This is what you state: "****AT THE MOMENT***** there are not a lot of 500s in fleet sales (since the Taurus now fills that niche), but that may change and same resale fate may come of the Fusion since the 500 is very pricey compared to the outgoing Taurus."
I think that depends on what you consider "a lot" of fleet sales. Reference the following article, the Five Hundred is above 14% fleet sales. Thats slightly above the last numbers I've seen for the Camry, which is in the 12-13% range (too high, IMO). I guess its a question of judgement. It should be noted though, that the Chrysler 300 is selling at a rate of 24% fleet, considerably higher than Ford. Still, enough 300s are sold that its sales to private/individuals are higher than the Five Hundred's.
And most importantly is demand as well, Chrysler isn't afraid of pushing 24% into rental fleet market because the demand for the vehicle is high even in the used car market. While many can't afford the $30K, they are willing to wait a year or so, so it drops to a pricepoint they wish to purchase it at, and even then, there's always willing to pay for it used, so it doesn't affect them (in this specific senario) to have as many in rental fleets.
Granted, give them some time before they ease off on the rental fleet sales, and they'll probably drop a bit down to 18-20%
Two things will never change in the car industry, people will only buy a car they like from someone they like.
Fortunately, people like cars for lots of different reasons. And I think Fusion will be successful because it is coming to market with some original styling when compared to Camry and Accord. Personally since cars tend to look more and more like each other in the exterior, I think the Fusion is going to win alot of people over with its snazzy interior.
Toyota to mee looks like Radio and HVAC controls where installed as an after thought.
Now Honda styling is more pleaseing to me but it does not look really exciting, its kind of geriatric
Altima has almost an industrial machine feel very plain over all but for the fake aluminum bits.
You know Ford does have engineers that check the interiors before they approve them for production. If C&A screwed them up Ford would take appropriate action.
Yes, if you post a quote, you must cite the source. Post removed.
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
Hi I was just looking over the european Focus (I love that car.. and yo ucan so see Volvo S50V40 in it.. ) anyways.. I love the european Focus ans still mourn that it will never make it over the ocean (we should get a "significant redesign in 2008 but still on the old platform)...
but when I was comparing the lineup... Fusion is neither European Focus, nor european Mondeo (remember Contour?)....
Given Fusion's smaller size in the class I would guess it is C1 - European Focus.. but I am not sure... here are some pics
It is bigger than Mondeo. Is based on Mazda 6, but bigger than Mazda 6. Bigger than European Honda Accord. Okay may be similar in size to Camry (but lower) or amrican Accord.
The Fusion will be a tad larger, than the European Mondeo. We lost the Contour here in the U.S. years ago, but while it festered in this market, it grew over in europe in interior size and dimensions. If we had the Mondeo here in the U.S., it would have been placed under the Taurus only in size, but would have been equal in price to the Taurus, hence...not profittable.
The Mazda6 platform, is a "altered C1 platform", but heavily altered where it required it's own platform name. Over in Europe, the next Mondeo/S60 will be an altered C1 platform. And with the Fusion, it's a Mazda6 paltform, but stretched so it's pretty much "in the family". Of course, it's tailored differently.
unfortunately for me I'm not too young to remember when the first tauruses came out. i personally didn't care for the styling but i do realize that it was a revolutionary design for its time. but that was a long time ago and i was referring to the current taurus against the competition.
so is the european focus/mazda3/s50/v40 C1 and mazda5/fusion ride on simple alteration of it?... so is fusion going to be the same platform as the next gen s60/mondeo? i. e. is fusion leading the crowd of the new base, or closing the chapter of the old one?
Let me just go on a rant for a little bit. I remember reading that Fusion was to be on the SMALL end of midsize... Something like Maz6, but maybe even smaller.. you know something like a little bigger and more powerful Jetta.... now.. if it is the size of accord, or campy even.... wow... that HUGE...
I have a friend driving th new camry... he is 22 and looks like a 50 year only in that car... and Accord is just a tad better.... and while fusion's styling is better (I really like it)... I don;t see the point of having a regular/large midsize (fusion)And a large midsize (500).. that's just stupid.... too close together... And altogether I really miss smaller sportier midsizes.. Galant is a heavy cow, so is Altima and I mentioned the others already.... So the only thing left (as in compacts) is Mazda... I love the 3... I would love to buy the European focus, especially with its different body stiles (I really want a compact wagon, but can;t afford Volvo)... but we will never get the new Focus.... And wild midsizes... I think VW is the only one realizing that there are people who don;t want a tiny Civic/corolla, but refuse to buy a accord/camry...
BTW does anyone else think that the latest camry has the image of a Buick crossed with mercury? I am not really talking about actual style/design, but about the image of the car... It just looks like the car for the retirees... and I only wish toyota will also follow the fat of buick/mercury... out to oblivion...
END OF RANT... I grew up in europe, and miss the car market dearly... every time I am about to buy a car I compare it to something european and sigh how much I am getting scammed... for example compare: Pontiac (Toyota) Vibe to European Toyota Corolla Verso or the Focuses or all of GM's ... Opel rocks in design... Chevy/Olds/Saturn not so much Compare Sentra to Altima (OMG) or the US Corolla to the EU corolla... I would also love the five door civic... but we rater get the stupid coupe... Sorry I am ranting again.
"Labeling Taurus an "appliance", "rental car special" etc. is just a lazy way to dismiss a very good car, as I know how it really performs and could care less about those shallow people who have to label cars they really haven't taken the time to evaluate, with their "imports can do no wrong" blinders welded to their head."
you think your beloved taurus is a very good car. well good for you because you're the only one that matters if you're the one driving it. but to dismiss those who think otherwise as shallow....hmmm
the huge incentives that are needed to sell the taurus and the high percentage of non-retail sales are indicators of this car not being very good.
so as to not be accused of being lazy i'll be specific with my criticism: engines lack polish and power bad transmission performance archaic suspension lacking the latest safety features dismal interior
in other words a car that's clearly showing its age. the fusion is long overdue. from my point of view you're the one with blinders welded to your head.
i truly do hope to be impressed with the fusion when it comes out. i'm not going to dismiss the car simply because it's a domestic.
Yes, C1 includes European Focus, C-Max, S40/V50, Mazda3.
Next generation Mondeo/S60 will be on an extended/improved C1 architecture. We will also see other vehicles based on C1... Next LR Freelander for example. "Volvo XC50", Volvo Coupe, etc.
Fusion is CD3 based (Mazda6) which has various components that can be interchanged with C1... example, a good portion of the frontal frame/suspension architecture is borrowed from the C1. The reason Europe will be using C1 (and stretching it) rather CD3 is because for their needs, it's much more flexible.... and easier to build at their factories as well.
The new Fusion will be Camry/Accord sized. What you may have read years ago about the Fusion being waayyyy smaller, was because of rumors that it would be Mazda6 based. And some media outlets are still stating that the 500 is a Taurus replacement, which isn't true either. The Taurus fit inbetween the Fusion and 500 in cubic feet sized, but if you've ever been in a Taurus, you would see it's dimension weren't used in the best way.
In other words, just as the Focus was able to fit a large interior, on a relatively small exterior, the same will be the case with the Fusion. Above average interior space, in a relatively decently (for tht segment) size.
The sales that the Taurus is leaving behind, are being fragmented into 2 vehicles. Why ? It's easier to offer possibilities/options to buyers. The days of 400K+ sales for one model vehicle, are being numbered. Aside from maybe the top 5 best selling vehicles, everything else will fall in smaller sales segments, therefore...you expand your offerings, hence...Fusion and 500.
You have some Taurus buyer's which would like to grow into something a tad larger (500), but without the Crown Vics dimensions/stigma, and then you have other buyer's that enjoyed the size of the Taurus, but would like something a bit airy and trimmer (Fusion).
Now because of this, your able to make a better business case for the 500, by basing the Freestyle on it as well, and offering the Montego for those who want a bit more exclusivity. Many Mercury shoppers are people who like the Fords, but don't wish to see their same vehicle at every stoplight, HENCE, something a bit "different" and better appointments, without having to pay Lincoln prices either. Hence "premium".
The same can be said for the Fusion/Milan/Zephyr, and those are perfect examples... Ask anyone, and chances are out of those 3 offerings, they like one much more than the other 2. Now, from the CD3 architecture, you will have an onslought of other vehicles that will debut from them in FWD and AWD drive variations. Everything from Midsize SUV (to complement the Explorer), to a minivan-utility type vehicle, luxury midsize SUV, etc.
Then you'll have the B1 architecture, which you have vehicles such as the Fiesta/Demio, based on. Currently, an entry vehicle (slotted under the Focus) is being planned, using the B1 architecture for U.S. introduction.
I grew up in europe, and miss the car market dearly... every time I am about to buy a car I compare it to something european and sigh how much I am getting scammed...
If you compare the prices you might decide the Europeans are the ones getting scammed .
We like the Jetta size and my wife is getting one. But the somewhat larger Fusion is a nice size vehicle too, imo. I will be strongly considering the Mercury version for my next car...possibly as soon as next spring, but likely further out than that. I am glad they are putting something between the size of the Taurus and the Focus...I really don't want something as big as the Taurus (or the 500).
When I saw Taurus first time I fell in love immediately. It was so beautiful and so futuristic. Audi also was futuristic and beautiful (esp Audi 80), but it cost much more and was smaller in size and trunk was like in coupe. Taurus was very smooth, well built and had good handling and steering feel. The Taurus project itself also changed the way of design and manufacturing processes on the Ford and made Ford most profitable company in the world by the end of 80s.
In best Ford traditions they decided to not improve it over the time. Car hardly was changed from 1986 to 1996. And for some reason Ford decided not develop advanced engine designs. Engines are main weakness of all Fords. But now with Mazda involvement it may change. My Focus has a great engine designed by Mazda. Duratec is good too, esp. on freeway speeds, but cannot compete with Honda and Toyota V6s.
1996 Taurus was also very interesting and unique design. I liked it when first saw. But the problem was that Ford was too late with bio-design, and offering inefficient and slow Vulcan instead of efficient modern say 2.4L four was a mistake.
Finally I can agree, with your last line! LOL (Just kidding, no offense intended!).
You must be due for a new car soon, isn't your Accord about two years old now?
On to the new vehicles from Ford. Positioning the Fusion a fair amount smaller, (t least in length) than Taurus and significantly shorter and smaller than 500 is absolutely the best approach, as this gives Ford three distinct an separate cars, Focus, Fusion and 500, with less potential for overlap in market segment. Overlap was the main problem with Contour, as it was too close to Focus in interior room, and too close to Taurus in pricing.
Current Taurus owners will likely decide Fusion is close enough in accomodations to make Fusion fit their needs, and if they decide it isn't, they can still get into a 500.
i do like the hondas inteior a lot but i really dont like the nissans Altima inteior at all but ford fusion does make i nice inside the only thing is i dont some of the features on it as i see on the Accord like duel zone climate control and i know it has kind of good tourque but i guess that six speed will speed it up a bit but i gues i am saying that i could be more impressed by it
Yes, these pics give me hope that Ford is improving its interior design. We've heard a lot about the increases in spending on interior design, but so far I haven't seen big results. My father has a 500, and while overall the interior/ dash layout is nice, and seemingly well put together, it looks very cheap. When I sat in the car for the first time, I thought, "I can't believe they used this hard plastic for the doors and dash." Then I touched the plastic and realized it was indeed soft touch, but they managed to find a soft touch material that looks hard and cheap. The radio and climate controls also have a "cheap American rental car" look to them. Sure, this is a difference in perceived quality rather than actual quality, but that's the only consideration most buyers have; they don't feel the dash and poke and prod like some car nuts do. They get in, the get an impression, and that's it. My impression of the 500 was "looks cheap." The Fusion however, at least from these pics, looks to be a step or two in the right direction.
Fusion (and new Focus) has the same integrated control panel as 500. It has rental look because display is the same old "microwave" style green luminescent. Modern cars have hi-tech look in their control panels, using LCD, LED and other tricks. Accord’s ICP looks more advanced and elegant than Fusion's.
And while it is an improvement over the current Taurus, it isn't on the Accord's level of refinement. The mateirals are soft touch in some places, but it doesn't have the materials of the Accord, Camry, and its about on par with my Altima.
I also don't find the overall design to be all that attractive either...it doesn't look well thought out and I don't like the design of the stereo are the steering wheel.
Overall, I still think the Fusion is a nice car, but from what I saw at the autoshow, it doesn't have the Accord beat.
While you can quibble about the quality of the plastics in the interior, I will bet that Fusion will have few if any of the squeeks and rattles than seem to be irritating a surprising number of the latest generation Accord and Camry drivers. To me, having an eye pleasing interior means little if not enough attention is paid to keeping the squeaks and rattles at bay.
In my experience, Ford has paid very good attention to this aspect of design. My 1990 Taurus never developed any interior squeaks or rattles in the ten years and 98K miles I drove it, even during cold Wisconsin winters and over the potholes that develop in this climate.
My 2000 Taurus is equally well bolted together, and while the interior could be labeled bland, all the surfaces normally touched are "soft touch" except the radio and climate control buttons and knobs, and the interior is wearing very well. At 48K and four years, there is hardly any sign of wear or tear on any interior surface, even including the cloth seats on my midlevel Taurus SES.
Many buyers get overwrought over the initial look of a blinged up interior and don't fully think through how that fake chrome or aluminum on plastic finish will look after a few years of wear and tear.
Especially considering that Edmunds.com is ONLY a small number of Accord/Camry owners..and considering that the Accord/Camry boards, especially Accord boards, get more TRAFFIC than the Ford Taurus boards.
I can see the Fusion doing well in INITIAL quality, but only time will tell if it holds up overall.
But as you say, it could very well end up being better quality-wise than the Accord/Camry, but to base your statements on Edmunds.com, doesn't make sense considering that most people on here COMPLAIN more than they compliment their vehicles...and considering the Accord and Camry (Accord especially) get WAY more traffic than the Taurus boards.
My 2000 Taurus is equally well bolted together, and while the interior could be labeled bland, all the surfaces normally touched are "soft touch" except the radio and climate control buttons and knobs, and the interior is wearing very well. At 48K and four years, there is hardly any sign of wear or tear on any interior surface, even including the cloth seats on my midlevel Taurus SES.
Seems to be the case for our 1997 Windstar as well. It has held up very well with regard to sqeaks, rattles and interior wear. We have 92,000 miles on it. Also no rust to speak of just a little around screws in wheel wells...and we are in Wisconsin as well. Now if they would just have put 3.8L engine togther better, so that I did not have a $1700 estimate to replace two leaking gaskets :mad: .
We had a Plymouth minivan before this one and it became very rattly.
My contour has a lot of rattling from the rear suspension however, 1996 with 101K mi.
Well how often would you bother going onto a message board, to complain about a rental vehicle? heh...
But really, the effort placed into making the Fusion a high quality vehicle is quite high. As it is, I remember many MANY months ago prior to the Ford 500 being released, I too emphansized the high attention and quality the vehicle underwent while being engineered, and we had the usual nay-sayers on the board stating... "It won't beat the Avalon in quality, blah blah". And just days ago the 500 was one of the top 3 vehicles in it's segment for Initial Quality by JDPowers survey. This for a newly designed vehicle in a newly retrofitted flexible manufacturing plant...impressive....
The same attention will be going into the Fusion, Milan and Zephyr.
ANT, I am confident that the Fusion should score well considering how the 500 is doing. One thing that was a little scary though was Mazda's abysmal showing in the recent JD power survey. With Ford planning so many new cars, including the Fusion, on a Mazda platform, could this be cause for concern?
The Mazda ratings dropped because of other factors, not necessarily the Mazda6 from where the Fusion will derive from. Dealer network and body (not being able to fix the issue on the first try), customer service, MPV for one.... are the main contributors. The introduction of the Mazda5, and Miata MX-5 might keep it at the current level this coming year .
Mazda isn't readily able to respond to an issue as quick as Ford can, therefore Ford can release a vehicle now and iron out the little quibbles before having it reach the showroom. The Mazda5 already in production elsewhere, might not hurt Mazdas initial quality. Surprises aren't expected from the Miata either.
When the MPV is dropped, then you will see Mazda jump quite a bit up in those types of surveys. But at that point, the Mazda CX-7 will come into play as well, but that's another vehicle that is receiving quite a bit of engineering attention to make sure it's perfect once released.
One thing that was a little scary though was Mazda's abysmal showing in the recent JD power survey.
FWIW I'm currently leasing an '04 Mazda6S and after 15 months of ownership I have experienced zero problems. There are a couple of rattles but nowhere near as many as the Civic it replaced had. Good thing my wife opted for the upgraded stereo when she bought that bucket of bolts.
Actually one of the most common problems with the Mazda6, as evidenced by posts on Edmunds' Mazda6 forum and other Mazda6 forums, is the CEL. Mazda has most of them worked out but fixes for some are still in the works I guess. Since most of these have been wiped out you're most likely not going to see them with the Fusion.
Much debate as to the root of the poor ratings has been typed on Mazda6 forums but no one has been able to put a finger on it. Sure there are a few unhappy owners, as with any vehicle, but the rest of us have nothing but praise for the car. Whatever the reason for the ratings we're not giving up our sweet rides.
ANT14, after talking with some ford engineers i've heard that mazda's quality control process is very poor. If theres some kind of rattle during testing of pre-production models that they dont report the problem,. This seems to make senses to me. Comments? Are the ford engineers wrong on this. If a ford engineer runs over any problem they have to report it immediately.
Usually the Mazda workers should also do the same if they encounter an issue. The new Mustang is being built at the same factory as the Mazda6, and the Mustang itself was rated in JDPower's IQS top in it's segment, and it was rated highly in the survey by Strategic Visions. So there's a large discrepency in that part.
Now on another example, the Chicago plant where the 500/M/FS are being built. If a worker encountered ANY concern, no matter how small. They had the power to stop the line immediately and have the appropiate people look/study, the problem, before resuming. And that was done quite a bit. The 500 was also rated in the top 3 in it's segment in JDPower IQS survey, and tied with the Maxima in Strategic Visions survey as well.
So as you can see the Mazda6 shouldn't have that issue, and it is odd someone would say that. But as line workers, there might be other issues involved as well. Remember back in school when the class "nerd" would keep asking questions, wwaaayyyy after the final bell has rung, and your rolling your eyes so he shuts up because he's holding class up....? It sounds to me that might be the issue.
You seem to have my comments mixed up ANT14. During the development phase of the products by the engineers in calibration, NVH, powertrain, etc.. if a Mazda engineer runs over a problem that a Ford engineer(the ones at Dearborn at least) would normally report they dont report it, there was supposedly some quality meeting about Mazdas poor ratings and why. That seemed to be the answer for why the quality ratings were so poor. I wasnt refering to the Mazda workers at Flat rock or in hiroshima.
The MPV doesnt make up a large part of Mazdas sales and the product is in the later part of the model cycle so wouldnt it by this point in time have a higher IQS? Mazda used to be above industry average and theyve rapidly gone downhill.
I heard about the Chicago Plants quality process and about the mustangs internal reported quality of 5 problems per 100 vehicles.
Yes the 500 and Mustang are doing extremely well in IQS so far. It was interesting to note how prior to the 500's released in the 500 forum, I stress how quality was an important factor of it's launch. And you usually had the "Well the Avalon will do better, because it's Toyota, etc.etc." Now look what the outcome has been.
And the same attention to detail and quality are being stressed with the F/M/Z vehicles as well. There's no room for error and 6-Sigma team is going over everything with a fine tooth comb.
The MPV hurts Mazda's IQS quite a bit. Even if the product is at the end of it's cycle, it doesn't necessarily mean it'll do better since not all the issues have been resolved. Although that product is manufactured at another plant, but it does drag Mazda's numbers down. The Tribute has substantially improved since it's beginning, but the Mazda3 introduction dragged it down a bit as well.
The B-Series (Ranger) is stable for the most part. That's one of those vehicles that improves yearly (since it's essentially unchanged for many years), your comment would apply to this vehicle though.
The RX-8 has hurt it a bit as well, but interesting to note, the complaints in the Rx-8 pertaining to high fuel consumption, and the engine uses too much oil. The surveys do take this into consideration in the way it asks the consumer the questions, and how they respond which is why it would hurt it. It's similar to how Hummer was dragged down a few years ago, after many of the "warranty claims" pertained to "uses too much fuel" complaints, when in reality....well, it's a huge SUV, that's to be expected.
Luckily for Mazda, they have a longer warranty period than most mainstream competitors, so it does offer peace of mind for the most part.
Ant14, is the embargo on fusion photos still in effect? My friend has pictures of an uncamoed version of the Fusion including interior shots, but didnt know if his relative who worked at ford would get in trouble if he showed them around.
Everyone has seen plenty of photos inside and out of pre-production models. I don't think you have anything that will show anything that hasn't been posted already unless it is simply different colors not seen before or actual production cars ready for the dealers.
The photos were released many many months ago, there's even short clips of it as well. It's not secret now. There's no embargo on that product anymore.
In fact, lots of pics and video of the car are available at the Ford website. I think the car will sell well, but it will sell better when it gets the new 3.5L V6 in '06 or '07.
ANT14, embargo gone? Nope. Driving impressions and certain parts information are still not for public distribution. How do I know that? Sorry, that particular information is also embargoed! (Note that my reply took a minute!)
I was reading an article that said the 6speed Auto in the Fusion V6 is going to be the the Ford/GM joint venture tranny.
Anyone know if this is true? I was under the impression that the 6 speed would be the unit from Aisen used currently in the Five Hundred and the Mazda6.
ANT14 is the SVT version using the mazda setup? I know there is going to be an SVT version and ive heard rumors of an ST version. So my question is then will the Mazda6 setup make its way into high-performance version?
I've seen plenty of pictures of the Fusion, but always in black with a black leather interior. If the embargo has been lifted and you've got photos of it in any color other than black, please post 'em!
ANT, there was some discussion a while back about a possible wagon version of the Fusion. Is this in the cards? I think the somewhat angular lines of this car would lend to a very attractive wagon design. With the next big gas spike surely within a year (and a housing bubble set to pop - explode in certain parts - between now and three years out), wagons might have renewed appeal from tapped out SUV drivers livin' on the edge.
Just a tidbit of info, the Taurus has been the #1 seller of station wagon trim, in it's segment. The same with the Focus. And as a company wholely, it has the most models with wagon availability, this meaning it includes Volvo, Jag, etc. I too think a wagon case is present because of that.
BUT, with so many cross-overs entering the industry, the fine line between them are clouding up....
about the ford edge triplet, we know its riding on the CD3 platoform, my question is will the Edge share its styling cues from the Model U concept? I've heard some hinting from people that the escape will be getting a tougher exterior. Wont the Escape and Edge be roughly the same size then?
you could setup the Escape as a more off-road suv and let the edge become an urban crossover. This allows the Escape to switch customer base slightly and the Edge to take some of those customers looking for better fuel economy.
The only problem I see with what you guys are doing right now ANT that you've proably already examined is that youre having to many models in the crossover/suv segment. Youre having the Ecosport based b-class car, the Edge, and Freestyle. You also have the CX-7 and Aviator coming as well. I dont think the customer market will become fragmented enough in the next few years to justify 4 different crossover models.
The next question is, will these models be generating enough profit to create a competitive next generation vehicle? One of the problems GMs run into is that they have too many models and not enough money to reinvest. Their needs to be some condensing of the model lineup. You can expand the lineup as much as you want, but long term wise when it comes to redesign the vehicles you could run into problems. The benefits though seem to be that youre diversifying your risk by making small runs per vehicle.
Couldnt you bore the 3.5L out to a 3.8L for a SVT Fusion version and size down the AWD system used on the Five Hundred to handle the higher TQ and HP? This would still make a class leading sedan while keeping the price affordable for the target consumer. Unless the cars engine is over 300HP I dont think you should make it. I did a mini-study of import owners who were looking at the Fusion and time over time i've been told that they wouldnt consider a performance version unless it had over 300HP. 300HP also had a psychological effect on people as well. Itd be a great marketing tool if used properly.
A good benchmark for the fusion would be the Subaru WRX STi. Its current price is $32,295. /w 300HP. The larger output 3.8L could provide superior TQ. and HP and since the labor cost is much lower for the Fusion sedan you could also undercut the price and use penetration pricing.
If you dont make an SVT version of the Fusion a Zephyr high performance version would also make sense. Currently the high performance of the Zephyr would be on par with the Acura TL /w 270HP, but you could trump the TL by offering a higher output version. This would also undercut the RL's pricing while providing the same output.
High performance Zephyr's competition Acura TL 270HP Infiinti M 298HP Lexus GS 245HP BMW M3 333HP
So if youre going to invest in a performance version of the Zephyr 270HP isnt going to cut it, you need to at least make it 300HP or even 334HP. The ability to say it has class leading HP and TQ would be a great selling point. Also making the styling more aggressive would be needed.
Many questions, I'll try to answer them as best as possible (while I'm eating dinner) heh...
The Escape and Edge will be "different", but similar in some attributes. Don't be surprised if sales of the Escape are pushed onto another vehicle, and have the Escape die before hitting the new decade. Sidenote: Don't forget the next Freelander will be C1 (Euro Focus) based, so that opens other possibilities as well.
Now, having all these different models (even in other brands like Mazda or Lincoln) really doesn't require that much reinvestment. Provided that the platforms are flexible (as are the plants producing them) you deminish the "developmental costs" substantially which allows you to offer another variation of the same vehicle.
There are people who do want to buy a Ford, but prefer better dealer treatment from the L/M dealerships. Or want something a bit different, so they'll go with a Mercury (let's use Mountaineer in this example", so they don't see 3-5 other Explorer surrounding them at each light. The demographics for L/M buyer's are a bit different, than those for typical Ford buyers, and Mercury does quite well with women as well. That's not something you want to throw out the window.
Then with Mazda, I've steered some people that way who may have wanted an Escape, but wanted a longer warranty or a different sophisticated look to it (Mariner). Another reason for the number of vehicles, is you must keep the L/M vehicles afloat and provide them vehicles. Mercury's best sales years have been when they have been Ford clones. And now with all the new vehicles hitting it's dealerships, sales have picked up as well.
But I can go on forever on dealership/vehicle offers, etc. but I'll try to stick to the simple aspects....
GM's issues (as many others) is legacy costs. And not being able to concentrate on one brand specifically. You have their minivans and trucks...each division gets one or another, even Isuzu gets the Asender. GM just took note of this, and now are trying to group their brands together so they can better market the vehicles.
Then you have Bob Lutz who supposedly is bringing out all these new vehicles, yet media reaction hasn't been positive over them. Then he gets upset, has a public conniption, then gets rediculed, and as I've stated (possible in another forum), he's nothing but a media monkey for GM and will get "promoted" another another position where he'll be doing less... heh...yeah... a promotion. And that was just what happened. Chris Bangle of BMW, also encountered the same situation... "Promotion"... Gotta love the lingo on corporate worlds.
Small runs of vehicles, with minimal developmental costs on a flexible line, does work. 500/FS/MTG are a perfect example. The days of 400+ sales per model, are numbered since there's more diversity being introduced into the marketplace. People want to be a bit "different" now.
Yes, the 3.5L could be bored to 3.8L to 4.0L if need be, but then you run into some senarios where (well if that's the case, just offer the 4.6L), then when you do that, the question becomes "lets go shopping for a transmission that's FWD/AWD that can accept it"...and then you run into other issues along the line. So those senarios need to be studied intensively.
300HP would be a great, but from studies I've shown all the people wanted that, are not willing to pay much for it. If the engine isn't lifted from another vehicle (as mentioned in the previous paragraph) you could loading a Fusion with such items and come out with a $37K vehicle. Then the argument will be "Well for that amount, I'll buy a 300C and it's a larger vehicle"... And let's not forget that many consumer associate a large price tag, should be a large car. That's why the Ford Focus N.A. isn't as luxuriously loaded as the Euro version. If it were, it would easily hit $25K and you'll have people crying "but it's not big enough, I can get a 500 for this same price".
But that's another subject I would dwell too much on.
And then you fall into other segments within the company. a 300HP, AWD sedan? It's called Volvo S60 R. You have people who are willing to pay a premium for the Volvo name, but not as many for a medium brand label.
The benchmark could be the Subaru WRX, or even a Mitsu Evo, but barebones structure, your paying $32-37K, for a platform that belongs in a $13K car. There's only so much giftwrap you can put on a tennis raquet before it's obvious, and sometimes it's better just to get a new box than re-wrap the tennis raquet. And also, there's many people who have reservations over such vehicles, and the way they are decorated.
You don't want to offend potential buyers, if they walk into a dealership and see the sedan they were wanting to buy, with a huge garbage pail sized chrome pipe, more scoops than a Dairy Queen banana split, a spoiler that's taller than the vehicle itself and could be used as a cloth hanging line.
The Zephyr could trump the TL if it offered the 3.5L along with AWD. Which I find is the main issue with the TL. Personally, anything over 240HP should start considering AWD or RWD to avoid torque steer. Although the Zephyrs main competitor is the ES330. Mainly in the sense of how it'll treat it's driver/passengers, the comfort, the luxury of it. Think more Jaguar, and less BMW on what it's mission will be.
Many of the best selling vehicles in their segment, are hardly ever the most powerful ones in their segment. It's usually the ones that are able to combine all the attributes that the customer might require. Sometimes you must skimp on some items, to gain others. Like with Nissans... great engines and performance, but GM-quality interiors.
The make or break of the triplets rest on your quality of the vehicle and the marketing. Its a good product, but if youre not marketing it properly youre not going to get a loyal lexus buyer into the showrooms. There has to be some selling point in their minds over the lexus before they consider switching in their ES or camry for the respective ford/lincoln model. A high performance version may not sell the needed volume to be a high profit vehicle, but if marketed properly it will draw in consumers that wouldnt normally look.
When they actually get into the showroom and they check their wallet they'll become more sensible and most likely end up opting for a lower HP version that isnt going to kill them in the pocketbook.
Oh and ant14, you sound like youre in fords marketing. Hopefully one day ill get to work there (or mazdas marketing).
Comments
This is what you state: "****AT THE MOMENT***** there are not a lot of 500s in fleet sales (since the Taurus now fills that niche), but that may change and same resale fate may come of the Fusion since the 500 is very pricey compared to the outgoing Taurus."
I think that depends on what you consider "a lot" of fleet sales. Reference the following article, the Five Hundred is above 14% fleet sales. Thats slightly above the last numbers I've seen for the Camry, which is in the 12-13% range (too high, IMO). I guess its a question of judgement. It should be noted though, that the Chrysler 300 is selling at a rate of 24% fleet, considerably higher than Ford. Still, enough 300s are sold that its sales to private/individuals are higher than the Five Hundred's.
http://www.detnews.com/2005/autosinsider/0505/15/D01-181639.htm
~alpha
Granted, give them some time before they ease off on the rental fleet sales, and they'll probably drop a bit down to 18-20%
Fortunately, people like cars for lots of different reasons. And I think Fusion will be successful because it is coming to market with some original styling when compared to Camry and Accord. Personally since cars tend to look more and more like each other in the exterior, I think the Fusion is going to win alot of people over with its snazzy interior.
Toyota to mee looks like Radio and HVAC controls where installed as an after thought.
Now Honda styling is more pleaseing to me but it does not look really exciting, its kind of geriatric
Altima has almost an industrial machine feel very plain over all but for the fake aluminum bits.
Quotations without attributions can cause copyright issues (ask the New York Times or USA Today or, most recently, Newsweek)....
Where is this from? I did an Internet search and found nothing.
Don't lose any more sleep over it savetheland. :P
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
Fusion interior in tan leather
Fusion exterior in red
but when I was comparing the lineup... Fusion is neither European Focus, nor european Mondeo (remember Contour?)....
Given Fusion's smaller size in the class I would guess it is C1 - European Focus.. but I am not sure... here are some pics
MONDEO:
C1 - Focus:
and of course fusion:
BTW have you sen the EUROPEAN FORD FUSION:
The Mazda6 platform, is a "altered C1 platform", but heavily altered where it required it's own platform name. Over in Europe, the next Mondeo/S60 will be an altered C1 platform. And with the Fusion, it's a Mazda6 paltform, but stretched so it's pretty much "in the family". Of course, it's tailored differently.
Let me just go on a rant for a little bit.
I remember reading that Fusion was to be on the SMALL end of midsize... Something like Maz6, but maybe even smaller.. you know something like a little bigger and more powerful Jetta.... now.. if it is the size of accord, or campy even.... wow... that HUGE...
I have a friend driving th new camry... he is 22 and looks like a 50 year only in that car... and Accord is just a tad better.... and while fusion's styling is better (I really like it)... I don;t see the point of having a regular/large midsize (fusion)And a large midsize (500).. that's just stupid.... too close together...
And altogether I really miss smaller sportier midsizes.. Galant is a heavy cow, so is Altima and I mentioned the others already.... So the only thing left (as in compacts) is Mazda...
I love the 3... I would love to buy the European focus, especially with its different body stiles (I really want a compact wagon, but can;t afford Volvo)... but we will never get the new Focus....
And wild midsizes... I think VW is the only one realizing that there are people who don;t want a tiny Civic/corolla, but refuse to buy a accord/camry...
BTW does anyone else think that the latest camry has the image of a Buick crossed with mercury? I am not really talking about actual style/design, but about the image of the car... It just looks like the car for the retirees... and I only wish toyota will also follow the fat of buick/mercury... out to oblivion...
END OF RANT...
I grew up in europe, and miss the car market dearly... every time I am about to buy a car I compare it to something european and sigh how much I am getting scammed...
for example compare:
Pontiac (Toyota) Vibe to European Toyota Corolla Verso
or the Focuses
or all of GM's ... Opel rocks in design... Chevy/Olds/Saturn not so much
Compare Sentra to Altima (OMG)
or the US Corolla to the EU corolla...
I would also love the five door civic... but we rater get the stupid coupe...
Sorry I am ranting again.
Igor
So now you also know why I love the Mazda's
Igor
you think your beloved taurus is a very good car. well good for you because you're the only one that matters if you're the one driving it. but to dismiss those who think otherwise as shallow....hmmm
the huge incentives that are needed to sell the taurus and the high percentage of non-retail sales are indicators of this car not being very good.
so as to not be accused of being lazy i'll be specific with my criticism:
engines lack polish and power
bad transmission performance
archaic suspension
lacking the latest safety features
dismal interior
in other words a car that's clearly showing its age. the fusion is long overdue. from my point of view you're the one with blinders welded to your head.
i truly do hope to be impressed with the fusion when it comes out. i'm not going to dismiss the car simply because it's a domestic.
Next generation Mondeo/S60 will be on an extended/improved C1 architecture. We will also see other vehicles based on C1... Next LR Freelander for example. "Volvo XC50", Volvo Coupe, etc.
Fusion is CD3 based (Mazda6) which has various components that can be interchanged with C1... example, a good portion of the frontal frame/suspension architecture is borrowed from the C1. The reason Europe will be using C1 (and stretching it) rather CD3 is because for their needs, it's much more flexible.... and easier to build at their factories as well.
The new Fusion will be Camry/Accord sized. What you may have read years ago about the Fusion being waayyyy smaller, was because of rumors that it would be Mazda6 based. And some media outlets are still stating that the 500 is a Taurus replacement, which isn't true either. The Taurus fit inbetween the Fusion and 500 in cubic feet sized, but if you've ever been in a Taurus, you would see it's dimension weren't used in the best way.
In other words, just as the Focus was able to fit a large interior, on a relatively small exterior, the same will be the case with the Fusion. Above average interior space, in a relatively decently (for tht segment) size.
The sales that the Taurus is leaving behind, are being fragmented into 2 vehicles. Why ? It's easier to offer possibilities/options to buyers. The days of 400K+ sales for one model vehicle, are being numbered. Aside from maybe the top 5 best selling vehicles, everything else will fall in smaller sales segments, therefore...you expand your offerings, hence...Fusion and 500.
You have some Taurus buyer's which would like to grow into something a tad larger (500), but without the Crown Vics dimensions/stigma, and then you have other buyer's that enjoyed the size of the Taurus, but would like something a bit airy and trimmer (Fusion).
Now because of this, your able to make a better business case for the 500, by basing the Freestyle on it as well, and offering the Montego for those who want a bit more exclusivity. Many Mercury shoppers are people who like the Fords, but don't wish to see their same vehicle at every stoplight, HENCE, something a bit "different" and better appointments, without having to pay Lincoln prices either. Hence "premium".
The same can be said for the Fusion/Milan/Zephyr, and those are perfect examples... Ask anyone, and chances are out of those 3 offerings, they like one much more than the other 2. Now, from the CD3 architecture, you will have an onslought of other vehicles that will debut from them in FWD and AWD drive variations. Everything from Midsize SUV (to complement the Explorer), to a minivan-utility type vehicle, luxury midsize SUV, etc.
Then you'll have the B1 architecture, which you have vehicles such as the Fiesta/Demio, based on. Currently, an entry vehicle (slotted under the Focus) is being planned, using the B1 architecture for U.S. introduction.
If you compare the prices you might decide the Europeans are the ones getting scammed
We like the Jetta size and my wife is getting one. But the somewhat larger Fusion is a nice size vehicle too, imo. I will be strongly considering the Mercury version for my next car...possibly as soon as next spring, but likely further out than that. I am glad they are putting something between the size of the Taurus and the Focus...I really don't want something as big as the Taurus (or the 500).
In best Ford traditions they decided to not improve it over the time. Car hardly was changed from 1986 to 1996. And for some reason Ford decided not develop advanced engine designs. Engines are main weakness of all Fords. But now with Mazda involvement it may change. My Focus has a great engine designed by Mazda. Duratec is good too, esp. on freeway speeds, but cannot compete with Honda and Toyota V6s.
1996 Taurus was also very interesting and unique design. I liked it when first saw. But the problem was that Ford was too late with bio-design, and offering inefficient and slow Vulcan instead of efficient modern say 2.4L four was a mistake.
for someone who just wants an affordable sedan that will be dependable for years to come the taurus is a sensible choice.
but for dummies like me who blow their hard earned money on a car every other year the taurus is not a likely candidate.
You must be due for a new car soon, isn't your Accord about two years old now?
On to the new vehicles from Ford. Positioning the Fusion a fair amount smaller, (t least in length) than Taurus and significantly shorter and smaller than 500 is absolutely the best approach, as this gives Ford three distinct an separate cars, Focus, Fusion and 500, with less potential for overlap in market segment. Overlap was the main problem with Contour, as it was too close to Focus in interior room, and too close to Taurus in pricing.
Current Taurus owners will likely decide Fusion is close enough in accomodations to make Fusion fit their needs, and if they decide it isn't, they can still get into a 500.
And while it is an improvement over the current Taurus, it isn't on the Accord's level of refinement. The mateirals are soft touch in some places, but it doesn't have the materials of the Accord, Camry, and its about on par with my Altima.
I also don't find the overall design to be all that attractive either...it doesn't look well thought out and I don't like the design of the stereo are the steering wheel.
Overall, I still think the Fusion is a nice car, but from what I saw at the autoshow, it doesn't have the Accord beat.
In my experience, Ford has paid very good attention to this aspect of design. My 1990 Taurus never developed any interior squeaks or rattles in the ten years and 98K miles I drove it, even during cold Wisconsin winters and over the potholes that develop in this climate.
My 2000 Taurus is equally well bolted together, and while the interior could be labeled bland, all the surfaces normally touched are "soft touch" except the radio and climate control buttons and knobs, and the interior is wearing very well. At 48K and four years, there is hardly any sign of wear or tear on any interior surface, even including the cloth seats on my midlevel Taurus SES.
Many buyers get overwrought over the initial look of a blinged up interior and don't fully think through how that fake chrome or aluminum on plastic finish will look after a few years of wear and tear.
I can see the Fusion doing well in INITIAL quality, but only time will tell if it holds up overall.
But as you say, it could very well end up being better quality-wise than the Accord/Camry, but to base your statements on Edmunds.com, doesn't make sense considering that most people on here COMPLAIN more than they compliment their vehicles...and considering the Accord and Camry (Accord especially) get WAY more traffic than the Taurus boards.
Seems to be the case for our 1997 Windstar as well. It has held up very well with regard to sqeaks, rattles and interior wear. We have 92,000 miles on it. Also no rust to speak of just a little around screws in wheel wells...and we are in Wisconsin as well. Now if they would just have put 3.8L engine togther better, so that I did not have a $1700 estimate to replace two leaking gaskets :mad: .
We had a Plymouth minivan before this one and it became very rattly.
My contour has a lot of rattling from the rear suspension however, 1996 with 101K mi.
But really, the effort placed into making the Fusion a high quality vehicle is quite high. As it is, I remember many MANY months ago prior to the Ford 500 being released, I too emphansized the high attention and quality the vehicle underwent while being engineered, and we had the usual nay-sayers on the board stating... "It won't beat the Avalon in quality, blah blah". And just days ago the 500 was one of the top 3 vehicles in it's segment for Initial Quality by JDPowers survey. This for a newly designed vehicle in a newly retrofitted flexible manufacturing plant...impressive....
The same attention will be going into the Fusion, Milan and Zephyr.
Mazda isn't readily able to respond to an issue as quick as Ford can, therefore Ford can release a vehicle now and iron out the little quibbles before having it reach the showroom. The Mazda5 already in production elsewhere, might not hurt Mazdas initial quality. Surprises aren't expected from the Miata either.
When the MPV is dropped, then you will see Mazda jump quite a bit up in those types of surveys. But at that point, the Mazda CX-7 will come into play as well, but that's another vehicle that is receiving quite a bit of engineering attention to make sure it's perfect once released.
FWIW I'm currently leasing an '04 Mazda6S and after 15 months of ownership I have experienced zero problems. There are a couple of rattles but nowhere near as many as the Civic it replaced had. Good thing my wife opted for the upgraded stereo when she bought that bucket of bolts.
Actually one of the most common problems with the Mazda6, as evidenced by posts on Edmunds' Mazda6 forum and other Mazda6 forums, is the CEL. Mazda has most of them worked out but fixes for some are still in the works I guess. Since most of these have been wiped out you're most likely not going to see them with the Fusion.
Much debate as to the root of the poor ratings has been typed on Mazda6 forums but no one has been able to put a finger on it. Sure there are a few unhappy owners, as with any vehicle, but the rest of us have nothing but praise for the car. Whatever the reason for the ratings we're not giving up our sweet rides.
Now on another example, the Chicago plant where the 500/M/FS are being built. If a worker encountered ANY concern, no matter how small. They had the power to stop the line immediately and have the appropiate people look/study, the problem, before resuming. And that was done quite a bit. The 500 was also rated in the top 3 in it's segment in JDPower IQS survey, and tied with the Maxima in Strategic Visions survey as well.
So as you can see the Mazda6 shouldn't have that issue, and it is odd someone would say that. But as line workers, there might be other issues involved as well. Remember back in school when the class "nerd" would keep asking questions, wwaaayyyy after the final bell has rung, and your rolling your eyes so he shuts up because he's holding class up....? It sounds to me that might be the issue.
The MPV doesnt make up a large part of Mazdas sales and the product is in the later part of the model cycle so wouldnt it by this point in time have a higher IQS? Mazda used to be above industry average and theyve rapidly gone downhill.
I heard about the Chicago Plants quality process and about the mustangs internal reported quality of 5 problems per 100 vehicles.
And the same attention to detail and quality are being stressed with the F/M/Z vehicles as well. There's no room for error and 6-Sigma team is going over everything with a fine tooth comb.
The MPV hurts Mazda's IQS quite a bit. Even if the product is at the end of it's cycle, it doesn't necessarily mean it'll do better since not all the issues have been resolved. Although that product is manufactured at another plant, but it does drag Mazda's numbers down. The Tribute has substantially improved since it's beginning, but the Mazda3 introduction dragged it down a bit as well.
The B-Series (Ranger) is stable for the most part. That's one of those vehicles that improves yearly (since it's essentially unchanged for many years), your comment would apply to this vehicle though.
The RX-8 has hurt it a bit as well, but interesting to note, the complaints in the Rx-8 pertaining to high fuel consumption, and the engine uses too much oil. The surveys do take this into consideration in the way it asks the consumer the questions, and how they respond which is why it would hurt it. It's similar to how Hummer was dragged down a few years ago, after many of the "warranty claims" pertained to "uses too much fuel" complaints, when in reality....well, it's a huge SUV, that's to be expected.
Luckily for Mazda, they have a longer warranty period than most mainstream competitors, so it does offer peace of mind for the most part.
Funny you should ask. Could be getting an Audi A4 within two weeks.
Everyone has seen plenty of photos inside and out of pre-production models. I don't think you have anything that will show anything that hasn't been posted already unless it is simply different colors not seen before or actual production cars ready for the dealers.
Brad, the Duratec35 will be available around summer of '06 for the Fusion. The first vehicle to receive the 3.5L will be the Lincoln Aviator.
Anyone know if this is true? I was under the impression that the 6 speed would be the unit from Aisen used currently in the Five Hundred and the Mazda6.
Mark
ANT, there was some discussion a while back about a possible wagon version of the Fusion. Is this in the cards? I think the somewhat angular lines of this car would lend to a very attractive wagon design. With the next big gas spike surely within a year (and a housing bubble set to pop - explode in certain parts - between now and three years out), wagons might have renewed appeal from tapped out SUV drivers livin' on the edge.
Yes, the Ford/GM joint venture transmission will be phased in at a later time, and most definately with the 3.5L.
Dave,
The ST will have a 270 HP engine.... The SVT senario is still being studied and under planning stages.
I believe this is one with the lighter interior, but the picture is so dark that it's hard to distinguish it. http://www.blueovalforums.com/2005/multimedia/fusion.interior.wmv Its a WMV file.
Wagon is being studied to see if it'll have an EDGE in the marketplace...
BUT, with so many cross-overs entering the industry, the fine line between them are clouding up....
you could setup the Escape as a more off-road suv and let the edge become an urban crossover. This allows the Escape to switch customer base slightly and the Edge to take some of those customers looking for better fuel economy.
The only problem I see with what you guys are doing right now ANT that you've proably already examined is that youre having to many models in the crossover/suv segment. Youre having the Ecosport based b-class car, the Edge, and Freestyle. You also have the CX-7 and Aviator coming as well. I dont think the customer market will become fragmented enough in the next few years to justify 4 different crossover models.
The next question is, will these models be generating enough profit to create a competitive next generation vehicle? One of the problems GMs run into is that they have too many models and not enough money to reinvest. Their needs to be some condensing of the model lineup. You can expand the lineup as much as you want, but long term wise when it comes to redesign the vehicles you could run into problems. The benefits though seem to be that youre diversifying your risk by making small runs per vehicle.
Couldnt you bore the 3.5L out to a 3.8L for a SVT Fusion version and size down the AWD system used on the Five Hundred to handle the higher TQ and HP? This would still make a class leading sedan while keeping the price affordable for the target consumer. Unless the cars engine is over 300HP I dont think you should make it. I did a mini-study of import owners who were looking at the Fusion and time over time i've been told that they wouldnt consider a performance version unless it had over 300HP. 300HP also had a psychological effect on people as well. Itd be a great marketing tool if used properly.
A good benchmark for the fusion would be the Subaru WRX STi. Its current price is $32,295. /w 300HP. The larger output 3.8L could provide superior TQ. and HP and since the labor cost is much lower for the Fusion sedan you could also undercut the price and use penetration pricing.
If you dont make an SVT version of the Fusion a Zephyr high performance version would also make sense. Currently the high performance of the Zephyr would be on par with the Acura TL /w 270HP, but you could trump the TL by offering a higher output version. This would also undercut the RL's pricing while providing the same output.
High performance Zephyr's competition
Acura TL 270HP
Infiinti M 298HP
Lexus GS 245HP
BMW M3 333HP
So if youre going to invest in a performance version of the Zephyr 270HP isnt going to cut it, you need to at least make it 300HP or even 334HP. The ability to say it has class leading HP and TQ would be a great selling point. Also making the styling more aggressive would be needed.
The Escape and Edge will be "different", but similar in some attributes. Don't be surprised if sales of the Escape are pushed onto another vehicle, and have the Escape die before hitting the new decade. Sidenote: Don't forget the next Freelander will be C1 (Euro Focus) based, so that opens other possibilities as well.
Now, having all these different models (even in other brands like Mazda or Lincoln) really doesn't require that much reinvestment. Provided that the platforms are flexible (as are the plants producing them) you deminish the "developmental costs" substantially which allows you to offer another variation of the same vehicle.
There are people who do want to buy a Ford, but prefer better dealer treatment from the L/M dealerships. Or want something a bit different, so they'll go with a Mercury (let's use Mountaineer in this example", so they don't see 3-5 other Explorer surrounding them at each light. The demographics for L/M buyer's are a bit different, than those for typical Ford buyers, and Mercury does quite well with women as well. That's not something you want to throw out the window.
Then with Mazda, I've steered some people that way who may have wanted an Escape, but wanted a longer warranty or a different sophisticated look to it (Mariner). Another reason for the number of vehicles, is you must keep the L/M vehicles afloat and provide them vehicles. Mercury's best sales years have been when they have been Ford clones. And now with all the new vehicles hitting it's dealerships, sales have picked up as well.
But I can go on forever on dealership/vehicle offers, etc. but I'll try to stick to the simple aspects....
GM's issues (as many others) is legacy costs. And not being able to concentrate on one brand specifically. You have their minivans and trucks...each division gets one or another, even Isuzu gets the Asender. GM just took note of this, and now are trying to group their brands together so they can better market the vehicles.
Then you have Bob Lutz who supposedly is bringing out all these new vehicles, yet media reaction hasn't been positive over them. Then he gets upset, has a public conniption, then gets rediculed, and as I've stated (possible in another forum), he's nothing but a media monkey for GM and will get "promoted" another another position where he'll be doing less... heh...yeah... a promotion. And that was just what happened. Chris Bangle of BMW, also encountered the same situation... "Promotion"... Gotta love the lingo on corporate worlds.
Small runs of vehicles, with minimal developmental costs on a flexible line, does work. 500/FS/MTG are a perfect example. The days of 400+ sales per model, are numbered since there's more diversity being introduced into the marketplace. People want to be a bit "different" now.
Yes, the 3.5L could be bored to 3.8L to 4.0L if need be, but then you run into some senarios where (well if that's the case, just offer the 4.6L), then when you do that, the question becomes "lets go shopping for a transmission that's FWD/AWD that can accept it"...and then you run into other issues along the line. So those senarios need to be studied intensively.
300HP would be a great, but from studies I've shown all the people wanted that, are not willing to pay much for it. If the engine isn't lifted from another vehicle (as mentioned in the previous paragraph) you could loading a Fusion with such items and come out with a $37K vehicle. Then the argument will be "Well for that amount, I'll buy a 300C and it's a larger vehicle"... And let's not forget that many consumer associate a large price tag, should be a large car. That's why the Ford Focus N.A. isn't as luxuriously loaded as the Euro version. If it were, it would easily hit $25K and you'll have people crying "but it's not big enough, I can get a 500 for this same price".
But that's another subject I would dwell too much on.
And then you fall into other segments within the company. a 300HP, AWD sedan? It's called Volvo S60 R. You have people who are willing to pay a premium for the Volvo name, but not as many for a medium brand label.
The benchmark could be the Subaru WRX, or even a Mitsu Evo, but barebones structure, your paying $32-37K, for a platform that belongs in a $13K car. There's only so much giftwrap you can put on a tennis raquet before it's obvious, and sometimes it's better just to get a new box than re-wrap the tennis raquet. And also, there's many people who have reservations over such vehicles, and the way they are decorated.
You don't want to offend potential buyers, if they walk into a dealership and see the sedan they were wanting to buy, with a huge garbage pail sized chrome pipe, more scoops than a Dairy Queen banana split, a spoiler that's taller than the vehicle itself and could be used as a cloth hanging line.
The Zephyr could trump the TL if it offered the 3.5L along with AWD. Which I find is the main issue with the TL. Personally, anything over 240HP should start considering AWD or RWD to avoid torque steer. Although the Zephyrs main competitor is the ES330. Mainly in the sense of how it'll treat it's driver/passengers, the comfort, the luxury of it. Think more Jaguar, and less BMW on what it's mission will be.
Many of the best selling vehicles in their segment, are hardly ever the most powerful ones in their segment. It's usually the ones that are able to combine all the attributes that the customer might require. Sometimes you must skimp on some items, to gain others. Like with Nissans... great engines and performance, but GM-quality interiors.
When they actually get into the showroom and they check their wallet they'll become more sensible and most likely end up opting for a lower HP version that isnt going to kill them in the pocketbook.
Oh and ant14, you sound like youre in fords marketing. Hopefully one day ill get to work there (or mazdas marketing).