Rhawb

To be fair, Honda actually makes some reasonably sharp looking cars - and ONE fun one (S2k). Toyota is in some serious trouble if they keep with their boring lineup. I, for one, don't even consider Toyota anymore when I'm thinking of new cars and I've been noticing that more and more people I talk to are doing the same. Making an absolutely bulletproof car can only take you so far when your entire line lacks inspiration or passion. I want a car that invigorates me, not one that reminds me of a kitchen appliance.

rx8wannahave

I 2nd that...where did that comparison come from?

Yeah...Toyota is a quality car builder...and...ummm, that's about it. lol

Japan8

Arrgh matey, there be some thread jacking...

Japan8

BING!!! And we have a winner!

This is what I have been trying to get across to bascho (and others on this forum) about the current Ford lineup. Fords aren't bad, but they aren't really good either. There just isn't any overwhelming reason to buy one over a competitor. Fusion vs Mazda6? Mazda6... I can get it in stick and the interior (especially steering wheel) looks better. Or even a Legacy GT... 5 year warranty. Mustang GT 3yr/30,000mi. There is no Lincoln anyone whould buy over a Lexus, Infiniti or BMW. Once in awhile Ford decides to try to make a go at it... Lincoln LS sedan, but end up falling short. Not because they can't do it, not only because of cutting costs (which has something to do with it), but because frankly they are being dumb. They end up trying to beat what's on the market now instead of what's getting ready to come out. So their all new model is already stale as soon as it hits the lot.

Ford needs to be daring. In this market, trying to be safe and make "just enough" sales with a "safe" design doesn't cut it... you just end up losing more money. Either break out with daring designs or just give up and close up shop.

Japan8

If you say so. Everything Honda makes now looks like *** to me. The S2000 and RSX are the only passable cars... I don't LIKE them, but I don't hate them. The new Civic... ewww, ESPECIALLY the bi-level dash. ... and every freaking car Honda makes is FWD... even Acura... even though that market is CLEARLY RWD/AWD only! Even Toyota figured that one out... and like you said... reliable, but boring cars.

I've been saying just that... if Toyota doesn't wake up and build cars that are more fun to drive and look more exciting... they're going to end up like GM eventually. My family has had great experiences with Toyotas, but frankly they don't build any cars that I'd even consider. IS300? auto only and it costs as much as a BMW. IS250? Underpowered and expensive.... BMW again. New Camry is ugly, but at least a little more daring than the old. Carolla... zzzz. No more MR-S, no more Celica, no more Supra. Wow... Toyota really builds a GREAT line up.

Renesis_8

With the new camry, I think Toyota is starting to realize their problem with boring cars now, they introduce this quite early, as a 07 model in early 06, that is saying something, IMO, they just cant change their styling in one model year, I predict in the coming years we'll see more exciting cars from Toyota. Toyota probably wont end up like GM, they'll fix it well before anything happens.

And I dont know where Honda is trying to go, perhaps following Toyota's steps, their cars are getting more ugly and boring generation by generation(civic + accord), we already have Toyota, we dont need a second Toyota.

Kinda off topic, but one thing I feel is that I aint excited by the new skylines and supra, i have no idea why they'd share platforms and engines on these cars, why not just make them UNIque, like Honda NSX (rumour V10)

The big 3 in japan should really look at what Mazda is doing, and come up with ways to counter them with all the money they have. That'd benefit us a lot as consumers. *well i am a mazda fan, so lets hope they never realize this*

Back on topic, I saw the Ford 500 for the 1st time yesterday, had to look hard to see what car it was, then saw the small 500 badge, it was silver and i thought it looked quite nice from behind, never saw the front, but its ugly in pic. How old is this car?(assuming 1 year, as i never saw any last year) Why would they spend the money to put it on the road and end the production a year after. Even tho they cut corners and stuff, its still rather costly to put a design on the drawing board to something on the road!, what the hack are they doing, they just dont understand what the market want.
________
HotAlisa4U

Renesis_8

Oh and what would the buyers of the 500 think? Buy a brand new car and the next thing you know is they are stopping production on it because its Boring? How are they going to repair the vehicle down the road?, warrenty? It'd suck to be them. and this stuff really hurt the reputation of the company. And who bought the 500? I am assuming they are mostly the pro-american cars people, the domestic car companys are slowly giving away their customers to foreign companies, making it TOO EASY for Toyota, Honda, Nissan.... Maybe that is why we see so many camrys and accords even tho they are so boring, but hey, its better than all the domestic cars.
________
Ocean View Condominium

RotoRocket

iTrader: (1)

GM and Ford are not investing in product for when gasoline will be permanently $3 or $3.50 per gallon, which will be sooner than we all care to acknowledge.

Desert Rotor

I drove a Ford 500 for almost two weeks last summer as a rental, on a vacation. It was the LX, with leather seats (always a wise choice in July), cruise control, a not totally gutless engine, split-zone climate control in the front seat (useless complexity, to me).

It was ... a car. Obviously Ford in the way things were laid out, pretty clearly intended to compete with the Camry / Accord in terms of size, styling, and so forth. Someone claimed it was Ford's answer to the Lexus, but, eh, only for someone who cannot afford a Lexus...Steering was actually sloppier than in the Crown Victoria, gas mileage was OK but since this trip consisted of driving around some little states near the Atlantic there was a lot of stop and go so I can't really make an accurate statement about mileage.

One notable thing: no keyhole in the trunk lid. The trunk could be opened by an easily noticed button next to the headlight control, or by the remote on the key fob, but there was no keyhole. The lock inside just didn't have any "key guts". Also there was no ashtray or cigar lighter, but that's pretty much standard now.

So I drove the car for a week, and pretty much my reaction was "Eh". It wasn't better or worse to any great extent than a comparable Toyota or Honda would have been, it was clearly a better car than the Taurus/Sable in some ways, but i wouldn't want to buy one. It is, honestly, a boring car, and it's a midsize boring car to boot. If I'm going to drive a boring car, it ought to hold more people and stuff than a Ford 500. If I'm going to drive a mid/small car, it ought to be much more interesting...and now that the 06's are finally on the lot I am preparing to make my move.

For the observant, yeah I have driven a Crown Victoria. Since Ford put rack and pinion steering in them back in 2003 (catching up with other automakers only 30 years late) the Vic has become a much better car to drive. The CV offers seats for 3 children and two adults plus a gigantic amount of baggage; the trunk actually contains more cubic feet than the cargo area of many SUV's. Because it has lower CG and can be obtained with a suspension upgrade, the Vic can handle far better than many SUV's, especially the Escalade/Navigator class. I've been behind those barges on the freeway in a strong crosswind, and watching them change lanes is always interesting. The Vic doesn't do that, it stays put on the road.

Yah, the Crown Vic is a boring car, but it holds a lot of people and stuff, gets 25 MPG on the highway at 75-80 MPH, is extremely quiet due to the newer glass and has very good crashworthiness. Ok, it's a cop car/taxicab, but sometimes that is a good thing. And it doesn't have one of those annoyiing sliding doors for the passengers.

bascho

I'm here how everyone......sorry, I was sick and didn't visit the boards through the weekend. My my this thread is interesting.......and here is why. I know that most of the people my age (late 20's early 30's) think the Five Hundred is really boring and under powered......but we are not the target market. If you look at the average age of the Camry, Five Hundred and 300 customer, they are mid-50's. Even if Ford built the baddest-looking RWD full-sized sedan to hit the market ever......I wouldn't buy one. Hey, the 300 is a great looking car......for my dad to buy. I know a lot of the people on this board rip Ford and the Five Hundred a new *** for power and looks......but most are RX8 owners like me that aren't buying full-sized sedans anyway. Ford cutting production has little to do with sales for the Five Hundred (which have been stronger than expected). Remember, Chrysler only has the 300.....Ford has the Five Hundred and Montego (add the sales together).

Ford has plans for the Five Hundred and Montego to keep the 50 somethings excited. For those of us in the different generation (younger), Ford has the Fusion, Milan, Zephyr which have been selling like crazy. Ford never intended to sell as many Five Hundreds as they did Taurus.....that is why they replaced the Taurus with two different cars (to split the sedan market). Although I think the Five Hundred is under powered and low on styling, it is definitely high on comfort and quality.

bascho

It is very hard to build cars that will not hurt your other brands.....this is something all automotive companies are really starting to think about...brand identity. Ford can't build cars that hurt Volvo sales or Mazda sales.....they have to appeal to different tastes. Your Volvo customer can't be a Ford customer.....otherwise you have not defined your brand effectively. No ONE car can be everything to everyone.......SOMEONE will always complain about something. Add too much power and fuel economy sucks......get great gas mileage and it's a dog to drive. Make it roomy so that 5 adults can fit along with 5 sets of golf clubs and you get people complaining its too big. Ask 50-something's what they like the looks to be and you get the 30-something's bashing the bland looks. Make it look edgy and get the 60-something's refusing to buy saying it's too gaudy. It's easy to sit back and second guess every automakers products.......so why don't you go out a design the next hit? You obviously 'know' what everyone wants!! (not directed to you Japan8...."you" is being used for anyone who thinks they can do it better) Remember, a new car line can cost hundreds of millions in investment.....make sure you don't eliminate/isolate your target audience with the design. Oh, and by the way, you have to guess at what your target audience will want 3-4 years from now.....because that is how long it takes to go from a design to an actual production level car.

I have yet to see anyone get everything right. The 300 looks great but the quality sucks *** just like every other Chrysler product. The Camry has a great history.....but the car is ugly. Toyota could take a **** in a box and sell 400,000 of them based on their reputation right now. The Accord is a quality automobile.....but again BORING!. I honestly don't blame Ford, Toyota and Honda for boring sedans.....the people that buy these cars are boring.

sti_eric

Wrong-o. Did you read the C&D article?

So slowing sales and layoffs = stronger than expected sales?

bascho

Yeah, all five sentences.


Since when does a car rag know what is actually driving an auto company's decision? They report what they know which is usually very little. I trust their reviews of vehicles tested and that is about it. C&D does not have anyone working in my office that I am aware of. Does C&D have a clue about Ford's plans for 2008-2010??? NO. Hey guess what? I do, but I can't tell you. I tell you guys everthing I can when I can safely tell you without risk to my employment. C&D doesn't have a clue why the plant is cutting production. They use a recent sales decline as speculation of Ford's reasoning......but that is all it is, speculation.

tuj

I dunno, I thought it looked more like the 300 than it does. The things that got me where the elevated driving position, and the higher stance, similar to what the 300 has. Maybe it SHOULD have looked more like the 300.

NotAPreppie

My paren'ts really like their 500. I think that says something about the target demographic for that car.

sti_eric

So, no layoffs at the Chicago assembly plant?

Japan8

I'll give you that on brand identity and not wanting to end up with your various nameplates competiting directly with each other. Fair enough. But ALL of Ford GROUP isn't producing anything that can REALLY compete with BMW, Infiniti, MB, Lexus. Nothing in the Lincoln lineup, nothing in the Volvo lineup, nothing in the Ford lineup... the closest they come is Jaguar, but those are more expensive, everyone still worries about their reliability (although Ford has improved this greatly since taking over), and frankly the sedans look like ***. Not to mention that they perform more like a MB than a BMW. Volvo... *sigh*... the S40 is FWD. Adding AWD and the turbo engine pushes the price to about $40k MSRP, but the weany *** car only has 218hp?! This is supposed to compete with the BMW 330, Lexus IS350 and Infiniti G35?!

Styling and target audience... come on bascho. MB's new S class is pretty hot... the shape has greatly changed from the stodgy old look to sleek and elegant. Even Toyota recognizes the need to add some spice to their cars with the new Camry... introduced EARLY says even more about this. GM has spiced up the Caddie lineup... hell they even has the "V" version to compete with the "M" and such. Lincoln doesn't have anything tuned by SVT, much less even a base car that can really even compete with them! BMW is doing damn well, so I don7t want to hear any freaking bean counters try and tell me that sporty cars/sports sedans/etc. don't sell enough... that there's no money in it. That is just plain BS. Just because Ford's efforts to date have been lackluster or failed doesn't mean jackshit. That's plain old faulty logic. An inferior or crappy product can easily produce those results as well.

I can spend all day picking apart and critiquing Ford's lineup. In the end it still comes down to their strategy thus far sucks. They need to fire the MBA's and supposed industry pundits... do like NASA with their open competition... tap into the many good people out there who aren't part of the automotive industrial complex, so they'd be ignored, but actually have some great ideas... different ones because they have a different view on things. Look... Ford needs to define what each brand is supposed to be, their competitor and target market. What competes with Mercedes Benz and Lexus? What competes with BMW and Infiniti and Audi? They're all the same market? No one in PD, marketing... any decision maker at Ford had better not say that. Anyone who does should be fired on the spot. You know as well as I do that they are very different cars. Luxury cars vs luxury SPORTS sedans. The market segment is clearly RWD and even the more luxurious cars like MB still have some element of sportiness to them. To continue on... what in all of the Ford lineup competes with the M3 and G35c? WRX, WRX STI, and Evo? GTI? What's up with the cheapass warranty? 3yr/30,000mi? WTF?! Americans are complaining about not just things like styling and power of Amreicans cars... their big beef is reliability. Suer longer warranties cost more money, but what is the point of a shorter warranty's money savings if no one buys your cars and you go Chapter 11? Ford needs to SHOW (not say... actions speak louder than words) that they have improved and stand behind their cars. match Subaru and VW's warranty. On the BMW's they have the full service included warranty and this is what Ford should be including on ther competitor brand cars. The issue isn't JUST with the Ford nameplate, but Ford Group as a whole.

Yeah... Chrysler quality and reliability Don't forget that the only Chryslers with a MT are the Viper, SRT-4 and trucks. The damn 300, magnum, Charger...just about everything only comes with AT/CVT.

I agree with you about Toyota. On just their reputation they can sell a pile of ****, tell people it's lemon and everyone would not only buy it, but also comment about how wonderful it smells. IMHO, Honda is the same... boring *** cars, but their reliability is highly overrated. However they have a great reputation from their past cars so they can sell any pile of **** they want and everyone buys it up.... even if the car is in the shop constantly, or requires expensive maintenance every 6 months after 60k mi, they think it's so damn reliable and great and American cars are ****.

bascho

Hello, 30,000 hourly jobs will be eliminated by 2008......every plant is laying people off. I can tell you that no one is being layed off at the Chicago Assy Plant due to decreased March sales of the Five Hundred. Most of the layoffs are through attrition (retirees not being replaced). There are more people working in Assy Plants then are actually needed (thank the UAW for that). Don't worry about the Five Hundred's future.......Ford is very happy with this car. I would love to post some of the internal mailings we get about sales performance and conquest customers......but it's not public info so I cannot.

Just don't believe everything you read in any car rag......except for the reviews of the test cars since that is their only source of first-hand info.

bascho

Japan8, I agree with you on almost everything you say.....but Ford cannot be a Mercedes Benz and nor to they want to. Mercedes is a tiny company in terms of US market share. I think Ford would rather be a Toyota then a Mercedes. Don't get me wrong, Mercedes makes some unbelieveable products......I would love to own many of them.......but they are a niche. How many people can afford a $75-$120K car? I definitely think that Jaguar is lost and needs direction......but Volvo is better then ever. Think back 10 years and describe a Volvo ......................
.................................................. .................................................. .....................
exactly, an ugly, boxy, boring sedan.....but it was safe. Look at their product
line-up now.

I am not saying Ford has done a good job at brand identity.....in fact, it's a big part of the 'Way Forward Plan". Over the last 20 years Ford, Mercury and Lincoln has all suffered severe brand identity loss. I do think that Ford is starting to 'get-it'.........you have not seen the products in the pipeline like I have. The Fusion/Milan/Zephyr/Edge/MKX are just the tip of the ice berg. 'Patience young grass hoppa'......Ford is just starting to flex it's 100 years of automotive muscle.

Glyphon

tangent...the woman in the Milan commercials is hot!

bascho

YEAH SHE IS!!!!!!

born2drive

American auto manufactures have really been screwing up lately. They have been making poor quality vehicles and are lagging far behind foreign manufactures in design and development.

They have also been offering way too many incentives to get people to buy their vehicles, ie. employee pricing and rebates. This worked for a short while, but it saturated the market with their vehicles and also drove down the resale value of the vehicles already owned by customers. This caused many brand loyal customers to switch to foreign brands, me included. Instead of concentrating on offering "affordable" and less appealing vehicles to the public, they need to concentrate on quality and current trends in style.

American auto manufactures have been overly dependent on the baby boomer gereration who where attracted to models which arent't desirable to the young men and women of today.

If the American auto industry starts making cars that are both good looking and high quality they should be able to get ahead of the game once again.

Maybe, they should just get rid of all those old geezers on their management teams.

bascho

I think your generalizations of American auto companies is off by about a decade. The products coming our of Ford, GM and DCX are of the highest quality and best designs ever produced by the domestic companies. I agree that the former 'Big 3' have had many quality problems in the past......but that is in the past. The difference between the highest quality cars and the average quality ones in current production is very small. I am not saying that Toyota is not still the best in quality......but their lead is smaller and smaller every year. The greatest thing Toyota has going is a history of quality and strong public perception. The domestic 'Big 3' now have the quality (which gets better every year).....but they have no history of quality.....thus low public perception. It takes a long time to change peoples' perceptions......but it can happen.

rodrigo67

Ok, not to bust *****, but could you clarify exactly what your trying to say.

In post 37 you say "The 300 looks great but the quality sucks *** just like every other Chrysler product.", but in the above post you say "The products coming our of Ford, GM and DCX are of the highest quality and best designs ever produced by the domestic companies. "

So, are they the best or do they suck ***, or are they just "the best" by only American standards, and "suck ***" compared to everyone else?

bascho

I said that the quality is the best they've ever had.......but for a lot of Chrysler products that is not saying very much.....which is why I say they suck ***. What that really says is that 10-15 years ago a Chrysler product was 'down right ****'.....but they have gotten better.....the 'sucks ***' level. In another couple of years they will be at the 'barely ok' level and then maybe a few years later they will be at the 'decent' level.


down right **** ----> sucks *** ----> barely ok -----> decent ----> good