Does Ford Have Too Many Engineers?

[xmanjeff]

Engineers that design 3/4 and 1 ton trucks that have to have the cab removed to service the engine, need to loose their job. Engineers that put a water pump inside the motor also need to loose their job. I have 2 Ford vehicles but I won't buy a newer one. Then they make a tail light that is over engineered and has a ridiculous price, who needs that?

spot on

 

[nthach]

They don't have too many engineers, just too many incompetent "executives"

Too many MBAs, a bloated C-suite, middle management(like any company) and an overdependance on AutoCAD/SolidWorks.

Airbus had a similar CAD clash - their Toulouse and Hamburg offices tasked with designing the A380 were running different versions of CATIA. As anyone who works with CAD know, unless it’s certain platforms(Bentley for example - the V8 .dgn file format hasn’t changed too much since the early 2000s, while Autodesk can tweak .dwg/dxf/dwf because they can), CAD files should be opened and worked on within a compatible version, else bad things happen.

 

[ekrampitzjr]

Some 20 years ago I was active on a Ford forum. One thread discussed how new mechanical engineers fresh out of university, just starting at Ford, had no idea how engines worked. They didn't know what a spark plug was or what it did. I wish I were joking.

So we see a source of the problem. Some engineers from the same universities undoubtedly went to work at GM and whatever Chrysler calls itself these days.

Another source of the problem is relying on computer simulations instead of actual testing. It's more widespread than you think. That is a bean-counter decision. That's also how you end up with garbage transmissions. "The design worked fine in simulations. I don't understand how it failed in the real world."

 

[nthach]

Another source of the problem is relying on computer simulations instead of actual testing. It's more widespread than you think. That is a bean-counter decision. That's also how you end up with garbage transmissions. "The design worked fine in simulations. I don't understand how it failed in the real world."

The funny part is that Toyota is as CAD/CAE dependent as the Detroit 3 - as a matter of fact, the Toyota Production System only wants humans interacting with a car where another human will touch/see/feel that area. Otherwise, a Toyota is built with smoke, mirrors and robots. I’m sure Toyota has ran simulations in SolidWorks/CATIA/Windchill as well.

 

[zzyzzx]

It's most likely MBA's, bean counters, and marketing people ruining the company, just like almost every other company.

 

[Skippy722]

Engineers that design 3/4 and 1 ton trucks that have to have the cab removed to service the engine, need to loose their job. Engineers that put a water pump inside the motor also need to loose their job. I have 2 Ford vehicles but I won't buy a newer one. Then they make a tail light that is over engineered and has a ridiculous price, who needs that?

I agree 110%, however I think the cab off requirement or components in stupid places is a direct result of being designed to be assembled so the manufacturer can save a buck or 2 in assembly cost per vehicle.

 

[pbm]

There is a lot of (well deserved) Ford bashing on this thread but GM is certainly no better.
It’s very telling that GM has poor management when their Opel division wasn’t profitable for years and when it was finally sold the new owners (PSA) made it profitable in very short order. And for this ’management’...Mary Barra gets 29 million dollars a year....ridiculous.

 

[nthach]

There is a lot of (well deserved) Ford bashing on this thread but GM is certainly no better.
It’s very telling that GM has poor management when their Opel division wasn’t profitable for years and when it was finally sold the new owners (PSA) made it profitable in very short order. And for this ’management’...Mary Barra gets 29 million dollars a year....ridiculous.

It’s beyond Mary Barra. The wounds at GM were inflicted by Roger Smith - it was a company that operated on a delicate spiderweb of connections between the head office and the unions at the plants as well as heavy vertical integration. Toyota was just icing on the cake in the 1970s-1990s. Roger really wanted Japanese efficiency at GM and a “world” car(like how Toyota, Honda and VW was able to sell the Corolla, Civic and Jetta/Golf with localized changes worldwide) but it was really messy. Ford was a bit more adept at the “world” car, Chrysler’s savior was Mitsu.

 

[4WD]

I agree 110%, however I think the cab off requirement or components in stupid places is a direct result of being designed to be assembled so the manufacturer can save a buck or 2 in assembly cost per vehicle.

Our Ford dealer does cab off’s like changing jeans …
One service bay is dedicated and they send ’em through …

 

[wavinwayne]

I worked in engineering for an automotive supplier to Fiat/Chrysler for 2.5 years a decade ago. It was the most stressful and depressing period of my professional career. The day I left the automotive field remains one of the happiest moments of my life, and I am not overstating it. I wouldn't touch a job related to the auto industry again for any amount of money.

 

[vwmaniaman]

When you are out on the road in middle America and your Ford diesel truck breaks down, there are no small shops that can deal with the cab removal and repair. Towing it many mile to get repaired becomes a nightmare that is UN-necessary if they used a better design like other manufacturers.

 

[4WD]

Our dealership will do cab off and put a tech on both sides and get the truck back working ASAP …
Professional mechanics like Clinebarger take them off when it makes sense to do so … I’d also say it’s going to improve workmanship …
Just not many brands that design for shade tree types …
Its not Lexus with the exhaust covering the ATF fill …
My town is just 12k and has several tow services …
HD are expensive and complicated trucks …

Do you have to remove the cab when........ - Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums

1999 to 2016 Super Duty - Do you have to remove the cab when........ - I am looking at two different F250's , one is a 2011diesel 6.7 and the other is a 2014 gas 6.2 . The 2014 has 90,000 miles and the 2011 has 229,000. I read somewhere today that the cab has to be removed from the 6.7 to do any...

www.ford-trucks.com

 

[Enthusiast]

My response to the original question:

I don't know, what I do know is the management has a problem with approving blatantly bad design (timing chains running a water pump), being too tolerant of unreliable designs (DCT in the Focus), incapability to have a successful plan to make luxury divisions successful (Lincoln, Jaguar, Volvo, Aston Martin, even Mercury), questionable newer transmissions, and over reliance on the same segment of vehicles that nearly bankrupted them all 15 years ago.

It's the same problem GM and...the mutt company that owns Chrysler has. It goes back to leadership to make tough calls to say engineer or not that a water pump driven by a timing chain is a ridiculous idea with a history of problems and we are not going to do it. It takes leadership to look at problems like the DCT and decide if a design is that bad and cannot be fixed we need to just drop it and go with something we know is reliable and support our customers whom we failed. It takes leadership to choose the right number of divisions to invest in, how to split them to find segments in the market to fit into, and to compete successfully. It takes leadership to figure out why competitors and third party companies are able to build better transmissions than yourself and either fix the process or accept defeat and buy from the a vendor (and choosing which ones are the best for each market segment). It takes leadership to recognize that they still need cars that are fuel efficient and affordable for when the hard times hit.

 

[4WD]

I think it’s clear the big units still sell and for handsome profits …
And don’t assume the switch to EV is all in their hearts - they give speeches from notes or prompters just like those who push them in a certain direction - and I don’t just mean a forbidden subject here …
Investors have become way too ideological … A real force …