Ford tops safe car list with 16 vehicles (http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20081125/AUTO01/811250410). Now, they just have to convince the NA consumers.
excerpts...
The insurance industry designated dozens of new cars and trucks, led by Ford Motor Co. and its Volvo subsidiary, to its annual list of the safest vehicles Tuesday, helped by the increased use of anti-rollover technology.
Ford and Volvo had 16 vehicles in the 2009 model year on the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety's list of the safest new cars, followed by Honda Motor Co. with 13 vehicles.
Ford was led by the Ford Fusion and Mercury Milan midsize cars with optional ESC; the Ford F-150 pickup, Ford Edge and Ford Flex midsize sport utility vehicles; and the Ford Escape and Mercury Mariner small SUVs. The list also included the Mazda Tribute, which has the same underpinnings as the Escape and Mariner.
Volvo's influence on Ford has been very positive, indeed!
Cheers,
Madman of the People
Bring over the Fiesta. People are buying the Accent and the Fit. The Mondeo would be incredible competition against the Accord and the Camry. Hell, the Transit would offer an alternative to the Sprinter. Ford Europe does have some cars that wouldn't make sense in our market, but there is a very good reason so many of their cars are held in regard over there.
Here we've had the Taurus and various forgettable blobs that don't entice anybody more than a used import.
I really don't think that they can pull themselves up with anything close to their current product strategies.
Quote from: Secret Chimp on November 25, 2008, 10:54:39 AM
Here we've had the Taurus and various forgettable blobs that don't entice anybody more than a used import.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Taurus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Taurus)
Since its launch in 1986, Ford has sold over 6.7 million Tauruses worldwide as of 2007,[3] making it the fifth bestselling North American nameplate in Ford's history; only the F-150,[4] Escort,[5] Model T,[6] and Mustang[6] have sold more units.
Quote from: Tave on November 25, 2008, 10:58:25 AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Taurus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Taurus)
Since its launch in 1986, Ford has sold over 6.7 million Tauruses worldwide as of 2007,[3] making it the fifth bestselling North American nameplate in Ford's history; only the F-150,[4] Escort,[5] Model T,[6] and Mustang[6] have sold more units.
I'm talking about the last several years, not history.
Quote from: Secret Chimp on November 25, 2008, 10:54:39 AM
Bring over the Fiesta. People are buying the Accent and the Fit. The Mondeo would be incredible competition against the Accord and the Camry. Hell, the Transit would offer an alternative to the Sprinter. Ford Europe does have some cars that wouldn't make sense in our market, but there is a very good reason so many of their cars are held in regard over there.
Here we've had the Taurus and various forgettable blobs that don't entice anybody more than a used import.
I really don't think that they can pull themselves up with anything close to their current product strategies.
Certainly, that is Mulally's plan. There are several articles that state, starting from small to medium, these cars will arrive in NA in a couple of years. The exact form and name may change, but they will be the same underpinnings.
As for the (original) Taurus, it was an iconic vehicle. We all know the reason that it diminished to throw-back status was because the investment wasn't made to keep it contemporary. Ford was too busy spending the cash it made from trucks on acquisitions to bother enhancing domestic product.
Quote from: Madman on November 25, 2008, 10:33:36 AM
Volvo's influence on Ford has been very positive, indeed!
Cheers,
Madman of the People
Very true, although shared technology between the Ford brands has helped each. North America has lagged because truck sales were too lucrative for too long. As well, Nasser was a megalomaniac who'd rather have an F1 team than invest in domestic product.
Quote from: Secret Chimp on November 25, 2008, 11:58:54 AM
I'm talking about the last several years, not history.
You think they should have killed their most successful model of the 1990s?
Quote from: FoMoJo on November 25, 2008, 12:02:12 PM
As for the (original) Taurus, it was an iconic vehicle. We all know the reason that it diminished to throw-back status was because the investment wasn't made to keep it contemporary. Ford was too busy spending the cash it made from trucks on acquisitions to bother enhancing domestic product.
The identity crisis didn't help either. From what I've read, the 500 was a competitive product (as is the new Taurus) but it severed that connection to the icon.
Quote from: Tave on November 25, 2008, 01:20:56 PM
The identity crisis didn't help either. From what I've read, the 500 was a competitive product (as is the new Taurus) but it severed that connection to the icon.
It was competitive but suffered from a few things:
Overly bland styling. (Also applied to the freestyle) It had many features but looked
really boring.
The 3.0L was gutless.
Quote from: Tave on November 25, 2008, 01:20:56 PM
The identity crisis didn't help either. From what I've read, the 500 was a competitive product (as is the new Taurus) but it severed that connection to the icon.
By 2006 (or whenever the 500 came out) the Taurus wasn't much of an icon.
Quote from: 2o6 on November 25, 2008, 01:23:21 PM
It was competitive but suffered from a few things:
Overly bland styling. (Also applied to the freestyle) It had many features but looked really boring.
So do Accords and Camries, which sell by the boatload.
And the last time Ford tried to give the Taurus a distinctive look, it lost the best-selling spot to Toyota:
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/fd/96-97_Ford_Taurus_sedan.jpg/800px-96-97_Ford_Taurus_sedan.jpg)
Quote from: TBR on November 25, 2008, 01:35:36 PM
By 2006 (or whenever the 500 came out) the Taurus wasn't much of an icon.
And by doing what they did, they made sure it wouldn't make a comeback.
Quote from: Tave on November 25, 2008, 01:40:24 PM
And by doing what they did, they made sure it wouldn't make a comeback.
Eh, I think the name is largely irrelevant, the problem was that it wasn't completely better than the competition and wasn't widely marketed. If it had the 3.5l from the beginning and Ford had put some serious marketing dollars behind it I think this would be a far different.
Quote from: Tave on November 25, 2008, 01:16:57 PM
You think they should have killed their most successful model of the 1990s?
No, I think they should have figured out that the boaty blob the Taurus ended up being was going to be awful competition against the Camry and Accord starting back in the late 90s and done something about it. Instead they went "oh, wait.... FIVE HUNDRED! IT'S HUUUUUGE"
Quote from: Tave on November 25, 2008, 01:37:30 PM
So do Accords and Camries, which sell by the boatload.
And the last time Ford tried to give the Taurus a distinctive look, it lost the best-selling spot to Toyota:
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/fd/96-97_Ford_Taurus_sedan.jpg/800px-96-97_Ford_Taurus_sedan.jpg)
You could argue that for a bland car, the Camry and Accord are visually more appealing. Fuel economy, and a more engaging drive (Accord) also was an advantage over the Taurus/Sable.
Quote from: Secret Chimp on November 25, 2008, 01:45:15 PM
No, I think they should have figured out that the boaty blob the Taurus ended up being was going to be awful competition against the Camry and Accord starting back in the late 90s and done something about it. Instead they went "oh, wait.... FIVE HUNDRED! IT'S HUUUUUGE"
But the Taurus didn't fail. Before the Five Hundred rebagde, it actually sold modestly. It was a cheap, reliable midsizer. (Sort of what the current Impala is) Ford just wanted all their cars to have F-names, and their trucks were doing well, so Ford did nothing with it.