Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Options
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
Thanks in advance!
Good luck.
Maybe the 3.5 V6 will be available.
I wonder if it will get this new Ford design element?
http://www.autosavant.net/2007/09/predicting-2009-fusion.html
Thanks for your consideration,
Jeannine
Jeannine Fallon
Corporate Communications
Edmunds Inc.
What I'm looking forward to is the debut of the rumored Fusion coupe, which I believe is slated for 2009. Maybe there will be a Milan coupe also. This I'm NOT sure about. It would be interesting, speaking for myself, to finally see a Fusion/Milan coupe with AWD and the upcoming improvement of ESC. WOW!
BTW does anyone have any idea if the new SYNC will eventually become Ford's answer to GM's OnStar, in time? I've read of such rumors elsewhere, but if this is true I seriously would consider a Ford in my future.
Peace!<-AladdinSane-<- :shades:
Now a FWD Mercury Coupe called a Cougar based on Fusion/Milan mechanicals that would be a GOOD IDEA.
Mark
As far as SYNC becoming Ford's OnStar type system in time I can see such a progression taking place, but it all depends on whether Ford is up to the task financially to follow through with it.
The Mustang? Speaking for myself that isn't in the cards for a purchase.
The redesigned Focus coupe? Maybe I would consider buying it, but I find its look unremarkable, IMHO.
Peace!<- :shades: <-AladdinSane-
Road trip of 600miles in my Fusion V6 netted me MPG of 29.7 cruising at 70MPH! I am very happy with the MPG of this car.
I think Ford is dropping the ball on the Focus, just like it did with the Taurus. The Focus was a top-notch product when introduced in the U.S. as a 2000 model (we own a 2000 station wagon with 93,000+ miles on it in addition to a 2007 SEL AWD Fusion). But Ford has languished on improvements to the Focus. This a shame. The 2008s don't do a thing for me.
I certainly hope your assessment is correct Allen. I guess we all just have to give Mulally a fair chance to turn things around. FoMoCo desperately needs a big hit in the marketplace.
Obviously the 2008 Focus was "in the can" as they say well before Mulally got on board and also before Fields was fully up to speed and in charge.
You also have to remember that the Focus is in a bad situation until the new B car arrives (another global platform faux pas). Until then the Focus has to be the low cost price leader on the dealer's lot. Once the B car arrives the Focus can better go after the Civic and Corolla head to head instead of having to battle both the Civic/Corolla and the Fit/Yaris.
Are you saying that Ford is planning on an entry-level car below the Focus? I wasn't aware of this being in the works. Tell me more.
Why...because he is ordering someone else to make the impossible happen?
Mulally to engineers: "You...yes, you over there...make this car profitable". Mullaly then thinks "Well, my job here is done...now, what problem should I solve next with my amazing management genius..."
If the market is such that there is a $3000 gap, good luck cutting that much out of the car or getting folks to pay that much more for it.
http://www.autoblog.com/photos/ford-verve-concept/392410/
Fields and Mulally decided to wait for this new platform instead of trying to rebadge an existing platform that wouldn't be so suitable.
This will go head to head with the Fit/Yaris/etc.
Until Mulally dictated global platform sharing it was very difficult to make a business case for such a car.
Who said it was impossible? I'm sure Honda and Toyota make money on the Civic and Corolla. Mulally is simply challenging not only engineering but also product marketing to identify what it would take to make the Focus profitable instead of just sitting back and saying that's the best we can do.
I see 4 obvious things right away:
Platform sharing. Using one platform for Europe and the U.S. should save a lot. The current C170 U.S. Focus platform is one of a kind and can't be cost effective.
Having a B car to slot in at the lower price points, freeing up the Focus to go after higher price points and more profitable options and models.
Right sizing production capacity (matching consumer demand) which would eliminate the huge rebates that have been necessary in the past.
The new UAW contract which according to Ford cuts most of the manufacturing cost gap with the imports.
The problem is nobody at Ford management was even attempting to close that $3K cost gap - they just said "that's the way it is". And that's not acceptable to Mulally.
Perhaps that was the way it was because of the UAW contracts...didn't they have to pay them whether they built cars or not? So perhaps they did not have the ability to "right size" production capacity???
I believe that the last global Ford car was the Contour...this global platform thing does not sound like anything new to me. Wasn't the old platform kept for the Focus because, given that most Americans will not pay premium prices for small cars, the new european focus would have cost too much in the US?
Ford's previous "global car" idea was different than global platform sharing. I don't remember all the details but I've heard experts say that it's not the same idea.
While it's true the current Focus and Fusion are cheaper than their Euro counterparts, the fact is the reason they don't share a platform is because previous CEOs never forced Ford of Europe, Ford of Australia and Ford of North America divisions to work together. They were allowed to operate like independent companies. They had separate meetings with the CEO and never shared financial details with each other. That's the first thing Mulally fixed when he walked in the door.
Australia will take the lead on the new RWD platform for Aus and U.S. Europe has the lead on small/fwd cars and the U.S. has the lead on trucks and SUVs.
The engineers still have to execute and the dealers have to sell the vehicles, but all of the things that were getting in their way have been removed. We'll have to wait a few years to see if it really pays off, but I'm optimistic.
Oh...this is a Fusion forum (I'd been thinking it was a Focus forum for some reason)....so who has the lead for the next midsize platform..or is that included in your "small/fwd" category?
Allen,
Sounds like a solid business plan to me. Also thanks for the link, and info, on the Verve. Odd name, I guess it rhymes with "curve." It will be really interesting to see how close the final product matches up with the concept.
Any idea of the time frame involved for the next generation of the Fusion (Mondeo/Mazda6)? When will all of these mid-sizers get the same platform?
Most people have no idea that these 2 CUVs are related under the skin. Most of Ford's experience with platform sharing hasn't gone so well.
Example of Bad platform sharing. Ford Contour and Ford Mondeo. The Mondeo was a hit in Europe. In the US that sized car needed to sell for thousands less than the Contour did. The similar sized Ford Temp was selling for under 15k at the time.
Lincoln LS and Jag S type. The Interior of the Lincoln had to be gutted to little better than Taurus standards to work on this Platform which was way way 2 expensive for a US Lincoln. Further the Jag sourced 3.9L V8 was totally inadequate for a car in the LS V8 price range.
Another example. Volvo XC-90/V70 and the 500/Taurus. The car that Ford called the 500 was always planed as a Taurus replacement. The problem was that Ford could never get enough cost savings to get the 500 down into the Taurus price range. This is a really good platform used on vehicles it never should have been. The MKS will show just how good this platform can be. Further Irony? Volvo is moving away from this platform to one that is far less expensive that was devoloped off of the Mazda3/Ford Euro Focus platform.
Mark.
That's because that wasn't Ford's intention.
The Taurus was planned to be replaced by BOTH the Fusion and Five Hundred. Both models are marketed to different types of buyers. The Five Hundred was a flop more because of the underpowered 3.0 DT and CVT that it was saddled with, as well as the lack of marketing (with the bigger emphasis on the Fusion), not because of price. Compared to the Avalon and Lucerne, the Five Hundred (and now Taurus) is comparably priced, while the Fusion, compared to the Camry and Accord, also fares well in pricing.
Can FoMoCo really wait this long to incorporate these changes?
It takes a few years to do a new platform, especially when you're talking about sharing it amongst continents.
Mark
Fast forward to 2000- the Ford Focus earns critical acclaim worldwide and is light-years ahead of the Escort it replaces. For 2004, Ford, Mazda and Volvo all introduce cars based on the co-developed C1 Platform- the Mazda3, Volvo S40/V50 and European Ford Focus! European markets were offered a Focus as competitive as the original was in 2000, but North American markets kept the same vehicle introduced in 2000.
One reason offered was that the European Focus was positioned as a 'premium' compact and American consumers wouldn't be willing to pay the price increase for a small car. Meanwhile, Mazda continues to sell every Mazda3 they can build and has not offered a single rebate on it since it was introduced in 2004.
The Focus name is as much of a joke now as the Taurus name had become. Why the heck Ford changed the name of the Five Hundred to the Taurus defies all logic! Maybe Chevrolet will bring back the Cavalier name, it has about as much brand equity (negative equity, that is).
Let's hope the third time's a charm (the Fusion, that is). At least the Fusion and its siblings share a platform with the Mazda6 and should be updated for 2009 along with the Mazda.
But did this translate into increased profits?
I don't think Ford believes that no Americans will pay a premium price for a compact, I think they believe they can not them sell (profitably) in large volumes, without a Toyota or Honda badge. I don't know that Mada3 sales tell you much, what are the sales numbers for Focus vs. Mazda3.
After the Civc and Corolla, the biggest selling compact is the Cobalt. Did it get there by being premium or by being cheap? I think it has to be by being cheap as I'd agree with Edmunds and rank the Focus ahead of the Cobalt, despite it's being a much older design.
http://www.edmunds.com/apps/vdpcontainers/do/vdp/articleId=106881/pageNumber=13
But the general public didn't know that. Ford could've easily slipped the Five Hundred into the market as a singular Taurus replacement. The CD platform was another solution for a midsize buyer that wanted something less expensive.
Besides, Ford could've done a lot more to cut costs for the Five Hundred. As it was, it was already rushed to market without the proposed 3.5L, which IMO has led it to being a flop.
BTW Focus was produced in Mexico. How it could not be profitable? If Ford could – I am sure they would make all cars in China and move all engineering to India.
a) it used a unique platform and wasn't shared with the Euro Focus, so the platform cost was much higher than it should have been.
BTW - the only reason the U.S. didn't use the same platform as the Euro Focus is simply that Ford Europe and Ford North America were previously operated as independent units who did whatever they wanted. If Ford Europe didn't want to share their platform with the U.S. they didn't. That's one of the biggest changes that Mulally made and one that will yield huge cost savings with shared platforms between the U.S. and Europe and the U.S. and Australia.
b) there was no B car slotted below it. This forced the Focus to be the "cheap" car on the dealer lots.
c) overproduction - they made more than the public wanted to buy.
B and C led to huge incentives which killed any profits. Ford is now addressing all 3 - finally.
I used to believe that, also. But didn't Bill Gates disprove that? And the Hummer is high price poor reliability. It is as if the world turned upside down.
And what about outsourcing engineering to India and China. Is it true?
Had Mulally been in charge back then there would be one global Focus platform today. But he wasn't and there isn't, so we'll have to wait a couple more years.
Ford has been keeping production in line with demand by slowing assembly lines or shutting down plants and shifts. It's also been cutting back on rental fleet sales and is now focusing (no pun intended) on producing more cars that are profitable at lower volumes instead of chasing market share.
http://media.ford.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=27105
So I would guess they have sold maybe a bit under 300,000 total.
I live in Georgia, and the Ford Fusion is like grass. You cannot drive for 5-10 minutes with seeing one on the road somewhere. I see more Ford Fusions than I see of the Camry's to be honest with you. Obviously, I mostly see the SE 4 cylinder and the SEL V6. And the most common color of the car is black. Even at night the headlights are very distinct. And that's not really looking and paying attention.