Why Do Ford Pickups Sell So Well?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: itguy08
Originally Posted By: demarpaint

Ram sales have been growing at a nice pace. You're correct, IF the Chinese buy Chrysler all bets will be off. That isn't cast in stone yet. IMO Ford quality has been dropping while their competition is slowly catching up. The aluminum bodies were a big mistake, I know a few people who were loyal Ford owners that swung over to Ram because of it.


Except GM and Ram have pretty much confirmed aluminum is on the table for them as well. I'd say the gamble paid off - sales are up 8% so far this year. In the 1/2 ton space they have to still meet CAFE and that means weight reduction and the easiest way is aluminum.

Sure Ram has been increasing bit it's starting to level off and GM was the one that lost the most. Ford has still been growing at a rate that is outpacing Ram's gains. GM is the one that needs to be worried - GMC and Chevy sales are off by -7.6% (GMC) and -5.8% (Chevy). Don't know why - the GM's are nice trucks too and both are better than Ram. Having the most cash on the hood has helped Ram a bit but I wonder how long that will keep up given FCA's dire financial situation.



Only time will tell. The wildcard is going to be the Chinese. Having driven Fords latest offerings, and the newest Ram, I'm a convert. Add to that the the 2.7L problems it's sad to say my love for Ford is fading.
 
Originally Posted By: Johnny2Bad
Originally Posted By: pbm
If I were in the market for a pickup I'd buy a Ford over a Chevy based on Ford not taking a bailout.


You are, of course, free to make buying decisions on any criteria you choose.

Ford didn't need a buyout because through collosal mis-management during record vehicle sales, they nearly went bankrupt. As a result, they divested assets (selling car companies such as Jaguar) and went to lenders of last resort to borrow funds to take them out of a crisis. They did so at a time when lenders were not just lending, they were lending at a reckless pace. Armed with those funds, they were able to weather the loss of cash flow that affected all domestic car makers after the financial crisis.

GM and Chrysler were in good financial shape, but the loss of cash flow affected them deeply and forced a financial crisis not really of their own making. Furthermore, lending essentially stopped after the crisis, making the options Ford was able to avail themselves of impossible.

It just goes to show that you can't predict the future, and sometimes the world bites you despite all your best efforts.

Personally I would choose my next truck based on the merits of the vehicles themselves, but I'm not you. Both GM and Chrysler (RAM) beat Ford on the number of vehicles still registered over time (number of older vehicles on the road). There are more than just new car sales as a criteria for choosing a vehicle.

The differences in sales volume between the big three domestic truck manufacturers are real, but they are not huge. You could also say that more people choose trucks other than Ford (GM and RAM together).

Again, I am not criticizing your choice of vehicle ... if you want a Ford, go ahead and buy one. The differences between the major truck offerings are not particularly great; they all offer similar packages and get the job done. Ford makes a good truck, as do the others, and I would consider all three based on my needs and wants, just as I think anyone should.

I just don't see the buyout issue as some kind of badge of honour, or dis-honour. The auto manufacturing sector of the US economy is arguably the last remaining large manufacturing capacity, and still is a huge job creator. On a more long-term view, the US could not and cannot afford to lose the domestic manufacturing ability the Big Three offer. Just like the Financial Crisis was sudden and unpredictable, there is a Strategic need to be able to quickly transform auto manufacturing to military manufacturing should the need arise. Losing two major automakers would significantly harm that ability.


Yea- Ford was just as bad as GM-it's really funny what we choose to believe!
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: pbm

I have a problem with GM because the stockholders took the hit while the unions were the winners....it's almost something you'd expect from a Leninist society...


I had a ton of GM shares. Worth exactly zero now. Forced bankruptcy destroyed my investment.

Also, quite simply, I find the Ford seats more comfortable. Always have.
 
Originally Posted By: Cujet

Also, quite simply, I find the Ford seats more comfortable. Always have.


Ford can be very good at seats.

The seats in my 1994 Ranger were a big selling point for me. When I saw the seats and t-case shifter on the floor, it was going home with me...
rp5Aax3.jpg


Factory power lumbar and power inflatable side bolsters with crank windows...only in a Ford.
crackmeup2.gif
 
Originally Posted By: cb_13
Originally Posted By: Elevguy
Originally Posted By: pbm
If I were in the market for a pickup I'd buy a Ford over a Chevy based on Ford not taking a bailout.
Ford took an EPA grant for 14 billion for development on alternative fuel vehicles but that not a bailout rite?


Student loans and welfare checks can both come from the government does that make them the same?



Still the same taxpayer money, but let's not put down people who need a hand from the gov't. FWIW I didn't take issue with the bailout; to me it's better than throwing money in the fire for all these perpetual wars.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: itguy08
Originally Posted By: demarpaint

Ram sales have been growing at a nice pace. You're correct, IF the Chinese buy Chrysler all bets will be off. That isn't cast in stone yet. IMO Ford quality has been dropping while their competition is slowly catching up. The aluminum bodies were a big mistake, I know a few people who were loyal Ford owners that swung over to Ram because of it.


Except GM and Ram have pretty much confirmed aluminum is on the table for them as well. I'd say the gamble paid off - sales are up 8% so far this year. In the 1/2 ton space they have to still meet CAFE and that means weight reduction and the easiest way is aluminum.
... snip) ...


Yes, but I suspect RAM and GM/Chevrolet won't be betting on all-aluminum body panels; there are plenty of other places to put Aluminum to save weight. And an aluminum pickup bed is sheer madness.

Weight-wise, the current RAM and GM trucks are nearly the same weight as the aluminum Fords ... the "600 pound" weight reduction claim* includes the savings from the previous generation's V8 engine to the Turbo four. Actual empty weight for similarly configured trucks is less than 100 pounds difference, with the RAM being slightly lighter of the two non-Fords.

Toyota full size trucks don't have a frame, they are unibody vehicles. That may be OK for some, but I doubt many people who actually use their trucks to haul stuff want a unibody vehicle; bend it once, and that can be just an oil-can dent in a structural member, and it's a total loss vehicle. I hope I don't have to outline how many ways there is to bend a unibody vehicle when you are dropping loads into and out of the box.

If the Texas-built Nissan Titan can overcome that brand's notorious reliability issues, it might start to eat at Toyota's sales in particular, let alone the other three major manufacturers. For now, the jury is still out and dealers are heavy with unsold inventory in August, month 11 of the sales year. On the other hand, certain models / options are unavailable. A little work remains yet to make a dent for Nissan.

* Also there is the "military grade aluminum" claim. Since there is no such thing as "military grade" metals of any alloy or purity, it's just pure Madison Avenue, but it's annoying to me. And I'm not singling out Ford either, I abhor "aircraft grade" just as much, as it's just as illusory, and it annoys me to see parts advertised as "billet". A billet is a lump of metal; why would you buy a lump of metal you have to machine yourself over an actual working part, which is most decidedly not "billet" after machining. It's a part.

Now, being annoyed at the Ford ads doesn't mean I would not look at a Ford truck when shopping. As they say, "I put it behind me" because I'm not shopping for advertising ethics, I'm shopping for a truck.
 
Originally Posted By: 4WD
Seems graph should have Chevy/GMC combined - same truck really ...


A few years ago they actually were, aside from badging and a little trim glued on here or there, the same truck.

These days they have unique body panels (not just grill emblems) and unique interiors. In some cases options are unavailable on the sister truck.

So, underhood they may be alike, but there are many vehicles out there that are like that with different badges and in some cases completely different vehicles. The difference I think today is justified; ten years ago, maybe not.
 
Like the "F series" ... dozens of iterations too - truck owners should care about driveline more than cup holders ...
(Unless they never needed a truck to start with) ...

Waiting for $5 gasoline to end the current truck/SUV "binge" ... they are flying off the lots around here ...
 
Originally Posted By: Johnny2Bad

Yes, but I suspect RAM and GM/Chevrolet won't be betting on all-aluminum body panels; there are plenty of other places to put Aluminum to save weight. And an aluminum pickup bed is sheer madness.


If you do some Googling you'll see the rumor sites all point to everyone going aluminum at some point for the next generation. Alpar confirm Ed it from FCA and others have seen GMs test mules. The aluminum bed seems to be working out for Ford as even in the Super Duties you don't hear many complaints.

Quote:
Toyota full size trucks don't have a frame, they are unibody vehicles.


Huh? What frame did Toyota just get through recalling on the Tundra? A cursory Google of Toyota Tundra frame sows pictures of a frame hat looks like everyone else's.
 
Last edited:
I've got no problem when people have a brand preference, but you don't get to make facts up.

The Toyota is not a unibody vehicle. It is every bit as much a body on frame vehicle as the others.

Ford didn't go to the eco boost engines to save weight. They are all within a few pounds of the 5.0 V8.

No four cylinder engines in the trucks. Eco boosts in the F150 are v6's.

We are all entitled to opinions, but facts are facts.
 
Originally Posted By: Johnny2Bad

Toyota full size trucks don't have a frame, they are unibody vehicles. That may be OK for some, but I doubt many people who actually use their trucks to haul stuff want a unibody vehicle; bend it once, and that can be just an oil-can dent in a structural member, and it's a total loss vehicle. I hope I don't have to outline how many ways there is to bend a unibody vehicle when you are dropping loads into and out of the box.
Sorry to be so direct but I have to point out that you are 100% WRONG on this point.
 
Originally Posted By: Johnny2Bad
Originally Posted By: itguy08
Originally Posted By: demarpaint

Ram sales have been growing at a nice pace. You're correct, IF the Chinese buy Chrysler all bets will be off. That isn't cast in stone yet. IMO Ford quality has been dropping while their competition is slowly catching up. The aluminum bodies were a big mistake, I know a few people who were loyal Ford owners that swung over to Ram because of it.


Except GM and Ram have pretty much confirmed aluminum is on the table for them as well. I'd say the gamble paid off - sales are up 8% so far this year. In the 1/2 ton space they have to still meet CAFE and that means weight reduction and the easiest way is aluminum.
... snip) ...


Yes, but I suspect RAM and GM/Chevrolet won't be betting on all-aluminum body panels; there are plenty of other places to put Aluminum to save weight. And an aluminum pickup bed is sheer madness.

Weight-wise, the current RAM and GM trucks are nearly the same weight as the aluminum Fords ... the "600 pound" weight reduction claim* includes the savings from the previous generation's V8 engine to the Turbo four. Actual empty weight for similarly configured trucks is less than 100 pounds difference, with the RAM being slightly lighter of the two non-Fords.

Toyota full size trucks don't have a frame, they are unibody vehicles. That may be OK for some, but I doubt many people who actually use their trucks to haul stuff want a unibody vehicle; bend it once, and that can be just an oil-can dent in a structural member, and it's a total loss vehicle. I hope I don't have to outline how many ways there is to bend a unibody vehicle when you are dropping loads into and out of the box.

If the Texas-built Nissan Titan can overcome that brand's notorious reliability issues, it might start to eat at Toyota's sales in particular, let alone the other three major manufacturers. For now, the jury is still out and dealers are heavy with unsold inventory in August, month 11 of the sales year. On the other hand, certain models / options are unavailable. A little work remains yet to make a dent for Nissan.

* Also there is the "military grade aluminum" claim. Since there is no such thing as "military grade" metals of any alloy or purity, it's just pure Madison Avenue, but it's annoying to me. And I'm not singling out Ford either, I abhor "aircraft grade" just as much, as it's just as illusory, and it annoys me to see parts advertised as "billet". A billet is a lump of metal; why would you buy a lump of metal you have to machine yourself over an actual working part, which is most decidedly not "billet" after machining. It's a part.

Now, being annoyed at the Ford ads doesn't mean I would not look at a Ford truck when shopping. As they say, "I put it behind me" because I'm not shopping for advertising ethics, I'm shopping for a truck.


While Toyota took a slightly different approach to their truck frames-THEY ARE NOT unibody frames-

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GNeLQmE1s0M
 
Originally Posted By: 4WD
Thought it was the Taco with the frame problem - been a while back ...


Yes the previous generation Tacoma, previous generation Tundra, and previous generation Sequoia. It was due to a supplier (Dana Corp) improperly making the frames. Toyota won a multi-million dollar lawsuit against Dana Corp, and replaced lots of frames for customers.

I can think of other brands I've seen that rusted away in the same timeframe, and there was NO hint of a frame replacement from those manufacturers..

It's funny to read comments from the extreme brand loyalists (not saying you, 4WD). I worked on all brands for years, and have many friends that still do. EVERY make of vehicle has their positives and negatives. Some more than others.

As for the Tundra frame, it's essentially the same design that was used on the Ford Superduty trucks, right up until the '17 redesign of the truck.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Vern_in_IL
Because Ford Models make sense, F150 F250...F650 no bull... and priced low because of Volume.


Then you got yuppie junk like the Honda Ridgeline.... and the [censored] "GMC" or is it a Chevy, but it's the same truck.


Ford is bringing back the Ranger to the U.S. also.


Those yuppies love their pickup trucks with the optional $7000 glitter and glam package...
 
Only two line items in a $7k package ? That's about how all the "build a truck" websites work these days ...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

O
How do the half ton v6 NA engines compare
Replies
18
Views
2K
dadto2
T
Ford/international fiasco
Replies
11
Views
744
OVERKILL
J
New Truck - Go with Diesel or....Gas model? Ford 3.5 Turbo took a dump.
7 8 9
Replies
168
Views
11K
Torrid
GON
Today's salvage vehicle- stolen 2014 FORD SUPER DUTY F-350 SRW RWD
2 3
Replies
58
Views
4K
ford250
HemiBenny
Another potential 1st rig for my son
2 3
Replies
47
Views
2K
HemiBenny
Back
Top