connection with this topic.
LouDawg,
That's awesome for Honda. I've always felt they made good stuff.
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
