The lowest estimation of Pfizer $9 billion R&D budget being publicly subsidize is 40% and that’s the lowest. It could be as high as 80% when you work out how much they spend on actual research of new developments/products. The last I checked Pfizer profit was about $8 billion, which is funny when the public could be footing up to $7.2billion in R&D alone not including massive tax cuts.

The amount of waste in the Ford way of doing things over the years is just nuts. For years they made two different small block V-8 engine designs, one the “Cleveland” and the other the “Windsor” depending on which factory built it. On many models they were used interchangeably in production. Spare parts were different, repair procedures different, etc. It has always boggled my mind as to how Ford gets itself into these messes. How on earth the modern Ford company let itself end up with so many platforms and so many overlapping parts is a real mystery to me. I guess that top management simply wasn’t doing it’s job and was letting every little fiefdom do it’s own thing.

Recently I went looking for good used OE replacement speakers for my old F150 truck. You would think that common round speakers would have been shared between the truck and the Ford sedans of that era, but nope.

The amount of savings to be had from rationalizing the product lineup is huge. Hopefully Ford also will stop wasting money on stupid projects like the Thunderbird, GT and Lincoln Blackwood.

In a way Ford has made it’s problems even worse with the acquisition of European brands. Not long after they bought Jaguar the management there convinced Ford that it would need to develop a complete new V-8 engine of it’s own. That engine family ended up going into the Lincoln LS also. More recently Volvo wanted a V-8, and contracted with sometimes Ford supplier Yamaha to make them one, which engine is completely incompatible with the Jaguar V-8 and other Ford V-8s.

The internal dynamics of organizations, especially those as desperate as Ford, do favor classifying ordinary expenses as R&D. Each unit is fighting for budget and power; those that promise a better future will be more resistant to cost-cutting than mundane activities. So yep, a lot of “spreadsheets and powerpoint presentations” may have got called R&D.

In addition, Ford has operated as a collection of competitive fiefdoms. Thus, for example, dozens of seat rail designs were R&D’d. Mullaly must often shake his head and wonder, “How did this outfit get so dysfunctional?” (Partial answer: weak top management, such as Bill Ford, who couldn’t bring himself to compel the kids in the sandbox to play together nicely.)

FYI I did some digging into this info and found some spreadsheets with a breakdown by company. The numbers are EU millions, convert for USD.
Ford= 5,459.96
Mazda= 609.26
Volvo= 1,249.06
I couldn’t find Jaguar and Land Rover broken out seperately. So if all that money is coming out of Ford’s pocket they are spending way more than $8billion more like $11billion.

Here is the link incase anyone wants wade through the speadsheets.

http://iri.jrc.ec.europa.eu/research/scoreboard_2007.htm

snicker

stuntnun
RyanK02-the gt , its engine is in the back-its not nose heavy … but as an investment the gt 500 will go up in price

Yes, the Ford GT's engine is in the back. However, the GT 500 is a tarted up Mustang and is very much front-engined. And front-heavy. It may show slower depreciation than other Mustangs, but it'll be many years before it'll show a return on investment (if it ever does).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_GT

Pure research is what results in things like Toyota’s hybrid system, Volvo’s anti-whiplash seats and headrests, etc, etc.

The D of R&D is just that – development. Developing a new car on a 30 year old platform is development. It might be worthless, but it counts in the tally.

Now, D is important, it’s the D that Toyota and Honda do that relentlessly improves each generation of their cars. D does not include operation expenses like manufacturing.

R is inventing a hybrid system. D is engineering the hell out of it to drive the costs down, down, down to the point where Toyota claims that the hybrid system in the next Prius will add only about $1000 to the cost of the car. So, both R&D are important in what the consumer sees in the end product.

Ford’s just using this as a PR puff piece. Still, regardless of the R v D breakdown, that $8B works out to $21 million per day. Nearly a million dollars an hour. That’s a lot of $$. Ford should have more to show for it.

Ford doesn’t claim to produce its own diesel engines in the U.S. It does however have a hand in designing them and is currently modifying an LR/Jag 3.6V8 into a 4.4V8 for the U.S. The lawsuit over Ford’s supposed breach of contract with the upcoming 4.4 has now been thrown out as well.

Ford’s R&D budget is very poorly spent. Why? Dangling platforms. Dozens of them. As Mulally and Fields realign R&D, there will be much better return on the spend naturally, but Ford is not without its fruits.

FoE has a phenominal line-up of designs and engines. However, the money spent last year and this year would be for things like: DSG tranny debuting next year, Ford’s U.S. diesel dev, the F-150 overhaul, their GenII hybrid system that debuts in L.A., their hydrogen work, their ethanol work, their plug-in hybrid work (all stuff that comes out over the next several years) and, yes, the new cars that are popping up like the Mondeo, Focus (Euro and U.S.), Taurus, Kuga, XF, C30, etc. etc.

Once platforms are aligned, however, dangling work like the U.S. Focus will be eliminated (or, really, greatly reduced). As Ford reduces from seven to two V6’s, extra investment there will be eliminated (etc).

The new Focus, by the way, is a wonderful driver. I got to rent one over the weekend, and was thoroughly impressed at its NVH, interior and handling. It was an SES, by the way. It’s definitely competitive with the Civic in NVH and a much better handler and feels more powerful. The interior is actually really nice (everything felt very substantial and put together well). The exterior would look better without the stupid vents. It doesn’t feel or sound at all like the old C170. It feels more like the Mazda3 even if it isn’t your beloved C1.

Routine product development is indeed part of the “D” in “R&D”. R&D covers the entire range of activities from non-product-specific research through product targeted research and all the way down to routine development. Nothing sneaky about it.

“hey glenn im in the usa and they are in the diesel design still -its a very good diesel, i think its rated 350,000 miles till a rebuild-its built in house”

BZZZT, not. Current Ford USA diesels are built by Navistar and in fact the two companies have been in court recently suing each other over terms, conditions, pricing, warranties and such. Navistar is also suing Ford over the planned F-150 diesel due in a few years which Navistar claims they have the agreement to supply and which Ford seems to be looking to modify a Land Rover engine for. Ford might end up building it’s own US market diesels in the future, but presently does not, no matter what hype Ford tries to put out on it’s website.

http://www.ford-trucks.com/news/idx/9/334/article/Navistar_Files_Lawsuit_against_Ford_for_Breach_of_Contract_Involving_Diesel_Engines_for_Ford_F150_Pickup_Trucks.html

http://www.topspeed.com/cars/car-news/super-duty-lawsuit-over-the-ford-super-duty-ar37309.html

Either Ford is being very inefficient with it’s funds and is wasting a lot of money, or Ford is simply not spending all that much on R&D and is listing various other expenses under the “R&D” category.

I would guess though that a big chunk of Ford’s R&D spending goes into trucks.

One thing not mentioned by the article is that Toyota also has a sizable R&D budget.

The article also did not mention trends, where companies like Ford and Chrysler are in a trend of reducing funding, while companies like Toyota and VW are increasing their R&D funding.

Ford only has a 33% ownership in Mazda as opposed to 100% for Volvo, Land Rover and Jaguar. I have a feeling Mazda spends a good portion of their own money on R&D and doesn’t just get all the money from Ford.

I guess your right though Mazda has some pretty great stuff(engineering & design), and their sales show it. Ford not so much.

Since when is the GT 500 better than the Corvette, in any way? It is not “advanced” as much as it is a bigger engine than normally comes in a muscle car. It is nose heavy and handles worse than almost any car in its class.

I can’t argue with you on the RX-8 or the Miata. If they would infuse some of their handling dynamics into the Mustang, the story would go differently.

Ford hasn’t done anything more than sell nostaglia in recent memory.