Ford at least makes a real hybrid car and is showing promise with its latest offerings like the Flex. The F-150 must still be made but Ford needs to let go of the idea that they need to build and sell as many as before.

next up to the poisoned chalice was the englishman (magic)Alex Trotman (96) did some good work in standardizing ford cars world wide. Everywhere that is except North America.

Then of course came Jac the Knife (99)who admirably succeeded in pissing everybody off except of course Carlos Ghosn who is said to be a friend.

Billy Ford took time off from being a rich dilettante (When you are a descendant of Hank F. and Harvey Firestone, you aren’t really having to apply at the Home Depot kiosk for a job) claimed to be an environmentalist (’hey Bill, where was the the electric ranger that someone could buy from one of your dealerships?) and amateur Ice Hockey champ for the ford team.

after 4 years at the top Bill found the strains of being an auto exec weighing him down. the new guy appears to panning out but the next couple of years could be ummm interesting.

This Petersen guy retired in 1990, and the same year Ford shelled out some cold cash for a cat on life number seven.

That would be an interesting timeline, if it could be established that within months of Petersen retiring, the Corporate Tool that undoubtedly replaced him had already started throwing Ford under the bus. Does anyone know that timeline; Ford’s activities in that regard circa 1990?

I always come back to a similar point when I think about Ford. It seems their saving grace is that they make desirable vehicles. That is why there is hope for them. When Chrysler came out with their new styles, they also had a chance, but the reliability was so low that it rubbed off on the new nice styling. Now they haven’t updated that either!

There is something (actually many things) about the domestics that consistently makes them fall into complacency, and they need to get a handle on most, if not all, of them. Yesterday.

Maybe like Ford did then, it’s time for big gambles. Perhaps GM needs to double down on the Volt. Ford and Chrysler need similar ideas. They are all so short stacked that if they don’t make big bets, they will be out of the game soon enough anyway.

Petersen stood there dumfounded, couldn’t think of a thing to say.

When Iacocca first viewed the 1986 Taurus, he said “It looks like a flying potato!”

Y’all forgot to mention the crappy brakes the first generation Taurus/Sable had. The brakes got so hot, the calipers melted. The rotors were defective from the get go. Ford replaced them four times, none of those updated rotors solved much of anything.

The auto/transmissions were terrible, but not as bad as the A4LD’s used in Bronco II’s and Rangers. These were so bad, some dealers only sold these two vehicles with 5 speed manuals (which by the way were either from Mazda or Mitsubishi).

The absolute WORST autotranny Ford EVER made was the AOD used in Crown Vics, Lincolns, Grand Marquis, F150’s, and others.

Nothing before or since was worse. AOD = A horrid POS!

The problem was…ppl drove these cars in O/D in heavy stop and go traffic. This caused the trans to shift up/down, in/out of O/D. Sooner or later, usually sooner, the trans fried.

The warranty costs to fix the terd was more than all the other autotrannies warranty costs COMBINED!

With all these problems and more (this is just the tip of the iceberg), it’s no wonder ppl bought Honda’s and Toyota’s, by the 1000’s.

Ford has only themselves to blame for the fiasco they’re in now. If they had made a better product..ONCE, they wouldn’t be in the position they’re in today.

I’d been lulled into thinking that Ford had some better chance than GM and Chrysler, but I’m starting to doubt it.

I had a Taurus, and it was a somewhat unreliable used car, but not abysmal. I did sell it when I thought the head gaskets on the Vulcan 3.0 might be getting weak, after dropping about $300 into having the ignition switch fixed (at a time when $300 was a VERY significant cash outlay for me, with crap jobs/crap economy/crap northwestern Michigan pay, two kids, having just bought a house instead of renting, etc).

My low point was later getting a used 1990 Lincoln Town Car with the first year OHC V8. It had good points – roomy, quiet, real good MPG on the highway (given the size and weight of the thing). But the reliability was poor, small things broke a lot, and it left me stranded. Several times. I got it and it only had 50,000 miles.

Even the craptastic 1984 Pontiac 1000 (badge engineered Chevette) I bought new way back was a better car, really. So that’s when I thought “wow, if this is the best Ford can do on the top-of-the-line car with only 50,000 miles on it, I’m done with Ford”. And – I am. “Never more.”

Unfortunately, NOBODY and I mean NOBODY was even interested in taking a 7 year old Town Car in trade until I snagged a 0% over 5 year deal on a new 1997 Chevrolet Cavalier (which was my LAST ever GM product), after which I traded it off on a new 1999 Dodge Neon (which was my LAST ever Chrysler product).

I’d run out of car companies so ended up taking what I considered to be a huge chance on a new 2002 Hyundai Sonata, which ended up “better than average” (but significantly better than any Detroit crap I’d ever owned), and we’re now on our 2nd Sonata (as well as our 2nd Prius hybrid).

At least now I know I will get where I’m going when I get into either of our near new cars.

“The only way for Ford to survive longer than Mulally’s stay is for the company to develop a good system for choosing management and workers. It seems to me like almost every time Ford has a major problem it can be traced back to the Ford family…”

Ding ding ding ding! You win the prize. That has been my observation of Ford all these years. That and the fact that they seem to spend more money developing a car than either GM or Chrysler, and let’s not talk even talk about the Asians. That’s why I think they are in such a precarious position. They can’t go C11 (shares become worthless), they can’t be bought by another company (too big, Ford family doesn’t want to give up control, and who would want them anyway?), and they can’t even manage their own brands let alone (the former) PAG. They can’t even hold onto their good employees. The guy that did the current Mustang was shown the door wasn’t he (I thought I read that here)? They got rid of Lee, but worse than that they got rid of Hal Sperlich. Hal who? He was one of the product guys working under Lee. His team came up with the idea of a new small van. Yep, Ford had the minivan concept first. But since Hal was a friend of Lee, Henry (he of the Ford family) gave him the boot. So he went to Chrysler. The rest as they say…

cheers

Malcolm

I don’t want to take any credit from Petersen, but he simply did what any good auto exec should have done. When that happens at Ford, it’s an exception, and newsworthy.

Meanwhile, ToyHon kept making good decissions all along, but there is article about how ToyHon in the mid ’80s was making good decisions, developing and building good products, etc. It’s the occassional wrong step, the occassional slow selling model that has to be killed off that seems newsworthy when looking at ToyHon.

But I disagree they need a new Taurus. This time around they need a new SMALL car. One with an engine below 2L. If Honda can do it with the Fit, BMW with the Mini, Toyota with the first Xb, why can’t Ford?? They have a fine, strong, refined, economic (and could be even more so with some variable valve lifting technology) 1.6L engine in Brazil and Europe. The Zetec Rocam. Just stick that thing in everything from the Focus on down.

And they need the new Fiesta and even the new Ka in NA sooner rather than later. The Fiesta must be made there, and the Ka could be imported from Brazil in lower quantities initially, but with some strong marketing support it could make it in NA due to its tremendous potential for being the new generation’s “it” car. Economical, frugal, stylish, environmentally-friendly, technologically-savvy, endlessly customizable. I think it could really strike a chord with the newer generations. Just be sure the interiors are up to par.

A Ka with such an image would steamroll the yarises, scions and whatnots of this world. A case study to show Ford how to do this right is for them to just see the kind of reception the Fiat 500 is getting in Europe. With the grain of salt necessary when reading Jeremy Clarkson’s hyperbole, he gives us a good image of what can be done with such a car when the marketing, production and follow through are done well. Clarkson wrote that this year at St. Moritz ultra posh ski town the “it” car was the 500. R8 yawn! Been there done that. The Bentley, yawn, overwrought. Land Rovers and whatnot, yawn, yawn, so last-turn-of-the-centuryish.

And the Ka being so small and light can even get away with even smaller engines. In Europe there are 1.2L (not recommeded for America) and 1.4 L engines (could make it in America, and specially Canada).

Maybe I’m just daydreaming, but once bitten by these high gas prices, I think it would take at leat a decade of gas bellow the 2 dollar mark for consumers to go back en masse to big hinking V8 behemoths.

However…

As part of his job, he bought company cars and one of them was a 1992 Taurus wagon. He liked it so much that he bought it from the company. A few years later he gave the wagon to a friend and bought a 1996 Taurus wagon from the company.

To me, the 1996 Taurus was a lousy car from a fit-and-finish perspective, and it felt like the 3.0-liter Vulcan V6 had pistons made of heavy lead, this engine just didn’t like to rev.

Anyway… the moral of the story is times change and the product improves, if incrementally.

Taurus killed Ford 10 years ago.
I think Ford is already dead, but it´s like in one of those Horror movies where the zombie just keeps walking around for a few more days before actually dropping to the ground.

P.S.-I fixed my Ford, I got a Chevy :)

So true. Toyota’s releasing the next-gen Prius, the Highlander Hybrid, a possible Tundra hybrid and possibly a compact truck based on the RAV-4 underpinnings using a hybrid engine.

Ford has the Escape. And only the Escape. And no coherent plans for another hybrid in the future.

(Edit: Oh yeah, the Fusion hybrid.)

If Mullaly can now just salvage the Ford brand, he will be a hero. I don’t know how good he really is, and because of the dreck he was left with at Ford, Mullaly may not have time enought to clean it all up. How do we expect these new auto execs to win for the home team when they are always batting in the ninth with two away and four runs behind?

The only way for Ford to survive longer than Mulally’s stay is for the company to develop a good system for choosing management and workers. It seems to me like almost every time Ford has a major problem it can be traced back to the Ford family, or choices they made in other staffs. For example, Henry’s keeping the Model T too long even as others in the company were begging him to update the thing), Bunkie Knudsen being hired over Iacocca and doing damage to the Mustang in the ’70s, Bill Ford’s greenlighting all the SUVs we’re seeing today, etcetera.

“Interesting article…the sad part is what happened later.

Ford let the Taurus rot on the vine, and waited far too long to address the head gasket problems with the 3.8 V-6, and the fragile automatic transmissions used in the Taurus/Sable/Windstar. Hundreds of thousands of customers were burned by that drivetrain – easily the worst to come out of Detroit since the Oldsmobile Diesel – and Ford’s passenger car business arguably never recovered.”

How true. I actually first became a huge fan of TTAC when an editorial ran lamenting the death of the Taurus. I posted a huge essay-length reply in the comments section about growing up with a Ford-loyal father and his move to Japanese autos.

He went from cursing the ‘jellybean’ shaped first-gen Taurus to owning two (a 1986 LX and an ‘88 L) – and then went on to buy an ‘89 Cougar LX and ‘93 Thunderbird LX (both with the 3.8L Essex V6), and a ‘93 Ranger. The ‘86 Taurus was showing signs of transmission issues when he unloaded it a few years later, and the ‘88 experienced total slippage when shifting into 2nd gear prior to 100k miles. Both the Cougar and TBird experienced the infamous 3.8L head gasket leak, resulting in complete engine failure, twice (!) apiece.

The ‘93 Ranger (2.3L I4, 5-speed) was the picture of reliability, quality, efficiency, and durability, serving my oldest brother for quite some time without a hiccup. I still miss that little truck.

Ford (under Petersen) did achieve an amazing turnaround in the ’80s, but unfortunately the overall quality was still lacking even before they allowed the cars to gather dust in the shadow of the Explorer. A shame, too, because all of those cars had nice features and design for the money.

5. I have a hard time trusting a company run by Bob Nardelli, who walked off with $360 million in compensation after shareholders (i.e. owners of the company) said they wanted his income to be more tied to the performance of the company and he refused.

Justin – While I am hardly a fan of Nardelli’s, it is not really fair to imply that he walked off with $360 million of his own volition. What actually happened is the BOARD of HD gave him the money to leave. Big distinction there. If someone gave me the choice of either tying my pay to my company or walking away with more money than I could ever spend, well, maybe I’m shallow, but I’d take the cash too. What is truly sickening is that there was not a wholesale shareholder revolt.

Jim

“In a time of retrenchment… sales sank deeply in the wake of the energy crisis, for most auto manufacturers in America. At Chrysler that was very much the case, despite a completely redesigned crop of models… Indeed, sales for most of the models … dropped … and a two-month backlog piled up. Despite that, _____ refused to cut prices, cutting production instead.

By early _____ of ____, sales for Chrysler were down 34%, while GM was down 43%. In desperation, Mr. ________ did something no one else in Detroit had ever done before: instituted cash rebates, essentially paying people for buying a car. While it must have galled him, since it meant throwing money away, it was necessary to move product. The big inventory that was setting around had been costing Chrysler $xxx,xxxx a week – a lot of money…

To get through ____, Mr. ________ had to make a painful decision. He closed most of the factories for a month to reduce the glut of cars, setting on the lots of Detroit, or on dealer lots, around the country.”

Sound familiar doesn’t it? This was about Lynn Townsend in 1974 and the first energy crisis.

American public is not stupid enough to pay 20% premium for diesel engine and 25% premium for diesel fuel. Besides, diesels are in decline in Europe currently.

It was William Clay Ford who had a royal hard-on for Jaguar, and pressured Petersen to buy it. He had lusted after it for ages, and when it came on the market he couldn’t resist the temptation.

As much as I admire what Petersen did at Ford, the sad truth is that he was the guy who got Ford into a bidding war with GM for Jaguar, and won …. er, lost.

“As in Europe, Turbo Diesels will end up eating the hybrid’s lunch.”

I used to think that as well, but as long as Diesel fuel remains priced way, way above Regular Gas in the US the diesel car remains doomed.

Technologically the one thing a hybrid can do that no straight diesel can pull off is regenerative braking. So for non-highway driving the hybrid is going to retain a significant efficiency advantage. I suspect we will see taxi-cab fleets move to 100% hybrids over the next 5-10 years.

I have never actually dissed Press, but I have a theory about him. It requires understanding of how Japanes companies work: decision making is by consensus, and the group dynamic is critically important.

My theory is that Jim Press is not an exceptionally gifted executive, but happened to be in the right place at the right time when he started with Toyota decades ago. He obviously fit in, and was able to work with the Japanese well. But how much credit does he deserve for Toyota’s success in the US these past thirty years? A good question, but perhaps not as much as some (Cerberus) might think.

Same here.
The Ford’s new Focus, Fiesta and Fusion are all fine and very competitive cars. I just can’t imagine how those low margin models (compared to their traditional but failing Truck/SUV cash cows) will allow Ford to become profitable enough in order to sustain the next rounds of R&D.
Toyota and Honda are already light years ahead in the new tech development…

Fearless prediction: As in Europe, Turbo Diesels will end up eating the hybrid’s lunch. The TDIs, albeit with enviro-mods, will be significantly more profitable and flexible than the Hybrids.

TAlso, there is plenty of domestic coal that can be processed into diesel.

Doesn’t most of the world’s lithium come from Central Asia? OLEC anyone?