Jump to content

"Ford will rely on Europe for a large portion of its future car development"


Recommended Posts

This article is similar to the one that appeared in the Detroit News, but I don't recall seeing the details of who was assigned to the vehicle programs.

 

From Automotive News:

 

DETROIT -- With the deal done for the sale of Jaguar and Land Rover to India's Tata Motors, Ford Motor Co. is reorganizing its global product development and purchasing operations.

 

Ford said today that its new structure designates global product development centers in specific regions for vehicle segments. The goal is to reduce the amount of time it takes to bring a new vehicle to market, cut development costs and reduce duplication in engineering and purchasing.

 

For instance, small cars -- such as the upcoming Fiesta -- would be designed, developed and engineered in Europe. Big pickups, such as the F-150, would be created in North America, while compact trucks would be developed in Asia and Africa.

 

Ford spokesman Todd Nissen said that last week's sale of Jaguar and Land Rover accelerated the changes to product development and purchasing.

 

Derrick Kuzak, Ford's group vice president of global product development, said in a statement: " These changes will allow us to fully leverage Ford's global product development and purchasing organizations to create more customer-focused vehicles faster."

 

Ford says it will start the new structure this month and roll it out with new vehicle programs. No layoffs or large-scale relocations are planned, Ford said.

 

Ford will rely on Europe for a large portion of its future car development and has named the following European executives:

 

• Marin Burela, B segment, vehicle line director. A B segment vehicle is a small car such as the Ford Fiesta.

 

• Gunnar Herrmann, C segment, vehicle line director. A C segment car is a compact the size of a Ford Focus.

 

• Steve Adams, CD segment, vehicle line director. A CD segment car is a mid-sized car the size of a Ford Fusion or Taurus.

 

• Phil Collareno, commercial vehicles, vehicle line director. This includes the Transit Connect small van coming to the United States in 2009.

 

Nissen said all of the vehicle line directors report to Joe Bakaj, vice president of product programs and product development.

 

Tony Brown, group vice president of global purchasing, said the changes will improve Ford's relationships with its global suppliers. Ford last year ranked last in two studies of how well automakers work with suppliers.

 

" Better alignment of our resources not only helps Ford -- it will also improve the way we do business with our global supply base by simplifying our sourcing process," Brown said in the company statement.

 

" This is consistent with the principles of our aligned business framework, which is strengthening collaboration with our key suppliers."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think CD engineering in Europe may prove to be a short term deal--it may be moved to NA. The rest of the list makes total sense. Ford has two large development centers. One in Dearborn and one in Cologne. Considering that Ford sells way more cars outside the US than in it, it makes sense that a large number of vehicles, going forward will be engineered in Cologne.

 

1) They have 'always' done it, and therefore they have "institutional knowledge."

 

2) They have facilities on par with Ford NA, or they should.

 

===

 

On CD, however, I have questions about efficient development. Under ideal circumstances, the CD products will be heavily researched and tested here, as well as in Cologne, and when you consider that the CD platform is, for the NA market, what the C platform is for Europe, it makes you wonder if Ford will either cheap out and reduce NA input into the product (by not paying for all those transoceanic flights and shipping), or move CD engineering to the states, and pay to shuttle over Europeans for input.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lovely...so we have to outsource vehicle development talent, to another continent as well...Is nothing sacred anymore ?

 

Just earlier today I was laughing because the tubs I'm installing on a rental property proudly displayed "Made in the U.S.A." I was shocked so I havent seen that in awhile...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think CD engineering in Europe may prove to be a short term deal--it may be moved to NA. The rest of the list makes total sense. Ford has two large development centers. One in Dearborn and one in Cologne. Considering that Ford sells way more cars outside the US than in it, it makes sense that a large number of vehicles, going forward will be engineered in Cologne.

 

1) They have 'always' done it, and therefore they have "institutional knowledge."

 

2) They have facilities on par with Ford NA, or they should.

 

===

 

On CD, however, I have questions about efficient development. Under ideal circumstances, the CD products will be heavily researched and tested here, as well as in Cologne, and when you consider that the CD platform is, for the NA market, what the C platform is for Europe, it makes you wonder if Ford will either cheap out and reduce NA input into the product (by not paying for all those transoceanic flights and shipping), or move CD engineering to the states, and pay to shuttle over Europeans for input.

 

We see a lot of product development work being done in Europe. We don't know what is being done in USA.

 

I suspect that Ford will develop 2 different C/D platforms. A narrow FWD one in Europe and a wider RWD one in USA. The C/D on from USA could be both C/D and D.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On CD, however, I have questions about efficient development. Under ideal circumstances, the CD products will be heavily researched and tested here, as well as in Cologne, and when you consider that the CD platform is, for the NA market, what the C platform is for Europe, it makes you wonder if Ford will either cheap out and reduce NA input into the product (by not paying for all those transoceanic flights and shipping), or move CD engineering to the states, and pay to shuttle over Europeans for input.

Remember that "electronic wall" that Ford was touting some time ago? The one that allows designers on two different continents to collaborate? There won't be that many transoceanic flights, only ones where "hands-on" is required, like, for ex., interior materials selection, or suspension tuning.

 

I agree, though, that CD is more properly a NA project. I would guess that Cologne is getting a shot at it now because EUCD for NA is already in the pipeline, and they have more experience with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We see a lot of product development work being done in Europe. We don't know what is being done in USA.

 

I suspect that Ford will develop 2 different C/D platforms. A narrow FWD one in Europe and a wider RWD one in USA. The C/D on from USA could be both C/D and D.

We probably won't see a RWD CD in the US, at least not as a Ford. The only RWD cars currently in this class are luxury brands - Infinity, BMW, M-B, Caddy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We see a lot of product development work being done in Europe. We don't know what is being done in USA.

 

I suspect that Ford will develop 2 different C/D platforms. A narrow FWD one in Europe and a wider RWD one in USA. The C/D on from USA could be both C/D and D.

IIRC, the Freep had styling and powertrain in the US, and chassis development in Europe. NA becomes RWD cars and fullsize trucks, as well as powertrain and styling.

 

In the end the 'my region iz kikkin' ur regionz' thinking has to go. The concerns I have about CD engineering in EU are logistical: I think it will be either more expensive to do CD there, or it will not be done as well as it could be done here.

 

And as most regular visitors know, I'm not at all thrilled about the "one Ford everywhere" philosophy. I think the savings in terms of cost are fractional over the life of the sheetmetal, and that it's being done largely in response to pressure from non-vested stakeholders, and that the approval cannot be justified on anything other than 'gut instinct'.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BTW, before anyone brings up the Mustang and talks about how rotten focus groups are, well, guess what? They focus grouped the Mustang and KNEW it was going to be a hit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think CD engineering in Europe may prove to be a short term deal--it may be moved to NA. The rest of the list makes total sense. Ford has two large development centers. One in Dearborn and one in Cologne. Considering that Ford sells way more cars outside the US than in it, it makes sense that a large number of vehicles, going forward will be engineered in Cologne.

 

1) They have 'always' done it, and therefore they have "institutional knowledge."

 

2) They have facilities on par with Ford NA, or they should.

 

===

 

On CD, however, I have questions about efficient development. Under ideal circumstances, the CD products will be heavily researched and tested here, as well as in Cologne, and when you consider that the CD platform is, for the NA market, what the C platform is for Europe, it makes you wonder if Ford will either cheap out and reduce NA input into the product (by not paying for all those transoceanic flights and shipping), or move CD engineering to the states, and pay to shuttle over Europeans for input.

I agree - this is the heart of the problem with this announcement. Ford Europe has less experience with mid size cars than the US, and virtually no experience with larger cars. The few times they've tried, they've flopped worse than the US vehicles. Ford Europe is good (but not great) at small and slightly larger cars. The first gen Mondeo bombed on both sides of the Atlantic and it's far too early to say how successful the latest Mondeo will be. Ford's better sources for mid size and larger cars are Japan, Australia and Dearborn. In any case, they don't say when any of this will actually affect products sold here. Dearborn is already finishing up the MKS, Flex, MKT, next generation Taurus (the one they claim brings tears to the eye), and they're making plans with Australia for rear drive large cars. Funny, the article doesn't even mention Australia. Nor does it say much about the red hot crossover market, which again is not a strength of Ford Europe.

Edited by EMDEE
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not necessarily a question of historical strengths, so much, IMO, as getting your engineers closest to the largest and most concentrated markets, in terms of efficiency.

 

One wonders if CD3 is being done in Cologne and C2 in NA, with the understanding that once these platforms launch, things will flipflop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FOE is said to be unhappy at having PAG broken up, maybe by moving this work to Europe Ford is keeping lots of board members happy that were ready to revolt.... either that or FOE is just considered to have more talent....

Tstag, for the last time, Ford is not a European company, so there's no "board revolt" to even consider. This is not a BMW, Mercedes, or VW situation. The Ford family owns the majority of the stock - plain and simple. The employees in Europe are just that: employees. They do not have a seat on the board. If they're not happy, they are welcome to hit the door.

 

Please don't introduce speculation that has no basis in fact.

 

OTOH, your observation that FOE is considered to have more talent might just be accurate; I don't think it is argueable that FOE is far ahead of Ford NA in having revamped its product lines and the processes that produced those products.

Edited by Harley Lover
Link to comment
Share on other sites

FOE is said to be unhappy at having PAG broken up, maybe by moving this work to Europe Ford is keeping lots of board members happy that were ready to revolt.... either that or FOE is just considered to have more talent....

"FOE is said to be unhappy at having PAG broken up"? I don't know why, because FOE product development no longer has to consider that what they might want to do might be in conflict with JLR. Makes life more simple, and allows more freedom, for example, to produce a 4x4 that might get into LR2 territory, like a deluxe EcoBoost Kuga.

WIth EcoBoost, FOE could produce higher-performance sedans, without worrying about the X-type and the V-6 XF.

 

Right now, we have to assume that the Mull is aware that the product, no matter where the master CAD files reside, has to be market competitive, no matter where the intended market is. So, if the next C/D is done in Europe, the US version should be sufficiently wide, for those big NA butts, so Ford gets its share of the pork parade. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FOE is said to be unhappy at having PAG broken up, maybe by moving this work to Europe Ford is keeping lots of board members happy that were ready to revolt.... either that or FOE is just considered to have more talent....

Geeeeeeeeeeeeeezzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

 

FoE has historically done A, B, C, and CD cars. They're not getting anything they haven't done before.

 

The only odd thing at present is that C2 is being done in Dearborn, and CD3 is being done in Cologne. The two should be flip-flopped, IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Geeeeeeeeeeeeeezzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

 

FoE has historically done A, B, C, and CD cars. They're not getting anything they haven't done before.

 

The only odd thing at present is that C2 is being done in Dearborn, and CD3 is being done in Cologne. The two should be flip-flopped, IMO.

I believe that is temporary - just for now ... the cost of US EUCD model is appartnly in line with FNA needs ... so Cologne is fine doing it. The C2 is here, because C2 has to be cheaper at base than C1 - and the one needing this is FNA - so FNA is doing it ..I think the reason why they are not doing EUCD2 is a RESULT of doing C2 - spreading out the projects.

 

Igor

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FNA is not doing C2. It's being done in Dearborn. FNA has no authority over it. Ditto CD3 in Cologne. It's being done in Cologne, not by FoE.

sorry - I am still stuck in old jargon and "shortcut speak" - you are correct - they do not have authority over the projects

 

Igor

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good. They have better looking designs and more efficient powertrains than NA.

There is very little in the way of gas powertrain engineering done in Europe. As a result, Dearborn ends up being home to powertrain development in the future. As well as design.

 

But this whole FoE vs. FNA vs. FoA is just a little retrograde, these days, as engineers and designers in all corners of the globe all report to Derrick Kuzak, not the head of the local P&L.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FNA is not doing C2. It's being done in Dearborn. FNA has no authority over it. Ditto CD3 in Cologne. It's being done in Cologne, not by FoE.

 

If this is true, then the reorganization make a little more sense.

 

On the other hand, the Focus that Detroit is working on, is work in progress, making the world C1 US legal. Europe would be starting new work on a complete redesign to follow later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...