I changed my grille (Ceramic White 2004) and the difference was super. Left the rear surround stock chrome. Also added the 16" chrome factory wheels over the painted silver wheels (left them for winter use with snow tires). Would recommend the change....
I do not know if this is good news or not Jeff, considering the Wixom annoucement. I just did a deal on an 06 LS with $8.5K in rebates for an LS with CD changer, adjustable pedals, chrome wheels for a price of $31K + tax and license. I hope you and your colleagues are not to upset with Ford to provide me with a good build model. Hope to have it w/n 6 weeks.
If anyone knows of someone interested in a very good condition 00 V8 Sport w/83Kmi at TI value of $9K let me know.
You can use the "Sell Your Car" link on the left side of the page under "Partners" to advertise your car, but you ask for help selling it in the Forums. Good luck with it and congrats on your new ride! Hope it's delivered soon and you enjoy it.
A reporter from a large local newspaper would like to speak to consumers who have or had a Lincoln LS and really liked the vehicle. If you would to speak with the media, please respond to ctalati@edmunds.com with your daytime contact info., city/state of residence no later than February 1, 2006.
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name. 2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h) Review your vehicle
Actually those fine dedicated working-class Ford Employees affected by mismanagement will be on administrative leave with pay as mutually agreed to by contract with management and in addition voluntarily agreed by each and every Ford consumer. Any civil and government workers out there wanna give a sympathetic Amen?
It is not only Ford consumers. Ford consumers actually save money because of all discounts and rebates. Eventually all American people will pay price – Ford and GM will dump retirement payments (after going bankrupt) on all American people in the form of government taxation. Take into account also boomer coming strong without retirement savings and with Soviet Union mentality (someone else will pay for your retirement).
What is a reasonable price for the dealer installed Sirius option on a new LS. Dealer wants to charge me $690 which seems high as MB charges a MSRP of $500. Do you know what one would get with this price as the 6 disc changer is already installed and not part of the $690.
This article Ford axes GT, two other cars confirms the demise of the LS along with the GT and scrapping of the Sport Trac Adrenaline due to the closing of Wixom. At the end, it says what you say - the people who will be laid off will get paid almost all of their present salary not to work.
That leads me to two questions. 1) How do I get a job where I can get paid for not working and 2) HOW IS THIS HELPING FORD FINANCIALLY?
“two questions. 1) How do I get a job where I can get paid for not working and 2) HOW IS THIS HELPING FORD FINANCIALLY?”
Well, Pat – I expect that a typical Host response would have to be:
“This is not the place for a discussion of these issue.”
That said, I think I understand what prompts the questions. Many are annoyed (to outraged) to learn some of what the UAW Union Agreements include.
The short answer to 1) likely is that it would be pretty hard right now to be hired in a Ford (or GM) production plant.
This sort of ‘job security’ provision was apparently negotiated (agreed to by BOTH sides) when the (auto industry and general US) economic circumstances were very different. (I’m sure that a Google search would provide many details.)
This is likely to lead to a discussion of a rather large and nasty “can of worms” where many have very emotional responses.
And the LS going out of production, regardless of Wixom’s fate.
Ray is correct. It was a benefit that was negotiated by the UAW and agreed to by the auto mfrs during a time when they believed that any plant shutdown or cutback would be temporary and the workers could be absorbed at another plant within a few months. It was never envisioned that they'd have a surplus of employees in the Jobs Bank for years.
As a side note - GM closed a plant in California 15 years ago and they just got rid of the last Jobs Bank employee LAST YEAR! The contract states that you have to take a job if offered in another plant within 50 miles. But there are no other GM plants in California. 15 years of paying people not to work.
Is it any wonder the general public doesn't feel sorry for the UAW workers?
Is it any wonder the general public doesn't feel sorry for the UAW workers?
Well, I guess I don't now.
But I still wonder what is the deal with Ford? Why pay people to not work when you can pay them not very much more money to actually produce a saleable product? Isn't that the smarter thing to do? I know there are other expenses involved besides salaries, but it doesn't make much sense to me.
I will postulate that the ‘losing money one each LS sold’ is correct. I will ** guess ** that the loss is roughly 10%.
If average invoice \ sell to dealer transaction is $30K (could certainly be off here - in either direction, but I expect that this is the order of magnitude) the loss would be $3,000 per LS.
With sales of 20,000 units per year (likely a bit high, now) that is a loss of $60,000,000 per year on the LS. (gulp) On a revenue stream of $600,000,000
Now – some speculation about the loss associated with closing down LS production:
Clearly, the cost of the UAW remains large – some high percentage of current. We can assume that labor = 15% to 20% of the cost to build. (Source = UPI)
The cost of materials (tires, etc.) and sub-assemblies drops to $0.
The cost of “running the plant” (electricity, indirect labor [not assembly: custodial, machine repair & maint., for examples],etc.) would drop substantially, but not to $0. Insurance on the facility might drop, for example, with no ‘dangerous’ assembly activity – but again would not even approach $0.
The cost of any mortgage \ loan on the physical plant (building and internal equipment, etc.) would continue to run.
So – the cost might drop to 50% of current – say $300,000,000. And the revenue stream drops to – (this one is easy) exactly $0.
So – the loss = umm, $300,000,000 per year. (Could be as low as $200M, could be $400M, I suppose. Specific numbers for a specific model and assembly plant are not likely to be released by Manufacturers.)
But any of these numbers look like a much larger loss than $60,000,000 / year.
And the ‘sell the plant’ suggestion? Well, what exactly is the market for a plant (like Wixom) that is designed quite specifically to produce automobiles?
Likely not good, today . . .
Like most complex problems, there are typically many ‘simple’ solutions – that are unworkable or cause equal (or greater) problems. And I freely admit that this is oversimplified.
Just my (free) analysis.
- Ray Happy to have my problems, and not Ford’s – or GM’s . .
Pat - that is precisely why GM and Ford (maybe Chrysler to a lesser extent) have kept building vehicles even when the demand isn't there. It's cheaper to build them even if they have to use huge incentives to sell them because they still have to pay the workers whether they're building cars or not.
FWIW, Ford has said they won't do that anymore and I think these plant closings are confirmation. As an alternative to Jobs Bank Ford has already announced it will offer free college educations. But my bet is most UAW workers won't take it and will hold on screaming until the end.
If they don't wake up and negotiate more reasonable and market compatible pay and benefits they won't have a company to work for.
Agreed, akirby. Closing plants and eliminating models isn't likely to help the company very much, under present circumstances.
Eliminating halo models like the Adrenalin even before they are introduced is also questionable savings. Ford needs more models, and more engine choices in those it does offer. Eliminating the SVT Focus contributed to that model's fall on the sales charts. All significant competitors have a hot model compact. Chevy's Cobalt is doing sales circles around the Focus, which used to be on top.
Not that I have the expertise, but I still wonder if the LS could have been saved with either some more upfront investment to reduce the platform cost, or with a body/interior redesign to make it a car they could actually charge more for.
"Not that I have the expertise, but I still wonder if the LS could have been saved ..."
Why would Ford want to do that? After all, take it from them, the Zephyr is a sportier car anyway ... and cheaper too.
I think, and I've resisted others saying this in the past, but I think Mercury will soon be axed. Perhaps Lincoln too. After all, Fords are just Mazdas or Volvos now, so who needs Mazda AND Mercury or Lincoln AND Volvo?
In fact, now that I think of it, who needs Ford anymore? Well, except for the people sitting watching Oprah and gettin nearly full pay and benefits.
UAW contract + Ford's business "decisions" = The Way Forward = The Toyota Empire.
" But there are no other GM plants in California" Not true. There is still the joint venture with Toyota which used to build Corollas and Prizms and is currently building the Pontiac Vibe and Toyota Matrix. Of course it is in Northern Calif. far from the closed plant in So. Calif. which I think was in Van Nuys and built the Camero. Ergo the 50 mile rule would apply.
Jerry - is the joint venture plant UAW? I didn't think so but even if it is you're right about it being more than 50 miles away.
The Adrenaline was an answer to a question nobody was asking. I hope they're focusing on higher performance cars and developing hi-po versions more quickly.
Lincoln (and Ford) has to get profitable before they can invest in expensive things like brand new RWD sedan platforms. I think the new products will do that.
Alan: Yes it used to be called New American Motors. Don't know if it still is. I believe it is in Fremont (near San Fran) and that is a very strong pro union stronghold. From what I've heard, very good quality has come from that plant.
The below shows it isn't just the union workers who have it made:
New York Times
February 1, 2006
As General Motors slashes jobs, closes plants and battles to avoid bankruptcy, the company's CEO has set up a retirement plan that will pay him at least $4.6 million a year - nearly twice his current salary.
G. Richard Wagoner, who the New York Post calls "the greediest, most undeserving CEO since Chainsaw Al Dunlap," was named GM's chief financial officer in 1992, when the company had a global payroll of 750,000 employees.
Under Wagoner's command as CFO and, since 2000, CEO, the carmaker has seen its employees dwindle to 324,000.
Now the company has announced plans to cut 30,000 more jobs and close 12 North American plants, and Wagoner is denying rampant rumors that GM is preparing for file for bankruptcy protection.
The carmaker's pension fund is under-funded by more than $45 billion, according to the Post. But Wagoner has nothing to worry about. He has a Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan, which allows a company to use after-tax dollars "that rightly belong to shareholders to shower riches on the CEO instead," the Post reports.
Best of all for Wagoner, this payout comes from funds that are separate from those underpinning the retirement programs of ordinary workers, which means he'll pocket his $4.6 million-plus a year even if GM files for bankruptcy.
are most of why the LS is soon to become history (here it comes again -- anyone remember the Merkur?) and possibly a large portion of why the American car industry may be on its last legs.
The LS is my first and last Ford product (and U.S.-built vehicle). It had such promise when introduced and has now turned out to be only a sad afterthought in the long-term scheme of things.
Those who drive vehicles in the Luxury/Performance Sedan category appear to be only one group among several that Ford is working to alienate. I guess if it's not a truck, it's irrelevant. The LS hasn't been included in any media comparisons of vehicles in categories that clearly include it for three or four years. Perhaps those who publish such things (also) knew within two years of the introduction of the LS that it was doomed to failure.
A front-wheel drive compact car with an automatic transmission may carry the day for Lincoln, going forward, but I remain to be convinced. OTOH, the Zephyr is easier to park than a Town Car, so the dealer cabal considers it essentially identical to the LS, but cheaper (in all ways).
Here's the question: (Mis)management, Unions, Dealer Cabal -- which will kill the American big-two car industry first? How will we be able to tell? There's some hope for GM, with the Pontiac & Cadillac situations, but I'm not so sure about Ford.
"Alan: Yes it used to be called New American Motors."
No it wasn't. That was what Chrysler and Lee Iaccocca killed when they bought it to get Jeep, promising NEVER to close the AMC plant in Kenosha Wisconsin and then doing the very thing within a year.
The joint GM/Toyota plant which is in Fremont California about 30 miles from me is called NUMMI (New United Motors something something). Look here for more info: www.nummi.com They are associated with the UAW, but not in the same way as the rest of America because of the involvement of Toyota. Right now they make the Matrix/Vibe and I *think* the Tacoma P/U but not sure. BTW, within a 5 minute drive is what used to be a Ford plant but it's been a shopping center for the last 15 years. They used to have examples of what the plant built inside the shopping center - my favorite was a '57 Sunliner hardtop convertible. But those are gone now. Nobody gives a rip.
"The Adrenaline was an answer to a question nobody was asking"
I beg to differ. Ever hear of 'TRD'? How about 'NISMO'? Ford is giving up another market niche to the Japanese by dropping the ST Adrenaline. I am on a Sport Trac discussion group as I own one of those as well and believe me, there are people there who were anxiously awaiting the '07 Adrenaline which was announced a few months ago and is now killed. They a P_SSED and are another bunch of car zealots who Ford has alienated.
Well IMO, the SVT work up would be more comparable to the TRD or NISMO but I'm not sure you can buy individual pieces of SVT product like you can say the TRD.
Ford may be a little gun shy after the fiasco with the Blackwwod. Now there was a vehicle that REALLY nobody asked for.
Unions have outgrown their usefulness. My father was a teamster from the mid 50's thru the early 70's before he was "medically" retired. He was nothing more then a petty crook (He proudly stole off the trucks)and milked the system. It is no wonder companies send work off-shores. Believe me I am a proud American. I have served almost 20 years in the Corps and fought in two wars, so I am far from anti-American. But America became strong by hard-working men and women, not a bunch of overpaid (with a ridicules benefits package) unskilled laborers, which is most of these unions are comprised of.
Outside of a few enthusiasts I still don't think there's enough of a market for the Adrenaline to recoup the investment. Just look at the last year of the Lightning. I think the resources would be better spent on a hi-po Fusion, Focus and Edge.
Is there any indication that Ford will redirect saved Adrenaline resources into any other hi-po project? How long did we beg them for an SVT-LS? They had but then dropped SVT Focus. SVT Fusion or Edge? Totally wishful thinking. I think Ford figures they've got the Mustang GT and need nothing else.
No, nothing that I've seen. But they've already said they're doing a Fusion, just not right away. My thinking is they'll accelerate the SVT Fusion and do another car or the Edge. Those would have more mainstream appeal and probably more benefit for the regular versions. But it's all just speculation.
I'd like to see them kill the SVT group and just design the hi-po versions along with the regular versions. Then we wouldn't have to wait 2 years for the hi-po versions.
I'm with you, only I love the Grand Marquis and the Town Car. When they go, there will be no reason to buy a Ford, as all their vehicles will be nothing that you cannot get at any dealership in town.
I've seen the Zephyr, and the interior is nice, but there is no way I'd pay $35,000 for a gussied-up Mexican built Ford Fusion.
The development cost of the TC was written off years (decades) ago. It's got to be a cash cow for Ford/Lincoln -- the livery trade uses them to a fare-thee-well.
FoMoCo seems to be willing to live off the residuals from the TC (& its clones), plus trucks. I'm not sure that will carry the day over the next ten years.
It sure won't for me. I'll be driving something built elsewhere within three years (as if it matters).
Enjoy your TC clone -- you're in a large, happy group. With luck, you'll still have something to buy in five years. It could be built by Ford, but don't count on it.
i have pretty much had fords leading edge performance vehicles for the last 20+ years. svt has made a lot of great vehicles, but the focus svt was not one of them. limited production vehicles do not usually make money on a stand alone basis. they may have a 'halo' effect. unfortunately, the LS costs a lot, but does not have good resale either. tough sell even though it is a good vehicle.
2024 Ford F-150 STX, 2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
Speaking of Town Cars....have you tried a Jaguar XJ8? I have a 2000 LS with over 100K miles on it. It looks and runs like new but I am kind of getting the itch for something else with more acceleration performance and luxury.
I test drove an XJ8 recently and was pretty impressed. It doesn't handle as crisply as an LS but the ride is awesome, and the quietness and performance are excellent. It seems that the long wheelbase model would be a superb alternative to a TC. With an XJ8, you would not be mistaken for a cab driver, either. Low mileage certified used XJ8s are priced decently, too.
Took my wife's 04 LS8 Sport on a 400 mile round business trip last weekend. Mileage came in at 23.4 (99% highway).
Not bad, but my 03 TBird with the same drivetrain has hit about 28 on straight highway runs.
Maybe the difference was winter vs summer and snow tires vs regular tires.
Anyway, the car was an absolute joy to drive. Would have taken the TBird except for 1) threat of snow, and 2) the TBird's hardtop developed a nasty rattle that would have driven me crazy.
Even with a mild winter (until the 24" snowfall this past Sunday), I can't wait for spring!
I don't think you can hit 28 with the LS over a period of time. I hit 27 once when I reset the mileage computer while driving at highway speed ... but it dropped as soon as I hit the first hill ... and eventually settled down to around 24-25.
Could be an issue of different gearing in the Tbird.(??)
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
My LS is an 04 with the 3:58 rear, same as my 03 TBird. Not complaining about 23+, just thought it would be a little bit better. I thought I did better once in the summer, but that may have been because of the tires, and because I only clocked it for a few miles in cruise control. On this trip, the computer showed 23.4, actual mpg was 23.1. Too small of a difference to worry about.
But, the TBird (which doesn't have a trip computer or a lot of other things that the LS has) pulled about 28 purely using the old method: miles driven/gallons used. (I did the topping off both times.)
My local dealer has a Light Tundra 2006. I'll be seeing it this weekend and then deciding about a grille swap. Love to get the 2006 lower facia too, but that's going a little too far.
Still looking for a Lincoln chrome hubcap that will fit 2003 TBird chrome wheels. So far, no success. Either too big or too small.
Was the T-Bird an "ultra-low emissions vehicle" (ULEV)? I'm guessing not.
The LS is. Oh boy.
That ULEV thing costs mpg (lots of it), but no one wants to talk about that downside of being "green." You've provided interesting & valuable back-to-back documentation. A rare thing.
However, if the T-Bird is also an ULEV, then I guess we'll have to look elsewhere for the answer. Sounds like the 'bird returns the kind of fuel mileage I enjoyed with my 3.5 litre Eagle Vision (worse than the LS in most respects, but mpg wasn't one of them).
Aerodynamics might play a role at highway speeds. The Bird with the hardtop in place might slip through the air a bit easier than an LS. Also, does the Bird consistently get better mileage than the LS or have you only compared them one time? If the T'Bird had a bit of a tailwind and the LS was going into the wind, that could explain the difference.
I have gotten as high as 27 on my LS on a 300 mile trip if there is a bit of tailwind. I have made the same trip and gotten 23 if I have a stiff headwind.
As akirby said, tire design, tire pressure, air temp, and other factors could be playing a part. I don't know if there is a difference in the emissions tuning or not but that is another factor.
Both cars were purchased from local dealers right here in beautiful North Jersey.
Yes, the TBird gets better mileage consistently. I'm basing this comparison based on the times that I drive the LS. Usually, my wife drives the LS, and a true comparison can't be made due to 1) her leadfoot and 2) the type of driving she does (short trips/stop-go).
What about the weight? The T'Bird is shorter than the LS, isn't it lighter? That would account for some mpg.
Wasn't aware the bean counters got to the T'Birds that way. Surprised that the computer was left out. Course they didn't put them in the V6 LSes either, the cheap so and sos.
This may surprize you: LS 8 3,768; 2003 TBird 3,775 (I'm not sure if the TBird weight is with or without the hardtop, which adds another 80 lbs.) TBird frame was beefed up to compensate for the roof being eliminated.
They chopped way more than just the computer.
EX: TBird has one touch down window on the driver's side-period, does not even have one touch up feature (?); no auto windows down with key; no driver's side exterior keypad; no auto mirror with compass; no adjustable pedals; no lights under side view mirrors; no electric parking brake, although the regular pull up emergency brake could be considered "sportier"; no driver control of the fog lights (switch can be pulled out, but does nothing); no cooled seats, just heated; memory seating only adjusts the steering wheel; no two person seat/mirror setting; no adjustable console, although that may be because of the center emergency handbrake; no redline on the tach (?); plus, no computer.
On the plus side, TBird does have more adjustable sound settings on the radio; and, the roof goes down (or can be taken off). The side window automatically drops slightly when either door is opened, which makes for a better, tighter weather seal.
They are both great cars, but the LS is more fun to drive while the TBird is more fun to take for a ride.
Well, this may surprise YOU, but my 2001 LS has none of those features either except it has the all window and sunroof open with press and hold key fob and has compass auto-mirrer (and wipers - love that). No keypad, no cooled seats, same pull-up parking brake lever, no computer, one touch down driver only, no one touch up, ...
I do miss the roof goes down thing:>) and I guess I'm not surprised at the weight. Had to beef it up for the convertible, plus the weight of all the conv hardware.
he's comparing the t'bird to the later LS, not to the ones that we own.
Sounds like the t'bird shares the pre-'03 LS "features," except for the ULEV thing.
Minor chip mods generate excellent fuel mileage with absolutely no effect on power, but the emissions go up by 0.0002%.
Some care.
Many don't.
Is it better to burn more fuel cleanly or less fuel slightly less cleanly? This is a discussion that requires the participants to actually be able to read, write, remember stuff and make intelligent arguments.
Wow, haven't been on this group for months.Nice to see Steve(cdnpinhead), Mike (ezaircon4jc) and George(heyjewel) still swingin.(And akirby,rainsaw and more).I had a great 2000 LS MTX which I regret not buying after lease in 2003. I can't believe Wixom is closing. The LS was a sleeper.Too bad it was under-appreciated, especially in handling.Used to love to slolom at the LS Manias! I got the original "Cone Killer Award". What a deal these "leftover" LSes are. My wife needs a replacement for her 96 960 Volvo and I'm going to mention a new LS as replacement. Hey Mike - does your new full boat LS still handle like a 2000? Stan in San Diego
I've (almost) gotten over my acute snit regarding where the LS is here in 2006, relative to where we were told it would be, six or seven years ago.
My next car will have been built in either Japan or Germany -- not sure how long it's going to be until I pull the trigger.
My LS is still running strong and would sell for about what a bag full of aluminum cans (squashed) is worth at the recycling centre. The frugal part of me says to drive it until it breaks, then pull the plates and abandon it. The part of me that has any sort of pride or ego regarding what I'm seen in (fortunately a small fraction, or I'd have never bought the LS in the first place) says to get rid of it sooner rather than later. Then, get into a car built by a company that actually understands the concept of a Luxury (or near-luxury) Sport Sedan (and enjoy the features that have been introduced since '00). Time will tell.
In the past day or two it occurred to me that our extended family has owned exactly 3 American-built cars over the past 10 years, out of 18. We're talking about myself, my wife & our four kids, plus a mother-in-law. One of the kids drives a Cherokee (for now), I'm enduring the LS & mom-in-law continues to drive her Intrepid. The rest are assorted Hondas (mostly), Nissans & a BMW.
My experience with the LS may or may not reflect why the American car (not truck) industry is going into the toilet.
The fact remains that when I eventually unload the LS, only my #1 daughter-in-law stands in the way of a large car-oriented (several of us Tivo all the F1 races) family going 100% "international." Oh, and she's looking at a Mercedes.
The LS is a perfect analog for why the American car industry is in trouble. I participated once. I won't again.
It's interesting that in the boards related to the cars I'm looking at, the main topics of disucssion are the bluetooth synchro or the nav system. No mention of, say, the automatic transmission or the window regulators.
Comments
If anyone knows of someone interested in a very good condition 00 V8 Sport w/83Kmi at TI value of $9K let me know.
Did the new grille come from Ford already painted?
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h)
Review your vehicle
That leads me to two questions. 1) How do I get a job where I can get paid for not working and 2) HOW IS THIS HELPING FORD FINANCIALLY?
Well, Pat – I expect that a typical Host response would have to be:
“This is not the place for a discussion of these issue.”
That said, I think I understand what prompts the questions. Many are annoyed (to outraged) to learn some of what the UAW Union Agreements include.
The short answer to 1) likely is that it would be pretty hard right now to be hired in a Ford (or GM) production plant.
This sort of ‘job security’ provision was apparently negotiated (agreed to by BOTH sides) when the (auto industry and general US) economic circumstances were very different. (I’m sure that a Google search would provide many details.)
This is likely to lead to a discussion of a rather large and nasty “can of worms” where many have very emotional responses.
And the LS going out of production, regardless of Wixom’s fate.
- Ray
Paid (only) for working . .
As a side note - GM closed a plant in California 15 years ago and they just got rid of the last Jobs Bank employee LAST YEAR! The contract states that you have to take a job if offered in another plant within 50 miles. But there are no other GM plants in California. 15 years of paying people not to work.
Is it any wonder the general public doesn't feel sorry for the UAW workers?
Well, I guess I don't now.
But I still wonder what is the deal with Ford? Why pay people to not work when you can pay them not very much more money to actually produce a saleable product? Isn't that the smarter thing to do? I know there are other expenses involved besides salaries, but it doesn't make much sense to me.
Business case - stop building Lincoln LS
I will postulate that the ‘losing money one each LS sold’ is correct.
I will ** guess ** that the loss is roughly 10%.
If average invoice \ sell to dealer transaction is $30K (could certainly be off here - in either direction, but I expect that this is the order of magnitude) the loss would be $3,000 per LS.
With sales of 20,000 units per year (likely a bit high, now) that is a loss of $60,000,000 per year on the LS. (gulp) On a revenue stream of $600,000,000
Now – some speculation about the loss associated with closing down LS production:
Clearly, the cost of the UAW remains large – some high percentage of current.
We can assume that labor = 15% to 20% of the cost to build. (Source = UPI)
The cost of materials (tires, etc.) and sub-assemblies drops to $0.
The cost of “running the plant” (electricity, indirect labor [not assembly: custodial, machine repair & maint., for examples],etc.) would drop substantially, but not to $0. Insurance on the facility might drop, for example, with no ‘dangerous’ assembly activity – but again would not even approach $0.
The cost of any mortgage \ loan on the physical plant (building and internal equipment, etc.) would continue to run.
So – the cost might drop to 50% of current – say $300,000,000. And the revenue stream drops to – (this one is easy) exactly $0.
So – the loss = umm, $300,000,000 per year. (Could be as low as $200M, could be $400M, I suppose. Specific numbers for a specific model and assembly plant are not likely to be released by Manufacturers.)
But any of these numbers look like a much larger loss than $60,000,000 / year.
And the ‘sell the plant’ suggestion? Well, what exactly is the market for a plant (like Wixom) that is designed quite specifically to produce automobiles?
Likely not good, today . . .
Like most complex problems, there are typically many ‘simple’ solutions – that are unworkable or cause equal (or greater) problems. And I freely admit that this is oversimplified.
Just my (free) analysis.
- Ray
Happy to have my problems, and not Ford’s – or GM’s . .
FWIW, Ford has said they won't do that anymore and I think these plant closings are confirmation. As an alternative to Jobs Bank Ford has already announced it will offer free college educations. But my bet is most UAW workers won't take it and will hold on screaming until the end.
If they don't wake up and negotiate more reasonable and market compatible pay and benefits they won't have a company to work for.
don't you mean "a company to sit at home and do nothing for"?
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
Eliminating halo models like the Adrenalin even before they are introduced is also questionable savings. Ford needs more models, and more engine choices in those it does offer. Eliminating the SVT Focus contributed to that model's fall on the sales charts. All significant competitors have a hot model compact. Chevy's Cobalt is doing sales circles around the Focus, which used to be on top.
Not that I have the expertise, but I still wonder if the LS could have been saved with either some more upfront investment to reduce the platform cost, or with a body/interior redesign to make it a car they could actually charge more for.
Why would Ford want to do that? After all, take it from them, the Zephyr is a sportier car anyway ... and cheaper too.
I think, and I've resisted others saying this in the past, but I think Mercury will soon be axed. Perhaps Lincoln too. After all, Fords are just Mazdas or Volvos now, so who needs Mazda AND Mercury or Lincoln AND Volvo?
In fact, now that I think of it, who needs Ford anymore? Well, except for the people sitting watching Oprah and gettin nearly full pay and benefits.
UAW contract + Ford's business "decisions" = The Way Forward = The Toyota Empire.
Ergo the 50 mile rule would apply.
The Adrenaline was an answer to a question nobody was asking. I hope they're focusing on higher performance cars and developing hi-po versions more quickly.
Lincoln (and Ford) has to get profitable before they can invest in expensive things like brand new RWD sedan platforms. I think the new products will do that.
New York Times
February 1, 2006
As General Motors slashes jobs, closes plants and battles to avoid
bankruptcy, the company's CEO has set up a retirement plan that will pay him at
least $4.6 million a year - nearly twice his current salary.
G. Richard Wagoner, who the New York Post calls "the greediest, most
undeserving CEO since Chainsaw Al Dunlap," was named GM's chief financial
officer in 1992, when the company had a global payroll of 750,000 employees.
Under Wagoner's command as CFO and, since 2000, CEO, the carmaker has seen its
employees dwindle to 324,000.
Now the company has announced plans to cut 30,000 more jobs and close 12 North
American plants, and Wagoner is denying rampant rumors that GM is preparing for
file for bankruptcy protection.
The carmaker's pension fund is under-funded by more than $45 billion,
according to the Post. But Wagoner has nothing to worry about. He has a
Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan, which allows a company to use
after-tax dollars "that rightly belong to shareholders to shower riches on
the CEO instead," the Post reports.
Best of all for Wagoner, this payout comes from funds that are separate
from those underpinning the retirement programs of ordinary workers, which means
he'll pocket his $4.6 million-plus a year even if GM files for
bankruptcy.
The LS is my first and last Ford product (and U.S.-built vehicle). It had such promise when introduced and has now turned out to be only a sad afterthought in the long-term scheme of things.
Those who drive vehicles in the Luxury/Performance Sedan category appear to be only one group among several that Ford is working to alienate. I guess if it's not a truck, it's irrelevant. The LS hasn't been included in any media comparisons of vehicles in categories that clearly include it for three or four years. Perhaps those who publish such things (also) knew within two years of the introduction of the LS that it was doomed to failure.
A front-wheel drive compact car with an automatic transmission may carry the day for Lincoln, going forward, but I remain to be convinced. OTOH, the Zephyr is easier to park than a Town Car, so the dealer cabal considers it essentially identical to the LS, but cheaper (in all ways).
Here's the question: (Mis)management, Unions, Dealer Cabal -- which will kill the American big-two car industry first? How will we be able to tell? There's some hope for GM, with the Pontiac & Cadillac situations, but I'm not so sure about Ford.
No it wasn't. That was what Chrysler and Lee Iaccocca killed when they bought it to get Jeep, promising NEVER to close the AMC plant in Kenosha Wisconsin and then doing the very thing within a year.
The joint GM/Toyota plant which is in Fremont California about 30 miles from me is called NUMMI (New United Motors something something). Look here for more info: www.nummi.com
They are associated with the UAW, but not in the same way as the rest of America because of the involvement of Toyota. Right now they make the Matrix/Vibe and I *think* the Tacoma P/U but not sure. BTW, within a 5 minute drive is what used to be a Ford plant but it's been a shopping center for the last 15 years. They used to have examples of what the plant built inside the shopping center - my favorite was a '57 Sunliner hardtop convertible. But those are gone now. Nobody gives a rip.
I beg to differ. Ever hear of 'TRD'? How about 'NISMO'? Ford is giving up another market niche to the Japanese by dropping the ST Adrenaline. I am on a Sport Trac discussion group as I own one of those as well and believe me, there are people there who were anxiously awaiting the '07 Adrenaline which was announced a few months ago and is now killed. They a P_SSED and are another bunch of car zealots who Ford has alienated.
Ford may be a little gun shy after the fiasco with the Blackwwod. Now there was a vehicle that REALLY nobody asked for.
Is there any indication that Ford will redirect saved Adrenaline resources into any other hi-po project? How long did we beg them for an SVT-LS? They had but then dropped SVT Focus. SVT Fusion or Edge? Totally wishful thinking. I think Ford figures they've got the Mustang GT and need nothing else.
I'd like to see them kill the SVT group and just design the hi-po versions along with the regular versions. Then we wouldn't have to wait 2 years for the hi-po versions.
I've seen the Zephyr, and the interior is nice, but there is no way I'd pay $35,000 for a gussied-up Mexican built Ford Fusion.
FoMoCo seems to be willing to live off the residuals from the TC (& its clones), plus trucks. I'm not sure that will carry the day over the next ten years.
It sure won't for me. I'll be driving something built elsewhere within three years (as if it matters).
Enjoy your TC clone -- you're in a large, happy group. With luck, you'll still have something to buy in five years. It could be built by Ford, but don't count on it.
limited production vehicles do not usually make money on a stand alone basis. they may have a 'halo' effect.
unfortunately, the LS costs a lot, but does not have good resale either. tough sell even though it is a good vehicle.
I test drove an XJ8 recently and was pretty impressed. It doesn't handle as crisply as an LS but the ride is awesome, and the quietness and performance are excellent. It seems that the long wheelbase model would be a superb alternative to a TC. With an XJ8, you would not be mistaken for a cab driver, either. Low mileage certified used XJ8s are priced decently, too.
Not bad, but my 03 TBird with the same drivetrain has hit about 28 on straight highway runs.
Maybe the difference was winter vs summer and snow tires vs regular tires.
Anyway, the car was an absolute joy to drive. Would have taken the TBird except for 1) threat of snow, and 2) the TBird's hardtop developed a nasty rattle that would have driven me crazy.
Even with a mild winter (until the 24" snowfall this past Sunday), I can't wait for spring!
I don't think you can hit 28 with the LS over a period of time. I hit 27 once when I reset the mileage computer while driving at highway speed ... but it dropped as soon as I hit the first hill ... and eventually settled down to around 24-25.
Could be an issue of different gearing in the Tbird.(??)
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
Mileage depends on tires, tire pressure, terrain, fuel, ambient air temp and a hundred other factors.
But, the TBird (which doesn't have a trip computer or a lot of other things that the LS has) pulled about 28 purely using the old method: miles driven/gallons used. (I did the topping off both times.)
My local dealer has a Light Tundra 2006. I'll be seeing it this weekend and then deciding about a grille swap. Love to get the 2006 lower facia too, but that's going a little too far.
Still looking for a Lincoln chrome hubcap that will fit 2003 TBird chrome wheels. So far, no success. Either too big or too small.
The LS is. Oh boy.
That ULEV thing costs mpg (lots of it), but no one wants to talk about that downside of being "green." You've provided interesting & valuable back-to-back documentation. A rare thing.
However, if the T-Bird is also an ULEV, then I guess we'll have to look elsewhere for the answer. Sounds like the 'bird returns the kind of fuel mileage I enjoyed with my 3.5 litre Eagle Vision (worse than the LS in most respects, but mpg wasn't one of them).
I have gotten as high as 27 on my LS on a 300 mile trip if there is a bit of tailwind. I have made the same trip and gotten 23 if I have a stiff headwind.
As akirby said, tire design, tire pressure, air temp, and other factors could be playing a part. I don't know if there is a difference in the emissions tuning or not but that is another factor.
Yes, the TBird gets better mileage consistently. I'm basing this comparison based on the times that I drive the LS. Usually, my wife drives the LS, and a true comparison can't be made due to 1) her leadfoot and 2) the type of driving she does (short trips/stop-go).
Both cars have 10-11,000 miles.
Wish the TBird had the features that the LS has.
Wasn't aware the bean counters got to the T'Birds that way. Surprised that the computer was left out. Course they didn't put them in the V6 LSes either, the cheap so and sos.
They chopped way more than just the computer.
EX: TBird has one touch down window on the driver's side-period, does not even have one touch up feature (?); no auto windows down with key; no driver's side exterior keypad; no auto mirror with compass; no adjustable pedals; no lights under side view mirrors; no electric parking brake, although the regular pull up emergency brake could be considered "sportier"; no driver control of the fog lights (switch can be pulled out, but does nothing); no cooled seats, just heated; memory seating only adjusts the steering wheel; no two person seat/mirror setting; no adjustable console, although that may be because of the center emergency handbrake; no redline on the tach (?); plus, no computer.
On the plus side, TBird does have more adjustable sound settings on the radio; and, the roof goes down (or can be taken off). The side window automatically drops slightly when either door is opened, which makes for a better, tighter weather seal.
They are both great cars, but the LS is more fun to drive while the TBird is more fun to take for a ride.
A nice touch but couldn't be better than the LS's fully framed window seals though.
But, you'd need the "jaws of life" to take the top off the LS.
I do miss the roof goes down thing:>) and I guess I'm not surprised at the weight. Had to beef it up for the convertible, plus the weight of all the conv hardware.
Sounds like the t'bird shares the pre-'03 LS "features," except for the ULEV thing.
Minor chip mods generate excellent fuel mileage with absolutely no effect on power, but the emissions go up by 0.0002%.
Some care.
Many don't.
Is it better to burn more fuel cleanly or less fuel slightly less cleanly? This is a discussion that requires the participants to actually be able to read, write, remember stuff and make intelligent arguments.
It will never happen.
What a deal these "leftover" LSes are. My wife needs a replacement for her 96 960 Volvo and I'm going to mention a new LS as replacement. Hey Mike - does your new full boat LS still handle like a 2000? Stan in San Diego
I've (almost) gotten over my acute snit regarding where the LS is here in 2006, relative to where we were told it would be, six or seven years ago.
My next car will have been built in either Japan or Germany -- not sure how long it's going to be until I pull the trigger.
My LS is still running strong and would sell for about what a bag full of aluminum cans (squashed) is worth at the recycling centre. The frugal part of me says to drive it until it breaks, then pull the plates and abandon it. The part of me that has any sort of pride or ego regarding what I'm seen in (fortunately a small fraction, or I'd have never bought the LS in the first place) says to get rid of it sooner rather than later. Then, get into a car built by a company that actually understands the concept of a Luxury (or near-luxury) Sport Sedan (and enjoy the features that have been introduced since '00). Time will tell.
In the past day or two it occurred to me that our extended family has owned exactly 3 American-built cars over the past 10 years, out of 18. We're talking about myself, my wife & our four kids, plus a mother-in-law. One of the kids drives a Cherokee (for now), I'm enduring the LS & mom-in-law continues to drive her Intrepid. The rest are assorted Hondas (mostly), Nissans & a BMW.
My experience with the LS may or may not reflect why the American car (not truck) industry is going into the toilet.
The fact remains that when I eventually unload the LS, only my #1 daughter-in-law stands in the way of a large car-oriented (several of us Tivo all the F1 races) family going 100% "international." Oh, and she's looking at a Mercedes.
The LS is a perfect analog for why the American car industry is in trouble. I participated once. I won't again.
It's interesting that in the boards related to the cars I'm looking at, the main topics of disucssion are the bluetooth synchro or the nav system. No mention of, say, the automatic transmission or the window regulators.