Ford Fusion/Mercury Milan

libertycat · July 2003

thanks for the link.

ANT14 · July 2003

So far the entire interior dimensions of the Futura are not even in the ballfield at this moment. Right now it's the "this is our mission, this is the platform, let's make it work" senario... By summer of 2004, the sizes, weights, etc. should be closer to finalization.

Funny you mention the babyseat issue, recently my friends had the day off (teachers work day) and they decided to go out and shop. I was nominated to drive. We had the choice of 03 Saturn L300 or 02 Focus, thinking the Saturn was bigger, they all movies their baby seats onto that vehicle. Well, it was quite a tight fit, I wasn't able to move my seat that far back. So my other friends said "let's try the Focus"... amazingly, the Focus was able to swallow everyone much more comfortably with the babyseats in their places. And the trunk was huge enough to fit their respective stroller's, as well as all the junk we all bought at the mall. (To be fair, the Saturn trunk is 17.5 cu.ft., even larger).

Minivans I believe are the best compromise between versatility (can use it to pretty much move anything you need, toe a boat up to 3500lbs), it seats 7-8 comfortably, etc. Unfortunatly it has a soccer mom stigma, or many perceive it that way. Compared to SUV, their gas milage are better, and overall the ride is better.

Now in my personal opinion, I don't think they have been exploited as best as they could be. Meaning, a Car based, RWD, V8 engined minivan, I believe. I'm not talking about Chevy Astro here either, being it's truck based. But with the sophisticated traction/stability systems out there, RWD is making a comeback. Couple that to V8 power which I believe ANY vehicle over 4000lbs should have standard. You might think, the V8 is a bit much... But in the case of the Explorer V6, to Explorer V8 gas milage is pretty much the same... Why? V6 has to work that much harder, to make up for power. The V8 is a much relaxed cruiser = last longer.

Eventually a manufacturer will stick a V8 into their minivan, for torque sense (not just horsepower) I just wonder who's willing to make the bold move first. :-) Which related me to your next question....

Competition makes good manufacturer's, better.

As you asked, why are Japanese manufacturer's seen as more reliable. Mainly it's their efficiency. See, when a detroit automaker renovates/reinvents a vehicle, every possily part is improved, replaced, exchanged, etc. This causes NUMEROUS items that can go wrong, NOT because of their fault necessarily, but because of the supplier's. It's NOT just a manufacturer that changes a specific part, it's the supplier who needs to fit those requirements, and make them within a time period that it'll be ready for production.

Japanese usually use the same parts over and over, their thinking is "if it's not broken, let's not fix it". So numerous components in their vehicles, are carried over. Maybe some slight improvements in the engine, and body structure, but that's mainly it. Ford has just announced they will start this new philosphy, since it's worked well for the japanese manufacturer's.

Platforms are also another issue, if you look at a current Accord/Camry, their basic platform pretty much dates back numerous years. But they designed back them, to be flexible, and be allowed to "grow" without minimal weight added. As example, let's take a 86 Taurus platform, that was increased to become the Lincoln Continental, and in the process it added up weight into the 4000lbs. zone.

Here's a tip I've learned when a platform is becoming dated and something massive will need to be done about it, check when the platform was last engineered, if since then it's grown about 300-400 lbs, in it's current state (sedan form, minivan form, etc) it's TIME to get a new one.

Mustang fits this senario perfectly, throughout ALL these years, it's ballooned 500lbs+, NOT bad considering it dates back to 1979, but it gives us a clue. And on the other extreme, new RX330. While the Camry platform is a good platform overall and can be tailored to pretty much anything, in this senario, the vehicle will require something VERY different, in it's next reincarnation. It just gained about 400 lbs.

Their factories are also quite efficient overall, just as a house... if you build a good foundation, everything else you put into the structure will hold up well. Unfortunatly (because of other issues) the american manufacturer's haven't updated most of their factories yet. From the Big3, Ford is the one that's ahead in this situation, NOT just in N.A., but all over the world. And they are beginning to use "supplier parks", meaning the components will be available, onsite, instead of having a huge stock, or short stock, or waiting for parts to be delivered. Flexible manufacturing systems where multiple vehicles are built within the same assembly line, allows for vehicle production to be changed between on to another, depending on sales at that time.

Japanese manufacturer's also do not have the massive union issues that american manufacturer's do. The UAW makes it very hard to stay competitive. The UAW is seen as a spoiled/only child. If they do not get what they want, then he's not going to do as you wish him you do. Personally, they need a good spanking. And unfortunatly, for every "give" the Big3 give to their demands, silently hundreds are jobs are added to their Mexican or Canadian plants. In reality, the UAW is burning their own bridges, and a reality check is soon in order. We'll see how the next UAW meeting coming up soon, pans out. The new President Gelterfelder (sp?) is acting stuff, in a situation that dictates compromise, not the spoiled brat syndrome.

Then you have the biggest issue of all (in my opinion) media, auto-journalists, analysts. They are a big influence on consumer's obviously. And their bias is quite evident in their publications. Take for example (I've used this example before) Consumer Reports publication. Newly renovated Accord debuts, it's not out for one month, and they give it a high rating. YET the Aviator (essentially an Explorer with a larger engine) receives a "too new to rate" rating. Go figure....

Or in numerous other publications I have read, such as Car and Driver, Motortrend. They'll call a platform "dated" if it's in a domestic vehicle that's 3 years old, yet when the same applies to another foreign brand, on a 4 year old platform, it's considered "warmed over", "efficient". I call it bias.

Most common example, between Pontiac and BMW's red interior illumination. On Pontiac (QUOTE) it was called "Garish", yet on the BMW it's called "insightful, easy to read".

BMW has had over 11 recalls on their X5, Focus has had almost just as many, yet on the newspaper or on local news, you will see the Focus being reported, NOT the X5. Civic itself has had quite a bit of recalls, yet they are done silently, and the media hardly ever heard of it. Yet even when one dome

nvbanker · July 2003

Great info, once again ANT. Wonder if you've read Mary Walton's book, CARS? (The 5 year story of the 96 Taurus development). I found it very enlightening on a lot of levels. Mostly, after reading what you have to do to build a car, it's a wonder the darn things run at all! A miracle, actually, and here we are arguing about which switch feels better... I gained a lot of compassion for the DN101 team in the end. But, if you've read it, do you feel it was pretty accurate from what you've seen?

Personally, I hated the looks of the
Taurus redesign. Too girly for me, so I never gave the new Taurus/Sable even a decent lookover when they came out. Other than renting them from time to time, I still haven't. After reading the book, Ford evidently had a car better than Camry in almost every respect when they got done. I feel badly, I gave the old girl no respect when she debuted. When the first Taurus came out, a relative let me keep their new 96 LX over the weekend, and I was totally hooked. HAD to have one for me, 87 Sable, and bought an 87 Sable and 5 Tauruses for the company. I felt they were unexcelled in their time. But I thought they got cheapened from them to now. The last Sable I rented was a dismally decorated car. Oh, it ran fine, if not ploddingly, but very uninspiring. I commented to my wife how sad I was to see them decontent such a great car to that level..... But, also, I have to dial in that I now drive Lincolns, and I'm used to those. Anyway, I digress badly here. Do you know of the book?

ANT14 · July 2003

No I haven't read the book. I actually dislike reading (for pleasure) because I'm constantly reading everyday. This stemmed from my childhood actually, I was amazed how I was able to graduated school and university by using just Cliff Notes, that gives you an idea how bad it was.

I wasn't too fond of the styling from the 96-99 generation Taurus. It was a bit too "much" for my taste. Ironically, the current Taurus's styling I simply love. I believe THAT should have been the styling that should have taken place for 1996. The froggy eyed look, ovoid overkill, and droppy butt elements do not do well for sedan consumers.

Unfortunatly, the product became discontented and earned less praise due to Jac Nasser's FAULT for not improving or concentrating on the vehicle. He was concentrating too much on SUV's and premium brands.

But yes, every possible component of a car is studied. For example, the Focus' switches were tested on older consumers, and glove wearing consumers, to see if they were simple to use. And if the tactile feel was good enough. If it has "quality" touch and texture to it. And that's becoming such an issue, where a doors "thump" is tested over and over, to make sure it has a quality sound to it. Down to how a vehicles trunklid shuts/opens, to the fluidity action a glovebox door travels.

Then once you find a solution, or a choosing for a particular component, it's the hope that the supplier is able to duplicate it, that many units over where the quality is consistant.

But that's just one of numerous factors involved, which is why so many "teams" are required for each process, which is why more vehicles are using more common components from one to another, lowering development costs, as well as complexity in manufacturing it.

libertycat · July 2003

I LOVE the current Taurus's styling and think it is one of the best styled vehicles on the market today. Does anyone agree? However the 96-99's were GROSS. Yuck, I hated that generation. And the wagon keeps the oval rear side windows and ugly rear end. Come on, ANT, why didn't they totally restyle the wagon too? I've always wondered that. I saw the wagon in a 2000 brochure and was VERY surprised at the rear end of it. If it weren't for that, I'd prefer the wagon to the sedan. Still, every year I hope for a restyled wagon, although I know that's not going to happen. Whoa! Hold on a sec. There isn't going to be a Futura or Five Hundred wagon. I never thought about this. Amazing that Ford is totally switching to car and truck based SUVs now. Wow! Oh, except for the current Focus and the Fusion, which is too small to be an SUV, just a compact wagon.

ANT14 · July 2003

Ironically, Ford sells the most station wagons of any other manufacturer. This is NOT including it's Volvo brand, just FORD brand itself. Add Volvo into the equation and overall Ford Company, has the most station wagon offerings of any other manufacturer.

Ford is limited as to what it can do styling wise to the station wagon, changing the tailgate design would require quite a bit of investment, therefore the most they can do is change the light assembly/configuration.

Yes the Five Hundred will have a station wagon version, it's called the Freestyle :-)

libertycat · July 2003

from reviews so far. To test you, do u consider Chrysler Pacifica a wagon? And yes, I realized they had the most wagons and that is way cool. Don't call them station wagons, just wagons, as STATION wagons don't make sense anymore.

ANT14 · July 2003

What test? It's all a crossover segment. Just how I see the Pacifica as a crossover. Personally I find it a bit rediculous someone pays $40K for a shrunken minivan (that IS the platform it stems from) and only seats 6. At least the Freestyle will one up them using a totally new platform (for Ford brand) and be able to seat at least 7.

libertycat · July 2003

is at that price. Crossovers are all (with the exception of Allroad and XC70 wagons) car-based mid-size SUVs in my mind. I hate the term CROSSOVER when in reality they are just mid-size SUVs built on a unitbody platform.

ANT14 · July 2003

Well different markets cater to different tastes, at least the consumer can't say there's no choice.

tomcat630 · July 2003

Futura is to be made on a stretched and widened Mazda 6 platform. So the nsaysayers who claim it will be "too small", don't have a clue.

ANT14 · July 2003

Unfortunatly I've already gotten those responses think it'll be small compared to the competition.

YES the vehicle will be smaller than the Taurus... but length wise. While the Futura will have more valuable space WHERE it counts, over the Taurus.

nvbanker · July 2003

Well, I hope they come up with a sexy name for it. I guess the one that disappoints me most, of the new string of "F" words, is the Freestar.....
I'm not a big fan of the Alliteration being used now, Futura wouldn't be all that bad - originally was a Lincoln Concept car if I recall correctly. But I worry about an allegiance to a format in favor of a universe of great options - ignored because they don't start with "F". Five Hundred works, Focus works because it's a "cute little thing". Freestar is dumb. Nothing wrong with Taurus, but Sable could go away.

Well, it's just me - what do I know, I've only spent about a half million on cars in my lifetime so far, and I can tell ya, the neatest car in the world won't go home with me if it's named something I'm going to have to explain everytime a colleage looks at it. The Ford Flatulence.....
The Mercury Mistake, The Ford Detour.......HEY! Bring the Fairlane back. It has great historical value......

f111d · July 2003

Since I own one. I hope the new vehicles use more common sense (I know I'm talking out of the other end now!) (maintenance) approach when it comes to the OBD II design. "Pre-Cats" with twin O2 sensor requirement, is center of the OBD II system. At least make these Pre-cats simple to replace. What a costly maintenance item the way they are now and I won't even talk cost cutting or the previous poor quality of the 95-96 model years. Pre-cat built into the manifolds ($1600 for V-6 plus over a half days worth of labor) with before & after O2 sensors and the programming in the PCM what hassle mechanics have chasing their tails???? I guess it keeps up the profit margins, BUT the maintenance costs are strapping the American family. And for those many that are wondering "why are sales so poor". HELLO!!!

Just one more design problem facing the accountants at Ford. I was going to say engineers, but I'm sure if given half a chance could design for maintenance instead of throw away. Of course in the last 40+ years I've been trying to do as much work on my own vehicles I haven't seen it happen, yet! I've even got an old laptop with ODB II software -www.OBD-2.com- Alex Pepper read his bio on his web site.

I hear it and see it everyday, families trying to make the decision, do I put food on the table or fix the Ole Junker. This is just the pollution & safety components. Hard choice, especially in light of our lack of reliable public transportation.

I can see why the Europeans are embracing the 2.0 Turbo diesels, I've read about for the Focus and PT Cruiser. I'd love that torque, too no cheap OBD II equipment failing, "damn CEL is on again"! Of course CEL lights for many other faults not related to the EPA/safety equipment.
I can't imagine the nightmare Hybrids are going to cause. I just don't see them being accepted, especially after the word gets out the real cost at the dealerships' repair shop. Ford needs to do a much better job at the dealership repair shop. "OH we've never seen that problem" this denial phase is being heard all over the country. Not good!
from contour.org and Ham radio and from my own dealer that Ford has given all these PR awards. I call it "lip-service awards".
Paul
N8BUU
F111D

ANT14 · July 2003

I believe the 2nd Generation diesels will be well received, over other hybrid senarios. Diesels allow low torque (which americans love) at low RPM, for great get up and go. And the infrasture is there as well.

nvbanker · July 2003

I agree, and I enjoy watching all of this hype over the hybrids that are coming out, giving you 10% more MPG over your already fabulous 40 MPG the non hybrid gets you. Seems like a lot of work and mechanical potentiality for the yield. I'd rather do the diesel thing.

alpha01 · July 2003

Perhaps there were quality faux pas, but I thought the Mistique/Contour were very good vehicles. At the time they debuted, I was 14, but had they been around 6 months ago in updated form, I probably would have checked them out. In particular, the old Mistique was a really sharp vehicle, well-received by Car and Driver and CR, but not such a good performer in the IIHS offset test. That, a marginal sales campaign and so-so quality killed the Mistique/Contour line. Too bad. Especially for a domestic make, they were a real find- compact, sporting, stylish.

~alpha

f111d · July 2003

Vehicle ownership is greatly enhanced with internet web sites such as the contour.org and I think I've said before I see no reason not to keep my Mistake for 10 more years. If I do buy a Futura I hope we can get a Futura.org going. I know the SVT helped by drawing in a larger group of car buffs, but the orginal Contiques are very enjoyable drivers car. Not exactly the best wording Hmmmmm.

I to was excited about the first Contiques, everything but the headlights performance. At that time some of the Chryslers really brought out the inadequacies of the SAE/American low-beams. Thank goodness the 98 models corrected that and so has every manufacturer since. It sure took allot of complaining to get the manufacturers to raise the height of the lenses.
I believe the headlight unit in my Mistake is a slightly modified aiming/beam pattern of the E-code. I'm extremely happy with them.
I just hope the new stuff continues on this path, low-beams that are very useful and little dazzle. Now if SAE folks would get active removing all these faux Hid's/blue etc lights from the highways. Some of those bulbs the driver has to be blind driving in the rain. HID is way to expensive, haven't heard much from the folks in Europe what the driving public really thinks?
The X-type Jag sure learned the hard way, no diesel offering? Who would ever thought Jaguar owners would have wanted diesel.
Given the OBD II nightmare, after reading those 2.0 turbo test drives, I want one.
Just exactly how much more pollution is there? I need to get time to Goggle and bone up.
Paul Echelberger
N8BUU

ANT14 · July 2003

A new particulate sout filter can be implemented into the Diesels innards, (changable at certain time points) that can make them workable for the american market. Current issue is, lower the sulfer on the U.S. gas, to allow for diesel to take off. Some refineries have begun this process.

Chrysler has already ventured into diesel with the upcoming Liberty. Ford already has dispatched a diesel team to study the possibilities. A diesel Focus fpr 2006 would be the first offering if everything goes as planned.

And yes, the Futura can hold diesel engine cabilities, same diesel engines co-created with Peugeot over in Europe. Those would easily fit the Futura , but instead, they'll use the Hybrid engine of the Hybrid Escape set to debut later this year (fleet) early next year (regular public).

f111d · July 2003

I was under the assumation there was a change in all the 18 wheels diesels? Well at least the new equipment and the fuel? I've talked to a few on the Low bands I understood or misunderstood the fuel price was already raised because of the lowered sulfur? At 57 I can't believe how quickly I forget, the bad thing is I still realize that I'm forgetting. Jeeze!!!
Paul
N8BUU

ANT14 · July 2003

18 wheelers using diesel, have different emmission issues, to adhear to, whereas passenger cars have another.

All refinerings haven't changed to the lower fuel just yet, but it's in the process. Also, regulations by 2006 are toughened, which is why these diesels cannot be introduced just yet.

stickguy · July 2003

Odd comment to me. One thing I liked about the Fusion was tha fact that it has nice long bottom seat cusions (front seats)! I can't stand short ones. some cars barely come 1/2 way down my thigh, and the Fusion seemed to come all the way (almost) to my knee. In any case, nice and long with good thigh support.

As alwyas, ones mans meat is another mans spuds, and you have to try out a car for yourself.

f111d · July 2003

http://www.dieselforum.org/index.html glad to see someone's thinking in the right direction.
Hope the full blown tree-huggers don't mess up this technology? If we can just get some common sense and simplify vehicles? This present OBD II gasoline w/accountant/engineers designed components has turned into maintenance nightmare. Especially in-light of the fact a decent mass transit in the US looks less likely.
Presently offered in the UK Mondeo 2.0L turbo diesel 4 with common rail has more torque 330 NM @ 1900 than the 3.0 Duratech 280NM @4900. Low end torque ideal for the American's ATX/AC effortless on-ramp/merging with economy. Economy's for the whole country per barrel of crude.
Paul
I lost the URL to verifty my numbers, I'll keeping looking.

jchan2 · July 2003

I hope that this car has an affordable price and a killer tranny, price, and looks. It would be great to bring over the Mondeo and mondeo wagon. (i'd certainly sell better than the Taurus)

ANT14 · July 2003

Think of the Futura as what would have been the Mondeo for the U.S.

upsetter1 · July 2003

BTW if you look for owner satisfaction for Mazda6 it is a disaster according to

http://autos.msn.com/userreviews/reviewlist.aspx?idmodel=10684&am- p;search=MostRecent&num=50&trim=All&lang=All

Compare it e.g. with

http://autos.msn.com/userreviews/reviewlist.aspx?idmodel=10038&am- p;search=MostRecent&num=50&trim=All&lang=All

Yeah it is fun to drive but problems seems to be similar to Contour/Focus - unreliable. Is Futura going to have the same problems? Taurus/Sable are at least reliable and Sable #1 in initial quality in midsize class.

ANT14 · July 2003

Internally, nothing has come up dictating the Mazda6 has any prone reliability issues, as of yet. I question some sites where peopel can voice their opinions without registrations, I've learned numerous times it's just the same person, under different handles, upset for one reason or another. I would say Edmunds might be a better online site where such concerns can be spoken/viewed/read etc. and you can easily interact with other's and question them furtherly.

dondilio · October 2003

Hey Ant, go to the Mazda6 board maybe you could give us some help with a problem. Thanks

ANT14 · October 2003

I did a search and came back with 41 forums pertaining to the Mazda6, could you link me specifically to the forum?

jchan2 · October 2003

hope it'll be less expensive than Accord. Otherwise- why buy one when the Mazda 6 is cheaper? ($18K vs. $20K for Accord and $21K for Camry)

Kirstie_H · October 2003

Here's the general Mazda6 discussion:
Mazda6

ANT14 · October 2003

Not sure if that's where he needs my help though. I'm still waiting for a confirmation.

dondilio · October 2003

I think you might help us with a rust problem in the Mazda6. I dont have it so far but people there seem kind of furious. Its widespread across the boards but you can find more in the mazda6 board and mazda6 owners problems and solutions

f111d · October 2003

Not a good sign, since most of the those on the CEG board cars built at Hermosillo plant had much higher quality problems than the KC plant. Rust problems like the 6"s for one???????
Strange we have have american car names being built out of country and foreign names in country. Wasn't Henry's philsopy, the workers were the best customers? Something like that? I know Ford's stuggling, but Ford's should be built on American soil!
Also still no hint of the "commom rail diesel"? Obviously no quick and easy way to offer it$$$$ Something has to give, but what???
Too many lives being lost because over OPEC's hold on us.
The specs on the new 2.7 Jaguar X's v-6 Turbo diesel, 220-240 hp, low-end torque better than the ole v-8's and MPG in the 40's.
Paul
from TCC car connection.

f111d · October 2003

http://www.4doorzoom.1hwy.com/m6_rust.html
Got to love the internet, finally hope for the consumer?

Paul

"ant14" stirring the the pot can be dangerous Eh!

ANT14 · October 2003

Yes I was glad to help, try the Mazda6 thread and you can see the progress since I was told about it. Which is why I'm laying low for awhile.

dondilio · October 2003

Hey Ant, do you work for Ford? My father used to work for FoMoCo. He died 6 yrs ago.

f111d · October 2003

ExxonMobil Develops Low SPAsh Diesel Engine Oil for DaimlerChrysler's New Diesel Particulate Filter

FAIRFAX, Va., Oct 23, 2003 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- ExxonMobil today announced that a cooperative technology project with DaimlerChrysler has resulted in the development of a new low sulphur, phosphorus and ash -- Low SPAsh -- diesel engine oil that, when coupled with DaimlerChrysler's new maintenance free diesel particulate filter (DPF), reduces automotive emissions.

ExxonMobil worked closely with DaimlerChrysler on the development criteria that its new filter required of the engine oil and consequently produced a lubricant with specifications that met the desired requirements.

The innovative technological development of filter and oil meets EU 4 (European Union) automotive emission regulations more than a year before they become effective in 2005, and sets an industry benchmark for the reduction of soot, hydrocarbons and nitrogen-oxide emissions.

DaimlerChrysler's new maintenance free diesel particulate filter was launched in September at the Frankfurt Autoshow. The new filter is currently available as a customer option on Mercedes Benz diesel automobiles in Europe. The new Mobil-branded Low SPAsh oil will be the factory fill in these automobiles and will be commercially available in late 2003 as part of the family of Mobil-branded engine oils.

"We have been working for many years with DaimlerChrysler on automotive developments and it is very rewarding to see these technical innovations reach the market," said Roland J. Frey, marketing director, Strategic Global Alliances, ExxonMobil Lubricants & Specialities. "The results of this joint innovation -- filter and oil working together -- prove that when two organizations are committed to high performance products, advanced technologies and a cleaner environment, they can produce a groundbreaking system."

"We are proud to be at the forefront of a technical development that is ahead of European legislation on emissions," said Leopold Mikulic, vice president, DaimlerChrysler Powertrain Development. "This has only been possible with the strong support from ExxonMobil."

Mobil and ExxonMobil are trademarks of Exxon Mobil Corporation or one of its subsidiaries.

SOURCE: Exxon Mobil Corporation

Paul

ANT14 · October 2003

Thanks for the article. I've read a bit about those particular filter's, although how manufacturer's work on their maintenence might be the last issue to contend with. Some are thinking of having a "warranty" to replace these filter's long after the basic warranty expires. SO I would think that's the last thing they need to figure out.

regfootball · November 2003

autoweek has pics of the concept Ford 427....is this the Futura? Does edmunds have these pics?

I actually like it.........kinda menacing.

ANT14 · November 2003

No, but the Futura will feature some styling features, that are shown on the 427. Mainly the front grill which will be incorporated onto the Futura and some future vehicles.

tomcat630 · November 2003

Hermosillo plant has been around a long time and has made quality cars in the past, the Mercury Tracers for one.
"but Ford's should be built on American soil!"

Funny, they have Canadian plants, but no one is calling a boycott. Also, Ford has plants worldwide and has done so since the 1910's.

ANT14 · November 2003

Funny you mention that, I know some French hating american's that I've had to mention their beloved Explorer's have french built trannies

Unfortunately most of the components/items in a vehicle need to be outsources to countries with cheaper labor. Mainly it's an issue from "Legacy costs", these are health care and pension costs. The union doesn't make it any easier with wanting increased pay at a time of economic uncertainty. Hence, the more union's want, the more components will be produced in other countries.

So far, notice how the higher profits Ford are being assembled in the U.S., these include most trucks (using the word MOST because some F-150s are built in Mexico), as well as Lincoln vehicles. This allows Ford to "keep face" by having them assembled here in the U.S.

Now as for the Focus, being it's a lower profit vehicle, it's surprising that it's being totally consolidated to U.S. production, as oppose to Mexico. But the Focus itself was introduced, while making a profit (even if minimal), unlike the Cavaliar which GM has admitted it sells at loses of around $800-1000K a unit.

Now the Futura will be assembled in Mexico with cheaper labor (not to mention, Central and South America will receive this vehicle most probably- Ford has the Mondeo down south). And that vehicle should post some decent profits considering it won't be discounted like that of the Taurus.

Although I personally would send the fleet bound Taurus to Mexico, since it's profits are minimal as well. Down south in Mexico, the Taurus, is really the Sable...Ford Sable.

nvbanker · November 2003

when I've traveled to Mexico, especially down South were there aren't so many drive-overs, all the Fords down there are Mercurys, with blue ovals on them. Even in the magazines, they advertise the Ford Grand Marquis for example. They have Ford Cougars, Ford Topaz', Ford Sables & my personal favorite, the Ford Lobo (F-150)! Found it facinating! If you actually find a badged Mercury there, you know it was "imported" from the States........

ANT14 · November 2003

Yes all new Ford's will have triple investment for interiors. The next round of vehicles we will see with such quality like interiors will be the Mustang, Five Hundred, Freestyle, and Mercury Montego coming out next year.

jchan2 · November 2003

how about the Ford Mountaineer????? and the Ford Tracer? and the Ford Mystique??? Weird.

tomcat630 · November 2003

In Canada, Mercury used to be like their Pontiac, selling equal models of the low price line.

In 1960, they had the Mercury Frontanac (sp?) a rebadged Falcon, not a Comet. Also, sold Mercury badged trucks back then.

nvbanker · November 2003

GM's Pontiac was a Parisienne, wasn't it?

tomcat630 · November 2003

CDN Pontiac had Laurentian, Parisienne and not sure what else for the full size line.

Hope there is a Futura concept car this coming Auto Show season.

jchan2 · November 2003

hope there is a concept.

Ford Fusion/Mercury Milan

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles