Ford RWD sedans in 2008

[swenson88]

The thing I don't get is why people are so anal about RWD. I went from a FWD small car to a Mustang then back to a small FWD car and then back to a Mustang again, and the last thing on my mind was what wheels it was driving. For the vast majority of people out there that actually buy cars, they could give less then two fucks which wheels its driving in the powertrain.

 

More than that, they don't even KNOW. Only my true gearhead friends have any idea what wheels are driving, what size or configuration their engine is, how many speeds their auto tranny has, etc etc. And those friends probably make up less than 10% of the people I know, if that much at all. Good styling goes a lot further than what wheels are driving the car. I'd drive a Fusion even though it's FWD, but to be honest I find the current Ford Falcon from AU really boring looking even though it's hi-po and RWD.

[StevenJ]

Just like the current GTO.

 

Sales figures aside, the GTO is a grand performance bargin. It is a fully independent front and rear suspension sport coupe with 400 hp and 400 ft pounds of torque for a mere $33,000 and the GTO is based on the last generation of the Monaro. Also, there is no reason as to why the body panels cannot be changed for when zeta arrives for US production to better suite the US market. The most important thing right now is that the basic underpinnings are developed and are ready for production. An exterior restyling for the US isn't that big of a deal. I don't know if you have or have not seen pictures of what the new cars look like but they are amazing. Not necessarily from an exterior stand point. Not everyone may agree with the blander lines of the car. But the interior is absoutely breath taking. The design layout of the dash and gauges make for the prefect touch of classic and modern design.

 

 

 

The thing I don't get is why people are so anal about RWD. I went from a FWD small car to a Mustang then back to a small FWD car and then back to a Mustang again, and the last thing on my mind was what wheels it was driving. For the vast majority of people out there that actually buy cars, they could give less then two fucks which wheels its driving in the powertrain.

 

Well that's dandy, because there are plenty of people who totally disagree and most of the uppermarket is made up of larger RWD sedans. From BMW, to Cadillac, to Mercedess, to Lexus, and to Jaguar, the vast majority is RWD. So appearently someone does care! Rwd has better weight distrubtion and better handling and it isn't all paper talk. I have driven a fair number of vehicles fwd and rwd and I just find that rwd drives better. RWD doesn't drive as harshly as FWD. Most FWD cars tend to lunge foward greatly when stopping and have a fair amount of understeer around corners, especially when driven hard.

 

They also tend to squeak their tires. RWD on the other hand has much softer when braking. They are also less prone to understeer. The other thing that kills me about FWD is driving in wet conditions. I have noticed that if you take off hard, even in fairly low hp fwd cars, they will veer strongly to the right or the left. This is of course known as torque steer. If I do the same in a rwd car with traction controll off, the car launches straight but there is wheel spin. However, at least I am not fighting with the direction of the car as much as I start moving and over comming wheel spin is easy. Just let off the throttle for a second and then reapply the gas.

 

Again, FWD for beginner drivers may be a bit easier since FWD gives the illusion of having better road feel since you can feel the engine vibration through the steering wheel but again, it's just an illusion. The fact is, RWD has higher handling limits, especially in dry conditions, since more of the weight is placed towards the rear unlike in FWD applications where more of the weight is up front which leads to a very unequal weight distribution. Also, FWD is limiting on design since the wheels must be place in alignment with the engine and the transmision. FWD cars are also harder to service, especially V engien since the engines are generally mounted transverly. Changing spark plugs on FWD V6s can be a grave challenge for this reason. Since the engine is placed transverly, it makes getting to the back of the spark plugs hard to get too. Also, with FWD you have to deal with CV shafts which aren't always the most reliable and can break easily especially in high horse power applications and with larger tires. Sure, for ecconomy car purposes, FWD makes sense since they generally weigh less since there isn't a need for a length driveshaft and no rear axle. But in higher preformance and larger car applications RWD makes since it is much easier to safely produce a high horse power RWD car than a FWD one due to weight distrubtion and the faults that come along with cv shafts.

Edited July 17, 2006 by StevenJ

[RichardJensen]

Oh geez. You have just got to stop falling in love with good press photography. Yeah. I know Ford's is so bad that you see something of even minimal quality from somewhere else and it just makes you go all to pieces, but please. Take a closer look:

 

1) Note that the farther down the console you go, the farther away the controls get. Now hold your arm directly in front of you and then rotate it down towards your hip. Question: does your hand get closer to your body, or does it get farther away? Closer, you say? Hmm. So why would the controls get farther away from you, the farther down they are? So you have to lean forward? Not ergonomically smart. You see this on the Zephyr, but do not see it on any other new Ford vehicle. In fact, most new Fords feature a rather sharply raked center console designed to keep controls within roughly the same radius, as you rotate your arm.

 

2) Now we have the gauge cluster. Granted, from this angle it looks like the temp and fuel gauges are obstructed by the steering wheel. In reality, from your position in the driver's seat, you would probably see both gauges through the steering wheel (as you would be closer to it, and also because you have a 34mm focal length (give or take) on your eyes and this was probably shot with a wider angle (which would make the steering wheel obstruct the gauges). However. When you look from the road down to the gauge cluster, do you automatically gaze to either side of the gauge cluster? No. You go straight down and then your field of view takes in one of the large center gauges (it will generally be the right since most people are right-eye dominant). You may then shift your gaze to the left, to check the tach (this does have the better speedo on the right/tach on the left arrangement--the 96-Taurus & Sable had it the otherway around and it's kind of annoying.) Now, to check the accessory gauges you have to look farther to the left, then again to the right.

 

However, if you put the accessory gauges between the speedo and tach (as Audi did, and then Ford), your eyes will take them in one pass as you move from the road to the gauge cluster and back.

 

3) Window controls are on the center console, as is the power mirror adjustment. This is a barbaric compromise for LHD/RHD compatiblity. You could find less intuitive locations for these switchs, but it would require putting them either under the seat or in the glovebox.

 

4) Vents are not opened and closed the same way. Center vents have the air flow control in between them. Side vents have the air flow control underneath. My Sable has airflow controls on the side vents but not in the middle. It's annoying. You would not 'compromise' your design if you imposed some uniformity here.

 

5) round dials for digital settings. Also a mistake. Unless the dial's resistance is just right for everybody, during the 'getting to know you' phase, you will continually be missing your click-stop. This is almost impossible with a lever type selector (again first seen in Audi and MB in the 80s, then Ford, then everywhere else). Passage of time and changes in style do not make an idea bad.

 

That's just what I can see from this press photo. Reality may be even worse.

Edited July 17, 2006 by RichardJensen

[StevenJ]

Rich I'm not knocking Ford, I'm just saying that the new Zeta cars are awsome. And little detailes like the window switches can be worked out when they come here. Yes it is odd that the switches are on the floor next to the shifter but nothing all that new that hasn't been done before. The controslf or the power eseat swoudl be better on the doors and not on the floor shifter though. Other than that, it's all minor. yes it is odd that the fuel and temp gauges are seperated from the tach and speedo and aren't placed in between them. I think it's something that you could get used to though. I'd give it an A++ for visual appeal B- for functionality,.

[RichardJensen]

little detailes like the window switches can be worked out when they come here.

But so often they aren't at GM, and they won't be on any imported Zetas. One of the things that has more quickly paid off at Ford (during the JMays tenure) is ergonomics: Ford's interiors work better these days. It's a throw back to the '86 Taurus where a great deal of time and effort went into creating a 'cockpit' that was subsequently copied by Toyota and Chevy (to greater and lesser extents, respectively). Mays is, despite all his preening, a classicist. The solutions he's overseen show attention to these little details.

 

As to any GM iteration of a Zeta, sadly, I don't think GM's got the right approach to product development to maximize the potential of the Zeta: They are looking for answers within the industry, instead of looking for answers from their customers. Upon defining their target Pontiac customer (lets say), they should prepare a range of options, and find out just what these customers want the most. It's easy to come up with a reliable set of questions and scenarios.

 

If GM defines a customer subset for Pontiac that is broad enough to support their typical volume of the last few years, and that subset really doesn't care about RWD, then GM is making a mistake prioritizing an RWD platformm for Pontiac. Sure such a decision may play well with the automotive press, but if it doesn't matter to the customers they're looking for, it's money that's been wasted.

 

I mean, it would be nice to put these cars out of context, and say, "man, I would love to have that in my driveway", the only problem with, is that it makes unsustainable assumptions about the market in general. The prevalance of that kind of thinking at Detroit is directly connected with survey after survey that finds a majority of consumers in many vehicle segments saying that Detroit products don't meet their needs.

[StevenJ]

Richard, Richard, GM is not giving up FWD. As a matter of fact, I think having a few more RWD products in the mix would help them to regain a lot of lost market share. Ever since the end of the B-body, lots of old timer GM fans have left the company and bought Ford crown vics and grand marquis or other similar larger cars. RWD sedans do more than just apeal to classic traditional bof car buyers. They also serve as means as a viable alternative to SUVs. You see, not everyone likes SUVs necessarily for the ride height. Many people are attracted to them for their big V8s, rear drive, and spacious interiors. A large zeta car with RWD will feature all these positive aspects with significantly better fuel ecconomy. After all, most RWD sedans in this class are capable of rougly 17-18 city, and 23-27 highway. And since these new sedans will feature six speed automatics, it is safe to assume that it will be higher on the mpg specturm and I'm sure the LS V8s that will be used in these cars will also feature DOD on top of that. Sure, not everyone wants RWD, that's why GM will continue to work on the Epsilon platforms for the Malibu and G6.

 

By not offering an affordable RWD sedan, you are missing out on a lot of market share. As I have menitoned, most upmarket sedans are RWD and these kinds of cars, like SUVs, tend to be very profitable since most costumers tend to get drawn in by the higher dollar options of the bigger engine, the fancier transmissions, sat nav, and all the other little features they can add onto options on a more luxurious upmarket car. I'm not saying GM should make everything RWD. I think having at least six of these cars would be fine. Two for chevy, pontiac, and buick. One coupe, one sedan. Chevy gets a short wheel base Camaro coupe, and a long wheel base Impala. Pontiac gets a long wheel base GTO coupe, and a short wheel base G8 sedan. Lastly, Buick gets a long wheel base Grand National type coupe and a long wheel base sedan.

 

It all makes sense and it fits in very well with the traditional line up. And if done at the right plant, they can make the line flexible in order to build more of certain cars than other. For example, of the Impala increases in demand and the GTO slows down, they can build more impalas and vice versa. Again, I'm not saying RWD is the end all be it all but it is not a segment that should be ignored. Driving ethusiast exist and unless you want their money to go towards a new Infinity M35 or a BMW 535, you shouldn't give up on the segment. Ford should offer something competitive in the market besides Jaguar. Yes they have the Mustang, great, it's a coupe! Why not a sedan variant too? I don't think Nissan is giving up it's G35 sedan variant any time soon! Why receed market share? I know Lincoln has the new 3.5 V6 MKS comming but come on? AWD has it's place but it's going to get lauded at for being an upscale 500. Yes you could techincally argue it is an S80 on the cheap but don't you think that would mean that the potential buyer should just go out and buy the S80 instead?

 

What's wrong with RWD? There are plenty of folk who don't live in the snow belt. They aren't any harder to drive in rough rain than FWD and especially thanks to new technologies like stability control and traction control. What's the big deal? RWD simply handels better, has less drive train loss than AWD, has better fuel ecconomy than AWD, and is less complex and easier to maintian than AWD. Maybe it's just me but I don't feel like having to pay to have to replace all four tires at once on an AWD car. FWD turned into AWD is a compromise for not having a RWD car to begin with. Why not just go RWD?

Edited July 17, 2006 by StevenJ

[RichardJensen]

What's wrong with RWD? There are plenty of folk who don't live in the snow belt.

Actually, "industry insiders" had an RWD only Pontiac lineup under consideration an while back... There's an article on AW somewhere if you want it.

 

Anyway, I got no beef against RWD--only thing is, a decision to sell RWD sedans here needs to be supported by market research. Not just anecdotal evidence or scattered buyer preference. Sound market research (which is to say market research that is structured neutrally, not so as to favor either FWD or RWD vehicles, and conducted on target customers) should underpin any decision to launch any new vehicle.

 

The trouble is, I don't think executives at GM could anymore define a target customer group for Buick than they could for Saturn or Chevy or Pontiac. You hear GM say they want Buick to be a Lexus fighter (sorry, I'm in soapbox mode now), which is absolutely ridiculous: you're not positioning your brand to a customer, you're positioning it in opposition to another brand. This is old Detroit thinking, and it doesn't work anymore.

 

If you can't define a Buick customer (e.g. mid-management professional, late 30s to early 50s, average income $60-80k, house decorated with items from Pier 1, Williams & Sonoma, Crate & Barrel, wears Kenneth Cole, Hagar, Dockers and Ralph Lauren clothing, lives in a suburban development (on a cul de sac), does not mind a long commute since it means a quiet and safe neighborhood), then you can't really find out if that customer wants a RWD or FWD vehicle, or if they even care.

 

See, in every other industry, to a greater or lesser degree of precision, companies know those kind of details about their customers. The auto industry for years got away with adding superficial distinction to their vehicles, while passing off the same basic designs. That doesn't cut it anymore. When you have a brand portfolio as broad as GM (or Ford) you need to very carefully design your target customer. If you do so, and you keep your definition up to date, you will create a steady stream of buyers that will consider your products to be extremely satisfying.

 

------

 

Anyway how this relates to the whole FWD/RWD thing is if you define your Pontiac customer as someone who is a race fan (say the Pontiac consumer is someone mid 20s to early 40s, more often a male, professional or skilled trade, $35-55k, not afraid to turn a wrench on his/her car, will travel over 500 miles to attend a race or sporting event, shops at Target, is a DIYer, might rent, might own, puts a premium on experiences over possessions, etc), it means a) there has to be a Pontiac racing program (and a Pontiac aftermarket program), but also b ) you may need to have one or two credible RWD performance offerings, and you should have a kickin' B-class car.

 

The thing is not to have a sort of symmetry across the lineup, but to have a balance within a brand, so that your Buick Enclave is not just a GMC Acadia with softer leather and more chrome. Or that you maybe only have a RWD coupe for Chevy, and an RWD sedan and coupe for Pontiac. With the global Zeta architecture, such a thing should be possible.

 

But, once again, GM cannot do solid market research unless they know their customers. If they have a broad parameter for their typical Buick customer........ they'll get no meaningful answers. Ditto Chevy, Pontiac, etc. The inability to establish a preference for RWD doesn't mean that giving every brand an RWD coupe and sedan is a good idea. It means that it's the wrong solution to the problem. The right solution is to find a more narrowly defined customer base.

 

I mean, say GM performs a market survey and 1/3rd say they want an FWD vehicle, and 1/3rd say they want an RWD vehicle, and 1/3rd say they don't care. This doesn't mean that an RWD sedan and an FWD sedan will both sell really well. It means GM's parameters are too vague.

 

Unfortunately the kind of crappy decisions that are based on vague results from overly broad operational parameters have led a lot of execs in Detroit to dismiss market research entirely. Since market research is only a tool, if you don't use it properly, you're not going to get quality results. If you don't torque down the headbolts on your car properly and the gasket leaks, is there a problem with the torque wrench?

 

So, what I'm saying is that the RWD/FWD "car guy" debate needs to be subordinated to the RWD/FWD "do the customers care" debate.

Edited July 17, 2006 by RichardJensen

[swenson88]

Most people buying upmarket vehicles like Mercedes and BMW aren't buying them for much more than the badge in most cases. Yes, they're RWD, but again, ask all the buyers if they know that when they make the purchase and I think you'll get a similar poor response.

[StevenJ]

Well it is true that it is a good idea to use market tools to decide what the market wants. It's also sometimes a good idea to enter into larger vehicle segments that have not been previous discovered. Again, how do we know that Lincoln has a market with large rebadged volvos and rebadged mazdas? That's essentially what the line up is going to be in the next few years. All fwd or awd. Maybe it's because they are copying the VW/Audi business model which Ford seems to be so fond of doing. Again, by building RWD vehicles could attract people that normally go for more expensive imported RWD luxury vehicles into the Gm show room. The way it should be advertised is that they are buying a large V8 BMW sedan at low prices with the same level of quality. It is quiet doable and has worked for other companies like DCX. But I think these GM sedans will need to do more than the LX. It will need more than just the right chasis and drive train components. It will also need a well put interior and the new zeta cars seem to have a well put together interior unlike the LX cars which could be one of many reasons as to why they aren't selling as well as they used too. Again, Maybe not every GM brand needs a coupe and sedan. Buick may be fine with just a sedan while Pontiac and Chevy may require both. Either way, there is a huge market for these kinds of cars. All they need is proper advertising and modest V8 fuel ecconomy that keeps up with the competition and then they can stress them also as a practical alternative to family SUVs.

Edited July 17, 2006 by StevenJ

[RichardJensen]

Well it is true that it is a good idea to use market tools to decide what the market wants. It's also sometimes a good idea to enter into larger vehicle segments that have not been previous discovered.

 

...

 

Either way, there is a huge market for these kinds of cars.

Market research allows you to take the measure of segments that are not presently occupied. Scion wasn't done on a wing and a prayer.

 

Also, do not make the mistake of assuming a segment is huge, simply because you perceived untapped demand.

[RichardJensen]

Again, by building RWD vehicles could attract people that normally go for more expensive imported RWD luxury vehicles into the Gm show room. The way it should be advertised is that they are buying a large V8 BMW sedan at low prices with the same level of quality.

Well, although Cadillac has a new ad program that appears to be more narrowly focused than their outgoing "anyone who's not retired or almost dead" campaign, it's not clear that they have a much better idea about their target customer.

 

Ford, OTOH, has a very distinct profile of their target Lincoln customer, and he/she is unlikely to be looking at Cadillac offerings because they have RWD. He/she may be looking at Cadillac as a purveyor of a luxury item, not necessarily as a purveyor of a performance item. Ford knows how many of their demographic enters the car market every year (between 200k and 300k), and it is Ford's aim to exceed their expectations from a car. If this included RWD offerings, you can bet they would be planned.

 

However, think about those numbers. Ford's target audience for Lincoln represents, at its upper limit, .1% of the U.S. population, and less than 2% of the car buying public as a whole. Yet, with shared componentry, this can be a profitable slice.

[old_fairmont_wagon]

Scion has almost completely missed its intended market segment. Toyota's initial guidance on Scion was urban and suburban youth in the 16-24 y/o range with limited disposable income that liked unusual but not offensive styling and practicality with the ability to make their vehicles unique. What they got was an average buyer age of 40+ years old and a take rate on dealer customizations of less than 30% (as of late 2005). The older generation saw the vehicles for what they were, inexpensive and efficient toyotas (i.e. all the preceived quality of a toyota for a whole lot less money).

 

That same thing has hit other brands that wanted one segment but got another one. Lets face it, what makes a car sell? People want a vehicle that will get them where they want to go, reliably and efficiently, and that they won't mind looking at in their driveway for years to come. There are very few people that are true driving enthusiasts or performance crazy. There are a lot of "wanna-be's" out there, though, and they propel the sales of the 240+ hp family sedan. Yes, they sell more 4 cylinder altimas, camrys, and accords then 6 cylinders, but, that 6 cylinder gets a lot of those 4 cylinder buyers into the show room. And, they do happen to move many tens of thousands of v6 sedans anyway.

 

What will make a car company successful in the near future will be its ability to utalize its capacity as efficiently as possibly. Not hitting the absolute highest sales volume possible, but, making sure that the plant can produce the vehicle efficiently and reliably, that the vehicle can sell once its hit the market, and not being afraid to make major changes to a vehicle that isn't selling well if advertising doesn't work. That's what I like about Ford's approach to the restructuring. It may not be perfect, but, they've seen the light on the basics of the industry. There's too much competition out there to rule with market share. Market share is a reward for doing your consumer targeting well and providing the right product fo that target. It is not an goal, it is an indicator of overall strategic sucess.

 

-----------------------------------------

 

As for dropping the CV and making it mercury only. Big mistake. The GM market is dying out (literally) and not gonna save the platform. This should be the path for the panther...

 

1) EOL the Grand Marquise. It does absolutely NOTHING for the Mercury brand that is good. Anyone going into a mercury dealership for a GM wouldn't consider anything else in the stable. Their kids already have their own vehicle opinions formed. If you want their business, fine, offer a $1500 rebate on a GM trade in for a Montego.

 

2) Keep the Retail C/V, but, up the luxury package to include the popular luxury features from the GM for those hardcore loyalists. Make a Lincoln Town car for the C/V Cab frame and sell that to livery companies as long as they want it. Change the engine and tranny to the 3V 4.6L V8 and 6AT from the explorer. There should be 4 versions of the CV. The Base edition that is the cheapest one possible. The CVPI. The Luxury one which is just a rebadged GM premium. And, the Blackhawk, which is the LX sport with the new engine package, a lot of the CVPI internals, but with the Luxury of the Luxury with some distinctive trim. Can the option packages. Make all the safety stuff standard.

 

They could likely sell the panther for another 5-6 years with that mix and do reasonably welll. If they really wanted to shake things up, they could offer the 4.0L cologne V6 and the 5AT combo from the Explorer in the CV as a fleet only option. It would likely be able to match or beat the DCX 3.5L LX competition in economy and emissions while still providing as much pull as they need for fleet non-persuit duty.

[StevenJ]

Well, although Cadillac has a new ad program that appears to be more narrowly focused than their outgoing "anyone who's not retired or almost dead" campaign, it's not clear that they have a much better idea about their target customer.

 

Ford, OTOH, has a very distinct profile of their target Lincoln customer, and he/she is unlikely to be looking at Cadillac offerings because they have RWD. He/she may be looking at Cadillac as a purveyor of a luxury item, not necessarily as a purveyor of a performance item. Ford knows how many of their demographic enters the car market every year (between 200k and 300k), and it is Ford's aim to exceed their expectations from a car. If this included RWD offerings, you can bet they would be planned.

 

However, think about those numbers. Ford's target audience for Lincoln represents, at its upper limit, .1% of the U.S. population, and less than 2% of the car buying public as a whole. Yet, with shared componentry, this can be a profitable slice.

 

Well again, you are running into the problem which Chyrsler is having with its DCX's LX sedans. They built too many for the target market. If they had not added so many damned shifts, they wouldn't have to end up discounting the damn cars as much and would easily be able to continue selling them at a profitable rate. Though RWD Cadillacs may cause some internal competition with the Zetas. We already know a market exists for the Camaro due to the large acceptance of the concept and all thoose nasty letters GM recieved from when they canceled the car. Again, Gm should do market research as to if they should replace the current Impala with a new RWD one. My personal opinion is they should since the current Impala over lap's with the Malibu since they both compete in the same midsized FWD market segment. Why have two cars taht do the same purposes?

 

The money would be better spent on improving the Malbiu and dropping the Impala. That or replacing the Impala with a RWD sedan if the market show acceptance to that. Either way Buick should have a sizeable market. Buick's target now seems to be the same market Lincoln is going after, the mid luxury market, like Acura. Kind of a one step before Cadillac for thoose who just want comfort and quiet ride. A quiet luxury oriented RWD sedan could work. It has for Lincoln for quiet some time with the Towncar. Sure now the Towncar isn't doing so great but they haven't put a seroius effort into doing something with the towncar since 03 when it got the same frame and front end updates as the other panther cars. Again, this just my personal opinion. And btw Richard, GM has racing programs for Pontiac. Both in the Rolex Sport car series where it serves as an engine manufacture for the prototype class and also races GTOs in the GT class. They also race the GTO in Grand Am I believe.

 

As for dropping the CV and making it mercury only. Big mistake. The GM market is dying out (literally) and not gonna save the platform. This should be the path for the panther...

 

1) EOL the Grand Marquise. It does absolutely NOTHING for the Mercury brand that is good. Anyone going into a mercury dealership for a GM wouldn't consider anything else in the stable. Their kids already have their own vehicle opinions formed. If you want their business, fine, offer a $1500 rebate on a GM trade in for a Montego.

 

2) Keep the Retail C/V, but, up the luxury package to include the popular luxury features from the GM for those hardcore loyalists. Make a Lincoln Town car for the C/V Cab frame and sell that to livery companies as long as they want it. Change the engine and tranny to the 3V 4.6L V8 and 6AT from the explorer. There should be 4 versions of the CV. The Base edition that is the cheapest one possible. The CVPI. The Luxury one which is just a rebadged GM premium. And, the Blackhawk, which is the LX sport with the new engine package, a lot of the CVPI internals, but with the Luxury of the Luxury with some distinctive trim. Can the option packages. Make all the safety stuff standard.

 

They could likely sell the panther for another 5-6 years with that mix and do reasonably welll. If they really wanted to shake things up, they could offer the 4.0L cologne V6 and the 5AT combo from the Explorer in the CV as a fleet only option. It would likely be able to match or beat the DCX 3.5L LX competition in economy and emissions while still providing as much pull as they need for fleet non-persuit duty.

 

Interesting point. I never truely thought of GM hurting Mercury in that was as Mercury was always intended as an middle aged to olderpersons brand based on wants and income levels. Though it does raise an interesting point that a CV may be more profitable than a GM. Again, same thing I have asked for, the explorer V8 powertrain.

Edited July 17, 2006 by StevenJ

[RichardJensen]

Scion has almost completely missed its intended market segment. Toyota's initial guidance on Scion was urban and suburban youth in the 16-24 y/o range with limited disposable income that liked unusual but not offensive styling and practicality with the ability to make their vehicles unique. What they got was an average buyer age of 40+ years old and a take rate on dealer customizations of less than 30% (as of late 2005). The older generation saw the vehicles for what they were, inexpensive and efficient toyotas (i.e. all the preceived quality of a toyota for a whole lot less money).

Scion research states that the average age of its drivers is 31, the youngest of any car brand in the United States. But Templin concedes that Scion also attracts its share of boomers and retirees who like the well-packaged, low-priced hatchbacks.

http://autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?...=73250945938169

 

I'm going to say the take rate on dealer customizations is what it is because they're crappy for the money, and because Toyota dealers suck, as a general rule. Scion has succeeded in spite of its dealers which are so far from what Gen Y types expect, that they probably cost more sales than Toyota realizes.

Edited July 17, 2006 by RichardJensen

[RichardJensen]

Earlier I said regarding Cadillac:

it's not clear that they have a much better idea about their target customer.

This quote supports that idea:

The move is meant to attract younger affluent buyers from foreign luxury rivals, industry sources say.

http://autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?...E/60717002/1041

 

Compare with this quote about Lincoln's target audience:

Lincoln’s refined yet dynamic American design will be the hallmark of these new vehicles, which have been created to appeal to consumers described as “self-made optimists”

http://media.ford.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=23640

 

Just a standard bit of fluff in a company press release, right?

 

Wrong. See also:

"These are people who are on their third or fourth domestic non-luxury unit, looking to move up," said Grill. "There are 350,000 of these people a year who step up into luxury, which is huge. And when you look at that domestic move-up, 70 percent of them refuse to buy an imported luxury vehicle. We can own those folks."

http://media.ford.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=23476

 

Which, of course, means that my 200-300k numbers bracket that 70% figure.

 

It also means that Lincoln is targeting a clearly defined audience that is NOT at all similar to the audience Cadillac is targeting..... Even though this is a natural market for Cadillac.

 

My personal opinion is they should since the current Impala over lap's with the Malibu since they both compete in the same midsized FWD market segment.

Don't define segments by powertrains. Sit in the backseat of an Impala and then a Malibu. You'll see a difference, believe me.

 

Also, don't define brands in comparison or contrast with other brands (Buick as a competitor to Acura, etc.), define them based on who you want to buy them. This requires a huuuuuge conceptual leap, but it's amazing how much more you can see on the other side.

 

Oh, and that '70 percent of them refuse to buy an imported luxury vehicle. We can own those folks' remark bodes well for an RWD Lincoln something or another. Provided the volume makes sense.

Edited July 17, 2006 by RichardJensen

[StevenJ]

Just wanted to say that the Malibu can always be made larger in the next itteration to make up for the loss of a larger fwd Impala. There could also be two wheel bases made, one short and one extended for thoose who want a larger back seat vrs. thoose who don't care. I understand what you are saying but there's still a market for large american v8 rwd sedans. There are many people young, old, and middle aged who remeber that old Chevy SS/ big Ford sedan that they or the father or grand father had owned in previous generations and has been dying for a great sedan from the domestics but decided to buy a BMW, Mercedess instead since they offere more choices. Or on the other hand they tried to buy the 'failed' domestic items like the LS and Marauder but weren't quiet satisfied because FORD didn't want to make the effort to make the vehicles WORK OR ADVERTISE THEM EITHER ! Your kind of person does exist. These are the poeple who go to car shows, bring out the 66' Chevy SS while draging it behind a Chevy duramax or some other big pick up truck wishing the days of old would return. LOTS OF PEOPLE LIKE THIS EXIST! And they are not impressed with the new under-powered FWD offerings and would gladly pay for a new modestly inexpensive V8 RWD all American sedan.

Edited July 17, 2006 by StevenJ

[RichardJensen]

Your kind of person does exist.

Then these are the questions:

 

How many of them are there?

 

How often do they buy cars?

 

How loyal will they be?

 

What is the best price point for this segment?

 

What, besides RWD & Performance, do they want (price? luxury? nostalgia?)?

 

Can a car be built to that price point that will satisfy them?

 

Does this vehicle fit in with the rest of the brand's customer base?

 

What is the best way to market this vehicle?

 

Each question must be answered before moving to the next question (actually those are thumbnail sketches of questions). If, at any point in time, the vehicle stops being profitable the study stops and you go back and rethink your premises.

 

---

 

Also you can't stretch the Malibu enough to make it Impala sized. Unless you want to give up a lot of frame stiffness.

Edited July 17, 2006 by RichardJensen

[StevenJ]

Then these are the questions:

 

How many of them are there?

 

How often do they buy cars?

 

How loyal will they be?

 

What is the best price point for this segment?

 

What, besides RWD & Performance, do they want (price? luxury? nostalgia?)?

 

Can a car be built to that price point that will satisfy them?

 

Does this vehicle fit in with the rest of the brand's customer base?

 

What is the best way to market this vehicle?

 

Each question must be answered before moving to the next question (actually those are thumbnail sketches of questions). If, at any point in time, the vehicle stops being profitable the study stops and you go back and rethink your premises.

 

---

 

Also you can't stretch the Malibu enough to make it Impala sized. Unless you want to give up a lot of frame stiffness.

 

And someone should go to car shows and internet forums and do polls to find out. I'm not a statistician. I'm sure in the next generation Epsilon that iscomming out in 09, 10, bout when the new zetas should come, they can make it so it can have different wheel bases.

Edited July 17, 2006 by StevenJ

[RichardJensen]

Not a bad start. However, you have to be careful about screening respondents.

[sullynd]

Also you can't stretch the Malibu enough to make it Impala sized. Unless you want to give up a lot of frame stiffness.

 

Impala Wheelbase:

110.5"

 

Malibu Maxx Wheelbase:

112.30"

[Traveler]

I just don't think non-enthusiast type buyers are going to care if the drive wheels are on the front or back. What they do care about is safety and stability. Make a RWD with those qualities and the average joes will buy. Plus, you'll be opening the door to satisfy those wanting RWD with above average performance.

 

With optional all-wheel drive capability as well as stability and traction controls that are either defeatable or not too overly aggressive, I don't see RWD being that threatening. In fact, aggressive driving can bring a FWD vehicle around about as fast if not quicker. Basically, in the wet isn't the problem. Its the ice and snow obviously. In the warmer climates, that isn't an issue.

 

The Impala right now is the car to watch. Ford and DCX both have committed themselves to their new full size sedans with Ford going FWD/AWD and DCX going RWD/AWD. I think that Chevy can switch over to RWD on the Impala and most buyers won't even notice. At the same time, though it will make the Monte Carlo a viable performance coupe on the market...despite its questionable styling.

Edited July 17, 2006 by Traveler

[RichardJensen]

Impala Wheelbase:

110.5"

 

Malibu Maxx Wheelbase:

112.30"

What's the track width? Might make sense to expand Epsilon after all. Lord knows the Ws have gone as far as they can.

[sullynd]

What's the track width? Might make sense to expand Epsilon after all. Lord knows the Ws have gone as far as they can.

 

Maxx Width:

69.80

 

Impala Width:

72.9

 

There have been articles (I don't have time to find them) which have mentioned the Malibu picking up the FWD slack if the Impala shifts to RWD. I'm assuming that's where the previous poster came up with the thought.

[Mr Embargo]

The Falcon, which is nearing the end of its current life cycle (hence it now looks dated) will not be sold in the United States, it will however be pushed for export to the Middle East. The left hook revisions are not to benefit futrure development for a possible RWD platform for the US. Whilst most of the world has moved on and grown up, there will still be a market for the Panther.

Edited July 20, 2006 by Mr Embargo