Design chief: Ford cancels RWD sedan program
Amid a tightening budget and uncertainty surrounding demand for large vehicles, Ford has been forced to shelve plans for new rear-wheel-drive sedans, according to design chief J Mays. The news comes six months after high gas prices prompted Ford to begin re-evaluating its RWD program.
Rumors about the new platform have been circulating for the past couple of years, and the longstanding story has been the architecture would be developed in Australia, where such vehicles are particularly popular.
?We?re going down a path right now that is all about fuel efficiency, and we?ve got a lot to do about that. So we?re not talking about rear-wheel drive,? Mays told Automotive News. RWD is ?out of the cycle plan,? he added.
Mays said he is disappointed the projects have been cancelled. ?I was very excited about it,? he said, noting that market conditions ?changed right before our eyes.?
Ford and Lincoln were expected to get at least one model each. The cars were expected to draw on the Ford Interceptor and Lincoln MKR concepts, both of which were rear-wheel-drive.
And what will market conditions be like in 2-10 years??
They seriously can't be making long-term decisions based on one summer of high gas prices..
And, why does RWD HAVE to be significantly worse for fuel economy than FWD? Didn't we have a bunch of RWD economy cars back in the day? Why would a 3500-4000 lb family sedan care whether it was FWD or RWD for economy's sake?
Again, I can pull 30mpg highway out of a 10 year old, 4000+ lb, 300 hp, RWD luxury sedan. That's not much worse than the best Ford or Lincoln have to offer NOW.
In light of the Pontiac G8's lack of success, Ford is reconsidering the idea of a rear-drive sedan. They have a large front-drive platform that is certified for North American consumption and is used across multiple brands. The cost of certifying and producing such a RWD sedan - with rather limited dynamic benefits to the average consumer - probably does not justify the cost.
Also note that neither Toyota, Honda or Nissan has rear-wheel drive sedans available. Lexus and Infiniti do, I admit, but they're upscale brands.
The only competitor that has had some success at the rear-drive sedan formula is Chrysler.
How much R&D can it take to make the Falcon LHD and re-badge it as a Mercury so that it doesn't overlap with the Taurus? :huh:
Quote from: Vinsanity on January 13, 2009, 03:19:58 PM
How much R&D can it take to make the Falcon LHD and re-badge it as a Mercury so that it doesn't overlap with the Taurus? :huh:
Can it be easily converted to RHD?
Can it pass strict North American crash standards?
Can it pass emissions?
Are you importing it? Will currency swings affect profitability of the car?
Are you building it in North America? Do you have a plant available? What happens if you can't sell enough to keep the plant going? Do you have the money to pay for the tooling?
Ford needs to be profitable at this stage. As much as I'd love to see a rear-drive Ford sedan here, I doubt it will happen given the state of the auto market. Ford needs the money to spend on the mainstream cars/trucks.
I can't say I'd buy one either - can't afford it - and many of the enthusiasts who swoon here about such a car proabably can't either.
Quote from: Vinsanity on January 13, 2009, 03:19:58 PM
How much R&D can it take to make the Falcon LHD and re-badge it as a Mercury so that it doesn't overlap with the Taurus? :huh:
The current Falcon platform, much like the R34 Skyline, will not accomodate an LHD conversion. You're talking basically re-engineering the platform to get LHD.
Quote from: 3.0L V6 on January 13, 2009, 03:26:16 PM
Ford needs the money to spend on the mainstream cars/trucks.
The Falcon IS a mainstream vehicle :huh:
I'd buy one if it's cheaper than the Pontiac G8
Quote from: MX793 on January 13, 2009, 04:45:56 PM
The current Falcon platform, much like the R34 Skyline, will not accomodate an LHD conversion. You're talking basically re-engineering the platform to get LHD.
did GM have to do that with the Monaro and the Commodore?
Quote from: Vinsanity on January 13, 2009, 04:47:50 PM
The Falcon IS a mainstream vehicle :huh:
I'd buy one if it's cheaper than the Pontiac G8
Would it be a mainstream vehicle here? Considering the Pontiac G8's lack of success here, it would be a niche vehicle. I can't see three companies competing in the same market niche successfully.
Quote from: Vinsanity on January 13, 2009, 04:49:01 PM
did GM have to do that with the Monaro and the Commodore?
Some RHD cars can be converted (often they are designed to be converted so they can be sold in LHD markets), others cannot. The current Falcon was never intended for sale in LHD markets, so the capability to convert it to LHD was never a design consideration.
The previous generation of Commodore/Monaro that the GTO was based on was actually an evolution of the old V platform (Opel/Vauxhall Omega, Caddy Catera) and was designed for both LHD and RHD applications. The latest generation was a truly new-from-the-ground-up design, but since GM intended for the platform to be used around the world, the ability to build both LHD and RHD variants was one of the design criteria.
Quote from: 3.0L V6 on January 13, 2009, 05:04:22 PM
Would it be a mainstream vehicle here? Considering the Pontiac G8's lack of success here, it would be a niche vehicle. I can't see three companies competing in the same market niche successfully.
meh. the biggest reason the G8 hasn't been successful is because it didn't have the "OMFG! HEMI FTW!" marketing campaign
Quote from: ChrisV on January 13, 2009, 02:45:19 PM
And, why does RWD HAVE to be significantly worse for fuel economy than FWD? Didn't we have a bunch of RWD economy cars back in the day? Why would a 3500-4000 lb family sedan care whether it was FWD or RWD for economy's sake?
Again, I can pull 30mpg highway out of a 10 year old, 4000+ lb, 300 hp, RWD luxury sedan. That's not much worse than the best Ford or Lincoln have to offer NOW.
I can 30 mpg out of my Bimmer pretty easily. And that's just regular highway driving, no gas-saving techniques involved.
Quote from: ChrisV on January 13, 2009, 02:45:19 PM
And, why does RWD HAVE to be significantly worse for fuel economy than FWD? Didn't we have a bunch of RWD economy cars back in the day? Why would a 3500-4000 lb family sedan care whether it was FWD or RWD for economy's sake?
Again, I can pull 30mpg highway out of a 10 year old, 4000+ lb, 300 hp, RWD luxury sedan. That's not much worse than the best Ford or Lincoln have to offer NOW.
I have no idea. I realize the drive shaft can take away a bit of efficiency but I don't get it. From a manufacturing and packaging standpoint I can see it being easier to build but why would it use more fuel?
meh I don't care whether they have any new RWD or not.
I just can't see why they don't have any sort of long-term vision. They're basing years and years of the future off of one summer of past..
Quote from: Catman on January 13, 2009, 05:59:28 PM
I have no idea. I realize the drive shaft can take away a bit of efficiency but I don't get it. From a manufacturing and packaging standpoint I can see it being easier to build but why would it use more fuel?
I think a main problem is not how efficient RWD can be, but it's image. People nowadays think RWD = performance. So if it doesn't perform like they think it should, they won't buy it. No matter how fuel efficient it is.
I bet if you made a RWD Civic (same MPG as FWD version, same performance) people wouldn't buy it. They would think it's less efficient, even though it's not, and doesn't provide extra performance.
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on January 13, 2009, 06:02:41 PM
meh I don't care whether they have any new RWD or not.
I just can't see why they don't have any sort of long-term vision. They're basing years and years of the future off of one summer of past..
They're doing the American version of Toyota. Which they need. Where's the long-term profitability in rear-drive sedans in a mainstream brand?
Honda, Toyota and Nissan don't think there's any money in it. GM found out there isn't money in it. Chrysler is the only successful one...and even the LX cars have high fleet percentages. Sure, Chrysler may have the police market all to themselves in a few years, but can that sustain a model line?
Fuel may get expensive again. OPEC is shutting down their supply to get prices up. It would be foolish to assume fuel will be forever cheap, as the Big 3 automakers did in the 1990s.
Quote from: 3.0L V6 on January 13, 2009, 06:44:18 PM
Sure, Chrysler may have the police market all to themselves in a few years, but can that sustain a model line?
Nope, just look at the Crown Vic.
Quote from: hotrodalex on January 13, 2009, 06:49:40 PM
Nope, just look at the Crown Vic.
That may die off at some point. I don't know how much longer they can keep it up to regulations without a costly redesign.
Edit: Did you mean that police sales can not sustain a model line, or that the Crown Vic will be giving competition to the LX cars in the future?
Unfortunately, Ford is in no rush to redesign the CVPI and I suppose we're fortunate that it even still exists. Most officers still prefer the CVPI because of the interior layout. With no RWD in site for Ford it doesn't look good and I am not sure Ford wants a police verion of the new Taurus. Even if they did I doubt many depts want FWD.
Quote from: Catman on January 13, 2009, 07:23:58 PM
Unfortunately, Ford is in no rush to redesign the CVPI and I suppose we're fortunate that it even still exists. Most officers still prefer the CVPI because of the interior layout. With no RWD in site for Ford it doesn't look good and I am not sure Ford wants a police verion of the new Taurus. Even if they did I doubt many depts want FWD.
How big is body-on-frame construction consideration play in your department's selection of police cruiser? Most new rear-drive cars are unibody. I've heard that BOF cars take hard driving (ie. hitting cubs, PIT) better due to easy repairability. Is that still an important consideration these days?
Quote from: Catman on January 13, 2009, 05:59:28 PM
I have no idea. I realize the drive shaft can take away a bit of efficiency but I don't get it. From a manufacturing and packaging standpoint I can see it being easier to build but why would it use more fuel?
Vehicle packaging. Generally You can get the same amount of useful interior and luggage space in a smaller and lighter front wheel drive vehicle than in a rear wheel drive. One might argue that with special alloys, lots of design time etc, one could make a comparable rwd vehicle just as space and weight efficient but that involves extra cost.
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on January 13, 2009, 06:02:41 PM
meh I don't care whether they have any new RWD or not.
I just can't see why they don't have any sort of long-term vision. They're basing years and years of the future off of one summer of past..
Rest assured that the probability of gasoline going up in price far exceeds the probability of it staying where it is or going lower.
Quote from: 3.0L V6 on January 13, 2009, 07:44:17 PM
How big is body-on-frame construction consideration play in your department's selection of police cruiser? Most new rear-drive cars are unibody. I've heard that BOF cars take hard driving (ie. hitting cubs, PIT) better due to easy repairability. Is that still an important consideration these days?
Not really. We really only have two choices, the CVPI and the Charger. We have one Charger and most prefer the CVPI because of the interior and outward visibility even though the Charger drives better. When the car is your office for 8 hours there's more to consider than just performance.
A cop I knew said the Caprice 9C1 was a better car. Was he right?
Quote from: the Teuton on January 13, 2009, 08:00:35 PM
A cop I knew said the Caprice 9C1 was a better car. Was he right?
In it's day they were pretty fast and very roomy. Not real sure about quality though.
Surely there are 2 things being mixed up here?
High gas prices caused everyone to stop and think about the type of cars they were going to make (and hopefully sell)........ ever larger Suddenly Unloved Vehicles appeared not to be the answer.
And now, after the financial challenges of the past 4 months, it's a straight affordability question, when survival is more important than anything else.
So, given limited funds to develop new vehicles, I assume Ford has to think very carefully about where the priorities are, and have decided that a large RWD sedan to replace the Crown Vic/Grand Marquis is not the priority. I suspect that this is a senseible decision.
Quote from: Catman on January 13, 2009, 07:48:50 PM
Not really. We really only have two choices, the CVPI and the Charger. We have one Charger and most prefer the CVPI because of the interior and outward visibility even though the Charger drives better. When the car is your office for 8 hours there's more to consider than just performance.
My local PD used primarily Luminas, now lots of Impalas. That's not an option?
I'd expect a lot of departments will also move to truck-based SUVs if RWD sedans become unavailable.
My point is, they have to develop a few all new platforms anyhow for various markets and categories. To say that one is being kiled of for fuel efficiency's sake seems a stretch, as it can't be THAT hard to develop an all new platform for either RWD or FWD that's fuel efficient.
I mean they are already filling up the interior with center tunnels that can accomodate RWD in their mainstream and small cars, (the fact that you dont' have to modify the floor pan or center tunnel to put a 5 liter V8 longitudinally driving the rear wheels on a Focus kinda proves that), so it can't be because of interior space issues. How hard would it have been to develop a platform for a car the size of the Taurus that was RWD AND fuel efficient? Weight is as much of an enemy to fuel efficiency as the slight additional driveline loss (and again, RWD cars have gotten outstanding fuel economy as well, at least as fuel efficient as modern midsizers and up).
No, fuel efficeincy as the reason for killing them seems to be fallacious.
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on January 13, 2009, 02:34:03 PM
And what will market conditions be like in 2-10 years??
They seriously can't be making long-term decisions based on one summer of high gas prices..
you are absolutely correct! i am and always have been against an "all or nothing" approach. buyers need choice, in my strong opinion. it amazes me how these over priced ceo's and board members keep having these knee jerk reactions -- always seemingly fueled (or initiated) by the media!
Quote from: MX793 on January 13, 2009, 04:45:56 PM
The current Falcon platform, much like the R34 Skyline, will not accomodate an LHD conversion. You're talking basically re-engineering the platform to get LHD.
I have seen Skylines with LHD Maxima dashboard....
Quote from: Catman on January 13, 2009, 05:59:28 PM
I have no idea. I realize the drive shaft can take away a bit of efficiency but I don't get it. From a manufacturing and packaging standpoint I can see it being easier to build but why would it use more fuel?
I don't get it either. A 3.5 V6 FWD Toyota Aurion (268hp/248lb-ft/3505lb) achieves 23.8mpg combined and an 0-60mph time of 7.4s, and a 4.0 I6 RWD Ford Falcon (262hp/288lb-ft/3756lb) achieves 23.3mpg and an 0-60 time of 7.3.
In other words, a Falcon that is 251lb heavier and faster (and torquier, longer, higher and wider, incidentally) than an Aurion travels half a mile shorter from one gallon of fuel, and that's supposed to be sufficient justification to dump large RWD platforms on the basis of fuel efficiency? Bollocks.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on January 14, 2009, 07:58:41 AM
I have seen Skylines with LHD Maxima dashboard....
There are companies that specialize in retrofitting 240SX steering columns and make reverse molds of GT-R dashboards.
It's more the firewall and some plumbing issues with the Skyline than anything else.
I hear the biggest problem is that they have to run a single turbo setup in the GT-Rs instead of the twin-turbo setup.
In any case, every Falcon generation since the 1988 EA has been almost exactly the same boat - the Taurus was earmarked to replace both the EA and the '94 EF, to the point whereby the Ford Australia president at the time was shown the door; the '98 AU was never meant to be; the '02 BA was fought tooth-and-nail but eventually approved by Dearborn as Ford Australia's last chance; and the FG is now apparently the last of the RWD Falcons.
My goodness, Ford Australia - do whatever you can to get the next-generation Falcon into the Middle East and South-East Asia.
I thought the killing of the rear-drive sedan was limited to the North American market only.
Quote from: 3.0L V6 on January 14, 2009, 11:17:59 AM
I thought the killing of the rear-drive sedan was limited to the North American market only.
This was their global RWD program (akin to GM's Zeta platform), which was slated to replace the Falcon in Australia and be sold in other markets as well (namely Europe and the ME, America wasn't really in the plan as a market but wasn't entirely ruled out either).
Quote from: the Teuton on January 14, 2009, 09:57:52 AM
There are companies that specialize in retrofitting 240SX steering columns and make reverse molds of GT-R dashboards.
It's more the firewall and some plumbing issues with the Skyline than anything else.
I hear the biggest problem is that they have to run a single turbo setup in the GT-Rs instead of the twin-turbo setup.
My understanding was that the location of some parts prevented a simple LHD conversion. I thought I read that it was related to the steering box interfering with something when moved to the left side, or something blocking the path of the steering column (possibly one of the turbos).
Quote from: ifcar on January 14, 2009, 07:28:00 AM
My local PD used primarily Luminas, now lots of Impalas. That's not an option?
Both of those cars you mentioned are universally despised among police. FWD just is not as durable and usually more expensive to repair.
Quote from: Catman on January 14, 2009, 08:20:36 PM
Both of those cars you mentioned are universally despised among police. FWD just is not as durable and usually more expensive to repair.
What about Explorers?
Quote from: ifcar on January 15, 2009, 07:15:03 AM
What about Explorers?
The RCMP uses a lot of Explorers. They also use a lot of Yukons and Full size Ford and GM pickups. Of course they really only use these vehicles in areas where going offroad may be required to pursue a suspect or go to a crime scene.
Quote from: HEMI666 on January 15, 2009, 09:58:28 AM
The RCMP uses a lot of Explorers. They also use a lot of Yukons and Full size Ford and GM pickups. Of course they really only use these vehicles in areas where going offroad may be required to pursue a suspect or go to a crime scene.
It's a RWD heavy-duty alternative to the Crown Victoria that can't cost too much more than the CV. And if officers don't like the comfort levels of the Charger, it may be a decent option.
Keep in mind the Explorer is going unibody in its next redesign.
Quote from: TBR on January 15, 2009, 10:40:50 AM
Keep in mind the Explorer is going unibody in its next redesign.
It's still around for now.
Quote from: ifcar on January 15, 2009, 07:15:03 AM
What about Explorers?
We have two. With a gun belt on they are very uncomfortable and are very expensive to maintain. The Charger is far more comfortable.
My local smokies all drive Yukons or Tahoes. We have a few CVs, but not many.
I see alot of Tahoes on the NYS Thruway. Maybe this is just coincidence, but everytime I see an 18 wheeler pulled over on 90 it is always an SUV cop.
Quote from: J86 on January 15, 2009, 08:27:18 PM
I see alot of Tahoes on the NYS Thruway. Maybe this is just coincidence, but everytime I see an 18 wheeler pulled over on 90 it is always an SUV cop.
Motor Carrier division. They're SUVs so they have a place to put the scale.
Quote from: Soup DeVille on January 15, 2009, 08:33:19 PM
Motor Carrier division. They're SUVs so they have a place to put the scale.
The regular NYS Police has a lot of Tahoes. The motor carrier guys typically use Ford and Dodge vans (though they may be switching over to Tahoes).
Quote from: The Pirate on January 15, 2009, 08:39:20 PM
The regular NYS Police has a lot of Tahoes. The motor carrier guys typically use Ford and Dodge vans (though they may be switching over to Tahoes).
Maybe they're just insecure about pulling over a trucker with a CV?
:lol:
Quote from: J86 on January 15, 2009, 08:27:18 PM
I see alot of Tahoes on the NYS Thruway. Maybe this is just coincidence, but everytime I see an 18 wheeler pulled over on 90 it is always an SUV cop.
I believe that, in light of the fire issues with the CVPI, the NYS Police have started using the Tahoe in greater numbers.
Quote from: J86 on January 15, 2009, 08:27:18 PM
I see alot of Tahoes on the NYS Thruway. Maybe this is just coincidence, but everytime I see an 18 wheeler pulled over on 90 it is always an SUV cop.
i have to agree. judging from the parking lots of their stations, the mainly use suv's now. i generally only see chevys and a few dodge durangos.
Both times I've spoken with the NYS constabulary on the Thruway they were driving CVs. I wonder how long the trucks take to come catch me :lol:
Quote from: J86 on January 16, 2009, 11:50:35 AM
Both times I've spoken with the NYS constabulary on the Thruway they were driving CVs. I wonder how long the trucks take to come catch me :lol:
If the Tahoes on Rt 17 are any indication, not very long :lol:
Given the current financial situation North America and its automakers are in, this might be a good decision on their part for the time being. I consider everyone here on the website to be well above the general populace in the automotive knowledge and understanding department and in this case what we understand about cars isn't what Ford either will cater to or be banking on in the near future.
They might be fearing what the general public's reaction to having a bunch of rear drive vehicle's being put in the line up will do. I'm betting there are people out there that are terrified of driving RWD cars, and possibly think they are worse on fuel than FWD. I sure as hell know many believe that FWD vehicles are absolutely superior in sketchy weather ( which IMO is false as well..). Couple this up with what it may cost in R&D for making new RWD platforms for NA cars, ( Why they don't borrow from AUS is beyond me...) it begins to sound almost like a risky proposition. They need bailout money during all of this and likely don't want the perception of thinking too far out of the box, especially if they are already in a better financial position than both GM and Chrysler.
I could be very wrong, but its just my $.02 .
Quote from: ChrisV on January 14, 2009, 07:41:37 AM
My point is, they have to develop a few all new platforms anyhow for various markets and categories. To say that one is being kiled of for fuel efficiency's sake seems a stretch, as it can't be THAT hard to develop an all new platform for either RWD or FWD that's fuel efficient.
I mean they are already filling up the interior with center tunnels that can accomodate RWD in their mainstream and small cars, (the fact that you dont' have to modify the floor pan or center tunnel to put a 5 liter V8 longitudinally driving the rear wheels on a Focus kinda proves that), so it can't be because of interior space issues. How hard would it have been to develop a platform for a car the size of the Taurus that was RWD AND fuel efficient? Weight is as much of an enemy to fuel efficiency as the slight additional driveline loss (and again, RWD cars have gotten outstanding fuel economy as well, at least as fuel efficient as modern midsizers and up).
No, fuel efficeincy as the reason for killing them seems to be fallacious.
Americans must only want RWD if there's a big gas guzzling V8 up front. :huh:
Quote from: 280Z Turbo on January 16, 2009, 09:19:40 PM
Americans must only want RWD if there's a big gas guzzling V8 up front. :huh:
Or a "premium" brand badge on the front like Lexus, BMW, Mercedes, Cadillac or Infiniti.
Quote from: MX793 on January 16, 2009, 10:06:28 PM
Or a "premium" brand badge on the front like Lexus, BMW, Mercedes, Cadillac or Infiniti.
Strange, because I don't think a Lexus buyer even cares what moves the car as long as it's quiet.
Quote from: 280Z Turbo on January 16, 2009, 10:09:53 PM
Strange, because I don't think a Lexus buyer even cares what moves the car as long as it's quiet.
Wouldn't that describe most Buick buyers too?
Quote from: Schadenfreude on January 19, 2009, 01:34:56 PM
Wouldn't that describe most Buick buyers too?
Wrong. Buick buyers demand the perfect enthusiast driving experience, with only the most cutting-edge and exciting high-performance drivetrains.