Ford - Stupid, Stupid - 21% production cut

[webbie]

Ford is paying the price for keeping SUV's and large Pickups as their sales leaders.
They announced a 21% cut in North American production today, just as Honda and Toyota...and even Hyundai are expanding and recording record sales.

This is a prime example of short term thinking...and also of corporation unable to change. An article I read about Ford suggest that the layers of management make it difficult to change quickly....

Now, you'll have to excuse me while I take a look at those Ford Corporate bonds my broker bought for me a few years ago. "Ford, what can happen to Ford?" is an exact quote from her.

 

[Shane]

"Dodge what can happen to Dodge?" ;-)

 

[BrotherBart]

The U.S. auto industry started down the slippery slope in the seventies amidst the reality or perception of vast quality differences between U.S. and Japanesse cars and it seems they never will recover.

 

[wg_bent]

You guys and Ford both have such a North American view. Ford has the cars that can compete with the rest of the world, they just sell them only in europe.

But your right Craig...Very short sighted!!

 

[bruce56bb]

[quote author="Webmaster" date="1155931380"]Ford is paying the price for keeping SUV's and large Pickups as their sales leaders.
They announced a 21% cut in North American production today


what is wrong with retreating to a defensible position?

 

[Sandor]

The Ford Motor company deserves to parish.

Explorer, Expedition then the Excursion.

Then they make the new F150 so big its nearly worthless as a true work vehicle. When I bought my 04 Chevy Z71, I really wanted the Ford. But, I could not put a 50lb toolbox in the back of the bed, behind the cab, and lift it out from the side of the truck. Looking back the last 3 years, I have not seen a single new style F150 at a jobsite. Plenty of Chevies, and I'm talking 1/2 tons here.

Add to this, my non contractor friends that bought the new F150 were getting 14mpg (maybe). My 5.3 litre Silverado consistantly clocks 19.7 mpg. Oh, and the F150 weighs 800 more pounds than the Chevy. 800!

Ya gotta love it. Part of the new Ford "Bold Moves" marketing campaign boldy states that their vehicles sucked up Millions of gallons of fuel over the last several decades. No freaking shi%. Now they want to become "responsible". Why now, cause your losing your butts? Some leadership position.

This company has not given a damn about the environment or energy. Only profits.

Time to pay....

 

[MountainStoveGuy]

I havent bought an americal vehicle in 10 years, the last one i had was a 96 F150. Since then i have owned 2 subaru's (forrestor and imprezia) 2 toys (rav and tacoma) and now i own a nissan frontier and a volvo s40. Whats strange is i think the Japaneese are jumping on the big amerian bandwagon. My nissan i can barley reach in the bed, has 17" wheels, 265 HP and gets 17 MPG. Not much different then the new F150's. Now that little volvo i can push 34 MPG with that 6 gear over drive, its the first Euro car i have owned, i love it, but the jury is still out. We will see how it holds up to the abuse that i give it. Im hard on vehicles, every day i drive up a 20 mile canyon that is very twisty and climbs 4000 feet, and i live a mile and a half on a dirt road. The canyon eats tires like nascar, and the dirt road will make a mercedes rattle. But so far so quiet. :D

 

[BrotherBart]

Three Chevy's, one Plymouth and a couple of Poulans. Around here if it has spark plugs in it then it was made somewhere between the left and the right coast. By a company that has it's headquarters somewhere between the left and the right coast.

 

[precaud]

I have an 05 Ranger longbed and love it. 27 mpg combined city/hwy. 1650 lb. payload. Solid and fun to drive, but certainly not flashy.

Ford and GM both have horrendous excess manufacturing capacity in the US. Hence the cuts. Shoulda been done a long time ago.

Ford has the cars that can compete with the rest of the world, they just sell them only in europe.

That's the truth!

Wish I'd had the cojones to buy Ford stock a couple months ago...

 

[begreen]

I was just going to chime in. I have an older 91 Ranger (aka Mazda B2600) and love it too. Great half-ton truck that gets excellent mileage with the 4 cyl engine.

 

[HarryBack]

I have an 05 Ranger longbed and love it. 27 mpg combined city/hwy. 1650 lb. payload. Solid and fun to drive, but certainly not flashy.

Ford and GM both have horrendous excess manufacturing capacity in the US. Hence the cuts. Shoulda been done a long time ago.

Ford has the cars that can compete with the rest of the world, they just sell them only in europe.

That's the truth!

Wish I'd had the cojones to buy Ford stock a couple months ago...

Heck, Precaud, maybe nows the time to gamble a bit and buy the Ford stock while its in the dumper?

 

[precaud]

Heck, Precaud, maybe nows the time to gamble a bit and buy the Ford stock while its in the dumper?

Harry, you do it and I'll watch. I liked it better a few months ago at 6 bucks... I almost pulled the trigger then, but still have not recovered from the 2000/2001 shellacing...

 

[mikedengineer]

I heard Ford Ranger and thought I say how I have a 96 Ranger 4 cyl 5 speed (mazda motor and tranny though). It get 25 mpg with 150,000 miles and no (knock on wood) major problems. Darn good truck. On the other hand those new F150's, I being 6'2" can't even reach over the side of it. Personally it not functional.

It blows my mind that they keep changing these vehicles to completly "new" styles. Why don't they stick with a good design and make it cheaper (retail price) and more fuel efficient. It's like they have a short attention span or something.

-Mike

 

[Shane]

I had an 88 ford broncoII it got around 20mpg if i remember correctly. Then I got a 93 explorer with the 6cyl engine it got around 16mpg around town and 20 highway. They were both good vehicles. I liked the explorer much better (I blew the motor up twice in the bronco). Now I have a 95 Dodge 1/2 ton. Sucks gas like no other 11.5-12mpg, I should have shopped for the V6 version though I'm not sure if they made that one four wheel drive or not though. A friend of mine in Highschool had one that was 2wd and it got around 16mpg.

 

[bruce56bb]

interesting that this thread turned into a mpg thread. as we speak, i have customers test driving a brand new 07 hard loaded tahoe. they are taking an extended test drive in real world conditions to compare fuel economy of the 07 to their 01 that isn't hard loaded(less weight). they stated 18 mpg on the 01 and i am hoping the 07 does similar. my gut feeling is that it won't, at least not until it is broke in and loosened up. after they return i will post the results.

 

[begreen]

I heard Ford Ranger and thought I say how I have a 96 Ranger 4 cyl 5 speed (mazda motor and tranny though). It get 25 mpg with 150,000 miles and no (knock on wood) major problems. Darn good truck. On the other hand those new F150's, I being 6'2" can't even reach over the side of it. Personally it not functional.

It blows my mind that they keep changing these vehicles to completly "new" styles. Why don't they stick with a good design and make it cheaper (retail price) and more fuel efficient. It's like they have a short attention span or something.

-Mike

Yep. My worst mileage - short trips to the dump, concrete recycler, dirt yards and town has been 22mpg. Best is a bit over 30 mpg. Size is just right. I got mine for $700 because the owner's daughter had slid into a ditch and banged up the pickup bed and driver's door. They replaced the door glass and bent out the worst dents, so it is completely drivable, just looks beat. But underneath it's still a young truck with a clean interior and lots of spunk.

 

[seaken]

We are in the market for a replacement truck. I currently have a 1990 Nissan King Cab 4-cyl 4WD and I get about 18mpg. It is about time to retire it and we are looking at other trucks. In the past few months I've been driving our 2000 GMC Sierra Extended Cab 8-cyl 4WD. The mpg's in that are around 12. I am hoping to find another mid-size 4WD that I can use as work vehicle and a sales vehicle, as the need calls for it. Some have commented about the Ford Ranger positively. I was thinking either another Nissan (Frontier) or a Ranger. We are also considering a GMC mid-size. Should I go for the Ranger?

Sean

 

[bruce56bb]

17.2 mpg on the tahoe. all were very pleased with that considering its weighs over 5600 lbs and that it is new and the powertrain isn't broken in yet.

 

[MountainStoveGuy]

We are in the market for a replacement truck. I currently have a 1990 Nissan King Cab 4-cyl 4WD and I get about 18mpg. It is about time to retire it and we are looking at other trucks. In the past few months I've been driving our 2000 GMC Sierra Extended Cab 8-cyl 4WD. The mpg's in that are around 12. I am hoping to find another mid-size 4WD that I can use as work vehicle and a sales vehicle, as the need calls for it. Some have commented about the Ford Ranger positively. I was thinking either another Nissan (Frontier) or a Ranger. We are also considering a GMC mid-size. Should I go for the Ranger?

Sean

i have the 05, crew cab nissan 4x4, its a sweet truck. Definatly worth looking at. It comes with a pretty price tag too.

 

[PAJerry]

I had a '94 Dodge Dakota work truck - 2.5L w/ 5 speed manual that got me 25 mpg going to and from work. Not bad at all, but the engine rattled pretty bad. My Prius gets a good 50+ mpg even on long trips. Followed my son when he moved to Manhattan KS in July and got 51 on the 2000 mi trip.

I wish someone would make a SMALL , efficient pick-up. The Ford Ranger is about the only small one left and I hear it is going out of production next year.

 

[Todd]

I have been temped a few times by those smaller pickups, but every time I load 3/4 cord of firewood into my F-250 PSD 4X4, I think to myself why? I get 20mpg highway, maybe a few mpg less than the Ranger, but I'd have to make twice as many trips in a Ranger. Another plus is "biodiesel". I'm getting close to taking the plunge into brewing the stuff.

 

[bruce56bb]

jerry, i'm just down the road from manhattan, should've stopped by. is your son going to k-state?
also, the weather was perfect here in july for moving(100*+ 80% humidity).

 

[MountainStoveGuy]

jerry, i'm just down the road from manhattan, should've stopped by. is your son going to k-state?
also, the weather was perfect here in july for moving(100*+ 80% humidity).

i miss the old flint hills, i lived in manhattan for 5 years. Yes it took me that long to get through K State.

 

[pubah]

Craig, here is the real story.

The "Big Three's management did great jobs and hit it big. They stacked away $billions from large truck sales during the last decade. So what if they cut 21% not that demand is sharply down. It's what they should do. Honda, Toyota and Nissen management were so poor in predicting the future that they missed almost that huge market opportunity. BTW, they are now bragging that their newest big trucks are finally as big as the "Big Three's" trucks.

A real problem at Ford and GM is not just too many over paid white collar people, it's their oppressive union contracts that make it almost impossible to respond to changes in demand. The world is flattening though and soon China will be a major supplier of US vehicles including a Chinese MG sports car that they will make in the US. The Chinese MG, like American made cars from Japanese and German companies will be built far away from union controlled states.

A bigger problem in management at the "Big three" is very cultural there. They design and build smaller cars as if they hate them and they have been that way for 50 years, not just during the run up in large truck sales.

The worst automotive problem for green consumers is that California environmental extremists have now made it impossible for manufacturers to bring in new small turbo diesel engines. These engines significantly reduce costs, global warming and allow the use of B99 Bio Diesel. We can't even get VW and Audi TDI diesels anymore thanks to these folks.

 

[BrotherBart]

"A bigger problem in management at the “Big three” is very cultural there. They design and build smaller cars as if they hate them and they have been that way for 50 years, not just during the run up in large truck sales. "

They hate them because they cost damn near as much to build as the little ones. And since everybody is sold on the idea that the only quality little ones will be built by somebody with English as a corporate second language then what choice did Detroit have but to build trucks?

I say it again. It got parked in everybody's brain in the 70's that rice burners were the highest quality cars on earth. Mercedes if you have the bucks. American manufacturers make as high a quality car as anybody on earth but if nobody believes it then they gotta build what people will buy from them.

And ask Toyota about covering up quality problems. Three execs facing jail time as we speak.