Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Ford shifting to smaller vehicles


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: Ford shifting to smaller vehicles Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Ford shifting to smaller vehicles - 7/27/2008 7:07:17 AM   
Maya2001


Posts: 1656
Joined: 8/22/2007
From: Woodstock ONT,CANADA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: SummerWind

It'll be alot more cost effective for them to make small shitty cars.....


no the opposite is true when it comes to profits as you still have the same base costs such as,  designing,  testing, equipment, labour force, heating, hydro, equipment, building and equipment maintenance costs,  management and supervision,   structural build to build the vehicle in  with a cheap car as you do a large vehicle but the profit margin is a lot greater on a $40k  vehicle than on the 10K vehicle that is the reason the US big 3 focused so much on building larger vehicles and why when they were building smaller vehicles they did less advertising of them ..had the dealers trying to push the sales on the larger models and quit offering the smaller vehicles for fleet vehicle sales  as Gm had done with the metro ..the last few years of its production life the refuses to sell it as a fleet vehicle ..the last fleet sales orders had  went to Molly Maid.  The retooling is a vry expensive cost for theUS  big 3  which is part of the reason for all the big cuts they are making as all new robotics have to be brought in ..the easiest way to do is the peel off the roof and bring in large cranes and rip everything out till it is an empty shell inside the weld shop and start everything fresh,  all the conveyor systems to move the vehicles throughout the plants have to ripped out, often requiring digging up the concrete flooring  to tear out existing undergound conveyors   and smaller conveyors have to be installed  to accommodate the smaller size,  fortunate designing costs  won't be as huge as they will likely use platforms  from the vehicles they build in Europe and them modify them for the North American standards   but it will take them about 2 years  or more to get to where the plants are going to be able to be functioning  at hopefully full production without a lot of bugs to work out in the computerized processes which can be a huge nightmare and headache especially in the welding department  which is highly computerized due to the huge amount of robotics that is used .  so the start ups tend to be fairly slow at the beginning .. I have been around for one 1/2 a plant overhaul  and it really is quite to process and amazing to see just how much work is involved to gut and rebuild lines to accommodate a different sized vehicle .

quote:

So now Ford and many American car companies are hastily switching their factories back to small cars.  Well I want to see small pickups make a comeback, but I am not seeing it.  We had all of these cars avaliable before.  Cooper made their Mini in many different models.  It was a good, solid, reliable car.  But hell no, we won't get that from our manufacturers.


You will be seeing some new smaller pickups coming out... the front end though on some  will be more car like sort of like the el caminos like the future pontiac g8  for 2010 http://jalopnik.com/366699/2010-pontiac-g8-sport-truck-the-el-camino-is-back

the companies won't be getting out of trucks, SUVs and CRVs altoghether they will simply be going to smaller versions ...for example where I work we will be building the GMC Terrain the North American model will be boxier than what was showcased in the Dubai autoshow  http://jalopnik.com/380639/2010-gmc-terrain,

as well we will still will be building the Equinox though it will go thru a major model
change for the 2010 model year









_____________________________

Lead me not into temptation - I can find the way myself

(in reply to SummerWind)
Profile   Post #: 21
RE: Ford shifting to smaller vehicles - 7/27/2008 6:40:56 PM   
Vendaval


Posts: 10297
Joined: 1/15/2005
Status: offline 		Thank you for the insider's view, Maya.

_____________________________

"Beware, the woods at night, beware the lunar light.
So in this gray haze we'll be meating again, and on that
great day, I will tease you all the same."
"WOLF MOON", OCTOBER RUST, TYPE O NEGATIVE


http://KinkMeet.co.uk

(in reply to Maya2001)
Profile   Post #: 22
RE: Ford shifting to smaller vehicles - 7/27/2008 9:47:28 PM   
Termyn8or


Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline 		"I've seen guys go out and buy a 1 ton, crew cab, dually with the biggest diesel and four wheel drive and they never haul anything.  They are merely using the truck as a status symbol."

I hope the predatory lenders get them. The truck in this driveway only moves when I have to haul something or nothing else runs.

They get what's coming to them.

T

(in reply to Vendaval)
Profile   Post #: 23
RE: Ford shifting to smaller vehicles - 7/28/2008 5:18:04 PM   
Celeres


Posts: 166
Joined: 3/9/2008
Status: offline 		I for one will continue to drive my small japanese car that gets me 35 miles to the gallon. =)

With that said... if Congress were to lower the vehicle safety standards on our vehicles, (possibly by lobbying your individual congressional representative) more cars will be allowed into the United States. I know most people are thinking, "cars are dangerous as it is, why lower safety standards?" Well, for one, you do not "have" to buy a less safe vehicle, but for those of us who do not mind, I for one would like to see more variety on the streets. Look at the streets of London, Tokyo, and other huge metropolitan cities around the world: rarely are the filled with Prius' or Civics. They are filled with more choice and that is what sells vehicles: ability to choose something besides a Toyota or Civic.

Besides, Ford is not necessarily "shifting" to smaller vehicles... the plans are already done. I.e. Ford Fiesta, Ford Mondeo, Ford Ka, etc. They are finally going to bring their designs over. Anyone else notice that their Ford Focus is about 100 times better looking/handling than the ones available here? That's not right... espcially since Ford began here.

(in reply to Termyn8or)
Profile   Post #: 24
RE: Ford shifting to smaller vehicles - 7/30/2008 6:41:16 AM   
petdave


Posts: 2479
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Maya2001

quote:

ORIGINAL: SummerWind

It'll be alot more cost effective for them to make small shitty cars.....


no the opposite is true when it comes to profits as you still have the same base costs such as,  designing,  testing, equipment, labour force, heating, hydro, equipment, building and equipment maintenance costs,  management and supervision,   structural build to build the vehicle in  with a cheap car as you do a large vehicle but the profit margin is a lot greater on a $40k  vehicle than on the 10K vehicle that is the reason the US big 3 focused so much on building larger vehicles and why when they were building smaller vehicles they did less advertising of them ..had the dealers trying to push the sales on the larger models and quit offering the smaller vehicles for fleet vehicle sales  as Gm had done with the metro ..the last few years of its production life the refuses to sell it as a fleet vehicle


Well, the missing element in the discussion of profitability is price. A modern U.S. consumer expects a small car to sell cheaply, unless it's something special (new Mini Cooper, Smart Car, etc). If you're going to sell a small car cheaply, you need to cut costs to the bone, while still moving a lot of units- the Model T, Volkswagen Beetle, Citroen 2CV, the original Mini (and Tata, Chery, and whatever the other big Chinese manufacturer is). Modern regulations and start-up costs make cost-cutting difficult (at least in Western markets), so you need to convince people to pay more for the car by one means or another. It's happening, but slowly.

The European Focus is a top-notch small/intermediate platform, and Ford did indeed make a big mistake in revising their first-gen Focus for the domestic market. Since the Focus 2 platform is sold in the U.S. as the Mazda3, i can only guess there is some sort of market exclusivity contract at issue between the two brands. Why they bothered dumping more development money into the old platform for a facelift in the US market (and killing the SVO version, which was the only thing it had going for it) i can't imagine. We own a 3, and it's a superb car for the size and price.

(in reply to Maya2001)
Profile   Post #: 25
RE: Ford shifting to smaller vehicles - 8/11/2008 9:59:49 PM   
Celeres


Posts: 166
Joined: 3/9/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: petdave

quote:

Well, the missing element in the discussion of profitability is price. A modern U.S. consumer expects a small car to sell cheaply, unless it's something special (new Mini Cooper, Smart Car, etc). If you're going to sell a small car cheaply, you need to cut costs to the bone, while still moving a lot of units- the Model T, Volkswagen Beetle, Citroen 2CV, the original Mini (and Tata, Chery, and whatever the other big Chinese manufacturer is). Modern regulations and start-up costs make cost-cutting difficult (at least in Western markets), so you need to convince people to pay more for the car by one means or another. It's happening, but slowly.


Hence why so many companies are offering more miles/years on a new warranty, or offering better leasing packages or more "standard" equipment. A "full-size spare" shouldn't a "standard" equipment... if there's room in the trunk for one, they should leave it alone. Having that as a selling point seems a bit ridiculous in my opinion, esp since a full-size spare is better.

An interesting fact that I've come across is that 80% of new BMWs in the U.S. are actually leased vehicles. No idea why Chrysler has dropped the leasing option and why GM plans to do it after the 2009 is pushed out the door.

I think the Mazda3 is a great looking car PetDave. Actually, I had the choice very recently to pick up a 2006 Mazda 3 for a decent price, or to pick up a 2002 Mazda MX-5. Due to the size, and strong wish to drive a 2-seater, I went with the smaller more gas-efficient MX-5. I also heard that Mazda, (perhaps trying to save weight) only applied 3 engine brackets to the Mazda3 instead of the usual 4. The effect?? I've heard of some engines falling completely out of the engine bay during some stress tests... but I do think it's a fantastic looking car. Especially since they've finally gotten rid of the crappy 323 and 636s. =)

(in reply to petdave)
Profile   Post #: 26
RE: Ford shifting to smaller vehicles - 8/11/2008 10:45:35 PM   
Archer


Posts: 3207
Joined: 3/11/2005
Status: offline 		Now if only Ford would set up for making a mid sized pickup with the same hybrid power plant they buy and put into the Ford Escape Hybrid.
I'm so waiting for that full hybrid midsized or light full sized truck to be put out by someone.

If they have the Escape with a hybrid by god how difficult would it be to relaunch the F 100 hybrid at 34 MPG it should be a no brainer.


< Message edited by Archer -- 8/11/2008 10:47:51 PM >

(in reply to Celeres)
Profile   Post #: 27
RE: Ford shifting to smaller vehicles - 8/11/2008 10:49:11 PM   
Leatherist


Posts: 5149
Joined: 12/11/2007
Status: offline 		If they put up a midsize with a decent power plant-thier elephant line would die forever.

_____________________________

My shop is currently segueing into production mode.

I'm not taking custom orders.

(in reply to Archer)
Profile   Post #: 28
RE: Ford shifting to smaller vehicles - 8/12/2008 12:37:38 AM   
candystripper


Posts: 3486
Joined: 11/1/2005
Status: offline 		Christ onna cracker...I cannot believe how badly run the American auto industry is at every level.  The auto worker here still wants/needs/expects to get paid $40 an hour with beneies the rest of us can only dream of.  Whole cities are completely dependent on tax revenues from just one manufacturing plant.  Dealerships have never gotten the messsage that people do not want to be treated like sh*t while buying the second-most expensive purchase most will make.
 
They've all had at LEAST 40 years...since the gas crisis of the early 1970's...to get the message that oil is a limited resource and the consumer needs a reliable, gas efficient and relatively inexpensive car...and its f**king NEWS that in 2008, one of them is actually considering moving in that direction?
 
Add car manufacturers to the list of industries I despise.
 
candystripper

(in reply to Leatherist)
Profile   Post #: 29
RE: Ford shifting to smaller vehicles - 8/12/2008 5:03:39 AM   
Archer


Posts: 3207
Joined: 3/11/2005
Status: offline 		They followed the buying trends of consumers candystripper. People stopped buying the little cars that got good mileage.
They offered up the minivan with good mileage comparatively and still the public worried about their image as a "soccermom/ soccerdad if they had the van. So they went back to a style of car that used to be called a station wagon which had an equally bad image but it got a cool new name SUV.



(in reply to candystripper)
Profile   Post #: 30
RE: Ford shifting to smaller vehicles - 8/12/2008 5:47:22 AM   
candystripper


Posts: 3486
Joined: 11/1/2005
Status: offline 		Archer, there is a real chicken-and-the-egg phemon when it comes to motor vehicles, I will grant you.  Some men and some (but in my experience fewer) women derive a sense of satisfaction, even self, from their mode of transport. 
 
You ought to look sometime at Dom profiles; the ones I see are almost invariably men posed in front of cars, boats, and motorcycles....and few are good photos of the men, but they are good photos of the vehicle.  Sometimes it's a man posed in front a large-ish home.  Rarely is it is a well-composed photo of the man's face. 
 
By comparision, the submissive profiles I've glanced at tended to feature better photos of women showing off whatever bodily assets they like best.  I'm not saying this is always true, but it is common.
 
But where did this come from?  Why does it change?  Leaving aside the harley riders for the moment, it seems to me it comes from auto manufacturers who tell the population at large, through intensive, unrelentng advertisements, that a particular vehicle has a particular 'personality'. 
 
Thus the feminization of the mini-van, the 'need' for a luxury vehicle, the allure of the SUV and monster truck....etc.
 
I can remember in my 30's and 40's watching advertisements for luxury vehicles, and actually feeling a sense of loss as I never expected to be in a position to plunk down $75k for one....then suddenly realising to my surprise I didn't want to spend money that way.
 
We want what we have been taught to want..what has been offered....and it has been crap from an engineering and resource management standpoint.
 
candystripper
 
 

< Message edited by candystripper -- 8/12/2008 5:50:28 AM >

(in reply to Archer)
Profile   Post #: 31
RE: Ford shifting to smaller vehicles - 8/12/2008 7:25:49 AM   
Archer


Posts: 3207
Joined: 3/11/2005
Status: offline 		I agree to the point that it's a chicken/ egg thing.

Still if we don't buy the big trucks/ SUV's then they don't continue to make them. evidenced current retooling.
Still there are other policy and advertising items that impact what models get offered here.
The whole policy of the subsidized Huge SUV that at first only applied to 2 models I think and then everyone started to try to build a HUGE SUV that would qualify for the business subsidy.
Had the Government policy been to subsidize the Ford Escape Hybrid SUV then we would have had 5 or 6 models of SUV hybrids to choose from.



(in reply to candystripper)
Profile   Post #: 32
RE: Ford shifting to smaller vehicles - 8/12/2008 10:34:45 AM   
candystripper


Posts: 3486
Joined: 11/1/2005
Status: offline 		O, there is PLENTY of blame to go around.  Not all government safety standards have been a 'necessity'.  There was a time -- which I vaguely recall -- when no one had even heard of the seal belt, and cars were absolute tanks with teeny windows.  To my knowledge, maximum speed limits were the same, higher, or just not applicable. 
 
Suddenly the government decided that it was going to move towards an absolute zero tolerance of crash related deaths and injuries.  They COULD have just as easily -- even simultaneously -- said cars must get a minimum of 35 mpg/hwy.  That cars must be engineered to last 300,000 miles with a reasonable maximum maintenance cost.  That engineering could not exceed the skill set of the home repairman with a decent set of tools and some working knowledge of auto mechanics, which it could also have mandated be taught in schools to every kid.
 
Instead, the government choose only the Big Brother route, telling us we cannot drive without seat belts, we cannot drive while preggers, we cannot allow UMs into the front seats of cars, and on and on.  The single exception to all this was the delightful new tax known as the emissions check, which has had no measurable effect on air quality that I am aware of, but has rendered many an older vehicle in good running condition undrivable.
 
candystripper 
 
 

< Message edited by candystripper -- 8/12/2008 10:36:11 AM >

(in reply to Archer)
Profile   Post #: 33
RE: Ford shifting to smaller vehicles - 8/12/2008 11:39:09 AM   
popeye1250


Posts: 18104
Joined: 1/27/2006
From: New Hampshire
Status: offline 		I drive a 2006 Mercury Grand Marquis "LS" model that gets 19 mpg around town and close to 27 mpg on the highway at 65-70 mph.
It gets better highway milage than a lot of smaller cars with 6 cylinder engines because the engine (4.6 litre V-8) doesn't work as hard at high speeds.
I drive at 70 mph and look down at the tachometer and it's only at 1600 rpms!
A V-6 would be at 2000-2200 rpms and getting 23-24 mpg.
Also the Mercury is lower to the ground than a lot of those "smaller" vehicles and has a much lower coefficient of drag.


_____________________________

"But Your Honor, this is not a Jury of my Peers, these people are all decent, honest, law-abiding citizens!"

(in reply to candystripper)
Profile   Post #: 34
RE: Ford shifting to smaller vehicles - 8/12/2008 12:10:22 PM   
CarrieO


Posts: 2432
Joined: 1/27/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Raechard

The other problem with the whole big car vs small car situation was the road safety factor. With people buying huge protective environments because in endless tests it was deemed the size of the vehicles involved played a big part in who came off worst after an accident. So in the end it leads to people buying bigger and bigger cars to protect themselves; almost like going for a drive is actually like going to war.


this quote brought to mind my recent drive on the New York State Thruway. a Smart Car buzzing along minding it's own business when a couple of large trucks began to tailgate/pull along side of it. i love the idea behind smaller cars and will always lean towards them when looking to buy, but to watch this little car with the "big dogs" was cause for concern as to the outcome of an accident should one happen. 
imo, along with looking into making smaller cars, driving habits and highway size needs to be considered also. 

of course...it still annoys me to see the local yummy mummys driving downtown in their Hummers on their way to meet Buffy and Biff for lunch. the size issue comes into play there.....the larger the bank account, the bigger the vehicle tends to be. atleast in my area. 

trucks and suv's are here to stay and many need them for work and because of a large family. no problem there. i agree with the idea, though, of trying make some more economical models.

carrie 

< Message edited by CarrieO -- 8/12/2008 12:50:36 PM >

(in reply to Raechard)
Profile   Post #: 35
RE: Ford shifting to smaller vehicles - 8/12/2008 3:12:57 PM   
popeye1250


Posts: 18104
Joined: 1/27/2006
From: New Hampshire
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: candystripper

Christ onna cracker...I cannot believe how badly run the American auto industry is at every level.  The auto worker here still wants/needs/expects to get paid $40 an hour with beneies the rest of us can only dream of.  Whole cities are completely dependent on tax revenues from just one manufacturing plant.  Dealerships have never gotten the messsage that people do not want to be treated like sh*t while buying the second-most expensive purchase most will make.
 
They've all had at LEAST 40 years...since the gas crisis of the early 1970's...to get the message that oil is a limited resource and the consumer needs a reliable, gas efficient and relatively inexpensive car...and its f**king NEWS that in 2008, one of them is actually considering moving in that direction?
 
Add car manufacturers to the list of industries I despise.
 
candystripper


Candy, and what's wrong with making $40 an hour with good benefits? Or even $75 an hour with good benefits?
That's the problem in this country, there's not enough people making $40 an hour or more!
People who make $40 an hour buy houses, cars, appliances, insurance, investments, furniture and a lot of other things! That's very good for the economy!
People who make $15 per hour with shitty benefits don't buy much of anything beyond subsistance.
I'd like to see a LOT more people making $40 per hour with good benefits!

_____________________________

"But Your Honor, this is not a Jury of my Peers, these people are all decent, honest, law-abiding citizens!"

(in reply to candystripper)
Profile   Post #: 36
RE: Ford shifting to smaller vehicles - 8/12/2008 3:40:43 PM   
LaTigresse


Posts: 26123
Joined: 1/15/2006
Status: offline 		It is unfortunate that american greed is driving the american car industry into the ground.

It is also unfortunate that the american car industry has such a stellar history of making pieces of shit, especially their "economy class" models.

I will stick with my beautiful, trouble free, gas sipping, imports. (except for the truck that lives most of it's life parked in the garage until I need to haul horses, hay or garbage to the dump)

< Message edited by LaTigresse -- 8/12/2008 3:41:08 PM >

_____________________________

My twisted, self deprecating, sense of humour, finds alot to laugh about, in your lack of one!

Just because you are well educated, articulate, and can use big, fancy words, properly........does not mean you are right!

(in reply to Vendaval)
Profile   Post #: 37
RE: Ford shifting to smaller vehicles - 8/12/2008 8:07:00 PM   
Vendaval


Posts: 10297
Joined: 1/15/2005
Status: offline 		Fast reply -
 
If you wish to compare gas mileage with your current, former or soon to be new vehicle, check out this site -

http://www.mpgomatic.com/best_gas_mileage_car.html

_____________________________

"Beware, the woods at night, beware the lunar light.
So in this gray haze we'll be meating again, and on that
great day, I will tease you all the same."
"WOLF MOON", OCTOBER RUST, TYPE O NEGATIVE


http://KinkMeet.co.uk

(in reply to LaTigresse)
Profile   Post #: 38
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2]
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: Ford shifting to smaller vehicles Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.094