Whats wrong over at Ford?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I really don't care about Ford, but I read a great article in BusinessWeek a few days ago describing all the things their new CEO is doing. Mulally is definitely asking the right questions. One point I remember was not long ago where he went to Consumer Reports with some engineers and had CR go over every single vehicle Ford makes. When CR pointed out the practical flaws (like ease of use, standard features, ergonomics, etc), the engineers tried to argue with CR and justify their mistakes. Mulally just went around, handed each engineer a pen and notebook, and told them to shut up and start taking notes!

The article also described his horror when he learned that Ford's new MP3 hookup system is incompatible in any of the Euro-built cars' (Volvo, Land Rover) electrical systems. "Mulally finds this incomprehensible, considering that Ford has owned the European brands for nearly a decade." (page 36).

He was also examining Ford's product line brochures when an exec pointed out that Ford loses $3000 each time a customer buys a new Focus. He asked him why Ford hasn't been able to find a way to make a profit on it. The exec gave some #@$%! about CAFE volumes, high UAW costs in Michigan, etc. Mualally responded, "That's not what I asked. I want to know why no one figured out a way to build this car at a profit, whether it has to be built in Michigan or China or India, if that's what it takes." (page 35).

So, I think it is clear that Ford's new leadership is working hard to make things better, but this will all of course take time.

As I said, I don't like Ford's products and will probably never buy a Ford, but I think they will come back under the right leadership.

Andy
 
when they figure out how to make a f.w.d automatic transmission last and work like it's supposed to would be a big help for them also.
 
And hire some stylists that know their buisness.
Other than the Mustang, Sporttrac, & Ranger, this generation of Ford products is the ugliest ive ever seen!
And, yes, i AM a Ford man.
Ford had some good designs in the late 70's, 80's & early 90's, but now? YEESH!
Even the F-150 is unappealing now.
It seems that Ford thinks people want "Buck Rodgers" angular styles cars now.
Guess their poor sales figures reflect that they were indeed wrong.
 
Quote:

Quote:

Ford has a lot on their plate right now, but they are in no more trouble than GM

Click to expand...


Yes they are in much more trouble than GM. GM's new vehicles have received a very warm welcome.

Quote:



Yes, it is a little lame to back pedal and rename the 500, but they have to have the Taurus name in the lineup. Without the funds or time to make a Taurus from scratch, renaming the 500 and making some notable changes to it is pretty much their only choice.

As far as good news, Fusion and Edge sales are strong. In fact, Ford is selling more than expected. The F-150 will see a major update in 2009, and there are rumors that Ford is getting quotes for tooling for a new 2010 Ranger.



Click to expand...


These are the exact kind of things I'm talking about. Ford needs to truly make BOLD MOVES to change public opinion. This won't be accomplished by putting a new badge on a failure. Also, the last complete redesign of the Ranger was done in 1993! If the new Ranger comes out in 2010 that would be 17 years without a complete redesign. Ford's answer seems to be stick a new motor in it or put a new grill on it.

Like I said before, I was a Ford fan my entire life until about 7 or 8 years ago. You know.... that time frame is when they lost focus of their core business and started buying other manufacturers.

Click to expand...

And Ford's new cars have not received a warm welcome too? I would say that the Fusion and Edge have received a warmer welcome than anything GM has brought out recently, other than maybe the Cobalt. Fusion owners love their cars, and Ford has even won over some Camry and Accord converts with the car. Like I said, both the Fusion and Edge are doing BETTER than anyone expected them to.

The Ranger has been seriously neglected, and Ford has waited too long to redesign it. They are milking the old design for all it is worth, which probably seems okay to them since it is still the second best selling truck in its class (it pushed ahead of the Colorado last month). However, if they let it age too long, they will lose people to the other brands, especially to Toyota. But, a redesign is better late than never and it is good to hear that 2009 or 2010 will bring a new Ranger. Ford would probably like to go back to selling 350,000 of them a year (like they did in 1998).
 
Ford are getting mauled here in Oz by Holden (GM). New Commodore is killing them in sales. Basis for Pontiac G8, new Camaro etc. But Ford still has ZF 6-speed which would tip me in their direction.
 
Ford is in the exact same position now as GM was three years ago. GM is on the right track these days and I expect nothing less from ford. I don't want them to redesign the ranger because it will most likely become much larger and it will be like all the other gas hogs on the road. They should keep the ranger small.
 
Quote:

Ford is in the exact same position now as GM was three years ago. GM is on the right track these days and I expect nothing less from ford. I don't want them to redesign the ranger because it will most likely become much larger and it will be like all the other gas hogs on the road. They should keep the ranger small.

Click to expand...


I hope they do both: redesign it AND keep it small.
thumbsup.gif
 
If I had the money to go out and buy a basic mid-size sedan today (I mean really buy, no loans), I would probably get a Fusion with the 2.3. I certainly think it's one of the better looking sedans out there, certainly better than the ugly new Camry or the bland Accord (I know, looks are subjective). And the Mazda designed power train certainly looks good on paper as well, though it could get a little better fuel economy. As of now, I bet one of these vehicles could reach 200k with proper care, which would be the minimum I would demand. As for the rest of the blue oval's lineup, I like the Mustang and the Edge, but the rest doesn't really excite me. The Focus is well, a CAFE car and nothing more, it seems. I'm certainly not in love with their trucks and SUVs, especially the new F-150 and the diesels they can't seem to get right. My favorite truck produced in recent years is the old Tundra, but asides from that I can't get excited about anything else full-size, maybe the new Silverado. I would consider a Ranger if I were looking for a no-frills small pickup with a single cab, 4-cylinder, and five-speed. Anything more than that would prompt me to look at Tacomas. Anyway, this is just my honest opinion on Ford's lineup from an individual who is in no position to acquire a new vehicle. I do believe they have made great strides, but they still need to complete the process, if you know what I mean.
 
Quote:



I hope they do both: redesign it AND keep it small.
thumbsup.gif


Click to expand...

I am in the same boat. My Ranger is the perfect size, just outdated. With all new sheetmetal, the 3.5 V6 as an option, a 6 speed manual, a new interior, etc... I would be happy. They can even keep the same frame and suspension system. They do not need to change what is good, they just need to really freshen the truck up.

I think odds are they will use a modified Explorer platform with a solid rear axle and an Explorer-derived body. I guess that would work for me, but I would really prefer that they not change the size of the truck at all.
 
Quote:

Quote:

Ford is in the exact same position now as GM was three years ago. GM is on the right track these days and I expect nothing less from ford. I don't want them to redesign the ranger because it will most likely become much larger and it will be like all the other gas hogs on the road. They should keep the ranger small.

Click to expand...


I hope they do both: redesign it AND keep it small.
thumbsup.gif


Click to expand...


Well, the trend is certainly for small pickup models to grow to full-size proportions, especially in length. That is probably the direction the Ranger is headed. I recently took my Dad's 2007 Tacoma SR5 Access Cab to Lowes and parked next to a Nissan Titan, which is a huge truck. Anyway, I swear that the Taco was the length of the Titan, if not longer. But the Titan certainly dwarfed it in height and it was definitely wider. I can't imagine what the 4-door long bed Taco is like. So anyway, it wouldn't surprise me if that's where the Ranger ends up. That would be very unfortunate, but that must be what the market demands.
 
I just keep thinking that this rush to make everything bigger will eventually peter out with gas prices being what they are. You're right, of course. Trucks (and cars) just keep getting bigger and bigger. But there is a real market out there for people like me, who just want a small pickup truck with a little four-banger, 5 or 6 speed MT, to commute and do light hauling around the house on weekends. Something relatively inexpensive, easy maintenance, reliable, can drive it 200K or more without major repairs, and bang around in on the weekends if we need. We don't need one that you tie to a 40' ocean container that you drop over the edge of a cliff, while all the time getting get 12.1 mpg. Most of the time, these things are used by one guy driving to and from work. It's not like most are being used on construction sites or for other hard-core work purposes.

My brother is a perfect example. He bought one of those big-a$$ '07 Titans with the big V8 and quad-cab or whatever they call it. I asked him why and what he's ever hauled in it. He said maybe his big-screen tv when he bought it and that was about it. He just wanted to have a big truck "just in case". So pretty much, because it makes him feel like more of a man, I guess. And he traded in an '04 on the '07...had like 12-13K on the '04 at the time. Gets about 10-11 mpg.

Hey, I like trucks as much as the next guy. But it seems like a big waste for a lot of people just to scratch macho itch.
dunno.gif


Okay...sorry. Rant over.
smile.gif
 
The funny thing is that a lot of the bigger trucks are so weighted down with extra stuff that payload suffers. My little Ranger has a 1500 lb. payload capacity, which is more than enough for the vast majority of pickup buyers. The only limit is the size of the bed, and that has only been a problem with really bulky stuff like riding mowers. Some of the loaded full size trucks (ext. cab, 4WD, big V8) are only good for 900-1000 lbs. payload.

Now I will say that I still don't need the Ranger. I could get away with a 10 year old Escort, but I like having a truck. I like the way it looks, I like the way it drives, I just like it because I like trucks. It is a fun vehicle to own.
 
Poor quality cars cost less to produce than higher quality cars. More bonus' for the CEO. Millions of $$$ to redesign a car instead of improving the present model.The newer model always will have lower quality. My 2006 Toyota 4x4 X cab is really a piece of junk .It is almost like a Chevrolet in quality I have owned 4 Toyotas over the years 3 trucks and an 88 Camry I would rate the Camry very good and the first two trucks excellent.

.This model (2006)really sucks ,Most likely my last Toyota .If I want poor quality I can pay less for a G.M. or Ford.
 
An after thought will the new buyers of Chrysler keep on building poor quality or stir the market with a great product? I will bet poor quality and good marketing to fool us dumb comsumers.
 
Quote:

As of now, I bet one of these vehicles could reach 200k with proper care, which would be the minimum I would demand.

Click to expand...


I mentioned to a friend of mine who owns a repair shop and is a mechanic that the EPA thinks the life of a vehicle is 100K (based on emissions standards over the life of the vehicle). He said just about any vehicle these days should make it to 200K with proper care.

I agree with that.
 
Quote:

when they figure out how to make a f.w.d automatic transmission last and work like it's supposed to would be a big help for them also.

Click to expand...


Ford might have the solution now with the Mazda designed FNR5 ATX. Seems like a great tranny so far.
 
Quote:

Restructuring is never easy, and it will take time to fix some of the mistakes that have been made over the past years.

Click to expand...

RangerXL: On the face of it, these sound like wise words. However, what does restructuring have to do with not offering modern, distinctive products that already exist? And fixing mistakes could start 'tomorrow': Ford sells very well-received products in the rest of the world, like the Mondeo, Euro Focus, Fiesta, and S-Max (that just won Car-of-the Year) that would be perfect for us. Instead, we get the same sausage in different lengths: US Focus, Fusion, Taurus, Edge, Escape, all the way up the ladder to the big trucks. All have that same disposable razor front end styling. It's obvious to me that Ford USA only wants to sell product by the pound, not by trying to differentiate or innovate. I suppose they think they have Mazda, Volvo, and Jaguar for that?

S-Max review on The Truth About Cars
 
For those of you who didn't want to click on the S-Max review above (and remember TTAC is brutally honest in their reviews):


Ford's stylish, practical and entertaining S-Max proves that The Blue Oval employs engineers and product planners who are as good as anybody in Japan or Germany. It's the mid-sized motor vehicle that should have replaced the pathetic Ford Windstar in the American market. Indeed, the S-Max might even have been the minivan that reinvigorated the entire genre, in ways that the bloated Chrysler Pacifica could only have imagined.

Pistonhead dreams of S-Max importation will probably go unrealized, as any such plans should have been hatched at the beginning of the model’s gestation, when a global strategy could have assured its profitability. Ford’s headed in that direction now, but it’s probably too late. The best-in-class S-Max is destined to be another Ford of NA could-a, should-a, would-a been.
 
Quote:

Quote:

As of now, I bet one of these vehicles could reach 200k with proper care, which would be the minimum I would demand.

Click to expand...


I mentioned to a friend of mine who owns a repair shop and is a mechanic that the EPA thinks the life of a vehicle is 100K (based on emissions standards over the life of the vehicle). He said just about any vehicle these days should make it to 200K with proper care.

I agree with that.

Click to expand...


Well, I would agree that most any vehicle could make it to 200k, but whether it will make there just on PM or will it require big repair $$$ is the big distinction. For me if a vehicle requires extensive repairs over its lifetime, especially before 100k, it's because it's poorly designed. For example, I'm sure one could definitely make it to 200k or more on Ford's previous midsize entry, the Taurus, with either the Duratec or the Vulcan. However, it's probably unlikely that it'll happen on the original transmission, even with religious fluid changes. So in sum, by 200k I mean 200k with little or no hassle. With Mazda's help, I do believe that Ford can now accomplish this with the Fusion, including getting 200k on an AT. As for the rest of their stuff, I'm not sure. But I do like the look of the Edge and the new 3.5 Duratec does sound sweet on paper.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top