QUOTE]Originally posted by formula79
[B]
.....You say that Ford is getting a bad rap over recalls..well lets see what are their cars becoming known for...

Focus= bout 10 recalls now...pretty much its repution is destoryed..which is a same..bet american small car ever[B][/QUOTE]

Caused by Ford USA skimping on cost & engineers. They felt since the Euro Focus was so well made, they didn't need as many engineers for Focus' assembly line start up. Of course, Ford USA accountants had a hand in this.


Caused by Ford USAs beancounters again. In order to make these cheap tires work on an Explorer & keep ride quality, they reccomended inflation that was lower than Firestone designed them for. This was instead of simply springing for a better quality tire.

That's what happens when you use a 25 year old chassis that complies with all safety standards of 1978 (Fox's 1st debut on Fairmont & Zephyr). In all fairness, that plastic cover you see on Mustang's fuel tank pretty much cured that. It still complies with current US standards.

Caprices had their fuel tank way out back, and although Crown Vics haven't changed much back aft since 1979, why are we hearing about this now? Besides, what would happen if we were rearended in our Camaro at 70-100 mph??

Again, beacounters! Someone (who obviously was clueless, yet influencial) got the idea that they could save 52 cents per car by not covering the battery terminals even though the battery is in the trunk and that metal is sitting right on it.

[I]Only the V8 models (the V6s have a bulletproff reputation). Again, pennypinching accountants decided to save money by pressing on the timing chain gear to the camshaft instead of welding it on or securing it the way the V6 SHO engines were.[I]


99% Of all Ford's problems are because of insane pennypinching at the cost of engineering. It's pretty ironic that the 85 & all the 93 Mustangs I had, and that 89 bird were mechanically excellent rides & were very well made, yet Ford of the 90s & currently have ruined their reputation badly.

Glad I jumpped ship when I did.

 

Mine wasn't directed solely at you either, ProudPony... to the contrary, I enjoy your mostly (obviously you are a Ford fan) objective view from the 'other' side... Just as I try (as much as possible being a GM guy) to look at things objectively... RE5.0 and I often have differing views, but I respect his views as well, and he often makes great points.

IMO, and I have stated it many times, GM & Ford are generally in line as far as quality goes, but, Ford in the last few years seems to be having more major problems than anyone else... The only major issue I can think of in recent times with GM is the TrailBlazer/Envoy/Bravada problems right after launch with the suspension... still inexcusable, but that is only 1 case...

As a GM guy, I am very jealous of the Ford Guys right now, because, hey, you still have your car (Mustang)... us Camaro and Firebird guys are out in the cold right now...

GM has done some specialty motors in the recent past too though (again, Turbo T/A, LT5, LT4, LS6, etc...)

 

Caused by Ford USA skimping on cost & engineers. They felt since the Euro Focus was so well made, they didn't need as many engineers for Focus' assembly line start up. Of course, Ford USA accountants had a hand in this.




Caused by Ford USAs beancounters again. In order to make these cheap tires work on an Explorer & keep ride quality, they reccomended inflation that was lower than Firestone designed them for. This was instead of simply springing for a better quality tire.



That's what happens when you use a 25 year old chassis that complies with all safety standards of 1978 (Fox's 1st debut on Fairmont & Zephyr). In all fairness, that plastic cover you see on Mustang's fuel tank pretty much cured that. It still complies with current US standards.



Caprices had their fuel tank way out back, and although Crown Vics haven't changed much back aft since 1979, why are we hearing about this now? Besides, what would happen if we were rearended in our Camaro at 70-100 mph??



Again, beacounters! Someone (who obviously was clueless, yet influencial) got the idea that they could save 52 cents per car by not covering the battery terminals even though the battery is in the trunk and that metal is sitting right on it.



[I]Only the V8 models (the V6s have a bulletproff reputation). Again, pennypinching accountants decided to save money by pressing on the timing chain gear to the camshaft instead of welding it on or securing it the way the V6 SHO engines were.[I]


99% Of all Ford's problems are because of insane pennypinching at the cost of engineering. It's pretty ironic that the 85 & all the 93 Mustangs I had, and that 89 bird were mechanically excellent rides & were very well made, yet Ford of the 90s & currently have ruined their reputation badly.

Glad I jumpped ship when I did. [/QUOTE] '

You make excuses...all i am saying is I don't care if Henry Ford his decayed self raised from the grade and was to blame. Ford has a serious issue with the public in terms of image as far as making a quality product. I don't cars whats wrong the comapany has to fix it to survive.

Say you were having a heart attack....would you cut a finger off. Would you blame the finger and keep going on till you bleed to death or would you fix the bleeding?

IMO Ford spend to much time blaming it's body parts from bleeding and not enough time stopping the bleeding.

 

Branden, I can't disagree with you here. You have valid points. All I can say is that I don't think Ford is making mistakes, in actual production or in the media intentionally. To some degree, every car launch has a certain amount of luck involved. Look at NASCAR racing as an example... Earnhardt Jr may have one of the best teams out there, and he will win several races this year, but there are just some occasions when things go wrong and it's nobody's fault - like a valve spring goes bad or a rear axle snaps. Ford may have done everything right that they could, but this problem still developed despite those best efforts. To paraphrase, sometimes "Sh1+ happens".

My rise in defense this time is just because everyone got into a major bash-Ford mode because production was halted on this one, special, limited edition car. CHRIST, we don't even know why!!! What if the cause was dash assemblies from an outside vendor that had mis-matched colors for crying out loud! Or maybe the Cobra monogram stitching in the seats was bleeding dye onto the leather? WHO KNOWS!?!? For $35k, I wouldn't be happy with either of those problems, and I'd sooner let the factory fix it before I got the car, than have a dealer-jockey joy-riding in my car while I think it's getting new upholstery installed.

Lastly - I don't recall this whole thing being an issue that Ford intentionally went public with, as they would in a recall situation. I think BON "leaked" it first, and it went goofy from there. If the news had never gotten out, and the problems are definitely fixed, and all production concludes on schedule - what was the harm? Again, you are right - the media sensationalizes EVERYTHING nowadays, justified or not, but that doesn't make it the right thing to do.


As far as this goes, I think I have to disagree. The reputation of the Explorer has not been that greatly tarnished after all the press coverage. I own 2 Explorers, and I did get some settlement on one of mine due to the tire issue. I have all the letters and correspondence that Ford sent out to Explorer owners about that issue, and they are nothing less than honest. Ford kept the owners abreast of all issues as the case went along - good and bad. They offered everyone peace of mind through settlement, tire replacement, inspections, WHATEVER THEY WANTED. You would have to have been an owner and gotten the correspondence to beleive how they handled it. VERY PROFESSIONAL, to say the least. If you don't beleive me about the reputation thing, go look at the sales numbers for the Explorer this year. Many thought the new Trailblazer would outsell the Explorer after last years' fiasco, but what really happened?

Same thing goes for the Crown Vics. The average public buyer knows that Cops abuse cars, drive them in a risky manner, and sometimes push them to their limits. Like guionM posted - the car has been deemed safe by several external sources besides Ford. How many cars out there do you think ARE 100% SAFE in a 70+ mph rear end collision? Crown Vic sales are just as strong now as they were before all this media hype. It appears that sometimes the average consumer has more sense than the media does.

So the Focus has had 8 recalls, it has still sold how many thousands of units? And how many mags are giving it all bad reviews? Some people are just happy to have the dealer wash and detail their car free of charge and don't care about the recall itself. I wouldn't be one of them, and I think it is still a bad thing to have a recall at all, but if the buyer is happy - the game is won.

I guess my point is that sometimes people only see what they want to see. If all you want to see is the bad in a company, then you can overplay every little negative thing to make that happen. If you want to see the positive, you can downplay every little bad thing and dwell on the good, etc.

If you play the game from a neutral position, you will learn that it really is tit-for-tat...
You say Pinto - I say Vega
You say Fairmont - I say Corvair
You say Crown Vic tank - I say C-series/S-series tank
You say Explorer - I say Trailblazer
You say Mustang tank - I say J-car ignition (BTW, at least the Mustang had to be hit hard in the **** to catch fire - the J-car ignition got it's fame from some housefires that killed FAMILIES. The ignition did not have to be actuated to cause the short - it has a hot lead all the time, and they were shorting and catching fire in peoples' garages and apartment building lots while the car was unattended.)

Anyways, you see my point.
Maybe we feel right now like the pot is calling the kettle black. I see your main point, and don't disagree, but to carry this little thing with the Cobra accross all Ford lines and models and to relate it to a problem like the Crown Vic tank or Explorer case is sensationalistic and really kind of tasteless from a real "car-loving" guy - especially when we don't even know what the problem really was. That's all I'm saying.

 

No excuses offered. Beancounters get their orders from somewhere, and/or someone has to weigh cost cutting against building quality cars. Most every single problem I've read about Ford & their recalls are based on someone pinching a penny way too hard & no one keeping them in check.

The finger analogy in this instance isn't accurate. A better one would be the guy who has a new car, but skimps on car maintence and begins to see the results of that. He not only has to change that mentality of skimpping, he now has a bigger repair bill & perhaps a voided warranty. Something a few extra dollars a month could have prevented.

Ford's NOT going to bleed to death over what's happening today. Ford was in far far worse condition in the early 80s (I'm sure alot of the older guys remember this). If it wasn't for Don Peterson Ford would haven't lived to 1990. Chrysler was actually making more money & doing better than them (thanks to all those K-car derivitives).

Ford still has strong sales, and many models sales have increased. Despite it's recalls, Thunderbird is still sold out for the next 6 months, Focus is still selling at near capacity, Explorers still are the best selling vehicle in it's class, and all of Ford's financial losses can be traced to only 2 sources (the fire sale of it's european service garage chain, and the problems & delays developing Jaguar's XJ replacement's alumunum body & chassis).

IMHO, if Ford can take the massive & numerous hits it's taken the past few years & still make a profit & sell more cars, I would hardly say they are having something serious as a heart attack.

A migrane headache or a case of the runs, but not a heart attack.

 

This article says everything i need to say about the Focus. It isn;t selling great..sales are projected to be down 100,000 units over it's first year despite 0% finnancing.

The fact that cavalier is actually outselling it which is simply frigging unbeliveable and an emabrassment to Ford considering how dated the J-body is. Also the Focus doesn't ahve a competitor with in it's company like the Cavalier does with teh Sunfire.

Also to have sales increase with 0% financing isn't as telling as it should be with 0% financing and all..what is really this issue is the huge decline in Focus sales.
Here is just an excript..

Quote:

Recalls, investigations pile up
For all of Ford's efforts, the bad news keeps coming in waves. So far this year, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has opened six separate investigations of the Focus.
"We don't keep records, but no one here can remember any other model with a similar number of safety investigations," said Tim Hurd, a NHTSA spokesman.
In the past few weeks, three of the investigations -- those involving a collapsing front suspension, air bags that reportedly burn vehicle occupants, and reports of sudden vehicle stalling -- have been upgraded to engineering analyses, often a precursor to safety recalls.
Earlier this year, the agency upgraded an investigation into reports of engine compartment fires. The flurry of safety investigations has led to more bad publicity. In April, USA Today ran a large headline over a review of the Focus. It read: "So nimble, so useful, but can Focus be trusted?"
In June, in their widely distributed "Car Talk" newspaper column, Tom and Ray Magliozzi echoed the sentiment.
"It's too bad, because the Focus is a very nice car to drive. But with fires, air bags deploying and wheels falling off, it's not a car we can endorse right now."
The concerns are affecting Focus sales. Through September, Ford sold 189,285 Focus models, down 5.2 percent from the same period a year earlier.
The Focus has been outsold so far this year by the Chevrolet Cavalier, a pedestrian economy box that hasn't been updated in eight years.
Ford has set a goal of selling 280,000 Focuses a year going forward. This year, Ford will sell a projected 240,000 Focuses, far short of its original sales goal of 360,000 units.

 

They aren't making a profit..they lost 5 billion last year...and they claim to have made a profit this time around..but that is just a matter of manipulating profits...

[URL=http://media.ford.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=13522&make_id=trust]FORD's OCTOBER SALES REPORT

Lotta nagtive signs on that report.

As far as sales goes..all of Ford's core brands are having double digit percentage decreases in sales. Ford down 10%, Mercury down 16% and Lincoln down almost 8%. Only Jaguar and Rand Rover have gained sales.

People complain about GM's car line being out dated...look at Fords car sales.

Every Ford car (cept the T-bird) is off 10%+

Even their core truck market has losses.

 

http://money.cnn.com/2002/09/04/news...ies/autosales/
"Ford (F: up $0.06 to $11.00, Research, Estimates), the world's No. 2 automaker, posted a 12.1 percent gain to sell 365,406 cars and light trucks, a record for August and the best sales month so far this year. The company sold 325,943 U.S. vehicles in August 2001. The company saw a 15 percent gain in car models and a 10.3 percent rise in the sale of light trucks. All of Ford's brands except Volvo posted a sales gain in the month."

http://www.jsonline.com/wheels/peak/...os04120301.asp
"Meanwhile, Ford reported its U.S. sales in November rose by 5% over November 2000, but year-to-date sales still are 6.6% below those for the first 11 months of last year."

http://www.business-journal.com/Late...Septsales.html
"Lincoln sales were 38% higher than a year ago. Sales for the redesigned 2003 model Lincoln Town Car were up 26%, sales for the all-new Lincoln Navigator were up 27%, and sales for the Lincoln LS were 68% higher than a year ago."..."Ford Focus also set a new September record as sales climbed seven% to 25,249. The previous record (24,755) was set in 1999."..."Mercury's September sales were 18,554, down 25% from a year ago. Lower sales to fleet customers accounted for most of the decline."

http://biz.yahoo.com/rf/021001/autos_ford_table_1.html

Ford may be down, but they are far from out.

Now stop it, you are makeing me sound like a Ford enthusiast.

 

BTW, remember Ford is competing with a "we'll-pay-you-to-buy-our-cars" GM.

 

That's compared to last Octobers sales numbers which looked like a very big month for Ford. I think they used the word "Sales Record" too which would indicate a huge record setting October month. That October broke a 24 year sales record. So that was by far not an average month for Ford. Look at the 2000 Ford sales. 2001 October sales were 34% more then October 2000 sales, 2002 saw a drop in 31% compared to October of 2001. Compared to October 2000 sales, sales for October 2002 would be up 3%. So it doesn't look like Sales are doing any worse then 2 years ago.

Plus, very few companies saw an increase over last October sales so it's not Ford only that saw a drop.

 

Only 12 people have died in these alleged 'defective' Crown Vic. fires. Since they have made over 200,000 of these cars every year for nearly 15 years, I'd call that a pretty good record. Quick, lets rear end other cars at 70+ mph and see how safe they are!

BTW, the gas tank is not directly behind the bumper. It is behind the rear axle, but it is at least 2 feet from the bumper, maybe even 3. Take a look next time you catch a cab.

 

I think you're missing the point that Ford went through the fuel tank issue before - remember the Pinto? Also, you should take note that the Crown Vic (Panther platform cars) and Mustang (Fox platform) are the only current domestic passenger cars with a fuel tank behind the rear axle. The fuel tank placement issue should have dealt with years ago, something which every other manufacturer has done. The Chevrolet Caprice (B-body) was the last domestic GM product to have a behind-the rear axle tank, and as you know, that car has been gone since 1996!

Manufacturers should have learned that the cost of rectifying safety issues is FAR CHEAPER than settling lawsuits. Even if only 12 individuals have died as a concequence of this design, something I can neither confirm nor deny, that still represents incalculable liability.

It makes me sad that Ford didn't learn its lesson from the fuel tank issue in the Pinto. What's worse, Ford experienced safety issues with Firestone 500 tires back in the 1970's - the Wilderness A/T scandal with Explorer was just history repeating itself.

That said, there is probably nothing inherently unsafe about any Mustang, Crown Vic or any Explorer. I wouldn't be "afraid" to own any of these cars. There again, I probably wouldn't have lived in dread fear of a Pinto with Firestone 500 tires. It's just too bad Ford didn't concentrate on making it vehicles beyond all reproach in terms of safety.

 

Damn - and I was just heading out the door to buy one..........

 

You'll like this, i know i did. GM sales were down 32% for October. Not off from Fords 34%. Bet i wouldn't hear you mentioning this.
http://www.auto.com/reuters/2002-11-...Z_01_N0119.htm

As for core trucks, the Silverado CK Series were down 9.5% for the year or the same as the F-series. Look into my "20 best selling vehicles list" topic for the % and how they rank. Despite Sales Drop, Ford as a brand still sells more F-series, Rangers, Taurus, Focus's, mustangs, and Explorers then chevy does Silverado/Ck series, Sanoma's, Impalas, Cavaliers, camaro's, and Trailblazers. I wouldn't be surprised to see the Windstar and E-series vans outselling their chevy counterparts either. Ford as a brand sells more of their core cars EVEN with the sales drops. Hmmmm

 

GM has more brands...

Ford doen't even have a competitor to the Grand Am, Alero, and Malibu which sell almost 450,000 copies a year. The only way it works is unless you put them in the same class as the Taurus/Sable which is pushing it. The Crappalier and ****fire outsell the Focus. The Le Sabre, Bonneville, and Auroua are neck and neck with the Crown Vic and Grand Marquis, and if you add the Impala which is rated in the same class it is stomped. The Le Sabre on it's own out sells either the Crown Vic or Grandpa Marquis.

You look at the bottom line and GM sells more cars and is gaining market share.

What happens to the Ranger's sales lead next year when the new Colorado and Canyon come out. They both will be ages above the ancient Ranger.

The Taurus becomes more out dated by the minute, and Ford really doesnt have a solution. The 500 is planed to be more what the Avalon is to the Camry, then a Camry competitor.

The Mustang though all new..I have to belive they will run nowhere near the profit margins they currently do on a 23 y chassis that paid for itself when Reagan was in office.

The Crown Vic and Grand Marquis may be in serious trouble if GM goes ahead with the SS concept also