skor

You are a racist, anti-Semitic, homophobic, misogynist for saying this. So what if it's the truth? The truth is no defense. You have been reported. Understand? REPORTED!

What are you worried about? Ford is done. Better look for a new gig now while you can.

Excuse me if I don't give a shit about PC-ims.

No one is picking on them, just stating facts. Ford brought this on themselves with 35 years worth of bad management. Ford execs were more interested in lining their own pockets, playing race politics and giving money to fags than they were in building a decent car. The deadwood is finally going to get burned. I say good riddance. I hope GM goes the same way soon.

You are assuming that Ford will maintain its current market share, which is not likely. Here is some anecdotal evidence. I live in Northern New Jersey, just out side of NYC. Ford's market share in this area is less than 10% and dropping. The only Fords I see on the road around here are pick-ups, SUVs, taxis and cop cars. I don't know anyone who owns a Ford car. 2 local Ford dealers have gone tits-up last year and a 3rd is going out of business this year. Ford is in an irreversible death spiral. That is the fact.

Let's face it kids, Ford is toast. Prediction: Toyota buys the truck division, and the rest is sold to the Chinese for scrap prices.

Why should the BMW guys have all the fun? Ford produces a turbo I6 engine in Australia that makes 360HP and 400 ft-lb torque. I would love an engine like this in a rear drive sedan or coupe for the US market. How about it, Ford?

I don't know how many 89 Probes are still running compared to 89 Mustangs, but I got 187K miles out of my 89 Probe LX. I got rid of the car because the body was starting to rust and the interior was grungy. When I dumped the car, the engine still ran fine.

Nope. The reason I think they are so great is because of the performance, styling, utility and reliability. Just about everything the NA Ford products lack. Did you know that the Euro-Focus is the highest rated car, in terms of reliability, in Germany!? Why is it that we can't buy this car in the USA? The only explanation that makes any sense is that the people running Ford's NA operations are mentally defective.

The first gen Ford Probe(a re-bodied Mazda MX-6 made in the Mazda plant in Flatrock, MI) was intended to be the new Mustang. Instead of becoming the new Mustang, Ford decided to carry over the old RWD Mustang platform and issue the Mazda front-driver under the Probe name ( Probe was the name of a Ford aero concept car that made the car show circuit during the 1980s) The story carried by the car rags at the time was that a massive grassroots effort by Mustang enthusiasts saved the hoary old Mustang RWD platform. I think that story was a lot of BS. I believe that internal company politics had a lot more to do with saving the Fox platform Mustang. The first gen Probe sold quite well. The 89's offered a normally aspirated I4 Mazda 2.2 and a turbo charged 2.2 The turbo cars were very fast -- in a straight line they were almost as fast as a GT Mustang. I saw a test conducted by Motorweek( I think it was Motorweek) when the Probe first came out. They drag raced a stock turbo 89 Probe GT against a stock 89 Mustang GT. The Probe came in about half a car length behind the Mustang at the end of the 1/4 mile. The 90-92 models offered three engine choices I4 Mazda 2.2 and turbo 2.2 as well as a Ford 3.0 V6. The Probe may not have been as fast as the Mustang, but it was far and away a better car. The first gen Probe offered (depending on the trim level) 4 wheel disc brake, anti-lock, speed sensitive steering assist, electronic suspension adjustment, trip computer and power everything. All Probes had 4 wheel independent suspension. Manual trans cars could return 30+ MPG on the highway I owned a 89 Probe LX, the handling was excellent, better than the Mustang of that era. The fit and finish was better than the Mustang. Contrary to the rumors, the first gen cars were quite reliable -- Consumer Reports said so. The second gen cars 93-97 did suffer from reliability problems. There were only two engine choices, a Mazda 2.0 I4 and a Mazda 2.5 V6. The second gen GT was not as fast as the first gen turbo, and it was now considerably slower than the GT Mustang. The 93 model sales picked up, but fell off quickly in subsequent model years. A number of factors conspired to kill off the Probe. The choice of names was unfortunate. It immediately turned off a lot of potential buyers -- women especially found the name to be in bad taste. The dealers hated the car from day-one since it was really a Mazda and didn't share any parts with the other Fords -- as my 89 LX aged, I gave up on the local Ford dealer and went to the Mazda dealer for parts. Sport coupe sales collapsed for everyone during the 90's. The SUV fad took off as the middle aged baby boomers became fat and creaky -- fat, old, arthritic people don't buy low to the ground sport coupes. Ford decided that since the big profits were in trucks and SUVs, they didn't really want to be a car company anymore -- I guess that really has come back to bite them in the ass now. The current AWD Mazda turbo 6 would make for a really nice sports coupe, but I don't see that happening. Even with high gas prices, the market for sport coupes is very limited now. The original Probe project had a lot of potential, unfortunately it was never given a chance by Ford.

Someone please explain this to me: Why can Ford produce some fantastic products oversees -- Euro-Focus, S-Max, Oz-Falcon -- yet can't manage to produce cars of the same caliber in NA and refuses to import said Euro/Oz cars into NA? Consider this S-Max review. --------------------------------------------------- Ford S-Max 2.5 Titanium By Jeremy Clarkson of The Sunday Times A couple of weeks ago the third most senior bishop in the Church of England announced that it was a “sin†to jet off on foreign holidays and drive a gas-guzzling car. Yup, the Bishop of London, the Right Reverend Richard Chartres, said tourists and school-run mums were being “selfish†for making global warming worse. Quite how he arrived at these conclusions we don’t know. I’ve checked and he has no known scientific qualifications. So far as I can tell, he read history before taking a job in Sainsbury’s. His hobby is advising men on how to wear dresses. So, is eco-vicaring the lunatic ramblings of a lone maverick in a dog collar? Or is it now official church policy? Well, when reporters contacted the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, for his views on the matter, he agreed that he too had a beard. And that yes, not having a beard was selfish. I suppose we shouldn’t be surprised by this. Few organisations know quite as much about selfishness as the Church of England. They preach to their increasingly small congregations about the iniquities of homelessness, and then lock up their churches at night to make sure tramps can’t get in and nick the communion wine. They tell us about the need for tolerance and to forgive those who trespass against us, but won’t let homosexualists into the pulpit because that sort of thing is a sin too. And so is being a woman. And so is greed, of course. The sort of greed that turned a simple belief into one of the richest institutions in the world. Then there are those who practise bell-ringing for two hours a night. Is that not a bit selfish; imposing your hobby and your vision of traditionalism on everyone within five miles? Some of whom may well have come from cultures where guns, not bells, are the soundtrack of village life. Would these people therefore be on the moral high ground if they were to shoot a bell-ringer? In the sort of multiculturalism the church likes so much these days (so long as you’re not a poof) then yes. Presumably they would. I’m sorry. I know it’s Sunday. I know many of you have deeply held Christian beliefs and you don’t like to see them being criticised. But for the same reasons I don’t like to see cars being criticised, especially by some jumped-up shelf stacker who has absolutely no idea what he’s on about. That said, I am approached by an increasingly large number of people these days who believe that their off-road car might be causing the lovely summer we’re having. This, for some reason, is making them feel guilty. Well, I don’t know what’s causing global warming. I’ve read several reports saying it’s the Land Rover Discovery and that you must immediately part-exchange it for a windmill. But then I’ve read an equally large number that say global temperature variations are cyclical and that choosing to become an automotive vegetablist won’t make the slightest bit of difference. I don’t know which are right because my only qualification is a bronze swimming medal. What I do know is that those who wish to change their Land Rover Discovery for something else have a bit of a problem. What? Writing in the Telegraph recently, Annabel Heseltine made a very good point; that the law requires children in the back of cars to fasten their seatbelts. And that if you have four children, you therefore need four back seats. Which means that G-Wiz electric car won’t really do. And nor will a people carrier . . . When I was a young man in London I had a very large overdraft and no real sense of how it might ever be paid off. Occasionally I’d look into the future and think, how do people manage? I am living in a shared house and I cannot afford the basics — cigarettes and beer. So how do you cope when you have a wife who can’t work because she’s at home looking after two small children? How can one wage packet sustain four people, four holidays, four sets of clothing, four new pairs of shoes? And how does anyone ever have enough money to buy a washing-up bowl? No, really, I used to see them in hardware stores and wonder how boring and complete your life would have to be before you’d even think about buying such a thing. And that really is where I stand on the people carrier. They’re for people with no imagination, people who can’t think of anything better to do with £17,500. Buying a Renault Scénic is like buying a passport into the grey, sterilised world of upper middle age. So if you need lots of seats because you have lots of children, it has to be a 4x4 of some kind. We have the Volvo XC90. You may prefer a Disco. Either way, it shows you are still packing a bit of meat. That you haven’t yet reached that stage in life where what you crave more than anything is “an early nightâ€. And then along comes the Right Reverend Richard Beardface to say that you’re a sinner and a heretic and that you should be placed in a wicker man and burnt while Britt Ekland prances around a nearby hotel room naked as a jaybird. So what’s to be done? Well, at last there’s an answer in the rather beguiling shape of the car you see pictured this morning. The Ford S-Max. It’s a people carrier but they’ve named it after a slang word for heroin. And that sums it up rather well. You look at the exterior styling, the 18in alloy wheels, the raked windscreen, the low roofline, and you think, yes, it might well have seven seats in there but who could possibly fit on them? Richard Hammond? You’re in for a shock. There’s tons of space for me behind the wheel and tons of space in the middle row too, which is made up of three individual seats, all of which slide and tilt independently of one another. In the boot there are two more seats that rise — easily — from the floor and behind them you have a boot that is big enough for a medium-sized dog. And under this there’s another boot that is big enough for a small overnight bag. Or you can fold all the seats in the back away and end up with a cargo area that’s big enough for a standard house door. So then you stand back and think, how in the name of all that’s holy (not poofs, in other words) did they get all that in there? The answer is to be found when you try to park. The S-Max may appear to be compact and sporty but it’s only a whisker shorter than the Volvo XC90. It is, however, much better looking, and much cheaper. The range starts at just under £17,000 and is still only at £22,000 when you get to the five-cylinder turbocharged 143mph 2.5 Titanium. Which is what I drove. I was expecting a characterless unibox but I was wrong. It was great to look at and cheap and more versatile than a decathlete’s trusty Leatherman. I’m not saying it’s a sporty car in any way, but it goes, handles, steers, stops and most importantly rides way, way better than you could hope for. And on top of this, it did 30mpg, felt very well screwed together and came as standard with air-conditioning, electric everything and automatic headlamps. Which were second world war searchlight bright, incidentally. This, then, is the holy grail. It’s an MPV you buy because you like it. Not because you need it. And because it appears to be small and has no four-wheel-drive system, you’ll be able to park it outside church, knowing the vicar won’t come along and chop it up with his special nine-bladed eco-sword. Vital statistics Model Ford S-Max 2.5 Titanium Engine 2522cc, five cylinders Power 220bhp @ 5000rpm Torque 239 lb ft @ 2100rpm Transmission Six-speed manual Fuel 30.1mpg (combined cycle) CO2 224g/km Acceleration 0-60mph: 7.4sec Top speed 143mph Price £21,995 Rating Four stars Verdict Strictly no beards http://driving.timesonline.co.uk/article/0...2299276,00.html

Ford is burning through its cash. Why do you think they are looking into dumping Jaguar and selling off part of their finance arm? Market share continues to drop for both Ford and GM and continues to rise for Toyota and Honda. While market share continues to slide, legacy costs don't. It's only a matter of time before both GM and Ford go under or are acquired by a viable auto maker. The only question is who goes tits up first.

Can anyone say "bankruptcy"? Gas isn't going to drop to $1/gal again ever -- or $2/gal for that matter. Ford put all it's eggs into trucks and SUVs, they have no cars that sell AND MAKE A PROFIT in the North American market. Sure, they claim that they have new product for 2008 -- too late. It's all over except for the scrap metal sale.

I love it! Can I get mine with a straight 6? Dual overhead cam, variable valve timing and direct injection of course.

Moot point. 40 years from now the USA will be a smoldering, radioactive waste. ETA, if you want to invest in something, I suggest a Soylent Green franchise.