Ford watching Europe's reaction to Mustang in new ads

[Submariner]

Our point is that government should not be forcing you to drive small powerless shitboxes if you don't want to.

Amen brother. 

[sportyaccordy]

When an American magazine reviews say a Mercedes E220 CDI, they'll be all over it bitching on how "underpowered" and "slow" it is and how it needs a 350-hp V6 bla bla. A European magazine on the other hand would praise its performance and acceleration and the gas mileage it gives. To Americans it's slow, to Europeans it's not.

Thats a lie. We have had the Jetta diesel here for over 20 yrs, journalists accept it for what it is. E320 CDI is down a good 80-100HP from the E350, nobody calls it "slow".

So when someone buys a 150-hp VW Passat 2.0 TDI here, the performance may very well be more than sufficient for him. He's not lusting after something more powerful or thirstier since he's happy with the power. I'm happy with the performance of my 143-hp BMW 118i. Do I want a 130i? No. Would I buy one of I had the cash? No. If I were forced to select a 1er of my choice I'd go for a 118d.

This is a lie too. Plenty of folks in the EU like more power. My father in law is a manager for an auto rental and he gets a lot of business from Europeans on vacation. When they come in they aren't scrambling for the little economy cars w/the most frugal gas mileage and "adequate" performance. They get regular cars, and often are not at all hard to upgrade to cars considered vulgar in Europe, like Chrysler 300s and Mustang GTs. Nobody "wants" to be forced to buy as cheap + small + frugal a car as they can stand to own, this is complete bullshit.

At the end of the day it's a question of priorities. There are tons of people here who can afford a gas-guzzling car but they value fuel economy and thus will avoid thirsty vehicles. The average European household has two cars. Many people might have a practical and efficient family car and a sort of weekend fun car that's sportier and uses more gas.

They value fuel economy, or are paralyzed by socialzeid or whatever it is?

Our fuel prices were actually relatively cheap prior to the 1973 oil crisis. In the '50s and '60s a liter of fuel cost a few Pfennigs in Germany: cheap gas. After the oil crisis many governments of Europe decided to tax the stuff because it was all imported. Putting a tax on it would ensure that most people would opt for economical cars and those that didn't would purchase expensive gas. It was a governmental reaction to the oil crisis and that brought us the expensive fuel tax. The oil crisis nearly crippled Western Europe.

And the result? The vast majority of car-owning Europeans drive efficient cars. America is 5% of the world's population yet consumes 24% of the worlds oil. The wastefulness of American society is well-documented by...well...prominent AMERICAN CRITICS. Source: Paul Ehrlich and the Population Bomb

Link: http://www.mindfully.org/Sustainability/Americans-Consume-24percent.htm


A fuel tax ensures that people will be RESPONSIBLE with the cars they buy and not WASTEFUL. You can buy a Ford F-650 in Europe, but be prepared to pay the high fuel costs. And if anyone buys a thirsty car, they can certainly afford to pay the fuel bills and couldn't be bothered about them in the first place. If they were, they'd be puttering along in some econobox.

Also, the few European nations that are self-sufficient in oil (the UK and Norway) have offshore oil rigs that supply their country and parts of Europe with oil. And yet the fuel prices in both countries are as expensive as any other European nation.

Americans drive a good 50% more than the average European, and the US is much less dense + way more spread out which requires more driving. So even if we drove your shitty little penalty boxes we would still use a lot more energy. Plus being that energy consumption + development go hand in hand, and America being one of the most developed countries in the world, of course we will use a disproportionate amount of energy. Half the world doesn't have regular electricity or running water, let alone cars, obviously that will skew things a bit. Plus w/Europe being so dense I am sure the public transportation system is much better, further reducing the need for cars.

Average fuel economy is up. http://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/annual/showtext.cfm?t=ptb0208

And again, why is it the gov'ts job to decide what is "responsible fuel usage", and why do they have to force people into doing so?

[SVT666]

I have one more thing to add to Sporty's comments.  Europeans have no idea how spread out North America is.  My cousins from Germany are in awe when they come here and they drive for 5 hours and all you pass in that time are a couple towns of 100 or so people.  Europe is so dense that mass public transportation makes sense and it works well with trains going absolutely everywhere.  It would take 5 days of 12 hours a day of solid driving to drive from New York to Seattle.  In Canada, It would take 8 days of 12 hour days to drive from Canada's most eastern point to the most western point and we only have 30 million people.  Germany alone has 82 million people, but it is in an area that's just 3.5% of Canada's land mass.  Driving, and driving a lot, is a necessity here.

[2o6]

I think part of it is taxes, part of it is social attitude.



There's no logical need for a 1.2L Fiesta with 58 HP (no exaggeration) any economy benefit is nil with a motor that small.


That is a tax special.

Something like a 320d isn't.

[Galaxy]

Europeans have no idea how spread out North America is. 

A good portion of Europeans have been to North America, on vacation or business trips, or school stays, and even those who have not probably have a good inkling about how vast the area is. In Germany we even make a joke about how the German phrase for no ones there (keiner da) rhymes with the German pronunciation of Canada.  

[sportyaccordy]

Has Wimmer?

[SVT666]

A good portion of Europeans have been to North America, on vacation or business trips, or school stays, and even those who have not probably have a good inkling about how vast the area is. In Germany we even make a joke about how the German phrase for no ones there (keiner da) rhymes with the German pronunciation of Canada.  

You can't appreciate it until you've seen it.  You can hear about it, you can read about it, but until you've seen it I don't think it can really register with someone how far apart we all are here.  Not just Canada either, outside of California, the western US is pretty much the same story (though not as dramatic).

[nickdrinkwater]

Tell me, if you lived in the city and did most of your driving there, what would you get?

A) Ford Excursion 6.8 V10
B) Ford Fiesta 1.6

Let me guess. You would take the Ford Excursion because gas is cheap and because there is no engine capacity tax, right? 


That's how most Europeans think. They buy a car based on their needs. If they're going to do most of their driving in the city, a smaller car is better than a bigger car. If they're going to do a lot of long-distance driving then a diesel car is better than a gasoline car, but this depends on the individual. I would prefer a diesel car for long distance driving simply because I can get more range out of one and have to stop less for gas.

Small cars are also more PRACTICAL in a European city. Today I had to go downtown to deliver some stuff with my car. This was the only parking spot free in the park garage. I kid you not but I wouldn't be able to park here with my dads E350 CGI. It was to tight. And if I managed to park, I couldn't open my doors because an E-Class is a wide car. I was standing near the snout of the cars across from where I parked when I took this photo. The Volvo XC90 guy sure did a great parking job - but let's see him get out.



^Big cars are not appealing because of this for example.^

And small cars generally come with smaller engines.



Look what mzziaz said:

A clear majority of the European citizens are willing to pay higher taxes than stateside in exchange for better public services.


This is why.

We pay high taxes but in exchange we have great public services and high living standards and affordable health care. That's far more important than the type of engine under my hood.

I would disagree with most of this, but then are we in the UK really "European"?  Probably not.

I for one think fuel prices here in the UK are far too high and the reason I drive a diesel/economical car is because I couldn't afford to run a car that uses double the fuel.  Let's not pretend we drive these cars because we don't like stopping to fill up, it's because realistically we have no choice.  Most people I know who drive small cars like Yarises and Polos would love something bigger/faster, if they could afford to fuel/licence/insure it.  I for one would switch over to a more powerful car if it didn't impact me financially to the extent it would.

Also, that car park picture says it all really: it's full of medium and large size cars.  You could definitely get your Mercedes in that space if you wanted to, given that the Touraeg and Volvo drivers have managed it ok.  I have no problem at all parking my Passat in car parks or on the streets in towns/cities.  Yes if had a Range Rover or Audi A8 you might struggle sometimes but it's not that bad that we can only drive small hatchbacks in urban driving, which you imply.  Maybe this is a mainland Europe mentality/perception as it doesn't extend to the UK and possibly other countries (IMO)

[cawimmer430]

Our point is that government should not be forcing you to drive small powerless shitboxes if you don't want to.

Those "powerless shitboxes" might have been true in the past, but these days any modern small car even with 75-hp has more than enough power to be enjoyably driven in everyday traffic conditions.

Once again we can buy whatever we like here. Most people are simply realistic in their choices. Realistic due to the fuel price situation but also realistic because they realize an E550 offers zero everyday advantages over an E220 CDI except for giving BMW and Driver, Performance & Track and Overpowered Trend a big bulging pants erection.

[cawimmer430]

Thats a lie. We have had the Jetta diesel here for over 20 yrs, journalists accept it for what it is. E320 CDI is down a good 80-100HP from the E350, nobody calls it "slow".

I'm exaggerating. But the hunger for more power in your car magazines can't be ignored. It's almost bordering on clinically insane in my opinion. 

In this day and age cars need to become more fuel efficient and release less emissions and yet BMW and Driver magazine is still whining that a boring family sedan like a Toyota Camry doesn't come with an optional V8 and 6-speed M/T and RWD. <--- You get my point.

This is a lie too. Plenty of folks in the EU like more power. My father in law is a manager for an auto rental and he gets a lot of business from Europeans on vacation. When they come in they aren't scrambling for the little economy cars w/the most frugal gas mileage and "adequate" performance. They get regular cars, and often are not at all hard to upgrade to cars considered vulgar in Europe, like Chrysler 300s and Mustang GTs. Nobody "wants" to be forced to buy as cheap + small + frugal a car as they can stand to own, this is complete bullshit.

Power is subjective. More power is always good, but many cars today are also completely sufficient in terms of power output: they're not underpowered or slow - they're sufficient. I'd consider my 118i as being part of that category. I'm never wishing for more power. I can accelerate to 100 km/h in under 9 seconds and have a top speed of well past 210 km/h. So what more power do I need? I don't drive like a maniac so I have no use for extra oomph.

The people that want more power...well guess what? They can buy a more powerful car. A 1er driver can buy a 120i or 120d. Hell, even a 118d is quicker than my car and far more fuel efficient. They can tune their car. They can remove the backseats and all excess weight if they want a faster car. There are countless ways to make a car faster without increasing power or with an engine tuning.

What rental car choices are there in the US? I don't think the average European would rent a Chevy Malibu or a Toyota Camry. They'd want to rent something iconic like a Ford Mustang because they have this idea of touring a part of the US with an iconic American car. It's their idea of fun.

And rental cars are a poor choice in describing what people want to drive. I have a friend who rented a Chevrolet Suburban in the US and he hated it. He hated the handling, the wishy washy brake feel and most of all the piss poor fuel economy. He simply wanted to try one.

They value fuel economy, or are paralyzed by socialzeid or whatever it is?

There are Europeans who value fuel economy and then there are those who don't care or have a variety of cars to choose from - some efficient and some sporty and thirsty.

Americans drive a good 50% more than the average European, and the US is much less dense + way more spread out which requires more driving. So even if we drove your shitty little penalty boxes we would still use a lot more energy. Plus being that energy consumption + development go hand in hand, and America being one of the most developed countries in the world, of course we will use a disproportionate amount of energy. Half the world doesn't have regular electricity or running water, let alone cars, obviously that will skew things a bit. Plus w/Europe being so dense I am sure the public transportation system is much better, further reducing the need for cars.

Yeah, you guys have longer distances to drive and a much less developed public transportation system, so driving is a necessity. I understand that completely. And because of that gas must be cheap. Fine. Understandable.

And yet the car buying habits in the US are "out of control" in terms of big overweight and gas-guzzling SUVs. You forget that in the US you also have a GAS-GUZZLER TAX, which applies only to exotics and sedans, but not to SUVs. Our high fuel prices are a sort of "gas-guzzler tax". The difference is that in Europe a thirsty car means higher overall fuel costs while in America SUVs and pickups are exempt for this law. So I gather that Americans are buying gas-guzzling SUVs because they can GET AWAY WITH IT because there is no gas-guzzler tax to pay. If there was, then that affair with the SUV would end pretty quickly.

And what's wrong with a wagon? Why do people insist on opting for a porky SUV that handles like shit, gets shitty fuel economy and is perhaps only marginally roomier than a wagon.

And again, why is it the gov'ts job to decide what is "responsible fuel usage", and why do they have to force people into doing so?

[cawimmer430]

Has Wimmer?

I've been to America. One week in Florida, the other week in California (San Francisco). My moms two cousins live in both states.

[sportyaccordy]

Using C&D as a representation for the avg American is asinine. That would be like using "Auto Motor und sport" as representative of the typical German buyer. And in any case, C&D hardly complains about "lack of power" in normal cars. They might complain about lack of power compared to competitors, or a shitty use of available HP, but its not like all they care about is speed. If not, "slow" cars like the Honda Fit & Ford Focus wouldn't be in their 10 Best. In comparisons often times the fastest or sportiest car won't be the winner. And in any case C&D is a magazine catered to enthusiasts, so naturally they will be skewed. So stop lying/exaggerating to make a point. Americans are nowhere near as HP crazy as you make them out to be. You look at the top selling cars in the US, they are hardly speed demons. A 4AT Corolla is no faster than your Bimmer, and yet its prob one of the most popular cars here. And you HATE Consumer Reports, even though they are far more representative of the typical American driver, put a focus on a car's practicality and are 100% honest and unbiased (unlike "BMW & Driver). But you disregard them because they called out the shitty European cars we got in the 70s/80s for what they were. You pick and choose + grossly exaggerate + outright lie to arrive at a predetermined conclusion- that the European auto market is "right" and the American one is "wrong". Its bullshit.

And if Europeans want a more popular car they CAN'T buy it. Germany's average income is 2x ours, but your tax rates are 4x ours, and from what it sounds like your cost of car ownership is at least 3-4x ours, for no other reason than high taxes. The idea that people are "happy" to pay $100 to fill up their Polo 1.2 is ridiculous, they have no fucking choice!

And you make buying an SUV, or ANY car beyond what you determine as what one needs sound like a crime. "Getting away with it"? Why not call it, having the freedom to buy whatever cars we want + can afford? Why should the government or someone like you have any say in what cars people buy?

[Raza]

And you make buying an SUV sound like a crime. "Getting away with it"? Why not call it, having the freedom to buy whatever cars we want + can afford? Why should the government or someone like you have any say in what cars people buy?

Sounds representative of the European mindset that having a car at all is a crime.  There's some serious cognitive dissonance here.  He's saying that Americans buy big cars because they can get away with it and Europeans buy small cars because they want to, and then he shows a picture of a European parking garage full of SUVs and midsize cars.  And Wims also admits the correlation between excessive taxation and car choice.  Wimmer, I like you man, but you've got to take a step back and look at what you're saying dispassionately and see what's going on.

Also, when I was renting a car just a few days ago, most of the people renting were Europeans.  The cars they rented?  Camry, Altima, and Tiguan. 

[SVT666]

I've been to America. One week in Florida, the other week in California (San Francisco). My moms two cousins live in both states.

Those two places give you absolutely no indication as to how spread out we are here.

[Galaxy]

You can't appreciate it until you've seen it.  You can hear about it, you can read about it, but until you've seen it I don't think it can really register with someone how far apart we all are here.  Not just Canada either, outside of California, the western US is pretty much the same story (though not as dramatic).

I've been to all Canadian provinces, except for four. I have also never been to the three territories. Did a marathon Saskatoon to Vancouver car trip, via Drumheller, Calgary, Banff, Jasper, and also your Okanagan valley.

I've been to all of the Canadian Provinces except for the three 

[SVT666]

I've been to all Canadian provinces, except for four. I have also never been to the three territories. Did a marathon Saskatoon to Vancouver car trip, via Drumheller, Calgary, Banff, Jasper, and also your Okanagan valley.

I've been to all of the Canadian Provinces except for the three 

That's awesome.  Why the hell would you even want to drive from Saskatoon to Vancouver.  Once you get to the Rockies it's great, but that first leg is awful.  I drove it twice and had a helluva time staying awake.

[Galaxy]

To the Argument in general: Both sides are kind of right. Certainly some people here are stuck with smaller cars because they can not afford the fuel for bigger ones. However I would also say that part of the population does make it as a conscious decision. No one buying an S 250 CDI does so because he can not afford an S500. Also green parties are a power to be reckoned. Obviously a relatively large portion of the population votes for them.

To a certain extent Germany is perhaps a bit schizophren in this regard. I know quite a few people who drive powerful cars, but vote green, or at least support green ideas. I guess they want politicians to work toward a world where they can drive down the autobahn with a hydrogen powered car, with the water split via solar power. 

[Galaxy]

That's awesome.  Why the hell would you even want to drive from Saskatoon to Vancouver.  Once you get to the Rockies it's great, but that first leg is awful.  I drove it twice and had a helluva time staying awake.

I had family living in Saskatoon. Yes the trip to Calgary is not something I would want to do on a regular basis. However a prairie thunder storm is something everyone should experience once. Saskatchewan's slogan "Land of the living skies" is really spot on. Also I found the badlands around Drumheller interesting (plus the museum was worth the stop) though I would not want to live there. The road through Banff and Jasper has to belong to the most scenic roads on the planet.

[SVT666]

I had family living in Saskatoon. Yes the trip to Calgary is not something I would want to do on a regular basis. However a prairie thunder storm is something everyone should experience once. Saskatchewan's slogan "Land of the living skies" is really spot on. Also I found the badlands around Drumheller interesting (plus the museum was worth the stop) though I would not want to live there. The road through Banff and Jasper has to belong to the most scenic roads on the planet.

Yes it is.  I have driven that road in the dead of winter with almost a foot of snow on the road in a Ram pickup.  That was actually one of the scariest drives I've ever done.  In the summer, it is the most beautiful drive I have ever done.

[TurboDan]

I like using the Excursion in my examples. 

I know. I appreciate it, actually. 

When an American magazine reviews say a Mercedes E220 CDI, they'll be all over it bitching on how "underpowered" and "slow" it is and how it needs a 350-hp V6 bla bla. A European magazine on the other hand would praise its performance and acceleration and the gas mileage it gives. To Americans it's slow, to Europeans it's not.

So when someone buys a 150-hp VW Passat 2.0 TDI here, the performance may very well be more than sufficient for him. He's not lusting after something more powerful or thirstier since he's happy with the power. I'm happy with the performance of my 143-hp BMW 118i. Do I want a 130i? No. Would I buy one of I had the cash? No. If I were forced to select a 1er of my choice I'd go for a 118d.

Americans don't take car magazines as gospel. Those who do don't care about C&D or MT – they care about Consumer Reports. 

Our fuel prices were actually relatively cheap prior to the 1973 oil crisis.

So is every other country's oil prices, worldwide. 

It was a governmental reaction to the oil crisis and that brought us the expensive fuel tax.

No it wasn't. It was politicians taking advantage of a crisis to push through a tax scheme they had favored for years prior but didn't have an excuse to execute. A famous American politician who is now Mayor of Chicago has a famous quote that I even used in my grad school final presentation: "Never let a crisis go to waste." It's a strategy that, often to the detriment of taxpayers, works.

And the result? The vast majority of car-owning Europeans drive efficient cars. America is 5% of the world's population yet consumes 24% of the worlds oil. The wastefulness of American society is well-documented by...well...prominent AMERICAN CRITICS. Source: Paul Ehrlich and the Population Bomb

Link: http://www.mindfully.org/Sustainability/Americans-Consume-24percent.htm

Do we waste fuel? Or are Europeans forced by government hard-handedness to use too little fuel?

A fuel tax ensures that people will be RESPONSIBLE with the cars they buy and not WASTEFUL.

No, it ensures that people will use exactly the amount of fuel that the politicians want you to use.

Also, the few European nations that are self-sufficient in oil (the UK and Norway) have offshore oil rigs that supply their country and parts of Europe with oil. And yet the fuel prices in both countries are as expensive as any other European nation.

That's because their citizens have been either too stupid, too indifferent or too brainwashed to protest outrageous taxation and demand accountability from their elected leaders.

[mzziaz]

A lot of haterade here, but one thing is certain: you guys are wasting fuel on an order of magnitude previously unheard of in the history of man.

[sportyaccordy]

A lot of haterade here, but one thing is certain: you guys are wasting fuel on an order of magnitude previously unheard of in the history of man.

You guys are not far behind. And lol @ assuming moral superiority through fuel use. Give me a break.

[nickdrinkwater]

A lot of haterade here, but one thing is certain: you guys are wasting fuel on an order of magnitude previously unheard of in the history of man.

[SVT666]

A lot of haterade here, but one thing is certain: you guys are wasting fuel on an order of magnitude previously unheard of in the history of man.

Says the man that imported a V8 Ford Ranchero.

[TurboDan]

A lot of haterade here, but one thing is certain: you guys are wasting fuel on an order of magnitude previously unheard of in the history of man.

We're not wasting anything. We're using fuel to power machines that we enjoy using and/or feel fit our lifestyle choices. I'm sorry your government disallows its people from doing this. 

[Galaxy]

We're not wasting anything. We're using fuel to power machines that we enjoy using and/or feel fit our lifestyle choices. I'm sorry your government disallows its people from doing this. 

The disallows part I take issue with. Discourage is perhaps the better word.

The fact of the matter is one can buy any US car in Europe (including an F-350), but one can not buy most EU cars in the USA, because actually EU laws allows more freedoms when it comes to grey imports.

[sportyaccordy]

You can import cars here too, if you are willing to buy a couple of copies to get them crash tested + federalized

And I imagine the fees associated w/getting a grey import registered in the EU are insane

My real + only gripe.. OK, I have two. One is this perpetuation of a culture of guilt/shame (people debadging/downbadging their luxury cars out of fear/shame, EU folks looking down their noses at Americans for not buying in, the LIE that EU folks LOVE to drive little 1L tin cans and pay $12/gal for gas), two is the brazen hypocrisy with which Wimmer (the dude whose famly's cars average fuel economy didn't even add up to 19 MPG in the US cycle in a country where the avg new car sold does 33 MPG) and mzziaz (aka Mr V8 Ranchero) post

Cmon guys... glass houses, practice what you preach

Wimmer you dont need a 118i, and I am certain the car you are looking to replace it with isn't the most fuel efficient choice. So what gives? And mzziaz I would bet your Ranchero gets the worst gas mileage of damn near every car on Carspin. I am not knocking your choices, just the hypocrisy of those choices and demonizing a country of folks who drive Camrys instead of Echos

[Galaxy]

And I imagine the fees associated w/getting a grey import registered in the EU are insane

Define insane? In Germany it costs ~? 450 to get the T?V paperwork, and inspection done, that includes getting an exception for equipment that missing from US cars, but generally required for EU cars like headlight range adjustments. It costs up to ? 1500 to get an emission test done.

The biggest costs will be transportation and customs.

[TurboDan]

The disallows part I take issue with. Discourage is perhaps the better word.

The fact of the matter is one can buy any US car in Europe (including an F-350), but one can not buy most EU cars in the USA, because actually EU laws allows more freedoms when it comes to grey imports.

Few people really care that much about grey imports. The vast majority of people just want to be able to buy a car that fits their needs with as little government intrusion into their choice as possible.

[Galaxy]

Few people really care that much about grey imports. The vast majority of people just want to be able to buy a car that fits their needs with as little government intrusion into their choice as possible.

And in many auto related areas there is less intrusion.

The "need" part is irrelevant. Otherwise the majority would be driving something like a Dacia Logan MCV.