No redesign until 2008? What is Ford thinking? Your right it will become another neglected name sent to the grave and for what? I am surprised the Ranger is still around.
Your right the Fusion should have been a Taurus. I don't know what's wrong with the car companies. They take a well known car with a good following/reputation, and run everyone off and then redesign it with a different name and loose it all.
Exactly! Toyota doesn't though, neither does Honda. Accord has been around since roughly 78. Civic since 73. Camry since about 84 I think, and Corolla since the 70's as well. Wonder why??? Sometimes I hate marketing people. Won't explain why..... :mad:
varmint: But I completely agree with you on the Fusion. It does look good today. I was just reading that it has increased showroom traffic. But Ford is going to have to keep it competitive for 5 years and not let it become a flash-in-the-pan.
That's the problem...Ford has a history of "launch and abandon" when it comes to new vehicles. That term was coined by no less than Bill Ford himself.
Honda and Toyota can keep using the same name for years because they always make sure that the vehicle stays fresh through constant and effective updates.
GM and Ford have a history of stretching the model cycle to the limit, and using rebates and fleet sales to keep the assembly lines moving during the last few years of the vehicle's life. Unfortunately, by that point the nameplate has a reputation of being either fodder for rental car companies, or a vehicle sold to domestic loyalists who couldn't afford anything better. So the new model must be launched with a new name, to avoid the negative association with the previous one.
"What's wrong with the Ranger? It's still more substantial than the Tacoma...."
That may be, but sales are just half what they were as recently as two years ago, and Tacoma now outsells it by close to 25%. So whether the public disagrees with you or is just looking for something else besides substance, Ford's decision to just let the Ranger go into oblivion was not a good one for sales.
Freestar: sales are apparently half what they were just five years ago when it was the Windstar (and why they renamed a model with such minor revisions is beyond me). Give it up, guys.
Focus: going into year six without any sort of a real update, and Ford is saying it will be at least another year and probably two before they do anything about that.
Escape: a decently popular little trucklet, also set to go some seven or eight years before Ford devotes any resources to updating it. I like the Edge concept, but why go to all the trouble of developing that model when Escape makes a decent place to evolve from? If Edge were to come to market, it would kill most of Escape's sales, so you just know that if Ford brings Edge to fruition, Escape is history, renamed or otherwise.
Freestyle: a good idea being dumped for the reasons listed above. Too bad.
Taurus: being allowed to FINALLY rest in peace after way too many years, which will leave a hole in the fleet sales to be filled by what model? Possibly Fusion if it doesn't sell up to expectations? Let's hope not.
Explorer: just revamped again, even though Ford admits it expects Explorer sales to drop in future??? For this they are delaying a new Ranger and Focus?
Five Hundred: hardly setting the world on fire, was outsold by the ages-old Impala in its first year, although who knows what the comparison of retail sales was. Called "decent", "stodgy" by every reviewer I have read. Damned with faint praise. Actually, more than the Fusion, this is the likeliest candidate for picking up the role of fleet sales leader when Taurus goes away.
Nothing in the last two decades leads me to have any faith that Ford will not continue to neglect its car lines and try to stretch out the model cycles to almost twice as long as the imports, the way it has in the past.
Now if GM really does have to declare bankruptcy, as the bankers are now predicting will happen in less than a year, maybe enough GM customers will be scared away and come to Ford to turn the tide a little bit...
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
and fleet sales? Made up 1/3 of all Ford sales in October. Compare this to a 6-7% figure for Toyota, and next to nil for Honda. Ford saw a 34% decline in retail sales in October. The other Big 2 declined in similar fashion, proof that if you play the rebate game all the time, people will just wait for the rebates if you pull them temporarily. You get in a downward spiral of never being able to sell the vehicles on their merits. Hyundai is now passing the domestics on the way up to price parity with the first-string Japanese brands, which they will probably arrive at in a decade or so. Where will Ford be then?
I believe the Edge will actually replace the Freestyle in the Ford line-up, not the Escape. It should be a larger vehicle.
I may have jumped the gun with my original post on this topic. Ford fans are suggesting the Equator will only be for Asian markets. We might get a different (or greatly modified) version for North America. However, the torque-happy V6 they are showing in the Equator concept makes it a likely candidate for the US, IMO.
Either way, it looks like the Escape will not get an FMC until model year 2008. One of the things that helped boost Escape sales back when it was released was the fact that it beat the CR-V redesign to the market. The CR-V was redesigned (with a peppier engine) in 2002. The Escape came along at the end of 2000 as a 2001 model and stole the limelight for a while. If they wait until 2008, the RAV4 will have been on the market with a powerhouse V6 for quite a while. And the next gen CR-V is to be launched late in 2006. So the next Escape/Equator is going to have to raise the bar quite a bit.
Ok, Focus: Started out as Frankenstein's Monster! Great dynamics, crappy interior, league-leading safety features, "European on drugs" styling, more recalls than you can shake a stick at, wheels would fall off, then burst into flames! C&D 10 Best! An exciting econobox!
Now old and no redesign in sight. Interior tamed. The next Ranger?
Taurus: R.I.P.
Fusion: Bold and brash. Nice tranny. Going for, and nailing adequate power. C&D review accurate. Good dynamics, but lacks power. Not anywhere near Accord. Quality still noticably iffy. Maybe obsolete with new Camry next year (that's what I was talking about, Mirth ).
Crown Vic: Awesome! If you're on Heaven's doorstep! Good at exploding in rear end collisions. Tight back seat for such a barge.
500: See aforementioned commentary. Like Fusion, stepped into a tornado, with new Camry coming shortly, and Sonata making inroads FIRST, is beginning a quick descent after a good start. New engine late next year too little, too late. Cheap wood. Wasting the CVT here. Passat wannabe. Gas tank likes to fall off! :confuse: I'd keep the Crown Vic around until Ford figures out the biggest engine goes in the biggest car! :confuse:
FreeStar: D.O.A.
Freestyle: Anyone see the Fly 2? After Jeeff Goldblum went through the replicator once too often? Get "Style" out of the name, put an engine in it, see above 500 comments, just substitute Subaro Outback for Passat.
Ranger: Dreams of being reborn as Tacoma! R.I.P.
F-150: A solid, successful redesign. Nut standing on shaky ground. 500 lbs too heavy. GM and Toyota are on deck, and are grinning from ear to ear, Titan is fairly successful, and will proliferate, needs two new engines to keep GM and Toyota from eating their lunch in 2007. 250Hp V6, 300HP V8, 380HP V8 by 2007-8 to stay on top.
Expedition: Major disappointment here. Slow, fat and crusty is no way to go through life, son :P
Interior is cut-rate. No style. Engine clearly overmatched. Ride is much stiffer than last version. HUGE 3rd seat, but not nearly enough to keep this beast from sinking.
Mustang: I HATE this retro design! I liked the last one, just wanted a modern transmission. I would buy a 2001 GT convertible with Auto. Have driven many times. For true playas . The interior is like a time warp. If you are under 50, you may grow wrinkles just sitting in it! Whatever.
Escape: As I said before, Hybrid tech about 2 generations behind 'Yota. Has gained 350lbs in last 5 years? Hybrid 0-60 in 9 seconds. gets 23-4 MPG. Highlander get 0-60 in 7.4 (CR), and 26 MPG (Inside Line) Can the NAV screen be smaller? Just wondering. Year 5 for this design with no news in sight. Are the bumpers still made of craypaper? I forget. The Tribute has the style of the two. Otherwise, as good SUV!
Advice: Get this 3.5 up and running by Spring in 500, Freestyle, and Fusion.
Redesign Ranger, Focus and Freestar (2008)
Put much bigger engines in overweight F-150 and Expedition. Offer hybrid tech here.
Go back to 5 cars for $10,995 (in today's dollars) promotion that worked so well on Escort, back in the day, on Focus.
This article states that compared to last year, Fords fleet sales represented a greater percentage of total car sales then same month a year ago.
They lead you to believe the the number of units sold to fleet actually went up. This is not necessarily true. Fleet sells could have remained flat or declined and still represnted a greater percentage of total car sales than a year ago.
What is clear is that retail sales fell. Obviously if the total pie gets smaller, the pieces represent a bigger percentage even if they are the same size.
This article again represents the low standards of journalistic integrity applied to american car companies.
Again no unit totals are provided.
Lets say that Chrysler fleet sales in oct 05 increased 19% compared to fleet sales in oct 04.
this 19% increase can be correctly restated as: Oct 05 fleet sales were 119% of oct 04 fleet sales. In reality it was only a 19% increase. Now you have see where the term spin comes from
I bet these are the same guys that are telling george bush there is no budge deficit.
Mainly what caught my eye was not so much the actual news that fleet sales had increased, but rather how much of their sales is NORMALLY fleet, roughly a quarter right (I didn't read it again right now)? Which I think means in retail sales Toyota outsells Ford even in North America. And they come right out and say that sales to rental fleets are at a loss. Ought they not reduce this number? Cut out the unprofitable rental fleet sales at the very least.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Fleet sales, especially to short term to rental companies are very very bad.
First you sell the car for nothing. Then 3 to 6 months later, during the SAME MODEL year, that car shows up at auction along with 1000s of its brothers. Ford takes a bath at the auction.
The now "near new" car ends up on a dealer lot for about 60% of the price brand new, same model year, car on the same lot.
New car sales suffer. This forces Ford to put more incentives out there which takes away the profit on the retail sale.
Also, all those "near new" cars destroy the residual values on new cars. Now leasing is impossible to sell because the residual on a Ford Taurus is 38% while on the non fleet sold competition its in the high 40s or even low 50s.
This also depreciates Joe Lunchbox's Taurus who ends up being the innocent victim. 3 years ago he bought a Taurus new, now he wants to trade that car in but even though he had low factory financing or a huge rebate he is still in negative equity. Now Joe is pissed at Ford and won't buy one again.
New car sales continue to suffer. Market share is lost. This forces more fleet sales as factories can't be closed.
On another site, a poster claims to have visited a styling clinic for what he believes is the next Focus. If his description is accurate, the new Focus will be a very attractive vehicle. It is supposed to debut about 15 months from now, which means that there is hope.
For all of the complaining about the Focus, it's worth noting that GM has had a decade since the debut of the last Cavalier revamp...and with the all-new Cobalt it basically came up with a car that (barely) equals a five-year-old Focus. Not too impressive in my book.
The Escape received a "freshening" in 2005. The interior was upgraded and the vehicle was refined. Unfortunately, it LOOKS exactly like the old one, so Ford messed up an opportunity to keep the vehicle fresh by making it LOOK fresh. Proponents of regular styling changes in the 1950s and 1960s knew what they were doing, but Ford seems to have forgotten that lesson...
As for fleet sales - not all fleet sales are bad. Crown Victorias, for example, are sold primarily to police departments and taxi cab companies. Not very glamorous, but it is a testament to the car's basic durability. And those cars don't come back as "nearly new" used cars within two years. (And as for those Crown Victoria fires - all of the cars were hit at speeds of between 80-100 mph. I don't know of any car that could withstand that sort of tremendous impact.)
The Lincoln Town Car is still the vehicle of choice for limousine conversion companies.
I also see lots of Expeditions and Explorers used by police departments (for example, by K-9 units).
Wouldn't all of those be considered fleet sales as well?
and the article distinguished those from net-loss rental fleet sales. It said they actually make a small profit on fleet sales to government entities and other businesses.
As for Cobalt, I would say that benchmarking GM's model-updating practices is NOT the way to go to becoming competitive in today's auto market! ;-)
I would like to know, however, how the Escape was "refined" for '05. Apart from moving the shifter from the steering column to the floor, what have they changed? It seems so minor as to be meaningless, much the way the Focus "update" was.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
well I believe the renamed the Taurus for two reasons...
first if you noticed all of Ford cars start with an "F" and wagons/suv's start with an "E" and trucks (except for ranger) are "F-#50". Mercury similarly stats all cars and SUV's with an "M".. So Taurus didn't fit that scheme (neither does Sable).
Secondly, after being neglected for so long the Tauruns name became a liability rather than an asset.... Fusion has different audience than the old Taurus and needed different name.. I believe the Fivehundred was a better candidtate for the Taurus name - because its buyers are more conservative and thus would enjoy that name. but after losing its value through fleet sales the Taurus name itself would harm the resale value of an all new model...
I be lieve ford is out of breath... it desperately needs new models like the Edge/Aviator and Meta One to finally come out plus it needs to finish the early re-design of Fivehindred/Mariner. This simply left no energy to deal with Escape and Focus. If you notice Mazda tribute isn't getting a redesign either. They are still fine. Ford might have installed a new transmission or some other non-visible change for 05...
this is what happened to Focus. Ford didn't have the energy to deal with the all new Mazda3 based european Focus.So they simply restyled it. It is still only 5 years old and can survive until its 2008 makeover in a decent shape (this assumes the 08 makeover will be substantial, otherwise Focus is going to take the route of Escort Cavalier etc). But what ois important is that the current focus has practically nothing sin common with the 2000 focus. Since 2000 Focus is on third engine (it started with Escor's weak SPI, then used the European Zetec engine and since 2004 adaped All new Mazda based Duratec). Since late 2002 it has a new manual and since 2004 new automatic transmission. The break and suspentions was tweaked as well.. This doens't change the fact that the whole platform is aging, but I believe in ford's situation, this might have been a smart move... The most recent rumor is, that Ford is simply skipping a generation of Focus. Its 2008 US Focus will be based on the all new 3rd generation focus that will come out in 2009 or so in the rest of the world... if that tuens out true it might be a very smart move.
Ford has upgraded the Escape several times. The incentives started at $500. Then they "upgraded" to $1,500. They upgraded again to $2,000. Then once more to employee prices.
That's a Ford upgrade. :P
Seriously, the 2005 MMC was a decent update. The changes/upgrades included...
New headlights. Improved chassis bracing for better crash safety. A new AWD system. A more refined (though slightly less powerful) version of the 3.0L Duratec. A new 4 banger for the base models. The shifter moved to the center console. I think the larger rims became standard. And maybe a few other cosmetic tweaks to the interior.
All in all, that wasn't a bad MMC. Sales are pretty good with the incentives in place, so they didn't need to change too much. It's just this 2005 update would have been better if it came in 2004 with a FMC coming in 2006.
European Focus actually looks similar to American one. They need to upgrade interior, because it is a good car, but feels cheap compared with Mazda3. Most people will not notice difference between Mazda3 and Focus in driving department, but difference in interior quality and design is pretty noticeable. Fords always were somewhat bland and cheap in interior, even on European models. Fords redesigns were always mild compared to other companies. E.g. you may think that Camry ’92 and Camry ’97 are completely different cars, even though it is basically the same car. You cannot say same thing about Taurus ’96 and Taurus ’00.
nippononly: As for Cobalt, I would say that benchmarking GM's model-updating practices is NOT the way to go to becoming competitive in today's auto market!
Very true, but with all of the doom-and-gloom stories, we sometimes forget that GM still sells a large amount of vehicles. So GM can't be completely ignored, although another few years on its current track and it will be. And remember that a fair number of "domestic only" buyers - their ranks may be steadily dwindling, but they do exit - are going to compare Ford's offerings to those from GM.
Plus, the Focus and the Escape may not be at the top of their segments, but they are still competitive. Neither vehicle is hopelessly outdated, even when compared to Hondas and Toyotas.
nippononly: I would like to know, however, how the Escape was "refined" for '05. Apart from moving the shifter from the steering column to the floor, what have they changed? It seems so minor as to be meaningless, much the way the Focus "update" was.
Varmint detailed what changes Ford made with the 2005 refinement. The main problem is that Ford didn't change the Escape's sheetmetal at all. The vehicle didn't LOOK new, even though it featured some worthwhile improvements under the skin.
Even the Focus update featured new, much better engines. The main problem is that the Ford DID change the styling and the dashboard, and the revisions robbed the car of much of its character.
I have a 2002 Mazda Protege5. The front dash is an artfull combination of different shapes, more or less curved, differnt surface finishes from satin alum to carbon veneer to grained black to the black with golf ball dimples. Overall the interior looks much more inviting than you would expect in an $18,000 car.
Now look at the 05 Focus. The interior has no design to the dash at all its basically an exercise in cheap.
People buy a car they like the looks of from someone they like. Today, with so many choices in the small car catagory, its even more important to be special looking.
I will be a little on the defensive here because I own an 05 Focus.
The new interior might not be your kind of coffee, but it a large step up... Protege (and P5) had nice interiors - no doubt about it.... but the focus simply aims at different audiences. Mazda continues to position itself as the "sporty" make and tries to attract the teens and 20somethings.
Focus got established an enormously great family car that is fun to drive, economical etc.... but it is a family car. While the 3door (like mine) is favorite among those that would possibly buy a Mazda, lots of Focus sales gor to 5door, sedan and WAGON.. an many of these buyers are 30+ families that said "Screw that" to the "bigger is better bullscrap".and honestly will not look at mazda, or many other compacts, because they are aimed at teenagers with stupidous amount of power and childish design.
So yeah Focus interior is more bland... because it has different audience.. but Protege was by no means the leader in interior materials / quality or design...and just the fact that you don't like the new Focus looks doens't make it "excercie in cheapness".. it was a design adapted from european Focsu C-Maxx where it worked well.. and it works well here too - the old interior turned away plenty of buyers.
If you want to see excercise in cheapness see Corolla or 05 Civic.. Toyota was clearly inspired by 85 Buick - tha is lack of style.
You sure about that? I've rented Nissans in the past, albeit not often. I've never rented a Honda, so if it's true that Nissan does no fleet sales, it's not true they're the only one, is it? Pretty sure Honda doesn't.
"The main problem is that Ford didn't change the Escape's sheetmetal at all. The vehicle didn't LOOK new, even though it featured some worthwhile improvements under the skin."
I'm not so sure that's a real problem. When Honda gave the CR-V an MMC, they gave the grill two chrome slats instead of one and they changed the color of the turn signals on the rear lights. The RAV4 didn't change much either.
No, Honda and Toyota update their vehicles on a five-year cycle. Ford has got the Escape on a 7 year plan. I think that's where the problem lies.
I know about the EU focus.. I wish it was here.. but actually I prefer my C170 Focus to C1 Mazda3... (just personal preference: the Mazda3 is too big/bulky...)..
but about the happy customers... I drove everything in the compact class and while Focus needs a little discount to justify its position (make it about 2k cheaper than comparable Honda, Mazda)... for the price you cannot beat it...
That's why I bought it... Mazda3, and Civic were not what I was looking for. Cobalt was straight out disappointing and ugly. Kia Spectra5 was nice, but after all I liked and trusted Focus more... so here I am a happy Focus owner..
a rental Sentra one time recently. Now THERE'S a car that makes the current Focus look great. But it is going to be all-new in about nine months. They better advance it more than just one notch, better make it a full two notches in this case! :-)
I also appreciate that Ford makes so many varieties of Focus available - mine would be a 5-door if they would just improve the interior, sound-proofing, and fuel economy. Between it and the Mazda3 5-door, right now the Mazda wins hands down IMO. But Ford, please don't stop offering hatches and the wagon in addition to the sedan on this model!
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
To whom it may concern Hertz in northern california rents Nissan Altima's, Xterra, Murano, Pathfinder Armada, Infiniti Q45, Qx55, G35 sedans, and Fx35. Honda's are few, Accord lx and civic lx. The largest Asian rental fleet company is Toyota with Highlanders, 4runners, Matrix's, Siennes, Prius's(I Don't see what's so special about this car)Avalons and the all to common Camry ,Solara and Corolla. I could say their are more Camrys in the fleet then Ford 500, Freetsyle and Mercury Montego combined.
Having cars in rental is not bad at all. It gives you chance to evaluate car in long-term test. Then again if you consider prices for rental Toyotas and Hondas at Hertz car sales - they are pretty high. For me it does not make much sense to go for previous rental Toyota/Honda because price is almost the same as for new car (say 15K against 17K). But it also means that Toyota and Honda do not sell cars to rental on discount - they make profit on each car.
the Fusion finally at the auto show Friday. Does not make out a stand-out impression from the inside. Outside the styling is good. You HAVE to get the big optional alloys though! The base wheels suck, turn the side view into the ugly duckling.
From inside, you have half power and half manual adjustment on the driver's seat, when everyone else is going power now. Why half and half Ford? The dash plastics are bad, big grainy surfaces like the dashes of GM trucks. The price seemed about right for the 4-cyl 5 speed I sat in. Given that it has some small cash incentives that is. It does, right?
The seat is a bit narrow and the IP of the Milan is nicer stylistically. The Ford section was fairly quiet, with just a few folks looking at the Five Hundred and Freestyle. The Explorer wasn't getting any traffic.
And the Mercury section next door left me once again with the question, why bother? I hear they are not even going to advertise the launch of the Mariner hybrid? And everything is so painfully obvious as a Ford rebadge. Ford needs to put Mercury to sleep permanently.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Why did they have to put a 203 hp engine into a big car like the 500? 203 hp for a big car like the 500 isn't enough HP. At least the engine should have been 230hp that they put in the 500. I think they put they put a weak engine HP wise because of the rising gas prices at the time. A 203 HP engine is just flat out slow for acceleration purposes I would imagine for a big car like that.
Detroit Auto News has an article stating that the Mariner is a good indicator of where they are headed. I'd post a link, but they seem to be having server problems today.
The article also explains how dumping Merc would actually be more expensive than simply letting it go the way it has been.
You people just don't get it. We should be applauding Ford for keeping Mercury and adding more vehicles? Do you want to drive the same car your neighbor does? Or would you go for something a little different? (if you said yes, kindly stick to the Toyota Camry forum were you'll find others of your persuasion)
Mercury allows Ford to Tweak Things for different market segments.
The Mariner is obviously tweaked toward the Feminine side. This is a good thing. Mercury does not have to have totally different cars from Ford to be successful. I work at a Ford Lincoln Mercury store and people absolutely have a preference between the Mariner and the Escape.
Different tires, different seats, more sound insolation, upscale look on the outside verses the macho look of the Escape. Even the the square fog lights on the Mariner verse the round fog lights on the Escape makes a difference.
Stop being so dense and get with the program. The age of no choice car shopping ended with the demise of the USSR.
As for advertising the launch of the Mariner Hybrid? Would you advertise something sold out?
"As for advertising the launch of the Mariner Hybrid? Would you advertise something sold out?"
I agree with you on that. They can't sell any more than they can build. And right now they can't get enough batteries to build more of 'em.
Though, I'll concede the advertising would help their image.
As for choice, that's not really the issue. Sure it's great to offer choice. As a consumer, I love it. But as a manufacturer, it complicates the assembly line (adding opportunity for mistakes), adds additional costs, and makes it look like everything costs extra.
Choice isn't a bad thing. It's just a double-edged sword.
To be fair, it's not really the issue of consumer choice that we're discussing here, but the survival of a particular company.
I don't think anyone would characterize today's auto marketplace as not offering an immense amount of consumer choice. It most certainly does.
But it comes from a myriad of firms building many types/styles of vehicles. This makes for intense competition, and a car company has to balance choice with issues of production economics, legacy costs (ask GM 'bout that one), labor/content issues and many other things. It's a tough act to stay competitive. Even the once dominant Japanese firms are facing stiff competition from the Koreans. And just wait until the Chinese industry gets seriously going...
Actually, the ending of "no choice car shopping" in the USA came on the scene much earlier than the demise of the USSR. It's just that it didn't come from domestic manufacturers...
In addition to limited battery supply. Ford is also having a hard time getting enough eCVTs from Aisin (Toyota appears to get first dibs on production capacity.) The eCVT is apparently patented so unless Ford or other supplier can get a license this looks like it will continue to be a hurdle.
I think Ford should definitely look at brand advertising for Mercury. They should also not just make a Mercury for the sake of making a Mercury. The Monterey is the perfect example of a totally pointless badge engineering exercise.
Comments
That's the problem...Ford has a history of "launch and abandon" when it comes to new vehicles. That term was coined by no less than Bill Ford himself.
Honda and Toyota can keep using the same name for years because they always make sure that the vehicle stays fresh through constant and effective updates.
GM and Ford have a history of stretching the model cycle to the limit, and using rebates and fleet sales to keep the assembly lines moving during the last few years of the vehicle's life. Unfortunately, by that point the nameplate has a reputation of being either fodder for rental car companies, or a vehicle sold to domestic loyalists who couldn't afford anything better. So the new model must be launched with a new name, to avoid the negative association with the previous one.
That may be, but sales are just half what they were as recently as two years ago, and Tacoma now outsells it by close to 25%. So whether the public disagrees with you or is just looking for something else besides substance, Ford's decision to just let the Ranger go into oblivion was not a good one for sales.
Freestar: sales are apparently half what they were just five years ago when it was the Windstar (and why they renamed a model with such minor revisions is beyond me). Give it up, guys.
Focus: going into year six without any sort of a real update, and Ford is saying it will be at least another year and probably two before they do anything about that.
Escape: a decently popular little trucklet, also set to go some seven or eight years before Ford devotes any resources to updating it. I like the Edge concept, but why go to all the trouble of developing that model when Escape makes a decent place to evolve from? If Edge were to come to market, it would kill most of Escape's sales, so you just know that if Ford brings Edge to fruition, Escape is history, renamed or otherwise.
Freestyle: a good idea being dumped for the reasons listed above. Too bad.
Taurus: being allowed to FINALLY rest in peace after way too many years, which will leave a hole in the fleet sales to be filled by what model? Possibly Fusion if it doesn't sell up to expectations? Let's hope not.
Explorer: just revamped again, even though Ford admits it expects Explorer sales to drop in future??? For this they are delaying a new Ranger and Focus?
Five Hundred: hardly setting the world on fire, was outsold by the ages-old Impala in its first year, although who knows what the comparison of retail sales was. Called "decent", "stodgy" by every reviewer I have read. Damned with faint praise. Actually, more than the Fusion, this is the likeliest candidate for picking up the role of fleet sales leader when Taurus goes away.
Nothing in the last two decades leads me to have any faith that Ford will not continue to neglect its car lines and try to stretch out the model cycles to almost twice as long as the imports, the way it has in the past.
Now if GM really does have to declare bankruptcy, as the bankers are now predicting will happen in less than a year, maybe enough GM customers will be scared away and come to Ford to turn the tide a little bit...
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
http://www.autoweek.com/news.cms?newsId=103587
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
I may have jumped the gun with my original post on this topic. Ford fans are suggesting the Equator will only be for Asian markets. We might get a different (or greatly modified) version for North America. However, the torque-happy V6 they are showing in the Equator concept makes it a likely candidate for the US, IMO.
Either way, it looks like the Escape will not get an FMC until model year 2008. One of the things that helped boost Escape sales back when it was released was the fact that it beat the CR-V redesign to the market. The CR-V was redesigned (with a peppier engine) in 2002. The Escape came along at the end of 2000 as a 2001 model and stole the limelight for a while. If they wait until 2008, the RAV4 will have been on the market with a powerhouse V6 for quite a while. And the next gen CR-V is to be launched late in 2006. So the next Escape/Equator is going to have to raise the bar quite a bit.
Now old and no redesign in sight. Interior tamed. The next Ranger?
Taurus: R.I.P.
Fusion: Bold and brash. Nice tranny. Going for, and nailing adequate power. C&D review accurate. Good dynamics, but lacks power. Not anywhere near Accord. Quality still noticably iffy. Maybe obsolete with new Camry next year (that's what I was talking about, Mirth
Crown Vic: Awesome! If you're on Heaven's doorstep!
Good at exploding in rear end collisions. Tight back seat for such a barge.
500: See aforementioned commentary. Like Fusion, stepped into a tornado, with new Camry coming shortly, and Sonata making inroads FIRST, is beginning a quick descent after a good start. New engine late next year too little, too late. Cheap wood. Wasting the CVT here. Passat wannabe. Gas tank likes to fall off! :confuse: I'd keep the Crown Vic around until Ford figures out the biggest engine goes in the biggest car! :confuse:
FreeStar: D.O.A.
Freestyle: Anyone see the Fly 2? After Jeeff Goldblum went through the replicator once too often? Get "Style" out of the name, put an engine in it, see above 500 comments, just substitute Subaro Outback for Passat.
Ranger: Dreams of being reborn as Tacoma! R.I.P.
F-150: A solid, successful redesign. Nut standing on shaky ground. 500 lbs too heavy. GM and Toyota are on deck, and are grinning from ear to ear, Titan is fairly successful, and will proliferate, needs two new engines to keep GM and Toyota from eating their lunch in 2007. 250Hp V6, 300HP V8, 380HP V8 by 2007-8 to stay on top.
Expedition: Major disappointment here. Slow, fat and crusty is no way to go through life, son :P
Interior is cut-rate. No style. Engine clearly overmatched. Ride is much stiffer than last version. HUGE 3rd seat, but not nearly enough to keep this beast from sinking.
Mustang: I HATE this retro design! I liked the last one, just wanted a modern transmission. I would buy a 2001 GT convertible with Auto. Have driven many times. For true playas
Escape: As I said before, Hybrid tech about 2 generations behind 'Yota. Has gained 350lbs in last 5 years? Hybrid 0-60 in 9 seconds. gets 23-4 MPG. Highlander get 0-60 in 7.4 (CR), and 26 MPG (Inside Line)
Can the NAV screen be smaller? Just wondering. Year 5 for this design with no news in sight. Are the bumpers still made of craypaper? I forget. The Tribute has the style of the two. Otherwise, as good SUV!
Advice: Get this 3.5 up and running by Spring in 500, Freestyle, and Fusion.
Redesign Ranger, Focus and Freestar (2008)
Put much bigger engines in overweight F-150 and Expedition. Offer hybrid tech here.
Go back to 5 cars for $10,995 (in today's dollars) promotion that worked so well on Escort, back in the day, on Focus.
Get GM on Quality!
Thank You.
DrFill
This article states that compared to last year, Fords fleet sales represented a greater percentage of total car sales then same month a year ago.
They lead you to believe the the number of units sold to fleet actually went up. This is not necessarily true. Fleet sells could have remained flat or declined and still represnted a greater percentage of total car sales than a year ago.
What is clear is that retail sales fell. Obviously if the total pie gets smaller, the pieces represent a bigger percentage even if they are the same size.
Mark.
http://www.detnews.com/2005/autosinsider/0511/05/autos-372441.htm
But, you're right, the articles do not compare fleet sales as a unit total for Gm and Ford.
Again no unit totals are provided.
Lets say that Chrysler fleet sales in oct 05 increased 19% compared to fleet sales in oct 04.
this 19% increase can be correctly restated as: Oct 05 fleet sales were 119% of oct 04 fleet sales. In reality it was only a 19% increase. Now you have see where the term spin comes from
I bet these are the same guys that are telling george bush there is no budge deficit.
Mark
http://blogs.edmunds.com/.ee8cfe6
Anyway, the point still stands. Chrysler increased fleet sales. We don't know if the others did.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
First you sell the car for nothing. Then 3 to 6 months later, during the SAME MODEL year, that car shows up at auction along with 1000s of its brothers. Ford takes a bath at the auction.
The now "near new" car ends up on a dealer lot for about 60% of the price brand new, same model year, car on the same lot.
New car sales suffer. This forces Ford to put more incentives out there which takes away the profit on the retail sale.
Also, all those "near new" cars destroy the residual values on new cars. Now leasing is impossible to sell because the residual on a Ford Taurus is 38% while on the non fleet sold competition its in the high 40s or even low 50s.
This also depreciates Joe Lunchbox's Taurus who ends up being the innocent victim. 3 years ago he bought a Taurus new, now he wants to trade that car in but even though he had low factory financing or a huge rebate he is still in negative equity. Now Joe is pissed at Ford and won't buy one again.
New car sales continue to suffer. Market share is lost.
This forces more fleet sales as factories can't be closed.
Yes it sucks to be an american car company.
Only Nissan does no rental fleet sales.
Mark
For all of the complaining about the Focus, it's worth noting that GM has had a decade since the debut of the last Cavalier revamp...and with the all-new Cobalt it basically came up with a car that (barely) equals a five-year-old Focus. Not too impressive in my book.
The Escape received a "freshening" in 2005. The interior was upgraded and the vehicle was refined. Unfortunately, it LOOKS exactly like the old one, so Ford messed up an opportunity to keep the vehicle fresh by making it LOOK fresh. Proponents of regular styling changes in the 1950s and 1960s knew what they were doing, but Ford seems to have forgotten that lesson...
As for fleet sales - not all fleet sales are bad. Crown Victorias, for example, are sold primarily to police departments and taxi cab companies. Not very glamorous, but it is a testament to the car's basic durability. And those cars don't come back as "nearly new" used cars within two years. (And as for those Crown Victoria fires - all of the cars were hit at speeds of between 80-100 mph. I don't know of any car that could withstand that sort of tremendous impact.)
The Lincoln Town Car is still the vehicle of choice for limousine conversion companies.
I also see lots of Expeditions and Explorers used by police departments (for example, by K-9 units).
Wouldn't all of those be considered fleet sales as well?
As for Cobalt, I would say that benchmarking GM's model-updating practices is NOT the way to go to becoming competitive in today's auto market! ;-)
I would like to know, however, how the Escape was "refined" for '05. Apart from moving the shifter from the steering column to the floor, what have they changed? It seems so minor as to be meaningless, much the way the Focus "update" was.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
first if you noticed all of Ford cars start with an "F" and wagons/suv's start with an "E" and trucks (except for ranger) are "F-#50".
Mercury similarly stats all cars and SUV's with an "M".. So Taurus didn't fit that scheme (neither does Sable).
Secondly, after being neglected for so long the Tauruns name became a liability rather than an asset.... Fusion has different audience than the old Taurus and needed different name.. I believe the Fivehundred was a better candidtate for the Taurus name - because its buyers are more conservative and thus would enjoy that name. but after losing its value through fleet sales the Taurus name itself would harm the resale value of an all new model...
Igor
This simply left no energy to deal with Escape and Focus. If you notice Mazda tribute isn't getting a redesign either. They are still fine. Ford might have installed a new transmission or some other non-visible change for 05...
this is what happened to Focus. Ford didn't have the energy to deal with the all new Mazda3 based european Focus.So they simply restyled it. It is still only 5 years old and can survive until its 2008 makeover in a decent shape (this assumes the 08 makeover will be substantial, otherwise Focus is going to take the route of Escort Cavalier etc).
But what ois important is that the current focus has practically nothing sin common with the 2000 focus.
Since 2000 Focus is on third engine (it started with Escor's weak SPI, then used the European Zetec engine and since 2004 adaped All new Mazda based Duratec). Since late 2002 it has a new manual and since 2004 new automatic transmission. The break and suspentions was tweaked as well..
This doens't change the fact that the whole platform is aging, but I believe in ford's situation, this might have been a smart move...
The most recent rumor is, that Ford is simply skipping a generation of Focus. Its 2008 US Focus will be based on the all new 3rd generation focus that will come out in 2009 or so in the rest of the world... if that tuens out true it might be a very smart move.
Igor
That's a Ford upgrade. :P
Seriously, the 2005 MMC was a decent update. The changes/upgrades included...
New headlights.
Improved chassis bracing for better crash safety.
A new AWD system.
A more refined (though slightly less powerful) version of the 3.0L Duratec.
A new 4 banger for the base models.
The shifter moved to the center console.
I think the larger rims became standard.
And maybe a few other cosmetic tweaks to the interior.
All in all, that wasn't a bad MMC. Sales are pretty good with the incentives in place, so they didn't need to change too much. It's just this 2005 update would have been better if it came in 2004 with a FMC coming in 2006.
Very true, but with all of the doom-and-gloom stories, we sometimes forget that GM still sells a large amount of vehicles. So GM can't be completely ignored, although another few years on its current track and it will be. And remember that a fair number of "domestic only" buyers - their ranks may be steadily dwindling, but they do exit - are going to compare Ford's offerings to those from GM.
Plus, the Focus and the Escape may not be at the top of their segments, but they are still competitive. Neither vehicle is hopelessly outdated, even when compared to Hondas and Toyotas.
nippononly: I would like to know, however, how the Escape was "refined" for '05. Apart from moving the shifter from the steering column to the floor, what have they changed? It seems so minor as to be meaningless, much the way the Focus "update" was.
Varmint detailed what changes Ford made with the 2005 refinement. The main problem is that Ford didn't change the Escape's sheetmetal at all. The vehicle didn't LOOK new, even though it featured some worthwhile improvements under the skin.
Even the Focus update featured new, much better engines. The main problem is that the Ford DID change the styling and the dashboard, and the revisions robbed the car of much of its character.
Now look at the 05 Focus. The interior has no design to the dash at all its basically an exercise in cheap.
People buy a car they like the looks of from someone they like. Today, with so many choices in the small car catagory, its even more important to be special looking.
I hope Ford improves this really really soon.
The new interior might not be your kind of coffee, but it a large step up... Protege (and P5) had nice interiors - no doubt about it.... but the focus simply aims at different audiences. Mazda continues to position itself as the "sporty" make and tries to attract the teens and 20somethings.
Focus got established an enormously great family car that is fun to drive, economical etc.... but it is a family car. While the 3door (like mine) is favorite among those that would possibly buy a Mazda, lots of Focus sales gor to 5door, sedan and WAGON.. an many of these buyers are 30+ families that said "Screw that" to the "bigger is better bullscrap".and honestly will not look at mazda, or many other compacts, because they are aimed at teenagers with stupidous amount of power and childish design.
So yeah Focus interior is more bland... because it has different audience.. but Protege was by no means the leader in interior materials / quality or design...and just the fact that you don't like the new Focus looks doens't make it "excercie in cheapness".. it was a design adapted from european Focsu C-Maxx where it worked well.. and it works well here too - the old interior turned away plenty of buyers.
If you want to see excercise in cheapness see Corolla or 05 Civic.. Toyota was clearly inspired by 85 Buick - tha is lack of style.
Igor
I love the driving position. Love the new engines. Love the fact that you can get a 3 door or a 5 door.
but check out this link and see what the rest of the world calls focus.
http://www.ford.co.uk/ie/foc_c307/foc_c307_experience/foc_c307_gallery/-/-/-/-#.
You drive an 05 Focus, I try to sell them. An honestly, everyone I have sold was to a happy customer.
But I just think Ford could have done a better job with the Refresh, and the Fusion interior proves it.
Opportunity lost.
Mark">
You sure about that? I've rented Nissans in the past, albeit not often. I've never rented a Honda, so if it's true that Nissan does no fleet sales, it's not true they're the only one, is it? Pretty sure Honda doesn't.
I'm not so sure that's a real problem. When Honda gave the CR-V an MMC, they gave the grill two chrome slats instead of one and they changed the color of the turn signals on the rear lights. The RAV4 didn't change much either.
No, Honda and Toyota update their vehicles on a five-year cycle. Ford has got the Escape on a 7 year plan. I think that's where the problem lies.
but about the happy customers... I drove everything in the compact class and while Focus needs a little discount to justify its position (make it about 2k cheaper than comparable Honda, Mazda)... for the price you cannot beat it...
That's why I bought it... Mazda3, and Civic were not what I was looking for.
Cobalt was straight out disappointing and ugly. Kia Spectra5 was nice, but after all I liked and trusted Focus more... so here I am a happy Focus owner..
Igor
I also appreciate that Ford makes so many varieties of Focus available - mine would be a 5-door if they would just improve the interior, sound-proofing, and fuel economy. Between it and the Mazda3 5-door, right now the Mazda wins hands down IMO. But Ford, please don't stop offering hatches and the wagon in addition to the sedan on this model!
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
New engine
NV
Why not just git a Murano, instead of waiting for Lincoln to copy one? Just wonderin'. :confuse:
DrFill
Interior lighting is important to me. The red in Audis and BMWs turns me off, and the Amber in Nissans do the same.
The blues in Chryslers and VWs, and the lights in Hondas and Toyotas are appealing, without annoying you.
I just don't want to stare at red lights for the next 3 years! And amber is too fea for me, sorry...... :P
DrFill
From inside, you have half power and half manual adjustment on the driver's seat, when everyone else is going power now. Why half and half Ford? The dash plastics are bad, big grainy surfaces like the dashes of GM trucks. The price seemed about right for the 4-cyl 5 speed I sat in. Given that it has some small cash incentives that is. It does, right?
The seat is a bit narrow and the IP of the Milan is nicer stylistically. The Ford section was fairly quiet, with just a few folks looking at the Five Hundred and Freestyle. The Explorer wasn't getting any traffic.
And the Mercury section next door left me once again with the question, why bother? I hear they are not even going to advertise the launch of the Mariner hybrid? And everything is so painfully obvious as a Ford rebadge. Ford needs to put Mercury to sleep permanently.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
The article also explains how dumping Merc would actually be more expensive than simply letting it go the way it has been.
You people just don't get it. We should be applauding Ford for keeping Mercury and adding more vehicles? Do you want to drive the same car your neighbor does? Or would you go for something a little different? (if you said yes, kindly stick to the Toyota Camry forum were you'll find others of your persuasion)
Mercury allows Ford to Tweak Things for different market segments.
The Mariner is obviously tweaked toward the Feminine side. This is a good thing. Mercury does not have to have totally different cars from Ford to be successful. I work at a Ford Lincoln Mercury store and people absolutely have a preference between the Mariner and the Escape.
Different tires, different seats, more sound insolation, upscale look on the outside verses the macho look of the Escape. Even the the square fog lights on the Mariner verse the round fog lights on the Escape makes a difference.
Stop being so dense and get with the program. The age of no choice car shopping ended with the demise of the USSR.
As for advertising the launch of the Mariner Hybrid? Would you advertise something sold out?
Mark
I agree with you on that. They can't sell any more than they can build. And right now they can't get enough batteries to build more of 'em.
Though, I'll concede the advertising would help their image.
As for choice, that's not really the issue. Sure it's great to offer choice. As a consumer, I love it. But as a manufacturer, it complicates the assembly line (adding opportunity for mistakes), adds additional costs, and makes it look like everything costs extra.
Choice isn't a bad thing. It's just a double-edged sword.
I don't think anyone would characterize today's auto marketplace as not offering an immense amount of consumer choice. It most certainly does.
But it comes from a myriad of firms building many types/styles of vehicles. This makes for intense competition, and a car company has to balance choice with issues of production economics, legacy costs (ask GM 'bout that one), labor/content issues and many other things. It's a tough act to stay competitive. Even the once dominant Japanese firms are facing stiff competition from the Koreans. And just wait until the Chinese industry gets seriously going...
Actually, the ending of "no choice car shopping" in the USA came on the scene much earlier than the demise of the USSR. It's just that it didn't come from domestic manufacturers...
I think Ford should definitely look at brand advertising for Mercury. They should also not just make a Mercury for the sake of making a Mercury. The Monterey is the perfect example of a totally pointless badge engineering exercise.
Mark.