Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
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
In the process of Sho shopping, it appears the factory is selling a "gadget goer". To get what is needed would require a special order.
Vibrating seats, heated or cooled, Navigation, Synch, hole in roof, distance sensors are not items to be appeciated. The $295 added charge for the Red forces a dark Black interior. The Limited offers a Tan interior, but no Ecoboost engine.
As of last week, you could not order a Limited Taurus with the Ecoboost.
Computer sequential production of Ford vehicles has given way to Bundling of gadgets.
Would be interesting to see an AWD 4 Door TC with at least the Mustang V8 and 5 speed tranny.
A lot of inconsistencies in features among badge brothers an the product heirarchy reflect Ford's emphasis upon bringing the most improved product to market as quickly and economically as possible. To not offer BLIS on MKS, EcoBoost in Flex SEL, but no non-SHO Taurus, massaging seats, and the lack of a simple backup camera in a non-SHO Taurus because it's spoiler-mounted and despite a badge-embedded alternative used in F-Series, Flex, and others are all similar examples.
With more cash andless uncertainty, 2011 will hopefully see many of these discrepancies cared-for, including why a Performance Package fitted SHO is made to forego so many of the other niceties that otherwise make 2010 Taurus such a terrific, nay the best, mainline large sedan available in North America by a wide margin.
As for Ecoboost, despite Mustang's 2011 butching-up, it would indeed have been nice to see EcoBoost work it's way to RWD platforms, including a Panther platform swansong. A V8 Ecoboost would indeed make a Police "Interceptor". As for Town Car and/or Grand Marquis, as much ad I happen to love both, the world probably doesn't need roads full of turbocharged airport livery drivers or white-shoed buffet-seekers dragging each other from red lights in order to make their tee times and doctor's appointments, do we? Polygrip doesn't make a strong enough product for that demographic.
I see this (the Taurus) as a great sign of even bigger and better stuff from Lincoln over the next 2-3 years.
Not that Lincoln couldn't, with a concerted effort. Look at what Hyundai did in a few short years. They went from Daewoo-style economy car mediocrity to building the Genesis, the Genesis coupe, the Equus and the 2011 Sonata, while renewing all the rest of their extensive line-up--and in the process became a sales leader. All Lincoln has to do (ok, it is a tall order) is build exceptional vehicles too, and all will be forgiven.
But so far, Lincoln has largely squandered their newest chances. The MKZ could have gotten more differentiation at its Zephyr introduction, but the beancounters did not think it was really necessary. Turns out it was.
The MKS is a decent and competitive car with almost zero Lincoln DNA is its Japanese-style look (except for the grill). The MKT was a stunner in concept form and would likely have defined a new genre, like the Explorer and Navigator did back in their day. Instead we got a carefully dumbed-down looking MKT (so as not to offend as much) and now it looks like a too-long station wagon. We know Americans unfairly dislike station wagons. Translation: unremarkable sales.
So where from here? I do think the MKR would be a logical step, but given the Taurus Police Interceptor, I doubt anyone at Lincoln yet understands what makes a truly aspirational vehicle. The small Lincoln C could be a surprise hit with its full size passenger room in an era of higher mpg standards. But I have no faith that they will bring it to market without dumbing it down a la MKT. What else is in the pipeline?
As long as the Ford brand is on a roll, I doubt anyone is overly concerned about the mish-mash at Lincoln. Besides, Lincoln sales have finally stopped their many years long nose dive. But for how long will even that hold? The moving targets are moving much more quickly today.
They obviously put the money into new drivetrains (all new V8s, new diesel, new V6, ecoboost V6 and I4, 2nd gen hybrids, etc.) and new market segments (MKT, Flex, Fiesta, unibody Explorer) and new technology (Sync, MyFordTouch, etc.).
Yes, a new roof and doors, upgraded interior and a 3.7L/3.5L EB powertrain upgrade would certainly help the MKZ, but there is limited opportunity there due to the popularity (and publicity) of the Fusion and Milan. I think they went a little above and beyond to give the MKZ a brand new interior right in the middle of a design cycle.
There is no doubt in my mind that Ford has big plans for Lincoln including a new RWD platform in the near future. They just can't afford to implement it all right now.
Patience, grasshopper.
2 - you're forgetting about the Aussies. A global RWD platform would be shared with them, not with Ford Europe, since they already have RWD V8 capable platforms. Same reason that the Fiesta was jointly engineered with Europe.
What does this mean for sales? There will certainly be new motivation for current Mustang owners to make their next purchase, and it will win the lion's share of present "fence sitters" who, until now, had to consider a more expensive GT to match LS/LT power. Ford also enjoys its media darling halo on behalf of its indisputably-Improved product and the propriety of it's own renaissance, a message that tends to play well to the "all-American" segment mindset in which endless entitlements and bailouts aren't as popular as they are among the left-leaning CamCord owners who suddenly don't know what to do with their Priuses now that Oz and Toyota City seem to be co-located. Atop organic demand within the marketspace and the very real potential to win business away from other RWD models at a much lower price point, 200K units may seem optimistic, but it's certainly not pie-in-the-sky. My pre-order goes in next week.
As for the D3 successor to Panther, the Commodore-based Caprice, while being a terrific driver's car, especially for the money, otherwise has no inherent advantage whatsoever over a Taurus interceptor, nor do the mythical benefits of an RWD law enforcement vehicle whose ONLY benefit is price and whose many disadvantages are fundamental to any fleet operator in a climate with rain or snow. Not only does Taurus provide an inherently safer platform by virtue of its available drivetrains, its larger mass puts physics even more squarely in safety's favor, period.
Price, therefore would be Caprice's only conceivable buyer's advantage, but that's only as much of a challenge as Ford decides will exist. Furthermore, with a common-platform and drivetrain LE truck based on 2011 Explorer, fleet maintenance cost advantages will help offset any difference in acquisition cost among fleet operators of both.
There are plenty of options today for RWD and cheap, yet Panther and Crown Vic continue to rule the day. When combined with just about any council member in any city where GM doesn't have an established U.S. assembly facility would have a very tough time indeed remembering to constituents at election time the justification for choosing to support a bailed-out GM over the self-sustaining Ford when spending further public funds.
That's not to say there won't be police fleets operating Caprices, Chargers, Impalas, or other vehicles as their mainline patrol vehicles, but the truth is that Taurus is likely to enjoy greater momentum and support, even as an entirely new platform to law enforcement operators than many existing models that are already in service. (At least, in a JUST world, it would.)
Lincoln will receive 7 new or significantly updated models over the next 4 years including a C class vehicle and unique engines.
As far as Lincoln goes, IMO every Lincoln should come with an Eco-Boost standard to differrentiate it from Ford.
You also would give up choices in interior colors and a host of features like dual panel moonroof, power moonroof shade, swiveling headlights, power tilt/telescope wheel, more compliant suspension, better weatherstripping/door sealing, lined door pockets, park assist, front parking sensors, drastically better leather, soft trim on lower doors, longer warranty, wide vision exterior mirrors, and styling that doesn't look like a female version of a Chrysler 300.
GM should have kept Pontiac and got rid of Buick. They could of scraped all the Pontaic models and maybe 4-5 brand new completely different sport oriented Pontiac models. Pontiac could have become their sport oriented division to compete with the likes of Scion. They really missed out on a huge opportunity there I think.
Now, GM has two luxury divisions, one true/prestigious and more recognized Cadillac division that competes fairly well with its Japanese and German competition and another cheaper, less prestigious, entry level luxury Buick division. The problem now, is that Cadillac is going to always be a ceiling for Buick. No matter what Buick does, they can't get too good as to have better materials, more features, etc that would make them better than Cadillac. Buick is and always will be a poor man's Cadillac, as long as Cadillac is in existence. So to me, its redundant and not necessary to have both Buick and Cadillac. If I had a choice only between these two, I'd be in a Cadillac every time.
What will be interesting to see is if GM really screws up and actually turns Buick into a division that actually begins competing with Cadillac for sales, mainly b/c even right now, the mid and high trim levels of Buick models intrude into the price ranges for the lower end Cadillac models. :sick:
Bottom line, should have kept and completely retooled Pontiac and got rid of Poor Man's Cadillac, Buick. GM would have been much more balanced had they had this structure.
Chevrolet: Fully Mainstream Division
GMC: Professional Grade Division for Industry/Businesses
Pontiac: Mainstream Sport Specific Division
Cadillac: Top Level Luxury Division
In this structure, they would have had every group of the car market covered.
Chev - Olds - Cad
Re: trucks? Make up your mind. Two truck divisions are not needed.
Buick was saved because it is a very successful brand and very important to GM's bottom line. It is GM's biggest seller in China, and you must remember that GM sells more cars in China than it does here. In China, it has prestige, and it lives comfortably there with Cadillac. Here it is still transitioning from a blue hair car to an Acura fighter. With the Encore, Lacrosse and Regal it is on its way. Lucerne will soon be kicked to the curb, and more new models are planned.
There has always been room for Buick under Cadillac. Some overlap is necessary for both to have a range of models, but Cadillac has a different focus with its emphasis on rear wheel drive, and V model halo cars that can kick the pants of anything else out there. Chevrolet can cover many bases: economy, quality mainstream, sport, utility as well as style. Ford hasn't the resources to manage more than two brands right now. What they are doing, they are beginning to do quite well. But GM's advantage here is having more brands, brands that are meaningful. Even Chrysler is looking like they have a shot at making it now, and setting aside the European partner brands, they still have Chrysler, Dodge, Jeep and Ram.
Success can certainly be achieved with just two brands: Honda and Toyota (although Scion is a third) certainly have done it. But Honda has seemingly reached an asymptote, and Toyota has stumbled with quality and cannot rely on Lexus to carry it through. Ford may be relegated to being a successful smaller manufacturer now that all brands but two are gone. We shall see.
GM needs to start thinking like Ford, who actually is making much better progress than GM. Last time I checked, Ford, like all the foreign car companies, only has 1 luxury division, Lincoln. They don't need a poor man's luxury company below that to fill some void that isn't there.
But Ford took over sales dominance for what? A month or two this year? GM, as beaten and bankrupt as it was, is now outselling Ford again. I can't say to them that I know how to do it better. How is Ford's progress, notable as it is (and I am a lifelong Ford man), so better than GM's right now? GM's sales are bigger, and this from a recently bankrupt company.
Oh, and as for all other companies having one luxury car division...
What about Mercedes (and their Maybach division), and BMW (and their Rolls Royce division), and Volkswagen (and Audi and Bentley and Bugatti and Lamborghini and Porsche divisions), and Chrysler and Fiat keeping Abarth and Lancia and Maserati and Ferrari around even though all cater to the higher end, not to mention Tata with both Jaguar and Land Rover (ok, LR, though luxurious vehicles, are SUVs for the most part). But you are right and none of this matters as it is mostly not in the US (although Maybach and Rolls and Audi and Bentley and Lamborghini and Maserati and Ferrari and Porsche, etc. are), and VW is growing at a rate that may soon put it at #1 worldwide. I'd love to see an American company do that. But with only two divisions, Ford has an even greater uphill battle to get that prize.
It seems you haven't learned anything from GM bankrupt and almost 30 years of quality/reliability problems. BEING NUMBER 1 IN SALES IN THIS COUNTRY IS NOT A GOOD THING! The companies who have been number 1, have had the most problems (GM, Ford, and Toyota). Plus, GM's market share has begun declining again so top sales means jack squat.
Ford products are wining more awards and have higher quality/reliability then anything GM is at yet with their products and did not have to take billions in tax payer dollars to stay afloat like your precious GM did or declare bankruptcy after taking billions in gov't loans and bailouts and still not being able to pay the bills and make a profit! Take a look at CR, MT, RoadTrack, or any other car website and you'll see the position of Ford is far higher than GM. Let GM mass market and try to be the highest sales volume, it will just lead them back down the same path as before to ever pending doom. Remember, the more volume you sell, the more quality control things are missed. Remember the Toyota fiasco a few months ago?
I'm so sorry my opinion of GM's decision in restructuring last year doesn't sit with your almighty praise for what GM did. Its just opinion man, take a chill pill.
In fact, I have little praise for GM overall...just noting that from some perspectives, the Buick move made sense, and the company itself seems on the mend. Of course only time will tell. I don't dismiss the many new GM models as failed efforts, and neither does the auto press (nor do I think that you do). Cadillac's planned move upmarket may not work out well, but it certainly could. For Buick to cover the Acura and Lincoln competition may not work here either. But it is working so far in China, and it is possible here.
Meanwhile, Pontiac was a more damaged brand than Buick. Could GM have rebuilt Pontiac? Sure. But they still would have had to keep Buick, or risk losing the larger market they now have in China. And like it or not, we need to sell more goods to the Chinese.
Can anyone justify GMC? I just don't get it. Give the GMC dealers the same vehicles with a Chevy badge (sorry - CHEVROLET) and be done with it.
As for whatever new they're planning - the question would be whether the same thing applied to Chevy would work just as well. Witness Ford and the Titanium/Platinum F150s.
How many people cross shop the GMC and the Chevy and pit the dealers against each other? Remember the camaro and firebird? Ford only had one pony car while the GM dealers undercut each other to the point both got cancelled.
For all of Ford's past sins, not having 2 truck brands was one of the smartest things they ever did (or didn't do).
The analogy would be for Ford to rebadge the F150 and Expedition as a Mercury and Lincoln.
GMC exists for the same reason Mercury exists. Ford bit the bullet and killed Mercury. GM needs to do the same for GMC and Buick if it wants to get serious.
Look at Ford and GM's sales volumes, then look at their plant capacity and employees. Huge difference.
You fail to point out, Allen, that GMC sales by comparison to Mercury are large. Chevrolet would indeed pick up sales if GMC closed, but not enough to equal Silverado and Sierra together. Further, GMC has plans to introduce models that are not shared with Chevy. Already the Acadia and Terrain do not share styling (not even greenhouses) with the corresponding Chevrolet models, and that differentiation will grow. GMC is actually going a bit upmarket from Chevy, which Mercury failed to do in comparison with Ford in its last years.
You may be right of course. But if GM can maintain four brands (instead of eight), they still have greater potential (if not the reality...time will tell) to attract more and different kinds of customers. Like Buick and Cadillac for example. Buick will cover the $25,000 to 45,000 market pretty well using front wheel drive (and some AWD). Cadillac will be more the $40,000 to $90,000 market, using mostly rear wheel drive and AWD.
There is always overlap of course. Ford and Lincoln overlap. Some people will prefer the Volkswagen CC, and others will go for the Audi A4 (I am a CC person and would not buy the A4, but that is another story). VW sells more cars overall by having both available.
Finally, you know darn well that if Ford had the money and resources, they would have kept and developed Mercury. That was the plan, but it just could not be sustained without hurting the core brand's chances of success. Ford went it alone, and kudos for that, but to make it work it did mean making some severe cuts (in ways other than the past methods of delaying new models and giving short shrift to quality).
Most of, if not all, Lincoln is just plushed up Ford so I don't think there really was a place for Mercury any more.
Take ANY business...why be #1 in volume, what does that means to customers who think???...to say I go to the #1 volume plumbing supply house means nothing if they aren't there next year due to too much overhead...I want a profitable company (altho I would never know what goes on behind the scenes, what I want is a business owner who understands about profitability over market share)...
Why anyone would want #1 market share is beyond asinine to me
Buick is absolutely different from Chevy and Caddy and GMC does not look anything like Chevy and has it own dedicated audience. I do not see why GM has to kill these brands and reduce its market profits share - just to satisfy few armchair CEOs from Edmund forums? Did you make research how much money will GM save or loose if it terminates these brands? If yes where are numbers? Is this thread about Lincoln or GM?
What a Lincoln should be:
So, while the buyer gets the advantage of the lower price, if the company goes bankrupt have you really received a great deal???...if the car never breaks, yes, if it is a lemon needing constant repair from a dealer that is no longer in business, no...
Just to be #1 in market share should not be the goal for any business...
After all, I could probably be the largest law practice in the state if I did bankruptcy for free and took 0% fees on accident cases... :P
There is no viable reason to make 4 vehicles that are clones of each other with minor differences (like the Lambdas). 2 is plenty and only if there is sufficient differentiation (like Ford is planning for Lincoln - different greenhouses, engines, sheetmetal, interiors, features, etc.).
There is too much competition to spend resources on keeping a bloated dealer network alive. Ford has realized this and is fixing the problem. GM only went halfway. We'll see who's right in a few years I suppose.
Ford's sales were up 16% to over 155,000 (still beating Chevy, yes!), but Lincoln decreased over 11% to 6,300. Lame duck Mercury outsold Lincoln handily at 9,250 units, even though everyone now knows Mercury is slated for death.
Buick and Cadillac share no models or platforms (like for example how the the Taurus and MKS are related between Ford and Mercury). Ford of course is in much better shape than it was and its quality is now absolutely stellar. But the company is still in debt to the tune of almost 30 billion dollars. Thankfully, it is like the little engine that could, and it is chipping away each month at that debt.
Still, GM is now fielding excellent products as well, and has more of them to offer. People are really pretty fickle, and I wonder how important Ford's decision not to take government money will weigh on people's buying decisions in a year or two. Already, a fair number are obviously loving the new GMCs and Buicks. And now the Regal is making a big advertising splash...
I guess I don't understand the vitriole for GM. They are an American company that screwed up and is clawing its way back, and yes, due to government help. Ford gets accolades for not requiring it, but GM has shown now they have good designers and engineers and are going to make a go of it. They are paying back their loans as well. If they do really well, then taxpayers are better off. I'd love to see America dominate the industry again, rather than Korea and China.