Jump to content

Custom Search





2019 Lincoln Aviator Introduced Here !


Welcome to Blue Oval Forums


Sign In  Log in with Facebook

Create Account
Welcome to Blue Oval Forums.  You must first register to create topics and post replies. Registration is a quick and easy process and only takes a minute.  Be apart of Blue Oval Forums by signing in or creating an account.
  • Start new topics and reply to others
  • Subscribe to topics and forums to get email updates
  • Get your own profile page and make new friends
  • Send personal messages to other members
  • Create a photo album and post images
  • Use the Shout feature and more. . .
Click here to create an account now.
 
Guest Message by DevFuse

Photo
- - - - -

GM engineers took public tours of Dearborn


  • Please log in to reply
28 replies to this topic

#1 OFFLINE   MY93SHO

MY93SHO

    Blue Oval Member

  • Blue Oval Member
  • PipPip
  • 1,010 posts
  • Joined 12-February 09

Posted 10 August 2018 - 12:44 PM

https://jalopnik.com...or-i-1828249775

 

 









Lose this advertisement by becoming a member. Click here to create a free account.


#2 OFFLINE   jcartwright99

jcartwright99

    Blue Oval Member

  • Blue Oval Member
  • PipPip
  • 582 posts
  • Joined 29-November 10
  • Region:U.S. Great Lakes
  • Location:Chicago
  • Current Vehicle:2017 Ford Fusion Titanium AWD

Posted 10 August 2018 - 01:20 PM

Not surprising in the least bit. I'm pretty sure most manufactures expect this. Breaking down competitor vehicles probably happens a lot too.


2017 Ford Fusion

2017 Lincoln MKZ

2014 Ford Escape

2012 Ford Edge

2001 Lincoln LS

1990 Oldsmobile 88

1993 Honda Civic Si

 


#3 OFFLINE   92merc

92merc

    Blue Oval Member

  • Blue Oval Member
  • PipPip
  • 1,858 posts
  • Joined 19-October 05
  • Region:Decline
  • Location:Bismarck, ND
  • Current Vehicle:2007Mercury Montego : 2003 F150 SuperCrew

Posted 10 August 2018 - 01:37 PM

If all the GM engineers found was difficulty with Ford installing doors, they didn't get to look that deep.  I'm sure they'll learn a lot more from buying an F150 and taking it apart.

 

As long as we're on the subject, I'm a bit puzzled by their 2.7 liter inline four.  From what I've read, it won't be the "bread and butter" engine for the GM twins.  I guess I don't understand this logic.  The 2.7EB Ford has done wonders.  If GM was putting this much engineering into a new line of engines for the twins, you'd think they do more work on an engine that would be a big seller.  Or maybe I just read into it wrong...



#4 OFFLINE   rperez817

rperez817

    Blue Oval Member

  • Blue Oval Member
  • PipPip
  • 823 posts
  • Joined 03-October 16
  • Region:U.S. Southern Plains
  • Location:Fort Worth
  • Current Vehicle:'17 Jaguar XF 20d; '04 Ford Ranger

Posted 10 August 2018 - 02:08 PM



As long as we're on the subject, I'm a bit puzzled by their 2.7 liter inline four.  From what I've read, it won't be the "bread and butter" engine for the GM twins.  I guess I don't understand this logic.  The 2.7EB Ford has done wonders.  If GM was putting this much engineering into a new line of engines for the twins, you'd think they do more work on an engine that would be a big seller.  Or maybe I just read into it wrong...

 

Good point 92merc sir. Only the midgrade LT and RST models will be available with 2.7 liter turbo. I thought GM would at least make it an option for more trim levels. I guess full size pickup truck buyers really like V8 engines. 

 

2019-chevy-silverado-1500-engine-lineup.


Native Texan sent to spread the message, "God Blessed Texas"  :) 


#5 OFFLINE   92merc

92merc

    Blue Oval Member

  • Blue Oval Member
  • PipPip
  • 1,858 posts
  • Joined 19-October 05
  • Region:Decline
  • Location:Bismarck, ND
  • Current Vehicle:2007Mercury Montego : 2003 F150 SuperCrew

Posted 10 August 2018 - 02:30 PM

And considering the same displacement Ford is pulling 325HP and 400 flt/lbs vs. the GM 310 and 348, the GM falls short in the torque department.   Which is probably why it isn't in more vehicles.  But I'd call that a failure of planning.



#6 OFFLINE   rperez817

rperez817

    Blue Oval Member

  • Blue Oval Member
  • PipPip
  • 823 posts
  • Joined 03-October 16
  • Region:U.S. Southern Plains
  • Location:Fort Worth
  • Current Vehicle:'17 Jaguar XF 20d; '04 Ford Ranger

Posted 10 August 2018 - 02:42 PM

... armed with stopwatches and trained eyes, the GM engineers believed they saw problems.
 
“They had a real hard time getting those doors to fit,” Tim Herrick, the executive chief engineer for GM truck programs told Reuters.
 
Is door fitment during vehicle assembly still a challenge for Ford F-150? Did Ford have that problem with the previous generation F-150 with steel doors and cab? 

Edited by rperez817, 10 August 2018 - 02:43 PM.

Native Texan sent to spread the message, "God Blessed Texas"  :) 


#7 OFFLINE   fuzzymoomoo

fuzzymoomoo

    Blue Oval Enthusiast

  • Blue Oval Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 8,760 posts
  • Joined 18-February 14
  • Region:Decline
  • Location:Southeast Michigan
  • Current Vehicle:2008 Focus, 2018 Fusion

Posted 10 August 2018 - 02:54 PM

Im not buying it. Door alignment is ALWAYS a challenge. Same thing with hoods, deck lids, and tailgates.
  • rperez817 likes this
Officially a disgruntled Ford Employee

#8 OFFLINE   akirby

akirby

    fordmantpw's alter ego

  • Moderator
  • 29,552 posts
  • Joined 18-April 06
  • Region:Decline
  • Location:Canton, GA
  • Current Vehicle:2018 F150 Supercab XLT Magnetic Grey 3.5LEB

Posted 10 August 2018 - 02:57 PM

And considering the same displacement Ford is pulling 325HP and 400 flt/lbs vs. the GM 310 and 348, the GM falls short in the torque department.   Which is probably why it isn't in more vehicles.  But I'd call that a failure of planning.

 

I4 single turbo vs. V6 twin turbo.   Not exactly the same.



2018 F150 Supercab XLT Sport (Magnetic) - 3.5LEB
2016 Lincoln MKX Reserve (Luxe/Cappucino)


#9 OFFLINE   jpd80

jpd80

    Member

  • Blue Oval Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,686 posts
  • Joined 02-June 04
  • Region:Decline
  • Location:My Happy Place
  • Current Vehicle:Falcon 302 V8

Posted 10 August 2018 - 03:15 PM

The issue with GM's 2.7 I-4 T is that GM is not looking to replace its V6 sales,

they are still very much in the mind of adding engines. What we see with the

2.7 EB V6 is a shift in F150 buyers who would have once bought 4.6 or 5.4 V8s.

 

GM does have two very good TT V6s but we would be forgiven for not knowing that

because they continue to be captive to low selling Cadillacs. To me this exemplifies

the difference in philosophy between GM and Ford's delivery of technology.


Edited by jpd80, 10 August 2018 - 03:27 PM.


#10 OFFLINE   MY93SHO

MY93SHO

    Blue Oval Member

  • Blue Oval Member
  • PipPip
  • 1,010 posts
  • Joined 12-February 09

Posted 10 August 2018 - 03:16 PM

If all the GM engineers found was difficulty with Ford installing doors, they didn't get to look that deep.  I'm sure they'll learn a lot more from buying an F150 and taking it apart.

 

As long as we're on the subject, I'm a bit puzzled by their 2.7 liter inline four.  From what I've read, it won't be the "bread and butter" engine for the GM twins.  I guess I don't understand this logic.  The 2.7EB Ford has done wonders.  If GM was putting this much engineering into a new line of engines for the twins, you'd think they do more work on an engine that would be a big seller.  Or maybe I just read into it wrong...

2.7 I-4 isn't in the parts catalog yet. Just the 5.3 and 6.2.



#11 OFFLINE   mackinaw

mackinaw

    Blue Oval Member

  • Blue Oval Member
  • PipPip
  • 1,823 posts
  • Joined 15-July 06
  • Region:U.S. Great Lakes
  • Location:Northern Lower Michigan
  • Current Vehicle:2012 Focus 1994 F-150

Posted 10 August 2018 - 03:40 PM

Not at all surprising that GM engineers are touring Ford assembly plants.  Its actually quite common for manufacturers to tour a competitor's plant.  That's how things as ubiquitous as bar codes, spread through the industry so quickly.



#12 OFFLINE   akirby

akirby

    fordmantpw's alter ego

  • Moderator
  • 29,552 posts
  • Joined 18-April 06
  • Region:Decline
  • Location:Canton, GA
  • Current Vehicle:2018 F150 Supercab XLT Magnetic Grey 3.5LEB

Posted 10 August 2018 - 03:40 PM

I think the 2.7 I-4 is closer to the 3.3L than the 2.7LEB.
  • jpd80 likes this

2018 F150 Supercab XLT Sport (Magnetic) - 3.5LEB
2016 Lincoln MKX Reserve (Luxe/Cappucino)


#13 OFFLINE   twintornados

twintornados

    Ford fan for a long, long time.

  • Blue Oval Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 6,983 posts
  • Joined 16-February 10
  • Region:U.S. Northeast
  • Location:Central NY
  • Current Vehicle:2017 Lincoln MKC Reserve

Posted 15 August 2018 - 08:34 AM

The "Tri-Power" 2.7L 4 cylinder from GM should be part of their medium SUV engine programs....as well as drop it in Camaro. 


Does anyone know where the love of god goes, when the waves turn the minutes to hours....Gordon Lightfoot, "Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald"

A government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have. ~ Gerald Ford - August 12, 1974

#14 OFFLINE   Fgts

Fgts

    Blue Oval Member

  • Blue Oval Member
  • PipPip
  • 1,702 posts
  • Joined 02-March 10

Posted 16 August 2018 - 12:47 PM

The "Tri-Power" 2.7L 4 cylinder from GM should be part of their medium SUV engine programs....as well as drop it in Camaro. 


There's supposedly more variations of the 2.7 coming into CUVs and cars. IMO the Traverse needs it and would make a good rwd Chevy sedan option.

#15 OFFLINE   fuzzymoomoo

fuzzymoomoo

    Blue Oval Enthusiast

  • Blue Oval Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 8,760 posts
  • Joined 18-February 14
  • Region:Decline
  • Location:Southeast Michigan
  • Current Vehicle:2008 Focus, 2018 Fusion

Posted 16 August 2018 - 12:50 PM

There's supposedly more variations of the 2.7 coming into CUVs and cars. IMO the Traverse needs it and would make a good rwd Chevy sedan option.

RWD Chevy sedan? Talk about unneeded. Theyve been there done that, and its not exactly like the FWD sedan market is lighting the world on fire lately either. Theyre better off investing in a RWD Traverse to better compete with the CD6 Explorer.

Edited by fuzzymoomoo, 16 August 2018 - 12:51 PM.

Officially a disgruntled Ford Employee

#16 OFFLINE   atomcat68

atomcat68

    Blue Oval Member

  • Blue Oval Member
  • PipPip
  • 1,900 posts
  • Joined 02-May 05
  • Location:Weymouth, MA

Posted 16 August 2018 - 06:18 PM

RWD Chevy sedan? Talk about unneeded. Theyve been there done that, and its not exactly like the FWD sedan market is lighting the world on fire lately either. Theyre better off investing in a RWD Traverse to better compete with the CD6 Explorer.

 

The RWD sedan would probably have worked better if they gave it some style like Chrysler did, instead of making it look like a 90's Pontiac. But I agree that they need to spend serious money on a RWD/AWD utility vehicle real soon! That needs to be an urgent priority and they need a Cadillac platform mate quickly! 


My latest movie project: https://www.facebook...93579443992689/

 


#17 OFFLINE   fuzzymoomoo

fuzzymoomoo

    Blue Oval Enthusiast

  • Blue Oval Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 8,760 posts
  • Joined 18-February 14
  • Region:Decline
  • Location:Southeast Michigan
  • Current Vehicle:2008 Focus, 2018 Fusion

Posted 16 August 2018 - 06:39 PM

 
The RWD sedan would probably have worked better if they gave it some style like Chrysler did, instead of making it look like a 90's Pontiac. But I agree that they need to spend serious money on a RWD/AWD utility vehicle real soon! That needs to be an urgent priority and they need a Cadillac platform mate quickly! 

FCAs RWD sedans arent exactly doing great either. They are doing OK despite their age though.
Officially a disgruntled Ford Employee

#18 OFFLINE   atomcat68

atomcat68

    Blue Oval Member

  • Blue Oval Member
  • PipPip
  • 1,900 posts
  • Joined 02-May 05
  • Location:Weymouth, MA

Posted 18 August 2018 - 10:11 AM

FCAs RWD sedans arent exactly doing great either. They are doing OK despite their age though.

 

Agreed.

 

I do think much of the slower sales stem from not updating as much as the CUV shift. They would sell at least 25% better in my opinion if people could see that they are new and not look like the cars they're ready to trade in.

 

They could easily have one full size sedan (Charger), one coupe (Challenger) and one CUV (300) off the platform and sell well and be the best profit mix off the full sized RWD platform.

 

So yes, if I were in charge of FCA, the 300 would be turned into the 300 Town and Country CUV.


Edited by atomcat68, 18 August 2018 - 10:12 AM.

My latest movie project: https://www.facebook...93579443992689/

 


#19 OFFLINE   fuzzymoomoo

fuzzymoomoo

    Blue Oval Enthusiast

  • Blue Oval Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 8,760 posts
  • Joined 18-February 14
  • Region:Decline
  • Location:Southeast Michigan
  • Current Vehicle:2008 Focus, 2018 Fusion

Posted 18 August 2018 - 10:41 AM

 
Agreed.
 
I do think much of the slower sales stem from not updating as much as the CUV shift. They would sell at least 25% better in my opinion if people could see that they are new and not look like the cars they're ready to trade in.
 
They could easily have one full size sedan (Charger), one coupe (Challenger) and one CUV (300) off the platform and sell well and be the best profit mix off the full sized RWD platform.
 
So yes, if I were in charge of FCA, the 300 would be turned into the 300 Town and Country CUV.

They dont really need to though, that platform was paid for a decade ago.
Officially a disgruntled Ford Employee

#20 OFFLINE   Fgts

Fgts

    Blue Oval Member

  • Blue Oval Member
  • PipPip
  • 1,702 posts
  • Joined 02-March 10

Posted 19 August 2018 - 11:10 AM

 

 
They could easily have one full size sedan (Charger), one coupe (Challenger) and one CUV (300) off the platform and sell well and be the best profit mix off the full sized RWD platform.
 
So yes, if I were in charge of FCA, the 300 would be turned into the 300 Town and Country CUV.


The LX will continue on its platform though it will be extensively reworked and lightened, one thing I hear on the 300 is a sportback may come in it's next generation.








Custom Search


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Privacy Policy Terms of Service | DMCA ·