Jump to content

Jalopnik: RWD Lincoln coming, and it's a crossover


Recommended Posts

I think Seattle could support Subaru all by itself. They're EVERYWHERE!

and San Francisco.....hate to go down the politically incorrect route, but there seems to be a HUGE following with the LBGT community...EDIT...hate to go down the Politically incorrect route, but its me and IM GONNA....

Edited by Deanh
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you think that, basically, Toyota & Subaru are peers, and that both companies are equally incapable of surviving independently? Even though Toyota is essentially its own keiretsu at this point, and Subaru is just a tiny part of the enormous Fuji keiretsu?

 

And your underlying point is that Ford should be more like Subaru, which you've just admitted cannot function as an independent car company?

Wow, I never said or implied any of that? I didn't go out for high school debate, but this seems like that league of a red herring tactic. I simply threw the Outback out as an example of a successful car that doesn't fit a conservative business case.

 

I'm not arguing against being successful in the mass market segments. These aren't so much low hanging fruit, though. These segments are very competitive. The success of the current Fusion involved skillful execution, but it was magnified by some good luck/bad luck. The tsunami hurt the supply of key competitors leading up to the release. GM committed Hari Kari. The 200 came out a couple of years later than was ideal. Toyota sat on the existing Camry platform unusually long. Honda updates were lukewarmly received. Winter fuel prices stayed up for a couple of years. Still, the styling was a big hit for the Fusion and everything else was good enough to not get in the way. Thus, they not only sold, but they have sold at price premiums that aren't usually maintained for long in ultra-competitive segments.

 

Bad investments like some that have been pointed out here aren't defensible, especially in the rear view mirror. That isn't my intent. Too much profit taking with too conservative of investment and risk taking doesnt lead to long term success, either. Heck, if Henry could of reconciled spending a bit more on paint colors and other updates when profits were unfettered, GM would likely have never got off the ground. The auto business is complex with big players out to win a various costs, government intervention on multiple continents, fuel prices at the whim of Arab Shieks, emerging global markets, fluctuating business cycles, and passion verse functionality. There is a level of risk to every investment made and not made. I'm simply arguing against taking a Pavlovian response to criticizing any idea different than what has just recently worked for Ford or a few other automakers. This is even more so when considering the luxury market where volume at low cost becomes less relevant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, I never said or implied any of that? I didn't go out for high school debate, but this seems like that league of a red herring tactic. I simply threw the Outback out as an example of a successful car that doesn't fit a conservative business case.

 

Too much profit taking with too conservative of investment and risk taking doesnt lead to long term success, either.

 

The Outlook doesn't exist in a vacuum. Talking about the Outlook approvingly implicitly suggests that Ford emulate the conduct of a niche company dependent on other, larger, corporations for fiscal support.

 

And if you want an example of sensible, defensible risk taking, the aluminum F150 is a classic example, as was making a turbo V6 the most powerful (torque) engine option. There were clear definite advantages to be obtained with these steps, and there was a clear need for the pickup market to shift to meet changing regulations.

 

But going with RWD 'because it's different', or because some vanishingly small number of consumers prefer it? That's just stupid.

 

See the difference?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never implicitly or otherwise suggested that Ford emulate Subaru. I simply refute the point that RWD can summarily be dismissed as a viable Lincoln platform. I used the Outback as an example of the fallacy of out-of-hand dismissing any particular vehicle configuration because this was the most improbable, successful configuration I could think of. It is a station wagon powered by boxer engines through a differential driven AWD. Compared to this formula, RWD based luxury platforms, with AWD as an option, are extremely main-stream...and, yes, I realize that Subaru isn't a luxury maker. You poo-poo anyone favoring RWD for Lincoln, but successful luxury makers without some in their line-ups are in unproven territory. Acura has long been faltering and Audi's Quattro system is unique to itself and definitely to Lincoln's I-AWD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I read this thread daily as it developed. He did seem to half-heartedly get there about the Aviator after much more strongly berating other ideas, like what I believe his established history to be. I held off for awhile on my points because of the posts about him not feeling well. Maybe I wated too long and should have just let it pass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I read this thread daily as it developed. He did seem to half-heartedly get there about the Aviator after much more strongly berating other ideas, like what I believe his established history to be. I held off for awhile on my points because of the posts about him not feeling well. Maybe I wated too long and should have just let it pass.

 

Of course I've got reservations about an RWD Lincoln platform!! Anyone with half a brain SHOULD have reservations about trying to justify a RWD platform for a marginal brand in the US that has barely launched in China.

 

As opposed to, you, it seems, I have zero confidence in the ability of RWD to convince people in the US to buy a LINCOLN at any time in the near or mid term.

 

Look at your nickname, dude. It has two cars in it that Ford doesn't even manufacture anymore. Let's talk realpolitik here.

 

There is almost no demonstrated desire for RWD from entry-level brands. Yes, you can talk about Chrysler's LX cars, but subtract out the volume that they'd get regardless, on the basis of sales of FWD large cars from Ford and GM and you're looking at what? Maybe 8k sales per month from people that *want* RWD from a mainstream brand in something other than a sporty coupe.

 

GM's RWD entry level products have been failures across the board, and yes, you can say "well, they didn't..." but after a while, you have to deal with the reality: If success is so elusive, then you've got to ask yourself whether you can justify betting hundreds of millions of dollars on that kind of a segment.

 

Essentially, you're looking at RWD as a luxury/premium offering only. And, again, I think anyone that thinks that there's a slam-dunk product case to be made for Lincoln in the super-premium segment needs to readjust their view of the world.

 

There is, again, zero demand for a RWD super premium Lincoln sedan at this point in time. None. Nobody is asking for this product. If you show this product to people with checkbooks ready to go, the number of people in the United States that are going to sign off on this is minuscule at best and--at worst--non-existent.

 

The reality is that Ford can't destigmatize Lincoln in the US until the Town Car fleet has dwindled to negligible levels and the number of 1st gen. MKXes and MKZs is at negligible levels. We're talking ten years from now, minimum, before Lincoln--with steady investment--can even think about sustained demand for truly exclusive product in the US.

Edited by RichardJensen
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Seattle could support Subaru all by itself. They're EVERYWHERE!

We have a pretty healthy Escape, Explorer, and even Flex population as well so its not all bad. Downtown its Audiland.

 

Speaking of subie-style tech, remember a couple years ago when the rumors of Ford working on a Boxer engine popped up? Good times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not about RWD or FWD as a stand alone thing. It's about where you want to take the brand and the types of drivetrains you want to use and what the competition is using.

 

If Lincoln just wants to make an Aviator to slot between MKX and Navigator and compete with MDX then D4 will work just fine.

 

If Lincoln wants to push the envelope and tout true all terrain/weather capability with higher power drivetrains and full time AWD then RWD makes that a lot easier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not to get anybody all worked up again, but Wes (who I know to have completely different sources than my own and who is also about as reliable a Ford insider as there is) is on the record saying that this program is something (he says "under review", but my last update was "moving forward").

 

He also says that the Taurus' reported doom in the US is complete BS.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not to get anybody all worked up again, but Wes (who I know to have completely different sources than my own and who is also about as reliable a Ford insider as there is) is on the record saying that this program is something (he says "under review", but my last update was "moving forward").

 

He also says that the Taurus' reported doom in the US is complete BS.

 

LOL Thanks for getting this long thread back on track ;)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

LOL Thanks for getting this long thread back on track ;)

 

What the hell... here's his quote:

 

Yes, Ford is considering a RWD Explorer and Aviator.

 

Yes, the next Lincoln MKS will be larger, more suitable for Chinese tastes, and possibly split into two models.

 

No, Ford is not dropping the Taurus. It's about to debut:

 

http://www.caranddriver.com/news/2016-ford-fusion-spy-photos-news

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It will be interesting to see how well a new Taurus sells. GM doesn't break out the sales figures for the new-generation Impala from total Impala sales, which tells me that it's not selling that well, or as well as GM expected.

 

If my eyes tell me anything, it's moving in numbers in line with the rest of the segment. I have seen more new Impalas than post-MCE Tauruses by now. Take that for what it's worth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

If my eyes tell me anything, it's moving in numbers in line with the rest of the segment. I have seen more new Impalas than post-MCE Tauruses by now. Take that for what it's worth.

 

 

It will be interesting to see how well a new Taurus sells. GM doesn't break out the sales figures for the new-generation Impala from total Impala sales, which tells me that it's not selling that well, or as well as GM expected.

 

According to this NYT article..

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/14/upshot/you-can-rent-whatever-you-want-as-long-as-its-an-impala.html?ref=todayspaper&abt=0002&abg=1&_r=0

 

Rental car companies registered 89,569 new Impalas during 2013, making it America’s top-selling rental car for two years running. Fifty-seven percent of all new Impalas sold in the United States last year became rental cars, according to data from Polk Automotive.

 

“Let’s face it, it was a rental car,” Eric Ibara, director of residual value consulting for Kelley Blue Book, said of the 2013 Impala. “Starting in 2014, Chevrolet dramatically changed that. They redesigned the vehicle so that it was much more appealing to consumers.”

 

 

But here’s the thing: Even after the revamp, the Impala is still mostly selling into the rental market. According to data from Kelley Blue Book, 74 percent of 2013 Impalas became rental cars; for the 2014 model year so far, the figure is still 54 percent. (The 57 percent figure at the top of this article is for the 2013 calendar year, so it includes a mix of model year 2013 and 2014 sales.)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

full time AWD then RWD makes that a lot easier.

 

You can do full time AWD just as easily with a transverse layout as you can with a longitudinal layout (see: Jaguar X-Type).

 

The reason why Fords do not offer full time AWD is because it hasn't justified the cost of installing a center diff.

 

Ford and Borg-Warner built the first fully electronic AWD system 20+ years ago, and that system, like its successor (the AWD system Ford currently uses), eschewed a center diff as being unnecessary given the speed with which torque transfer could be accomplished.

 

That Ford has not subsequently built AWD vehicles that compete with Jeep/Subaru is not a function of the AWD system itself, rather, it's Ford's refusal to invest significant development dollars in additional pieces (locking front & rear diffs, additional gears on the transfer case outputs) because they would not pay their way and because Ford's reputation is not at stake.

 

The second takeaway from this is that any full time AWD vehicle would not use Ford's AWD system. It would have to be an off-the-shelf product from an outside supplier.

Edited by RichardJensen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Let's be fair and include this paragraph (even though I have no love lost for GM). ;)

 

The Impala continues to depend on the rental market in part because the old Impala lives on alongside the new Impala. It’s marketed as the Chevrolet Impala Limited, it costs a few thousand dollars less than the revamped Impala, and it’s sold only to fleet buyers like rental car companies. General Motors does not break out separate sales figures for the Impala and the Impala Limited; we saw both on National’s lots in the last week.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Let's be fair and include this paragraph (even though I have no love lost for GM). ;)

 

 

I thought most here would know that the models are umbrella'd together and the General refuses to breakout sales between the two. Although, with some of the paste eaters around here these days...

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

well, they DID own Land Rover for a while...and the current FWD based Explorers AWD system is eerily similar albeit simpler than one utilized in the Evoque.

 

Is it even worth mentioning at this point that one of the stillborn Explorer replacements (pre-meltdown) was part of a program that included a Lincoln and Land Rover variant? Naw, I won't even bring it up.

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...