Ford. What are its short and long-term prospects?
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 669
From: Arcadia, OK
What's interesting is comparing mileage ratings for these two vehicles: Impala SS is rated 16/24; Taurus ratings (est) are 17/24. Where's the "eco" in ecoboost?
Consider, too, the Impala SS is using an "ancient" pushrod V8 and 4-speed auto. What do you suppose the cost comparison would be for these two drivetrains? Two to one?
Consider, too, the Impala SS is using an "ancient" pushrod V8 and 4-speed auto. What do you suppose the cost comparison would be for these two drivetrains? Two to one?
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,123
From: Melbourne, Australia
SSbaby, I think you have a very narrow window of what you consider excitement. A 13.9-14.0 104MPH 1/4 mile run of a ecoboost MKS is very impressive, this not a svt tuned or v line tuner. It is a very fast premium car that under cuts the price and outperforms most in it segment with top quality and features.
So yes I'm excited about Fords, because from top to bottom there cars and trucks are very competitive with anybody out there, including GM.
So yes I'm excited about Fords, because from top to bottom there cars and trucks are very competitive with anybody out there, including GM.
My point is basically this...where exactly will the MKS vehicle find favor with prospective customers? It's way too heavy for the Ecoboost V6 to give any sort of reasonable economy and the AWD system just doesn't do the car any favors. Is it a luxury car? If so, would you consider something else in its price range and is the alternative better?
I recall the same concerns being raised about the Taurus SHO. It's too heavy, too expensive and probably just the wrong vehicle at the wrong time. So where exactly are Ford hitting the mark with their products?
Maybe I am too narrow focused in my thought train... but I'm thinking more like a prospective buyer, and not just focusing on the notion that the vehicle is good for a Ford.
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 4,600
From: Pewee Valley, KY
SSbaby, I don't think these are mass market cars. Where Ford is gaining traction have been products like the Fusion, Taurus, and F150. All are selling strong. Their CUVs are holding down the fort as well. The Festia will be a ground breaker for Ford, and quickly followed up by the new global Focus the following year.
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 4,306
From: Jersey Shore
SHO = 40k
Impala SS = 30k
Yeaaaaaaaaah....and to make matters worse
G8 GT making more power then the SHO with about the same gas milage...30k as well.
SHO is a great car...but fourty thousand dollars...
Impala SS = 30k
Yeaaaaaaaaah....and to make matters worse
G8 GT making more power then the SHO with about the same gas milage...30k as well.
SHO is a great car...but fourty thousand dollars...
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 3,698
From: USA
I don't think the Impala will see anywhere near it's rated numbers. I had a Grand Prix GXP and it struggled to stay above 14mpg mixed. I once took it to the dealer because I was concerned at to why it was getting such bad milage.
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,178
From: Payson, AZ USA
Don't get me wrong, I'm not criticizing its performance. I'm just questioning where Ford are smacking their competitors with stunning product?
My point is basically this...where exactly will the MKS vehicle find favor with prospective customers? It's way too heavy for the Ecoboost V6 to give any sort of reasonable economy and the AWD system just doesn't do the car any favors. Is it a luxury car? If so, would you consider something else in its price range and is the alternative better?
I recall the same concerns being raised about the Taurus SHO. It's too heavy, too expensive and probably just the wrong vehicle at the wrong time. So where exactly are Ford hitting the mark with their products?
Maybe I am too narrow focused in my thought train... but I'm thinking more like a prospective buyer, and not just focusing on the notion that the vehicle is good for a Ford.
My point is basically this...where exactly will the MKS vehicle find favor with prospective customers? It's way too heavy for the Ecoboost V6 to give any sort of reasonable economy and the AWD system just doesn't do the car any favors. Is it a luxury car? If so, would you consider something else in its price range and is the alternative better?
I recall the same concerns being raised about the Taurus SHO. It's too heavy, too expensive and probably just the wrong vehicle at the wrong time. So where exactly are Ford hitting the mark with their products?
Maybe I am too narrow focused in my thought train... but I'm thinking more like a prospective buyer, and not just focusing on the notion that the vehicle is good for a Ford.
I guess we will have to wait and see, won't we.
There are many reasons why the SHO is "relatively" expensive. The features that it offers are more "luxury" than mainstream, as is the whole car. However, if you don't "get" the SHO, then you probably didn't get the original one either. They are priced almost exactly the same (adjusted for inflation, they are within a few hundred dollars of each other).
I get the SHO................ and will buy one.
The SHO mileage vs the Malibu SS, is rather stunning, in my view. You get 60 more hp, AWD, NO TORQUE STEER, and a ton more weight (and features)................. for no mileage penalty. Damn, I think thats great.
I truly cannot see anyone shopping the two against each other. The Impala SS is the epitome of blandness, inside and out. The reason it sells, is you can get them for CHEAP. I just don't find cheap to be a desirable feature.
Remember, SS, that you see Ford through jaded eyes. There is nothing that Ford makes, that you do not think that GM does better. Thus, you have a hard time seeing anyone else as thinking any differently than you do. Ford has been increasing marketshare for 6 of the last 7 months.............. so some, obviously, think differently than you do.
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,123
From: Melbourne, Australia
You are extrapolating your "opinion" on what is a good product that will appeal to the market, to all people.
I guess we will have to wait and see, won't we.
There are many reasons why the SHO is "relatively" expensive. The features that it offers are more "luxury" than mainstream, as is the whole car. However, if you don't "get" the SHO, then you probably didn't get the original one either. They are priced almost exactly the same (adjusted for inflation, they are within a few hundred dollars of each other).
I get the SHO................ and will buy one.
The SHO mileage vs the Malibu SS, is rather stunning, in my view. You get 60 more hp, AWD, NO TORQUE STEER, and a ton more weight (and features)................. for no mileage penalty. Damn, I think thats great.
I truly cannot see anyone shopping the two against each other. The Impala SS is the epitome of blandness, inside and out. The reason it sells, is you can get them for CHEAP. I just don't find cheap to be a desirable feature.
Remember, SS, that you see Ford through jaded eyes. There is nothing that Ford makes, that you do not think that GM does better. Thus, you have a hard time seeing anyone else as thinking any differently than you do. Ford has been increasing marketshare for 6 of the last 7 months.............. so some, obviously, think differently than you do.
I guess we will have to wait and see, won't we.
There are many reasons why the SHO is "relatively" expensive. The features that it offers are more "luxury" than mainstream, as is the whole car. However, if you don't "get" the SHO, then you probably didn't get the original one either. They are priced almost exactly the same (adjusted for inflation, they are within a few hundred dollars of each other).
I get the SHO................ and will buy one.
The SHO mileage vs the Malibu SS, is rather stunning, in my view. You get 60 more hp, AWD, NO TORQUE STEER, and a ton more weight (and features)................. for no mileage penalty. Damn, I think thats great.
I truly cannot see anyone shopping the two against each other. The Impala SS is the epitome of blandness, inside and out. The reason it sells, is you can get them for CHEAP. I just don't find cheap to be a desirable feature.
Remember, SS, that you see Ford through jaded eyes. There is nothing that Ford makes, that you do not think that GM does better. Thus, you have a hard time seeing anyone else as thinking any differently than you do. Ford has been increasing marketshare for 6 of the last 7 months.............. so some, obviously, think differently than you do.
Statistics can make any ordinary entity look better than it really is. Six of the last 7 months and Ford is still trailing GM by 30% in overall sales.
Now that that's outta the way... how's this scenario?
The prospect of a G.M. effectively owned by the government raises a number of thorny questions. Countless policy decisions — on matters such as fuel economy standards, tax incentives to replace aging cars and green technology initiatives — will present conflicting interests.
For example, with $30 billion invested in G.M. and Chrysler thus far, would the government tip the scales in favor of those companies when buying vehicles for its fleets? Will Ford find itself at a disadvantage, since it has turned down federal money?
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/27/bu....html?_r=1&hpw
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 1,214
From: City of Champions, MA, USA
It won't mean squat for GM if they don't have good/great vehicles to back it up, and change the perception of the public.
Whether it's true or not, the perception will still be 'Ford didn't take a hand out, GM/Chrysler did'
No different than 'Toyota has ultra high quality compared to anything NA'
It's all perception
Whether it's true or not, the perception will still be 'Ford didn't take a hand out, GM/Chrysler did'
No different than 'Toyota has ultra high quality compared to anything NA'
It's all perception
GM/Chrysler will be fine, the attention span of the American people is so short. Plus they all will think that since the big O is running them they have to be perfect.
Registered User
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 2,043
From: Shelbyville, IN
I'm a die hard GM fan, but the fact that Ford had enough foresight coupled with maybe a little luck to avoid the disaster that GM and Chrysler are currently in really improves my perception of the Ford Motor Company. I will consider their cars in the future where before I would only look at Chevrolet.
Now, if GM doesn't get out from under the governments wing in the next few years; I will NOT be buying a new GM vehicle. I have always liked the new Mustang and could easily see myself driving one.
Now, if GM doesn't get out from under the governments wing in the next few years; I will NOT be buying a new GM vehicle. I have always liked the new Mustang and could easily see myself driving one.
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 10,285
From: Albany, NY
SHO is expected to be 25mpg hwy. So it puts out ~60 more HP than the Impala yet gets 1mpg more city and hwy all while having AWD and a heavier curb weight. The regular Taurus AWD is rated 17/24. The eco is getting better mileage while you poor on the boost.
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 669
From: Arcadia, OK
Perhaps I should have said "old tech" instead. My point was the relatively low-tech Impala SS pretty much matches the new, high-tech, "eco" Taurus in performance and efficiency. Explain to me again how this twin-turbo V6 is less expensive/more efficient/more powerful than modern V8 in any significant way? I have no problem selling a twin-turbo V6 for performance, but Ford changed the name to make it sound more "green" and that stuff just smacks of hyperbole. Add DI to 5.3 V8/6-speed auto and I would bet money it would be at least as powerful, less expensive and more efficient.