Ford plans to eliminate most passenger cars for US market, will focus on trucks, SUVs and commercial vehicles

My Nissan Leaf Forum

Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
IssacZachary said:
Oh man! I think we just derailed this thread! But anyhow, here's another one.
I'm so proud of my wife!
You know the saying -- little wife, big wheels
 
LTLFTcomposite said:
If anything I'd add this changing consumer preference to the list of risks for Tesla, they are mostly selling cars in a world that is looking for a different form factor.
Sort of. Sports CUV is a bit of an oxy-moron. For the rest, Enter Model Y

In any case, the Ford (and presumably all of Detroit) abandonment of cars is as much recognition that the market belongs to the Asian and Korean manufacturers as it is changing tastes. They just do not compete well in those segments. Time will tell if they can compete in the CUV space, and they better pray that fuel prices do not push Americans away from gas guzzlers.
 
I concur. It isn't a matter of public taste not supporting car sales. I see lots of new cars on the road - just not Fords. They are attempting to distract from their failure to effectively compete in the car market by claiming the issue is a shift in consumer preferences to SUVs. The shift in consumer preferences has actually simply been away from Ford cars, not cars. While there has been a definite shift to SUVs, that is only part of the story. They are attempting to hide the fact they mismanaged the company and can no longer compete on cars.
 
DarthPuppy said:
They are attempting to distract from their failure to effectively compete in the car market by claiming the issue is a shift in consumer preferences to SUVs. The shift in consumer preferences has actually simply been away from Ford cars, not cars. While there has been a definite shift to SUVs, that is only part of the story.
Not true for the US auto market.

Look at http://www.wsj.com/mdc/public/page/2_3022-autosales.html. "Light duty trucks" now made up over 1 million of the vehicles in the US. Cars were only 555K.

Unfortunately, not many people have submitted snapshots of that page but look at https://web.archive.org/web/20091112063305/http://www.wsj.com/mdc/public/page/2_3022-autosales.html for Oct 09. Cars were 431K and "light duty trucks" were 406K.

Dec 2009 year end: https://web.archive.org/web/20100121063904/http://wsj.com/mdc/public/page/2_3022-autosales.html - almost 5.5 million cars vs 4.9 million "light-duty trucks"
Dec 2017 year end: https://web.archive.org/web/20180106200934/http://www.wsj.com/mdc/public/page/2_3022-autosales.html - 6.3 million cars vs. almost 10.9 million "light-duty trucks"

Look at the top players at http://www.goodcarbadcar.net/2013/02/2008-america-auto-sales-rankings-by-mode/ for 08.

Look at 2017: http://www.goodcarbadcar.net/2018/01/december-2017-year-end-u-s-vehicle-sales-rankings-top-296-best-selling-vehicles-in-america-every-vehicle-ranked/.

Look at March 2018: http://www.goodcarbadcar.net/2018/04/march-2018-ytd-u-s-vehicle-sales-rankings-top-284-best-selling-vehicles-in-america-every-vehicle-ranked/

Notice that the Toyota Rav4 (classified as a "light truck") now outsells the Camry? Camry was Toyota's best selling vehicle. Now it's Rav4.

Notice the Nissan Rogue (classified as a "light truck") outsells the Altima? Altima was Nissan's best selling vehicle. It's now Rogue.

Notice in 08 the positions 3 thru 8 were cars but for 2017, the top 5 are now "light trucks" .
 
You'll notice Ford is keeping the Focus. There's still a market for cars like Corolla, Sentra, Focus etc with people looking for the cheapest thing possible to drive around, but buyers of a mind to spend a little more are opting for crossovers.
The line between cars and crossovers has blurred to the point it's little more than a styling change, not unlike 2 door vs 4 door or when Landau tops went away.
 
cwerdna said:
Not true for the US auto market.

Look at ...
Dec 2009 year end: https://web.archive.org/web/20100121063904/http://wsj.com/mdc/public/page/2_3022-autosales.html - almost 5.5 million cars vs 4.9 million "light-duty trucks"
Dec 2017 year end: https://web.archive.org/web/20180106200934/http://www.wsj.com/mdc/public/page/2_3022-autosales.html - 6.3 million cars vs. almost 10.9 million "light-duty trucks"

Quite true. Your own stats indicate a 14% increase in sales of cars in 8 years (6.3m vs 5.5m). Yes, there is a shift toward SUVs and CUVs causing those segments to expand faster. But the car market is far from as weak as they are trying to pitch it. The truth is that Ford's mismanagement has led to them being unable to compete on cars. That is the real story. You can buy their spin on it if you like. Afterall, they pay their PR people lots to try to dress it up nice so people don't notice what is really going on.

Yes, they have more success with trucks and SUVs. But if they don't recognize and fix the reasons they failed to compete with cars, how long before they blow it on these too?

This reminds me of when Lee Iacocca blamed the consumer for preferring Japanese cars over American, completely missing the concept that under his leadership his firm failed to accurately assess what the consumer wanted and provide it to them while the Japanese firms did. Rarely does management admit it botched it. Almost always they attempt to blame outside forces so that it doesn't look like it is their fault.
 
Another thing being overlooked here is the fact that CUVs are essentially station wagons - NOT trucks. Light SUVs like the Rogue, and even the Rav4 and CRV are also more like station wagons than trucks, with cabin height being the main difference. The whole "Light Truck" designation was originally a way for manufacturers - especially American manufacturers - to dodge safety and fuel efficiency standards implemented for "cars." I'm sure that there are still little perks to building a vehicle as a "truck" instead of as a "car" and this has as much to do with the above stats as any actual consumer stampede toward larger SUVs. There was such a rush after 9/11, thanks in part to the manufacturers feeding the fears of the public, but now the CUV has replaced the SUV as the desired vehicle of most younger people.
 
DarthPuppy said:
cwerdna said:
Not true for the US auto market.

Look at ...
Dec 2009 year end: https://web.archive.org/web/20100121063904/http://wsj.com/mdc/public/page/2_3022-autosales.html - almost 5.5 million cars vs 4.9 million "light-duty trucks"
Dec 2017 year end: https://web.archive.org/web/20180106200934/http://www.wsj.com/mdc/public/page/2_3022-autosales.html - 6.3 million cars vs. almost 10.9 million "light-duty trucks"

Quite true. Your own stats indicate a 14% increase in sales of cars in 8 years (6.3m vs 5.5m). Yes, there is a shift toward SUVs and CUVs causing those segments to expand faster. But the car market is far from as weak as they are trying to pitch it.
Weird interpretation.

Let's see, for 2009 vs. 2017, the entire light 4+ wheel vehicle market grew from about 10.4 million to 17.2 million, or about 65%. The car market was nowhere near that with ~14% growth while the light truck market was up 122%.

The market shifted from cars outselling trucks by about 12% to trucks outselling cars by ~73%.

Side note: Many of Subaru's vehicles (except the BR-Z) are classified as "light trucks", which let them get away with lower fuel economy as the CAFE standard required mpg on "light truck" fleets is lower than it is for the two car fleets: DP and IP (domestic and imported passenger cars).

Chrysler's PT Cruiser was one of the more well-known examples of a car that got classified as a "light truck" which helped boost Chrysler's "light truck" CAFE numbers. See specs tab of https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=38695&id=38857&id=38646&id=20165.
 
Another "light truck" that caused some consternation was GM's first slope-nosed minivan. The name escapes me, but it was pretty terrible, and even lacked, IIRC, side impact beams because even though it was marketed as a minivan, it was legally a "truck." The light truck category has always been the loophole through which the manufacturers could happily drive a... well, you get the idea.

EDIT: they were the "Lumina APV" and "Pontiac Trans-Sport."
 
LeftieBiker said:
Another thing being overlooked here is the fact that CUVs are essentially station wagons - NOT trucks. Light SUVs like the Rogue, and even the Rav4 and CRV are also more like station wagons than trucks, with cabin height being the main difference...
The Honda HRV is supposedly based on the Fit platform (I've never understood what that meant). Does it matter that a bunch of people are opting for the HRV over an Accord?
 
LeftieBiker said:
Another thing being overlooked here is the fact that CUVs are essentially station wagons - NOT trucks.
Well you're right about the line not being very clear as to what is what. But I do think there is a fairly good difference between crossovers and station wagons as well as their pros and cons.

Consider this,
the Mazda 6 wagon actually had more passenger and cargo volume than the Mazda CX-7 crossover and was quicker, and got better fuel economy.
from Car and Driver.
 
Crossovers are in part an attempt to graft modern SUV styling onto a station wagon, and the curving roof that results usually means less cargo room than a similar wagon. They also make CUVs so the passengers sit higher off the road. Despite that, most CUVs are more car than truck.
 
LTLFTcomposite said:
You'll notice Ford is keeping the Focus. There's still a market for cars like Corolla, Sentra, Focus etc with people looking for the cheapest thing possible to drive around, but buyers of a mind to spend a little more are opting for crossovers.

Ford is keeping the Focus name, but the version we will get has been somewhat CUV-ized in the vein of the Subaru CrossTrek or the VW Golf Alltrack:

l6jvvgaayjinp5dwlrb7.jpg


According to Car and Driver, the Focus Active will actually be the next rung up the price ladder from the EcoSport: https://www.caranddriver.com/news/this-is-the-ford-focus-active-thats-coming-to-the-us

In other words, Ford USA is abandoning the sub $20k car market, as EcoSport starts at $20,995. GM will be the only US manufacturer competing in that space with the $13k Spark (Sonic may not make a return appearance in 2019), otherwise that market is being fully ceded to the Asian manufacturers.
 
RonDawg said:
otherwise that market is being fully ceded to the Asian manufacturers.

Sad, but so true. R&D budgets on cars often have benefits across multiple models. So now there will be virtually no cross over benefit as there won't be much in common between the Mustang and the Focus.

And now that they've declared their car team the unloved step-child, does anyone really think they are going to have the funding, support and morale necessary to succeed? The end is practically in sight for these two models as well.
 
Also thinking about some of the above observations, I think they may be trying to flout the safety, emissions, and fuel economy regs. They could simply be shifting to producing 'cars' that they will classify as "CUVs" and therefore are subject to less stringent restrictions as they will list them as part of the light truck category. :x
 
DarthPuppy said:
Also thinking about some of the above observations, I think they may be trying to flout the safety, emissions, and fuel economy regs. They could simply be shifting to producing 'cars' that they will classify as "CUVs" and therefore are subject to less stringent restrictions as they will list them as part of the light truck category. :x

No doubt. That's why Chrysler (pre-Fiat) classified the PT Cruiser and the Dodge Magnum as SUV's :roll: The latter is especially laughable as it's literally a station wagon version of the Chrysler 300, and in fact it was sold outside North America as the Chrysler 300C Touring, with the 300's front end treatment and interior appointments but otherwise the Magnum's body shell.

448614.jpg
 
LeftieBiker said:
Crossovers are in part an attempt to graft modern SUV styling onto a station wagon, and the curving roof that results usually means less cargo room than a similar wagon. They also make CUVs so the passengers sit higher off the road. Despite that, most CUVs are more car than truck.
True. But you'd be amazed at what else is going from truck to car. Vans for an example. The only truck chasis van now is the Chevy Express (also called the GM Savana). The Ford Transit, Dodge Promaster and Mercedes Sprinter are all uni-body car type chasis and suspensions.

But don't let the structural design fool you. The main energy loss on any vehicle is the aerodynamic drag. If you take a car, shape it like a less aerodynamic SUV and then increase the ride height you are killing the efficiency whether it's a uni-body or a frame chasis. But simply taking a hatchback and making it longer hardly affects air drag.
 
IssacZachary said:
But you'd be amazed at what else is going from truck to car. Vans for an example. The only truck chasis van now is the Chevy Express (also called the GM Savana). The Ford Transit, Dodge Promaster and Mercedes Sprinter are all uni-body car type chasis and suspensions.

Unibody construction is not new for vans, not even American vans. The Dodge "Tradesman" and "Sportsman" B-series vans built from 1971 to 2003 are unibody. Same with the first and second generation Ford Econolines.

And don't mistake "unibody" for "car-like" as they are not the same. The vans I mentioned above do NOT have a car-like drive quality to them at all. Conversely, there have been many body-on-frame luxury cars (the Lincoln Town Car being the last in production) with smooth rides.
 
RonDawg said:
Unibody construction is not new for vans, not even American vans. The Dodge "Tradesman" and "Sportsman" B-series vans built from 1971 to 2003 are unibody. Same with the first and second generation Ford Econolines.

And don't mistake "unibody" for "car-like" as they are not the same. The vans I mentioned above do NOT have a car-like drive quality to them at all. Conversely, there have been many body-on-frame luxury cars (the Lincoln Town Car being the last in production) with smooth rides.
That's really the whole point. Similarities don't make vehicles the same. Crossovers aren't really just taller station wagons. Taller has a big aerodynamic penalty. There are guys making their gasoline powered cars get over 100mpg just by improving the aerodynamics. (e.g. AeroCivic.) it seems as engine efficiency improves the general population is happy with 25-30mpg by making that car taller and less aerodynamic, counteracting any improvement in engine efficiency. Trying to sell bigger taller cars as SUV's with car-like fuel economy is a scam in my opinion.

One of the big reasons I got my Leaf is I wanted a car that gets better fuel economy than my 1985 Golf diesel. Yes, that car spews thick clouds of black death, but it also gets over 50mpg even after 500,000 miles! It's 2018 for crying out loud and people still think a 30mpg crossover that's going to last 200,000 is acceptable! The Aptera got 125mpg. The VW XL1 got 250mpg. And yet when any other car starts to get more than 30, it's almost like people demand that the car be made bigger and heavier so that it gets less than the 30mpg mark again or they will look for a bigger and heavier one that does!
 
Back
Top