Mazda the ANSWER to Ford's ills?
 

http://garage.autoblog.com/2006/04/1...ords-troubles/

I think Brillo myself and a few others have commented on this recently as well:)

Kiley argues that Mazda has all the right ingredients for success: interesting, innovative designs; products that appeal to the desirable youth-market; and a consistent branding in its (in)famous 'zoom-zoom-zoom' tagline. Virtually all of Mazda's recent products - the 3, the 5, and the famous MX-5, are hits not only in the important North American market, but around the world, as well. (Pictured is the new seven-passenger CX-9) Mark Fields even said that Mazda is "a model for what we have to do at Ford.

Why did they not mention the 8?

Perhaps, but Ford could really do itself a favor and bring some of its Euro designs this way. I have a feeling that Mazda is slightly out of touch with the US market. Not just with consumers (they are greatly improved in that area) but with engineering needs (look at the MS6 engine issues, or only one oil cooler on 4port 8's as examples). Between the 2 companies, both could benefit from a more involved working relationship.


IMO.

other markets only get one oil cooler on all the models of the 8.

Why didn't they mention the 6? It's not like the 8 was the only car they left out. I think it was more of an example.

Doesn't mean the greatly varying climate here in the states shouldn't warrant 2. If the 6 port needs 2, why wouldn't the 4. It's not like 6 port 8's spend a majority of their time above 7500rpm.

I agree that Mazda can help FORD, but FORD needs to fix itself and shouldn't rely on Mazda for that. As stated many times...why oh why is FORD's Euro stuff not comming over here? It's like they got to the point where they understand the Euro customer more than their American customer.

It's because they think all we want to drive in America are pickemup trucks I guess :dammit:

I agree fully. You can never have too much oil cooling ability but you can have too little. With an oil system that absorb nearly as much heat from the engine as the coolant, it should have 2. I personally feel that the stock dual oil coolers are inadequate and should be upgraded.

Its wierd they mentioned the 5, as its sales #'s are tiny and mazda knew that going in as it was a way to test the market for the japanese econobox's like the scion or element.

While the MS6 hasn't been a huge sucess yet, its not much of a gamble since it was built on the euro AWD Mazda6 platform and the engine is findings its way into many vehicles. If they pulled the MS6 from the market, its not a huge loss for Mazda, but I bet the car stays and will get more tailored for American tastes.

Mazda has a great handle on the U.S. market, look at the CX-7 and CX-9 for example, both build just for American tastes. Mazda doesn't have resources of Toyota, so they have been rebuilding in baby steps. The 6 is a great car, buts its a world car and therefore a little small for America (compared to the current Camry, Sonota and Accord), the next 6 will be bigger like the fusion. By 2008 Mazda will have a product slate that rivals any of the other japanese in terms of breadth and excitement.

I think Ford as a corporation can look to Mazda's success for morale, and some platform sharing but not much more. I'm with many other sentiments that Ford needs to get the job done on their own. Too much mixing of lines between Ford and Mazda worries me. I don't want Mazda to lose their recently re-discovered identity for the sake of Ford.

^ I have to tell you, as someone that works in Ford PD, Ford does not use Mazda's designs at all. All platform sharing is collaboration from the beginning. No platform that is shared by Ford branded companies ever started out as a purely Mazda or purely Ford or purely Volvo design. The exterior sheet metal, interior trim and some drivetrain variance is definitely customized to each brands identity.....but the platform was designed with the intention of being shared. The reason for this is that it allows the individual brands to bring new product to the market faster. Neither Mazda, Ford, Volvo, Lincoln, Jag, etc could bring as many new products to the market as they have in the last few years without the collaboration on the architecture of the platform. Even if Mazda brought the first production variant of the platform to the market first (such as Mazda 6) the CD3 platform architecture was a collaboration between Ford, Mazda and Volvo from the beginning. I don't think Ford wants to take Mazda customers.......why would they? I think the Fusion/Milan/Zephyr/Edge/MKX/Mazda 6/CX-9 are all very different vehicles.....yet all start out life as a variation of the CD3 platform. This is ideal for assembly plant flexibility and common part consolidation.

I think the real reason Mazda has had success is that they have strong brand identity and that is what Ford needs to work on.........and we are :)

^^^
Good to know...

Fusion/Milan/Zephyr- there is absolutley nothing different about these cars but package levels and some small exterior styling. they even have the same stupid steering wheel.

i dont think the fusion is selling too well, i hardly ever see them on the road.

I don't understand how Ford can be missing so badly with its designs, J Mays seems to have lost his golden touch. Anyhow, Mazda isn't big enough and doesn't sell enough cars to save Ford, Ford has to save themselves. Plus, 33% of a small company like Mazda (compared to Ford) is a pitance to a giant such as Ford.

^^ huh? What does 33% (actually 33.4%) ownership have to do with anything? Ford's 33.4% awards them controlling interest of Mazda under Japanese corporate law.

http://www.nni.nikkei.co.jp/FR/TNKS/...sary/m_01.html


1979
Ford Motor Company purchases a 24.5 percent stake in Mazda Motor Corporation.

1996
Ford Motor Company increases its equity in Mazda Motor Corporation to 33.4 percent.

I dont think sales is the point here as much as the way mazda is going things. Mazda is putting out interesting, fun, quality products and ford needs to learn from that. THAT will save Ford.

Those ARE the differences. They are not supposed to be completely different vehicles......they are supposed to basically the same vehicle tailored to different tastes. The exteriors are nothing alike at all......but yes, the interior of the Fusion and Milan are not that different (just materials and textures). The interior of the Zephyr looks nothing like the Fusion and Milan.

They are selling great in Michigan.......it seems like every other car is a Fusion, Milan or Zephyr. The most important part of the sales of these cars is the conquest rates.......they have been a lot higher than expected. For those that don't understand conquest rates.....it's the # of buyers that have come out of a non-Ford product to buy a Ford.......meaning they turned in a Camry to buy the Fusion.....or they turned in a Accord to by a Milan. That is a big deal and we are Ford are very proud of the success of these three cars in the short time they have been available. Remember the first model year for these three cars was 2006.....there is a lot for Ford to build on here and we plan to.

Mazda has been making great cars the past few years but I still think they're a few years behind the market.

example: CX-7...
-Great suv but it's been done already... can we say Nissan Murano?

I think as Mazda's vehicles continue to grow popularity, we'll see that gap narrow.

I knew all that but I misunderstood the argument that was being made and didn't real the article. I was looking at it from a sales perspective more than from a perspective or Ford using what Mazda is doing as a model and/or borrowing platforms and design.

^^ I see... cool then...

Yea. but they can say they're the first SUV like that to have a TurboCharged Engine ! :shocking: :shocking: :shocking:

They even mention that in their commericals

"the SUVs that you never saw them coming .... introducing the new Mazda CX-7 ... turbo charged .... direct injected .... Zoom zoom ...."

Ever heard of a Typhoon or a Forester XT, both turbocharger, both SUVs, and both fairly quick?