Ford Explorer!

[2o6]

LOL - Raptor as an alternate to an Explorer? Perhaps Ford would have been better off forgetting about wasting money on a vehicle that virtually no one will buy and in turn sped up development of critical product that is WAY past due - Ranger, Mustang, Fusion, Focus, etc.

Focus - This fall.

Mustang - It's fine, I don't care that you feel the Live axle setup is inferior, it's just fine.

Ranger - In development. Mules have been spotted running around.

Fusion - Still very competitive. It's a moot point; will be replaced by Mondeo soon.

[goldenlover1101]

Focus - This fall.

Mustang - It's fine, I don't care that you feel the Live axle setup is inferior, it's just fine.

Ranger - In development. Mules have been spotted running around.

Fusion - Still very competitive. It's a moot point; will be replaced by Mondeo soon.

I have to agree with most of these points. The Mustang is fine and has always had extremely long product cycles and frequent updates and special editions. The Focus is relatively new and will be due for a refresh soon but is very competitive in its class. The Ranger = Old as dirt, desperately needs a refresh but I think is low on the priority list. Focus, well the Focus line really bothers me. Why they didn't converge the Euro and US Focus a  long time ago and let the US Focus whither and die is beyond me. It was a great competitive car when first arriving on the scene (I owned a 2001 ZX3 and loved it) and then they ignored it to the point of irrelevance. This is what bothers me about Ford

[2o6]

I have to agree with most of these points. The Mustang is fine and has always had extremely long product cycles and frequent updates and special editions. The Focus is relatively new and will be due for a refresh soon but is very competitive in its class. The Ranger = Old as dirt, desperately needs a refresh but I think is low on the priority list. Focus, well the Focus line really bothers me. Why they didn't converge the Euro and US Focus a  long time ago and let the US Focus whither and die is beyond me. It was a great competitive car when first arriving on the scene (I owned a 2001 ZX3 and loved it) and then they ignored it to the point of irrelevance. This is what bothers me about Ford

It doesn't matter. The new "world" Focus is coming this fall.

[Atomic]

i like the side view best of all. not too crazy about the front and rear. the interior is awesome! the entire design will grow on me, i think. there will be a lincoln version in time, eh?

[Tave]

As to FWD or FWD-biased 4WD? Meh - virtually no one off-roads or tows with these types of vehicles and when they do it's small (3,500 lbs or less) which is well within the limits of such vehicles, even "large" ones such as the GM Lambdas, Pilot, CX-9, etc.

No one uses Explorers for off roading. At least, not many of the current Explorer buyers.

Then they have, can, and will buy crossovers. That's what they're there for. All this does is position the Explorer to cannibalize Edge sales.

[GoCougs]

Focus - This fall.

Mustang - It's fine, I don't care that you feel the Live axle setup is inferior, it's just fine.

Ranger - In development. Mules have been spotted running around.

Fusion - Still very competitive. It's a moot point; will be replaced by Mondeo soon.

Sorry, but this is an AWFUL post. What is happening NOW is relevant only in that is should have happened IN THE PAST.

By spending development $$$ on financially irrelevant endeavors like the GT and Raptor Ford sucked away (= slowed) development efforts of core marques like the Ranger, Taurus, Focus, Fusion, and Mustang, ALL of which are past they 5-year model development cycle needed to stay competitive.

[MX793]

Your cars are also older.  The current Focus has one gigantic stalk, as does every other current Ford vehicle.  This is the first to break that mold in several years.

Euro market Fords like the Contour/Mondeo and MkI Focus that weren't heavily Americanized kept the 2-stalk setup (since that's what is used in most imports that I've been in) while American market cars (like the current US Focus and most other Fords) use the single stalk.

[CJ]

Sorry, but this is an AWFUL post. What is happening NOW is relevant only in that is should have happened IN THE PAST.

By spending development $$$ on financially irrelevant endeavors like the GT and Raptor Ford sucked away (= slowed) development efforts of core marques like the Ranger, Taurus, Focus, Fusion, and Mustang, ALL of which are past they 5-year model development cycle needed to stay competitive.

The Ranger, Focus, and Fusion do need updating.  The Mustang was just updated, and the Taurus was just completely redone.  The Mustang, though it has a solid rear axle, handles absolutely brilliantly and rides very well.  While IRS would be pretty cool, it's not necessary.  The Taurus has a very nice interior with good looks and a positively massive trunk.

[Catman]

The Ranger, Focus, and Fusion do need updating.  The Mustang was just updated, and the Taurus was just completely redone.  The Mustang, though it has a solid rear axle, handles absolutely brilliantly and rides very well.  While IRS would be pretty cool, it's not necessary.  The Taurus has a very nice interior with good looks and a positively massive trunk.

Yeah, not sure what he is saying.  How many Fusions are being sold?

[MX793]

The Ranger, Focus, and Fusion do need updating.  The Mustang was just updated, and the Taurus was just completely redone.  The Mustang, though it has a solid rear axle, handles absolutely brilliantly and rides very well.  While IRS would be pretty cool, it's not necessary.  The Taurus has a very nice interior with good looks and a positively massive trunk.

Fusion saw a fairly significant facelift (plus powertrain upgrades) last year.

And performance cars like the Mustang rarely see ground-up redesigns every 5 years like mainstream vehicles.  8-10 years with a substantial facelift somewhere in the middle is much more typical.

[GoCougs]

The Ranger, Focus, and Fusion do need updating.  The Mustang was just updated, and the Taurus was just completely redone.  The Mustang, though it has a solid rear axle, handles absolutely brilliantly and rides very well.  While IRS would be pretty cool, it's not necessary.  The Taurus has a very nice interior with good looks and a positively massive trunk.

Not updating, replacement. Japan came to own Detroit because it had many of its core vehicles on 5-6 year model cycles. Detroit STILL isn't there, with Ford being the worst offender.

[2o6]

Not updating, replacement. Japan came to own Detroit because it had many of its core vehicles on 5-6 year model cycles. Detroit STILL isn't there, with Ford being the worst offender.

So, you're condemning them for decisions that were made in the past and don't really have anything to do with the now?


Ford is doing great, and honestly, is doing the best out of the domestics.

[Catman]

So, you're condemning them for decisions that were made in the past and don't really have anything to do with the now?


Ford is doing great, and honestly, is doing the best out of the domestics.

[goldenlover1101]

FOrd is doing well but it can't fall into the bad habits of the past. Mainstream products like the focus, taurus, edge, etc need to be on a 5-6 year product cycle. There is no excuse for them letting their mainstream products whither and die in the past. If they do it again their newfound success will be short lived.

[GoCougs]

So, you're condemning them for decisions that were made in the past and don't really have anything to do with the now?


Ford is doing great, and honestly, is doing the best out of the domestics.

Uh, Ford's mistakes of the past explain its current position of having too many models that are simply too old, which is a duplicate of the sin committed in the '80s/early '90s when the Taurus, Ranger and Escort were ALL sales leaders in their segments but were left to languish for years and years, ultimately becoming most irrelevant or defunct, and helping Ford into the unenviable position of having one of the largest debts of any company EVER.

[TBR]

Not updating, replacement. Japan came to own Detroit because it had many of its core vehicles on 5-6 year model cycles. Detroit STILL isn't there, with Ford being the worst offender.

Actually, I think with the Fusion Ford is clearly implementing the Toyota/Honda strategy of gradual improvement rather than large leap forwards.

[ifcar]

Uh, Ford's mistakes of the past explain its current position of having too many models that are simply too old, which is a duplicate of the sin committed in the '80s/early '90s when the Taurus, Ranger and Escort were ALL sales leaders in their segments but were left to languish for years and years, ultimately becoming most irrelevant or defunct, and helping Ford into the unenviable position of having one of the largest debts of any company EVER.

It was the botched full redesign of the Taurus that gave the heart of the family sedan market to the Accord and Camry, not the series of modest upgrades. It was the best-selling car in its class until just after the redesign.

The Ranger was still fresh in the early 90s, staying fully competitive until all its competitors were redesigned in a two year period in the mid-2000s. I don't think it lost its sales crown until the current generation of Tacoma.

And the Escort was only irrelevant after the Focus was on sale -- and even then people happily bought ZX2s for four more years.

[ifcar]

Actually, I think with the Fusion Ford is clearly implementing the Toyota/Honda strategy of gradual improvement rather than large leap forwards.

Nothing new for Ford. 2000 Taurus, 2006 Explorer, 2007 Expedition, 2008 Escape, 2008 Focus, 2010 Mustang: Change the front, change the rear, maybe change the interior, make some tweaks throughout, and see if it works.

And it typically did. Cars just aren't advancing as quickly as some people like to think that a new-looking car with an older design is going to automatically be a problem.

[TBR]

Nothing new for Ford. 2000 Taurus, 2006 Explorer, 2007 Expedition, 2008 Escape, 2008 Focus, 2010 Mustang: Change the front, change the rear, maybe change the interior, make some tweaks throughout, and see if it works.

And it typically did. Cars just aren't advancing as quickly as some people like to think that a new-looking car with an older design is going to automatically be a problem.

That's true. Ford just doesn't completely redo body work like Honda and Toyota do.

[SVT32V]

That's true. Ford just doesn't completely redo body work like Honda and Toyota do.

Redo the bodywork on a mostly carried over chassis, the current camry has the same roofline as the outgoing model, it just has new fenders/grill/back bolted on.

Much like the the 370Z vs the 350, they are just evolutions of the same chassis not new ground up chassis, such as a 2005 mustang.

[ifcar]

Redo the bodywork on a mostly carried over chassis, the current camry has the same roofline as the outgoing model, it just has new fenders/grill/back bolted on.

Pretty sure they preserved styling cues but ended up with a different roofline:

[CJ]

I think he means the facelifted version.

[Mustangfan2003]

Ah either way driving a Camry everyday is like ordering vanilla ice cream everytime you go to Baskin Robbins.   

[CJ]

My dad's driven that Camry for 10 years and 142,000 miles.

[CALL_911]

My dad's driven that Camry for 10 years and 142,000 miles.

Actually, I don't mind that generation. The one after it was a turd and I don't like the current gen.

[SVT32V]

Pretty sure they preserved styling cues but ended up with a different roofline:

No, if you seem them parked next to each other they appear identical, I am sure all the glass is interchangeable. If there are any changes they are minor.

[GoCougs]

Actually, I think with the Fusion Ford is clearly implementing the Toyota/Honda strategy of gradual improvement rather than large leap forwards.

Camry and Accord have been on a 5-year cycle for many, many years. 2010 is the Fusion's 5th year - 2011 should be an all-new car if Fusion if Ford was following in Honda's and Toyota's footsteps (and it is not).

[GoCougs]

Pretty sure they preserved styling cues but ended up with a different roofline:

Are others really arguing this - that they're not two entirely different cars??? (Yes, they are.)

And no, glass is NOT interchangeable.

[Rupert]

No one uses Explorers for off roading. At least, not many of the current Explorer buyers.

Maybe they would if it was worth a damn off road.

[Rupert]

Then they have, can, and will buy crossovers. That's what they're there for. All this does is position the Explorer to cannibalize Edge sales.

I do believe that this Explorer is a crossover, now, if it wasn't already. Eesh.