Ford to update cars every 3 years.

http://www.leftlanenews.com/ford-shortens-styling-cycle-flex-redesign-already-underway.html

I've been thinking this for years. If you want people to trade in for something new, you have to offer something new. I always hated when automakers put out a nice car and then left it to rot.

Seems like a good idea to me. :shrug:

I think that was standard practice among the Big 3 during the 50s and 60s. Sometimes they even got carried away and redesigned them more often. Check the GM lines from 57 to 58 to 59. The 58s were completely different from the 57s and the 59s were completely different from the 58s. If I remember the story correctly Virgil Exner, the design chief at Chrysler, developed such a radical new line of cars for 1957 that GM threw away the original design for their 59 model year and started all over again. :lol:

I have wondered why we haven't seen redesigns more often these days... technology in chassis design as well as just the design method itself in general using computers seems like it would allow for design cycles half what it was just 20 years ago. Maybe the manufacturers just haven't seen enough need for it. We do seem to have mid cycle refreshes on most cars at the 3 year old mark but nothing really significant usually happens then.

I have wondered why we haven't seen redesigns more often these days... technology in chassis design as well as just the design method itself in general using computers seems like it would allow for design cycles half what it was just 20 years ago. Maybe the manufacturers just haven't seen enough need for it. We do seem to have mid cycle refreshes on most cars at the 3 year old mark but nothing really significant usually happens then.

Because making parts for 50 cars costs a lot more than 10. They have to keep stock of them all.

I think that was standard practice among the Big 3 during the 50s and 60s. Sometimes they even got carried away and redesigned them more often. Check the GM lines from 57 to 58 to 59. The 58s were completely different from the 57s and the 59s were completely different from the 58s. If I remember the story correctly Virgil Exner, the design chief at Chrysler, developed such a radical new line of cars for 1957 that GM threw away the original design for their 59 model year and started all over again. :lol:

From 1964 to 1975, the Mustang changed EVERY YEAR.
You can tell each MY from 100-feet away if you know what to look for.
From 75-78 - no changes.
from 79-82 - no changes.
83, 84, 85, 86, and 87 all have body changes that are easily noticeable to the trained eye.
87-89 - no changes.
90-93 - no changes. (many have problems telling any diff between 87 and 93 but there are some diffs)
94-95 - no changes (OK - 2 pcs of trim, but even 90% of Mustang guys don't know it)
96-98 - no changes
99-04 - no changes

Anyone see a trend?

I personally think vehicles should go no more than 2 years in identical trim.

Another thing to note - sow and steady change is good - in almost every way. It facilitates continuous improvement, it keeps the unit "fresh", and it affords opportunity for the carmaker to enhance the line as it runs and ages. This was a philosophy of Japanese carmakers that helped lead them to profitability. The CVCC was the first great example - it was never really "redone" from it's initial launch, but went through numerous small changes and enhancements over time. It allowed them to fix problem areas, and maintain areas that were working well. Japanese makers to this day are not warm and fuzzy about complete platform changes or radical changes on a product in one big instance.

3 years... we'll see.

96-98 - no changes
Since we're getting very detailed here and you mentioned the minor changes in 94-95 that 90% of mustang guys don't know... 98 saw the removal of the dash mounted clock that was on the 96 and 97.:p

I personally think vehicles should go no more than 2 years in identical trim.
I agree... it seems to me that especially with the flexible platforms today that car manufacturers could make cars just a constantly evolving form... always being improved. Powertrain one year, transmission another year, body another year, chassis another year, etc... keep people talking about it. I don't see how it would create too many more parts out there though I guess it could make general knowledge of what parts belong to what year a little more tricky. Nothing a parts guy with a database in front of him wouldn't be able to handle.

Well the body itself 99-04 didn't change..but you CAN tell the difference in years based on certain parts.
Hoods and scoop size, spoilers, bumpers, badges, wheels etc.

The 2005-2009 has had even LESS changes...basically colours and wheels.

I think the thing that holds back the continuous improvement that we'd all like to see is the constant recertification required by the government. Powertrain certifications, crash testing, EPA fuel economy ratings, etc.

Horbury suggested the days of minor facelifts are over, saying recent research shows small updates have “no value,” while major changes have “huge value.”

I think this is true. How often have we seen a model "go stale" and then they do something minor and almost unnoticeable like change the grille? Just a big waste of money.

Since we're getting very detailed here and you mentioned the minor changes in 94-95 that 90% of mustang guys don't know... 98 saw the removal of the dash mounted clock that was on the 96 and 97.:p
Hard to see that from 100 feet away... and outside the car though, huh?!?! :lol:


I agree... it seems to me that especially with the flexible platforms today that car manufacturers could make cars just a constantly evolving form... always being improved. Powertrain one year, transmission another year, body another year, chassis another year, etc... keep people talking about it. I don't see how it would create too many more parts out there though I guess it could make general knowledge of what parts belong to what year a little more tricky. Nothing a parts guy with a database in front of him wouldn't be able to handle.
You just described the OPTIMUM situation. :bow:

There is more to this than the design cost though. Factories have to be adjusted, tools made, work with part vendors etc etc. I think you can make changes from year to year, but they are likely to be minor changes. I think 5 years is the max for a car these days before it gets major changes/redesign.