Economics 101. Split the development costs, more advantageous economies of scale, etc, etc. IE: it's cheaper to develop one engine and produce them at one factory at 1m units vs. 2 engines, 2 factories for the same # of units.

I love the prospects of this for all the reasons stated above. This also more advantageous for owners for reasons of service and parts availability and cost.

You already see this in other markets. Take for example the inboard boat market. The entire market is probably ~10-12k units per year. Each and every manufacturer uses the EXACT SAME 2-3 engines and yet owners of each have very specific reasons why they chose one over the other. Cost range is mid 30's to $100k so differentiation absolutely exists.

The bread and butter car owner doesn't know and more importantly doesn't care if the engine in their Malibu is basically the same as the engine in his neighbor's Focus.

 

Perhaps, but then maybe they just need to build the same car?

ie: Scrap Fusion and let Ford rebadge the Malibu?

You can take this to just about any extreme... to what point is it OK, and when does it cross the proverbial line?

 

Exactly and then some. Most people don't realize that a Toyota Matrix and Pontiac Vibe are the same car - much less the same powertrain.

If this makes Ford/GM More competitive against the competition, go for it. We need the two to stay alive right now more than anything.

 

Wait a year or so. The only Ford 3.5 on the market now is the same basic N/A non-DI unit that's been out for a year or so and it's a very comparable unit to the non-DI GM 3.6 so comparing it to the DI 3.6 is like apples and oranges. Direct-injection and turbocharged versions of the 3.5 are on the way and we'll probably see them next year. And Ford has said power-outputs will be as high as 340hp/350lb-ft tq to 415hp/400lb-ft tq depending on the application.

So i wouldn't write the Ford 3.5/3.7 Duratecs off yet based off the single base offering that's available today. There's more in store. The ecoboost program looks very promising.

 

Excellent post.


Developing a new engine from scratch - $1,000,000
Developing a new engine with help from a friend - $500,000
Getting some gearheads to understand a good business proposition - impossible

 

Corvettes with Mod motors would be an equal turnoff.

It might just be time to let go of the past and realize -- the only way we can ensure the survival of our favorite products is to make some new history.

 

An Ecoboost V6 Camaro sounds like it would be a winner.

 

Ecoboost engines (the upcoming V6 has LS3 horsepower with superior fuel economy).

More OHC experience than GM.

How to make engines (especially with forged internals) lighter and low cost (the V8 cammer engines are physically much larger than GM's LS engines, but weigh less than GM's LS engines).

BTW: GM's autos transmit power to the pavement better than Ford's, but Ford's auto trannies have proven to be more durable (at least in RWD applications).

 

All well and good, but that particular level of Ecoboost will be a very limited production, expensive motor I am guessing?

 

I'd not hedge that bet too hard. The new ZR1 is awesome, as-is the CTS-V, but don't think Ford is not sitting on some nasty hardware. Shelby is putting a warranty on 625hp, and offering an unwarratied 750 - that's not shabby. Ford shelved the new Lightning, Adrenalin, GR1, and the Daisy V10 Cobra for business reasons... not because hey didn't have nasty power to put in them, because they all had fully-functional drivetrains made from existing hardware. I'd rather think that Ford was more interested in shelving the toys to concentrate on saving their *** right now, and drag out the non-profitable stuff when the bottom line is green again. Jack Roush and Shelby are taking up making Ford's play-things while they are doing crisis-control. Maybe GM should have been doing the same - working on developing/selling 500,000 econo-cars instead of developing/selling 1500 ZR1's.

Tremec is an outside company that sells to anyone with cash - even to the public. They only do manual gearboxes, and both GM and Ford (and Chrysler) are buying manuals from them already. There is nobody developing new technology in automatics - so the OEM's are having to do it themselves. Also, automatics tend to need interface with the vehicle they are in - engine, throttle position, braking, etc., which makes them more OEM-dependent.
A manual is a much simpler piece to put on the shelf. Ford and GM have already done 1 automatic project together that was deemed successful by both - making this point moot anyway.


Is your opinion, and I respect it for that. Truth is, there are AOD and AODE trannys out there that are taking anything that can be thrown at them. I have an AODE in my '89 that has been thoroughly thrashed and thrown at 100's of rice burners, drag strips, and auto-X events. It's never been rebuilt and has 239,000 on it, and is doing just great; doesn't even weep from old seals!
If you won't take the AOD, I'll put the C4 or C6 up to task anyday.
Point is - they both made good ones AND bad ones.

The bigger point is - all that stuff above is all IN THE PAST!

WHAT CAN FORD BRING?
Ford is dominant in Europe - where small cars and mileage have been king for years now. They are cross-shopped with BMW and Mercedes in small-to-mid sized cars. They have a stellar engine program and have for years. They have had TDCi and TDi diesels for years now. They have great technology in DI gas engines as well. Ford's group in Australia also has a great engine program that is very separated from the US programs, and they have a lot of unique technology to bring to the party that we don't get to see here.
And as if that's not enough, who is leading in initial quality right now, Ford or GM?
Now don't get me wrong, I can start listing off some GREAT programs from GM-Powertrain that are stellar too. GM has a great foothold in China and they are doing great stuff there. Opel and Saab both bring their European technology to the table too. They have Holden in their back pocket, etc, so this is not a "bash-GM" post - not at all. Just making statements to stir thought.

Seems to me that if you take off your rose-colored glasses, you can see plenty or reasons why Ford and GM could come together for a successful JV.
You just need to understand that it is a "this-point-forward" type of project, not a "share what we already did" kind of thing. It also should be more concentrated on economic passenger cars than V8 sportscars, as that is where the market is heading en-masse right now, and that is where they need to grab market share.
Don't even think about discussing Camaro/Mustang stuff in this JV context for years to come.

 

Put it ALL together, and what do you get?

 

The 340 horse/340 lbs ft version is going to be powering next year's Ford Taurus ST, Lincoln MKS, and Fusion GT. Mustang's already locked in for 2010 MY, but it's likely to show up there in 2011 or 2012. Cutting to the chase regarding performance: this is the last year the Ford Motor Company will have any type of power shortage on all vehicles outside of Mustang. The new Focus will have an EcoBoost 4, so most all Fords will have a performance version based on the twin turbo, direct injection engine.

The Ecotec V6 is 150 pounds lighter than the 4.6, yet has more power and better fuel economy. The engines are putting out up to 450 horsepower, so there's plenty of potential for more. The early ones are being tuned down to 340 hp & torque although they are easily running 400.

Saying Ford doesn't have anything to offer in a GM-Ford collaberation on engine design, especially grounding that view solely on GM's LS engine (which is based on engineering done almost a decade and a half ago) isn't being very realistic. Sure, the LS engines are good engines, but they aren't flawless, ultra advanced, technological holy grails that could only be designed by aliens from highly advanced planets. Even "lowly" Chrysler has leaped over the LS engines with their "Hemi II".

Powerplants that will eat anything created overseas in both power, fuel economy, durability, and cost to manufacture.

 

The japanese and asian importer companies are in the lucrative "appliance" portion of the car market.

As long as Ford and GM keep the sharing to a narrow but lucrative area, I see no harm or foul. I also see it as a way for GM to keep many bright folks in their engineering development jobs. One of my biggest concerns has been attrition from GM engineering, which is a very important resource in the long run. If it helps keep Americans working and there is no loss of brand differentiation where it actually matters? Do it. No downside to getting bread and butter vehicle to market faster and at an expanded economy of scale.

This should generate a lot of in house meetings at Toyota and Renault/Nissan. This should have their forecasters very worried.

 

In today's economy, and the current state of the companies, it doesn't sound like a bad thing at all. I'm sure both companies could learn a lot from each other. The article does say "new engines and other powertrain technologies", so it can't be bad to see if the two automakers could come up with some new ideas/technologies that they may not have thought of on their own.

 

When an engine family costs over $1Billion to develop, sharing those costs as much as possible seems prudent. What's my guess? HCCI. They're both working on it, and they both need help perfecting it. 2 companies working on it at the same time could save 3-4 years in devleopment time.

Could they also work together on turbo's? Maybe.
Could GM be trying to get to Ford's coming DCT's? Possibly.
Are they both trying to bring the silver bullet to market years before the Japanese? Yes!

And what is this silver bullet? HCCI and its integration into FI and hybrid powertrains.

I might be wrong (def. not the first time), but this is where my bet would go at Ceasar's...