Ford Inside News banner

Ford needs to use the Mustang Platform...

17K views 80 replies 15 participants last post by  mooseman 
#1 ·
Why can't Ford give us a great RWD/AWD Sedan for Lincoln and Ford off the Mustang Platform. Also a true X5 competitor. Crossovers like the Ecosmart are junk...heavy...slow...cramped...rattly...yet we get that instead of the great new Focus ST.
 
#5 ·
If Sedans are dead why hasn't someone informed Toyota, Lexus, Hyndai, Kia, Genesis, BMW, Mercedes, VW, Audi, Volvo....did they miss the memo? Fords option for the Focus is the Ecosport. Its unrefined, heavy, cramped...definitly not eco or sport. And it cost more than equivalent sedan. If we get well engineered crossovers thats great but I feel we will get mushy handling products with a higher price tag because they feel the target buyer mom has no idea what makes a car good.
 
#7 ·
If Sedans are dead why hasn't someone informed Toyota, Lexus, Hyndai, Kia, Genesis, BMW, Mercedes, VW, Audi, Volvo....did they miss the memo?
The customers are now informing them. Check out the sales charts!
 
#12 ·
Exactly...Ford always starts with promising sedans then lets them get old. Taurus save Ford in 1986...and never changed until it was too little too late. But the new Focus is hear and now...easily imported. Outstanding competition to my GTI. I am even amazed at how many people don't understand the VW GTI. They see small hatchback. I see a well packaged personal luxury sport sedan. Liberals tell everyone that electric cars are the trend....yet they are huge money losers. People who like cars do not want a quiet electric car. And even then...GM has one that is well made and cost less than Tesla. The Bolt. Yet Tesla's that fall apart are worshiped like gods. Where all the talk about the great, well made, equally high tech Chevy Bolt?
 
#17 · (Edited)
I have nothing against a well crafted crossover or SUV. I feel the new Explorer will be amazing and thank god its on a modern RWD platform. What I don't like are poorly developed cars turned into mushy crossovers with $5000 tacked onto the price tag. Hence this would be most of the crossovers out there that flood the streets. The ones that bottom out on steep angles and look like they would tremble in fear at a curvy road or gravel road. Ford EcoSport is a sorry excuse for an entry level replacement of the Focus or Fiesta both of which I could have gotten an ST. The USA is being completely robbed of an amazing experience with even the new Fiesta ST that Europe gets. Again the Eco Sport crossover is a load of dead weight. Literally its clumsy, heavy, cramped, ugly, and 100% hard plastic inside. It also cost as much as a Fiesta ST would.
 
#18 ·
Agreed on the EcoSport. One drive proves all that.

Typically most crossovers are shared platforms of course, which means there are compromises in both sedan and CUV. That's just the nature of engineering. You can't optimize for two opposing applications. My hope is that with sedans gone, Ford can optimize future CUV platforms a bit more. Bronco is kind of an extreme example, as it shares a truck platform. I do think their strategy for more power/economy through their new added hybrid system is smart as well, whereby a single engine is used instead of multiple options which equals more complexity. Simple is always better, from a quality POV.
 
#26 ·
When we say: sedans are dead, we mean sedans are not the big sellers and the core of the auto business any more. Of course, sedans will continue be present at dealers of many automakers, but in very small numbers and only as a premium product.


Is curious, Ford was the first automaker that kill the minivan... all we thoght it was a crazy idea, but the time gave Ford reason and the minivans and people movers are dying (including here in Europe). Now, Ford kill its sedans (ok, Chysler kill its small sedans first, but keep the big ones...so... Ford is the first automaker that drop all its sedans from its american line-up) and the rest of autoindustry follow them.


Ford is not as crazy or is not as out of focus as we thought.
 
#28 ·
There is only a limited amount of money and resources for automakers. There is an evolution of vehicles, and all companies need to decide what merits their efforts. Sedans that are on newer platforms will stay and be refreshed, but likely not re-engineered as often. There is still a market for sedans ( I love my Fusion), and sales will drop more, but not to the point of irrelevance.
 
#29 ·
Inevitably the question is always asked, what is the business case for any decision. I get that Fusion and Taurus were on tired old platforms and would need major capital to completely update, which limits any appeal given the market. But I am angry about Focus the most. An update already exists, and customers deserve an entry level vehicle that does not cost over $20K. Just import them and offer them with minmal incentives to maximize their business case value.
 
#30 ·
Well, Wings already addressed this, but I'd also point out that I responded to a different post than the one that you insist was your only (repeated, ad nauseum) point...and I addressed how you seem incapable of relating, in any reasonable way, to the reality that sedans are a dwindling market.

Every maker you've mentioned has seen that reality, yet you insist on "sending them the memos"...again, repeatedly.

If you're gonna do the digital equivalent of stomping your feet and babbling the same point over and over, even after it's addressed/countered (repeatedly)...I'm going to treat you like someone determined to behave stupidly.

It's called dealing with the presented reality, and you need some practice.
 
#31 ·
Wonderful! I see, we agree on something; "sedans are a dwindling market." I can even agree that the sedan market is dying.

Others here can repeat "sedans are dead, sedans are dead, sedans are dead" ad nauseam but if I say not so fast in context, I'm behaving stupidly. I guess I'm smart if I toe the party line, stupid if I don't.

I'm 75. My capacities are "dwindling." Somehow, I'm not yet a candidate for an autopsy. On this thread, I'd have been buried years ago. I'm very happy that I can understand that there is a distinction between "dwindling" and "death."
 
#53 ·
All of us are "forum hacks with opinions." Being a Ford employee makes no difference other than possibly fostering an understandable tendency to defend almost any Ford business decision. Some forum hacks don't defend Ford and some forum hacks do.

Are there any heavy-hitters in Ford's upper ranks of executives posting here?

So, IMO, It's not about the money. Ford makes plenty of money and always has. Ford made profits from sedan sales as well, just not enough to satisfy the bloodsuckers on Wall Street. IMO, too many of the most influential Ford shareholders care more about the stock than about the product. So, IMO, Ford made many business decisions that attempted to entice the bloodsuckers into rating their stock higher in order to attract investors, rather than decisions that would entice more customers to buy their product. Less R&D boosts profits in the short term (the only term the bloodsuckers really care about) but starves product development. For example, Ford milked CD4, IMO, until it was obsolete and then milked it some more.

Unfortunately, Wall Street did not reward these business decisions. Then an upstart, disruptor appeared and became the new darling of the bloodsuckers. So Ford made more business decisions to try to win back the bloodsuckers' love. Moves like firing their perfectly capable car-guy CEO and hiring a cabinetmaker in his place. How's that working out, shareholders?

Ford invested heavily in their biggest seller, the F-150 and that is to their credit. IMO, Mustang got short shrift with poor platform decisions ("optimized" because it didn't require much investment) but remained a best-seller because other aspects of the model received investment and because it was/is Ford's only desirable, aspirational model that's not a truck/SUV/CUV. Hotchkiss rear axles on a car well into the 21st century and the current lack of an AWD option (the purists and drag racers don't have to check this one off) is inexcusable. IMO, Mustang, though very popular, is ceding sales in the snow-belt to competitors, foreign and domestic.

IMO, it's too late to speculate on a 4-door sports sedan on a Mustang platform. That flight has left the gate.
 
#70 ·
Ford made profits from sedan sales as well, just not enough to satisfy the bloodsuckers on Wall Street.
As it turns out a companies leadership isn't just there to ensure the company continues to do what it's always done. But rather, they're there to ensure the company is doing what it should be doing... and not doing. The most successful companies are always the ones move in the direction the market is going to move, not those who move after the market already moved.

Change is the only thing that never changes. BOF cars gave way to less sturdy unibody cars. Wagons gave way to utilities. Mainstream RWD vehicles gave way to the more efficient packaging and utility of FWD. And now sedans are giving way to crossovers, which if we're being honest, are really just tall wagons. They may not be the most exciting, but they're surely more utilitarian than a comparably sized sedan. Ingress and egress are far easier. Loading small children into car seats is surely easier in the taller vehicle. The carry more cargo which is certainly attractive to many who don't have the luxury of owning a truck as a second vehicle.

In the end Toyota and Honda will continue selling sedans far longer than the rest. That's because their management was focused over the long haul, which Detroit never has been. The Big 3 all multiple days in the sun, only to fall back into old habits and let the competition retake the initiative. Toyota and Honda can afford to be the last companies standing because their volume enables them to stay the course, and pick up the sales from brands that cannot. That doesn't mean Ford should continue throwing money into a segment that it expects to continue to rapidly shrink, they're best served now by trying to get ahead of the curve in terms of crossovers and electric, lest they really and truly end up nothing more than the F-Series company.
 
#60 ·
*Cadillac is so stupid they made a placeholder car that they are going o replace with a another car. Bad business decision*

Soon as unfavourable facts on Ford are stated you deflect. GM makes stupid decisions also, are you judging Ford by their standard?

The point that you need to agree with is Ford doesn't utilize RWD platforms as good as every other company. Why is that?
 
#59 ·
Wow, the doom-and-gloom troll brigade is out in force!

I gotta say...just dismissing a Ford employee as a "hack opinion" is a sign of willful ignorance, as I've learned about a lot of upcoming products/changes from Wings and a few others over the years...but there is nothing to be learned from drool-soaked doom predictions coming from people that are consistent in cherry-picking what information they base their "points" on.

2018 has been a transition year for Ford, and the writing on the wall was in thick writing almost a year ago. A great deal of new product is right around the corner, but not happening in 2018...so it's a year light on years and long on babbling negativity.

Reminder: Wall Street generally hates Detroit, and doubly hates Ford for the family's controlling shares. Their praise is typically minimal, even when Ford has great sales/profits.

Therefore, I dismiss their prattle just as I mock the doom-and-gloom brigade for buying into any/every speck of potential negative Blue Oval speculation.

Seriously, trolls...if anyone needs constant babble that's largely based on ignorance and panic, I suggest C-SPAN.
 
#63 ·
This was not babble?

Stop responding like you know what I or anyone of the other dissenter know, do or think. READ! UNDERSTAND!

It's time to stop sub commenting on people's post and start actually understanding what's being said.

It makes no sense for Ford to bring the Ranger over now when it was under development before they dropped the old one. Now we have an orphan Ranger that is different from the row version. If this was GM what would you guys say?

Nobody is cherry picking anything but it's a time and place for everything. Right now it's Ford's turn to be in the grinder. The 90s aren't the only time Ford has been inconsistent with updates (Fusion, Focus, 05-14 Mustang). I love that Wings provides Ford Inside news (lol) but i would love it even more if he were more honest on Ford's management. It has lacked for decades and continues to.
 
#68 · (Edited)
Actually, I think it's OK for Ford to introduce the Ranger now. The market appears to be ready for it. If there is a newly engineered Ranger in 3 years (not just a refresh), all the better. Then Ford will have shut up all the naysayers here, like me, who bemoan Ford's slow development pace. Hey, an introduction now and, then, a new and better introduction in 3 years? What's not to like?

Oh, wasn't this thread about Mustang platforms?
Im not mad at that if they do but still...we shouldve...NVM

Oh yea Mustang. Hopefully Ford isn't as doom and gloom as some of the info suggests and we get a CD6 Mustang, Mkz replacement and Conti.
 
#71 ·
Speaking of corporate changes coming, holly crap, if the rumors I am hearing are true, Ford will soon make some huge news that will impact many. It will make GM's news pale in comparison.
Obviously I can't say anything, and again, it's only a rumor. And Hackett's vision is still unclear to even us.

But I will say this much, I might have to update my resume for the first time in years. Gee, I hope I still have a 5.25" floppy drive to read it, lol.
 
#72 ·
I hope the changes that is coming that you hear rumors of does not include mass layoffs. I see some articles by analysts saying possible more layoffs from Ford than GM but those articles are relying on analysts opinions and should be taken as opinion piece for now. Especially since Hackett himself denied the articles claims of mass layoffs. But still I do hope it's not mass layoffs or even plant closures.

I do hope there's some management shifting where multiple job positions can be combined or shifted to reduce redundancy to cut costs. Positions like executives and higher ups which explains why there's been some higher ups 'suddenly' retiring as of lately as it appears. Even though some have already put in their papers months ago or already had been thinking of retiring months ago as well. I saw the part you mention having to update the resume so I figure it is what I'm guessing: shifting some jobs around to reduce clutter and redundancy. I know you work for Ford but do not know what job you do. You may have said here or even told me before but I forget.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top