Whats wrong over at Ford?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Quote:


Quote:


Restructuring is never easy, and it will take time to fix some of the mistakes that have been made over the past years.



RangerXL: On the face of it, these sound like wise words. However, what does restructuring have to do with not offering modern, distinctive products that already exist? And fixing mistakes could start 'tomorrow': Ford sells very well-received products in the rest of the world, like the Mondeo, Euro Focus, Fiesta, and S-Max (that just won Car-of-the Year) that would be perfect for us. Instead, we get the same sausage in different lengths: US Focus, Fusion, Taurus, Edge, Escape, all the way up the ladder to the big trucks. All have that same disposable razor front end styling. It's obvious to me that Ford USA only wants to sell product by the pound, not by trying to differentiate or innovate. I suppose they think they have Mazda, Volvo, and Jaguar for that?

S-Max review on The Truth About Cars



The changes you mentioned can't happen over night. They could bring the whole European lineup over, but people would still say that "Fords are unreliable," or "that's nice but Toyota is better." Ford has to change their own mindset in the US (which they are doing) and the mindset of car buyers. That takes time. You also have to remember that when they have brought over European models in the past, things did not always work out like they had hoped. The Contour (Mondeo) never sold as well as the Tempo it replaced.

Their car lineup here is not as bad as you make it out to be. The Fusion, Edge, Escape, and trucks are all selling well and have been well received. I do think they should look into bringing over some small European models to compete with cars like the Yaris and Fit though.
 
i don't get it. my 1977 thunderbird has 141,000 miles on it now. never any major trouble. transmission still shifts great, the 351W still doesn't use any oil. it's a much better car than my 2002 taurus ever thought of being. i maintain both vehicles to the best of my ability. cars built in the mid to late 70's weren't really known for there quality either. my 'bird will live to see 200,000 easily enough. you'd think ford would have made great strides in quality between 1977 and 2002. i believe they went backwards.
 
Quote:



The changes you mentioned can't happen over night. They could bring the whole European lineup over, but people would still say that "Fords are unreliable," or "that's nice but Toyota is better."




What US drivers typically prefer in a vehicle is not what European vehicles offer. They won't have the mushy suspensions and overboosted steering (you can lick your finger and turn the steering wheel on a stopped car with it).
 
Quote:


The changes you mentioned can't happen over night. They could bring the whole European lineup over, but people would still say that "Fords are unreliable," or "that's nice but Toyota is better." Ford has to change their own mindset in the US (which they are doing) and the mindset of car buyers. That takes time. You also have to remember that when they have brought over European models in the past, things did not always work out like they had hoped. The Contour (Mondeo) never sold as well as the Tempo it replaced.

Their car lineup here is not as bad as you make it out to be. The Fusion, Edge, Escape, and trucks are all selling well and have been well received. I do think they should look into bringing over some small European models to compete with cars like the Yaris and Fit though.



The Mustang has been a sales explosion, and there's nothing new about it except its looks, so people are willing to take a chance on a Ford if it looks interesting. I think you could have said almost the same thing about the original Focus (at least as far as looking interesting). True about the Contour, but it never seemed like a good deal compared with a Taurus while also looking so similar. But the new Mondeo looks great.

My main point was that Ford's lineup are mostly look-alikes: I can't tell the difference between a TaurusX, Escape, or Edge, and I believe buyers want something that is fresh and distinctive, no matter who makes it. Name it whatever you want, Taurus or 500, but don't make it look like an old Passat. Sure, you're not going to convince the diehard import buyer, but this isn't really the market Ford is after.
 
Mazda6 is a great car. I find the new Ford Body no where near as attractive.

Ford has a great small car. Its the Focus (II) currently on sale in Europe. Unfortunately we have to buy a Mazda3 or Volvo S40 to get it and neither is as attractive as the Focus II.

An even smaller car Fit/Yaris size is available in the Euro Fiesta.

Ford has some really nice RWD Sedans. Unfortunately you have to be in Oz to buy them.

The only current US car I would keep if I was at Ford is the Mustang and I would be real worried about getting the power up to face the Challenger and Camaro as well as getting the freshening here faster and the new car online no later than 2011 model year. The GT500 is going to e to expensive to face off against them.
 
Ford found the problem... They circled it.
Ford_Corporate_Logo.jpg
 
I sure hope that the powers that be at FORD do not read this forum because unlike those who are bashing Ford I OWN AND DRIVE FORDS.
I would NEVER consider buying a Fiesta or a Focus or anything like it.
I have never owned and hope to never own a unibody vehicle every thing that I own has a frame and I never have owned and will not buy a front wheel drive or a car powered with a 4 cylinder engine.
I currently have 5 Fords but can't say as to how reliable they are the highest mileage one is a 85 and only has 345,000 miles on it but it is still going strong I drive it every day.
If they start building nothing but what is suggested here then they will loose a long time customer.
I know that many on this forum like those motorized skate boards but their are also many like me who will never buy one of them.
OH well their is always the Hummer
 
Ford quality is not consistent. I had a Ford Ranger (94). A real quality disaster with multiple problems. My last American car made in Mexico with a German engine - so I thought. I broke down and got a '06 Mustang GT - rear-end failure, cabin leaks, strut/frame clunking, a real rattle box at 8K. In between, purchased a couple Toyotas, Japanese trucks made in America. Definitely better built on every front.

The new IDEA at Ford would be to improve quality, until they do, hope they avoid liquidation. Do it for the hard working Ford workers here in America.
 
What problems did your Ranger have? What engine and transmission did it have?

Mine has been close to flawless in 85,000 hard miles. It was a fleet truck before I got it. Ford's warranty and tsb repair database shows no warranty, tsb, or recall work ever being done to the truck aside from having the seat belts tested to see if they were part of a defective batch from TRW (they passed). I have had to replace a tailgate handle and a tailgate strap. No other quality problems. My parents have an '02 Ranger that has also been great. It had the serp belt and tensioner replaced under warranty for noise, and also needed a tailgate handle (the plastic ones suck, metal ones from older Rangers are a direct replacement though), but has not had any other issues. It only has 42,000 miles though. Their old 1986 Ranger only ever needed an ignition switch...that was it for repairs in 130,000 miles and 13 years.
 
Ford's been relying on their partners for all of their engineering, for too long, and now it's come to bite them back. Without their partners they would have NO IDEA what to do, and would have sunk long ago. Notice how all the well moving Ford products are built from parts designed by their partners' engineering teams, and the products they design and build themselves (Ford 500/Taurus) all suck and no one is buying them.
 
Quote:


What problems did your Ranger have? What engine and transmission did it have?

Mine has been close to flawless in 85,000 hard miles. It was a fleet truck before I got it. Ford's warranty and tsb repair database shows no warranty, tsb, or recall work ever being done to the truck aside from having the seat belts tested to see if they were part of a defective batch from TRW (they passed). I have had to replace a tailgate handle and a tailgate strap. No other quality problems. My parents have an '02 Ranger that has also been great. It had the serp belt and tensioner replaced under warranty for noise, and also needed a tailgate handle (the plastic ones suck, metal ones from older Rangers are a direct replacement though), but has not had any other issues. It only has 42,000 miles though. Their old 1986 Ranger only ever needed an ignition switch...that was it for repairs in 130,000 miles and 13 years.




4.0 liter motor with the automatic - By 70K:

Two transmissions (one stopped going into reverse, the other front brearing was so bad new seals couldn't fix the ATF shower)
A starter
Leaking intake manifold
Throttle Position Sensor
Oil pressure gauge and sensor (4 times to get the gauge (switch) fixed
Gas tank level indicator (in the tank)
2 oxygen sensors
AC Compressor shot
Front bearings on the I-beams replaced/relubed multiple occasions
Rear antiloc brake module
Seats rotted (foam turned to dust under seat) in three years
Continuously warped front rotors (finally fixed by indexing, using shims and frozen rotors)
Never would keep an alignment
Water pump
PS Pump
Leaky rear seal to brake drum

Not to include maintenance items such as leaky brake caliper, shocks gone at 40K, frozen e-brake cable, cracked radiator tank at 20K.

This is all with very traditional maintenance (O/F at 3K, all other fluids to include tranny, ps, antifreeze every two years). And it was a commuter, no real work to speak of. Glad a deer in the road took it's life. Only other worse car I'd every had - 1991 Dodge Caravan.
 
Quote:


Quote:


What problems did your Ranger have? What engine and transmission did it have?

Mine has been close to flawless in 85,000 hard miles. It was a fleet truck before I got it. Ford's warranty and tsb repair database shows no warranty, tsb, or recall work ever being done to the truck aside from having the seat belts tested to see if they were part of a defective batch from TRW (they passed). I have had to replace a tailgate handle and a tailgate strap. No other quality problems. My parents have an '02 Ranger that has also been great. It had the serp belt and tensioner replaced under warranty for noise, and also needed a tailgate handle (the plastic ones suck, metal ones from older Rangers are a direct replacement though), but has not had any other issues. It only has 42,000 miles though. Their old 1986 Ranger only ever needed an ignition switch...that was it for repairs in 130,000 miles and 13 years.




4.0 liter motor with the automatic - By 70K:

Two transmissions (one stopped going into reverse, the other front brearing was so bad new seals couldn't fix the ATF shower)
A starter
Leaking intake manifold
Throttle Position Sensor
Oil pressure gauge and sensor (4 times to get the gauge (switch) fixed
Gas tank level indicator (in the tank)
2 oxygen sensors
AC Compressor shot
Front bearings on the I-beams replaced/relubed multiple occasions
Rear antiloc brake module
Seats rotted (foam turned to dust under seat) in three years
Continuously warped front rotors (finally fixed by indexing, using shims and frozen rotors)
Never would keep an alignment
Water pump
PS Pump
Leaky rear seal to brake drum

Not to include maintenance items such as leaky brake caliper, shocks gone at 40K, frozen e-brake cable, cracked radiator tank at 20K.

This is all with very traditional maintenance (O/F at 3K, all other fluids to include tranny, ps, antifreeze every two years). And it was a commuter, no real work to speak of. Glad a deer in the road took it's life. Only other worse car I'd every had - 1991 Dodge Caravan.



That is definitely an unusual case. Everyone builds a bad apple though.
 
Quote:


Quote:


Quote:


What problems did your Ranger have? What engine and transmission did it have?

Mine has been close to flawless in 85,000 hard miles. It was a fleet truck before I got it. Ford's warranty and tsb repair database shows no warranty, tsb, or recall work ever being done to the truck aside from having the seat belts tested to see if they were part of a defective batch from TRW (they passed). I have had to replace a tailgate handle and a tailgate strap. No other quality problems. My parents have an '02 Ranger that has also been great. It had the serp belt and tensioner replaced under warranty for noise, and also needed a tailgate handle (the plastic ones suck, metal ones from older Rangers are a direct replacement though), but has not had any other issues. It only has 42,000 miles though. Their old 1986 Ranger only ever needed an ignition switch...that was it for repairs in 130,000 miles and 13 years.




4.0 liter motor with the automatic - By 70K:

Two transmissions (one stopped going into reverse, the other front brearing was so bad new seals couldn't fix the ATF shower)
A starter
Leaking intake manifold
Throttle Position Sensor
Oil pressure gauge and sensor (4 times to get the gauge (switch) fixed
Gas tank level indicator (in the tank)
2 oxygen sensors
AC Compressor shot
Front bearings on the I-beams replaced/relubed multiple occasions
Rear antiloc brake module
Seats rotted (foam turned to dust under seat) in three years
Continuously warped front rotors (finally fixed by indexing, using shims and frozen rotors)
Never would keep an alignment
Water pump
PS Pump
Leaky rear seal to brake drum

Not to include maintenance items such as leaky brake caliper, shocks gone at 40K, frozen e-brake cable, cracked radiator tank at 20K.

This is all with very traditional maintenance (O/F at 3K, all other fluids to include tranny, ps, antifreeze every two years). And it was a commuter, no real work to speak of. Glad a deer in the road took it's life. Only other worse car I'd every had - 1991 Dodge Caravan.



That is definitely an unusual case. Everyone builds a bad apple though.




I'm sorry, but anyone who has problems like this in 70k miles on ANY car obviously beats the living p!ss out of the vehicle. I had a '93 Explorer with 150k and the only common problem it had with this Ranger its entire life was the annoying radius-arm/bushing problem. Beyond that it was just a couple batteries and brake pads. It doesn't matter if you maintain it every 5000, 3000, or even 1000 miles, if you stomp on the throttle constantly and then stand on the brakes, you're going to wear out things like a/c compressors, p/s pumps, transmissions, rotors, shocks, etc. If another brand can stand up to it, more power to 'em, but I venture to guess either the driving style has changed since this Ranger so the cars last longer, or this guy must have been the unluckiest car buyer alive...!

crushedcar.gif
 
Every car company makes a bad one now and then...some more than others, but most relatively minor - generally speaking. But if you're buying a car based on quality and/or reliability, you really only have three choices:

1. Buy based on your own experiences and the experiences of others in your circle of family/friends/acquaintances.

2. Buy based on the statistical evidence and "expert" recommendations available from any of a number of sources out there or any combination thereof, e.g. Consumer Reports, Car & Driver, Motor Trend, J.D. Power, TrueDelta, ConsumerGuide, Yahoo, MSN, Cars.com, TheAutoChannel, CNet, etc.

3. Buy based on a combination of one and two above.

But what you shouldn't do is base any buying decision, whether it's cars or pop-tarts, based on only one or two data points. That's just silly.

My
twocents.gif
 
LouDough I think you're completely correct. However, how one treats a vehicle should also be considered when talking about how good a vehicle is (and this is what drives me so nuts about these debates). I beat the tar out of my old Neon and my sister drove her older, higher mileage car like a "normal" person. My Neon had quite a few issues, my sister's didn't, but all my issues were attributable to my autocrossing, and playing with it on open track days- shocks, rotors, motor mounts, clutches, power steering pumps, wheel bearings, etc. I will still trumpet how good of a car my Neon was even though I was constantly working on it at *only* 110,000 miles. It took WAY more abuse than the average driver could dish out and, yes, if often broke. But is that car really designed to be flogged on a race track- or on a commute to work? I no longer own the Neon and now have vehicles that I drive "normally" and take care of. They've all been great.
 
Quote:


Quote:


when they figure out how to make a f.w.d automatic transmission last and work like it's supposed to would be a big help for them also.


Same for Chrysler. Oh dear Lord....
pat2.gif
crushedcar.gif





IF we are talking current production both are doing this substantially better than toyota .

offtopic.gif


Aldaris , in light of this weeks news and postings concerning things like how toyota was just clocked by FORD (JD POWERS) and Hyundai(Strategic Visions Inc.) and your own recent posts bashing everything from HONDA, GM , and FORD you might want to just change your handle here , I ... but well ,.... its SOOOOOO EMBARRASSING for you ..... , heck , I even feel bad .......
 
Last edited:
Ford beats Toyota in quality rankings
Automaker takes lead spot in five of 19 segments in survey
The Associated Press
Updated: 4:24 p.m. PT June 6, 2007
DETROIT - People might have to stop making all those jokes about the quality of Ford’s cars — the ones that say Ford stands for “Found on Road Dead” or “Fixed or Repaired Daily.”

Now, it could be “Fixing Our Reputation Daily.”

Ford Motor Co. supplanted Toyota as leader of the pack in J.D. Power and Associates’ annual initial quality rankings released Wednesday, grabbing more individual awards than any other automaker for the first time since 1998, when it tied for the top spot.

Ford ranked highest in five of 19 segments in this year’s survey. That’s two better than in 1998 — the last time a U.S. automaker was on top — when Ford tied with Toyota and Honda.

The Dearborn automaker earned segment awards for the Ford Mustang, Lincoln Mark LT, Lincoln MKZ, Mercury Milan and Mazda MX-5 Miata. Mazda is 33.4 percent owned by Ford.

Porsche again dominated the overall ranking of brands, averaging 91 problems per 100 vehicles, as it had last year. That compared with a 2007 industry average of 125 problems per 100 vehicles. Last year it was 124.

Toyota Motor Corp., which grabbed the top spot in 11 segments last year, captured only four this year — the 4Runner, Sequoia, Tacoma and Lexus RX350/RX400h.

Ford’s Lincoln brand, which jumped from 12th to third in overall vehicle quality, averaged 100 problems per 100 vehicles. It was behind Porsche and Toyota’s Lexus luxury brand, which averaged 94 problems per 100 vehicles.

“We saw dramatic improvement from Lincoln,” said Neal Oddes, J.D. Power’s director of product research and analysis. “It was a fantastic year for the Mercury Milan, with dramatic improvements in terms of defects.”

Overall, he said, Ford’s strength came from new launches such as the Edge and the Lincoln MKX and MKZ.

Ford spokeswoman Anne Marie Gattari said those launches “speak volumes about what we’re doing right.”

“What we saw today is the result of several years of adhering to our design and manufacturing processes with complete discipline,” she said. “It took some time for the results to be evident.”

Toyota had seen its list of quality leaders decrease in a quality study released Monday by Strategic Vision Inc., a San Diego-based market research company and consultant to automakers. Despite improving its overall quality, Toyota led in one category in that study — down from four in 2006. South Korean automaker Hyundai Motor Co. led in five categories, outperforming its Japanese, European and U.S. competitors. Last year, it had no winners.


Joe Ivers, J.D. Power’s executive director of quality and customer satisfaction, said there’s no clear answer for Toyota’s drop. But several vehicles brought its quality performance down this year, including the Corolla, Prius and Lexus models.

It is worth noting, he said, that Toyota executives have been speaking publicly about their concerns about maintaining its historically high quality during a time of rapid growth.


“We’re not used to seeing their vehicles go backward from a quality standpoint, and several of them did,” he said. “It’s no big change, but when things go backward for Toyota, it’s unusual.”

Toyota spokesman Mike Michels said the company was pleased with its results, adding that Toyota was the second-ranked non-luxury brand and stayed in the top 10 overall. Lexus also maintained its second-place ranking overall.

Michels said the LS460, which for the first time was not the top-ranked in its segment, came in a close second to the Audi A8 and Mercedes Benz S-Class, which tied for first. Still, the company also was pleased with that showing, since it was a redesigned model and had just been shipped to dealers before the survey-taking began.

Michels said small shifts such as these make a huge difference as the quality gap has narrowed among automakers.

“In our view, if you really look at this, we’re starting to see differences that are not statistically significant,” he said.

“The (Initial Quality Survey) is not the whole picture when it comes to customers’ perceptions and the information they have on quality. We think that long-term quality and durability are what people base their buying decisions on.”

In the J.D. Power survey, Hyundai fell from third overall to 12th. Oddes said relaunched vehicles such as the Santa Fe did not do as well as the automaker had hoped. On the plus side, the redesigned Elantra performed well in its segment.

Lincoln was followed by Honda, Mercedes-Benz, Jaguar and Toyota. Honda, with the fewest problems per 100 vehicles among non-luxury brands, improved in the ranking to fourth from sixth in 2006.

The most improved nameplates in the study are Land Rover, Saab and Mercedes-Benz.

Ivers said Mercedes-Benz’s improvements have been significant and speedy across its product line. It grabbed the top spot in three segments, and notable was its S-Class going from “worst to first” as it launched a redesigned model.

“A lot of people avoid buying a vehicle in its first year of production, but Mercedes, with its S-Class, got everything right,” he said.

J.D. Power also gave the Platinum Plant Quality Award for producing vehicles yielding the fewest defects to Ford’s Wixom Assembly Plant, which stopped making cars May 31. The Detroit-area plant produced the Lincoln Town Car, which averages 35 problems per 100 vehicles.


It was the first North American assembly plant to receive the honor since 1999.

For the study, Westlake Village, Calif.-based J.D. Power collected responses from more than 97,000 buyers and lessees of new 2007 model year vehicles after 90 days of ownership.

This year’s survey included 228 questions and asked for information specifically about design and production, such as defects and malfunctions.


© 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19073071/


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

MSN Privacy . Legal
© 2007 MSNBC.com
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top