Hey Ford Motor Company, want to make money, build this (Part 1)

[sideview]

I'd love to see an AM with a Louis Vuitton fine leather interior From what I understand it's only rumor right now & no final purchase has been officially announced.

Series_3 may not be too far off the mark - it's really anyone's guess right now what will happen to the three brands under Ford's new management & restructuring. Just a bunch of speculation mostly.

FWIW This report from last month states a couple things that kind of make Land Rover's future with Ford sound shakey.

The automaker is assessing ``where their capital is going and how many balls they have up in the air,'' said Michael Robinet, an analyst at consulting firm CSM Worldwide in Farmington Hills, Michigan. ``It probably makes more sense to devote time and resources to the mass-market brands.''

Booth said in September that Jaguar and Land Rover aren't for sale ``at the moment'' during an investor conference in Paris. His comment was similar to what Mulally said about Jaguar yesterday.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...Pxk&refer=home

Who knows...

[Greg M]

Originally Posted by SCSL

I like your ideas, but I'm not sure this:


...is going to make them any money. That's a political consideration, not an economic one. There are a variety of reasons for Ford's impending demise. But one reason is clearly the inability of unionized American auto workers to compete in a global theater.

Plenty of foreign manufacturers have been able to successfully open plants here, including foreign auto companies. But they are in states who's capitals are not controlled by union hacks, run by polititians who don't prostitute themselves out to unions. No foreign manufacturer in their right mind would operate a union plant in the U.S. And neither should Ford,,, providing it wants to stay in business.

Amen.

[Rovin4life]

union guys are cheapskates that wont go to a dealer despite the fact the techs make less money then they do and turn alot more screws and think a hell of alot more.

They get paid to stand around and do nothing whilst we dont get paid to work our butts off for their mistakes.




Although I have to ask the question why has an american car or mexican made car such better quality then an older range rover or discovery of the same year. I own a ford escort that hasnt broke down as much and doesnt leak as much fluids.

Is it the british unions or the factory standards that never gave a damn about any quality whatsoever.

theres more problems with the programming engineers then the factory guys who put them together now. That was unheard of before.

[Series 3 guy]

Originally Posted by Rovin4life

union guys are cheapskates that wont go to a dealer despite the fact the techs make less money then they do and turn alot more screws and think a hell of alot more.

They get paid to stand around and do nothing whilst we dont get paid to work our butts off for their mistakes.




Although I have to ask the question why has an american car or mexican made car such better quality then an older range rover or discovery of the same year. I own a ford escort that hasnt broke down as much and doesnt leak as much fluids.

Is it the british unions or the factory standards that never gave a damn about any quality whatsoever.

theres more problems with the programming engineers then the factory guys who put them together now. That was unheard of before.

My 1982 Series 3 109 has 587,488 miles on it. Same engine.same head.no internal work done...looses no oil. Any ideas?? Maybe luck?? maybe ,just maybe not too bad of craftsmanship??
Arnt you a LR mechanic for a dealer??? Oh yeah....you wouldnt recognise craftsmanship.

[Rovin4life]

I perform a service, not a craft. That guy that repairs your leather and makes it look brand new. Thats a craft.


I cant understand for the life of me how mexican made and south korean made cars have less leaks then an english product. Its no secret about how bad Solihull use to be, it seem to be the norm. Untill BWM took over rumour has it the people causing all the quality issues were the ones that left the company first. Seems evident after the mark three came out. better product in terms of no leaks.

20 years ago the american unions were as bad as the english. Until they were forced to improve quality, american products were of poor quality. Fords were a piece of shit. Yet land rovers were seen as well iconic and normal. Yet still as expensive and even more expensive then ford or chevy products. leaks, noises, and other stuff was accepted.

listen the english craftsmenship is without a doubt way beyond the american standards.

But why is it accepted that sub par parts and building were considered normal and the british way of doing things.

and series three guy I can understand how you feel about english mechanics . At least overhear in the states most if no all are flatrate, if the car and fixed right you dont get paid to fix it right the second time. with salary and the like for your countrymen I am sure they dont give a damn whether or not its fixed right or even repaired at all. kinda like the same guys that put it together.

[jozg44]

Originally Posted by Rovin4life

20 years ago the american unions were as bad as the english. Until they were forced to improve quality, american products were of poor quality. Fords were a piece of shit. Yet land rovers were seen as well iconic and normal. Yet still as expensive and even more expensive then ford or chevy products. leaks, noises, and other stuff was accepted.

But why is it accepted that sub par parts and building were considered normal and the british way of doing things.

You've sort of answered your own question- Ford was forced to improve its build quality because if people don't buy Fords, the company goes bust (as it seems to proving at the moment).

British Leyland in the 1970s and (to some extent) the 1980s had no real incentive to improve its products because, being a nationalised industry, its job was to employ people rather than to sell cars. Thus, the money would keep coming in regardless of how poorly the cars sold. On top of this was a hugely unionised workforce that staged over 500 walkouts in ONE YEAR in ONE FACTORY (out of the 42 British Leyland owned), and it's inevitable that the build quality and material quality would suffer hugely.

Basically, the British motor industry self-destructed because the only way to sort it out was to sell it all off to foreign companies with the money and the methods to do so. Throughout its existence, BL produced plenty of good, clever, often ground-breaking designs (Rover SD1, Austin Maxi, Austin Princess, Range Rover, Austin Metro etc.) that were let down by shockingly awful build quality, bad marketing and lack of product development. It was these last two problems that finally killed off MG-Rover in 2005- it had sorted the build quality, but was stuck selling out-dated designs with no money to market them properly or develop replacements.

I don't really know enough about Ford in the USA to comment on its current situation, but I will say that if it starts selling off its British operations, things are going to get tricky because they all share so much- not only engines and drivetrains but development, design, engineering and testing facilities. It would be very hard to buy (say) Land Rover, because you'd be stuck with having to either buy-in Jaguar and Ford engines, or develop your own.

Jack

Jack

[Adam in NYC USA]

unless you actually want to see the American car industry implode.

Crysler, Ford and GM have all post losses, yet everyone here will lay blame from the workers at the plant to the color of their underwear.

Boutiquing is the term car companies are doing to get new models out faster and make more money. Why don't we suggest a model that would get us a fresh new model and let them make some money in the process?

Don't you want to see Ford make a turnaround or should we just wave goodbye to the American auto industry and just buy Toyotas instead?

Lets lose the negativity folks. You can join as one force or just do nothing and let it go.

Enjoy guys.

[Muddy Oval]

"Although I have to ask the question why has an american car or mexican made car such better quality then an older range rover or discovery of the same year. I own a ford escort that hasnt broke down as much and doesnt leak as much fluids. "

Simple- your car is really a Mazda.

There are a lot of flaws in the idea to "save" Land Rover. The Freelander was the saviour of Land Rover as a marque, although in the USA it didn't do well. Why? Because the low end model was too basic, people didn't like it. The high end one was too expensive. The dealers didn't, and still don't, know how to fix them. It flopped for the most part in the USA despite being the hottest thing in Europe.
The Defender in the USA was technically a flop as well. They really didn't make anything off those after all the R&D, slapping a V8 in it etc. It wasn't a moneymaker for Rover and never would be if they brought them back.

[OkieRover]

I had this discussion with my boss yesterday.
American car builders need to build a car or truck that people want to KEEP. All of their cars are built to be thrown away in 5 years. Take a clue from the Japanese and build something that lasts.
Design is everything. What they are building IS NOT SELLING. So build something else. How many platforms of vehicles do they build?
So build a CAR for car people.
A TRUCK for truck people.
A MINIVAN for minivan people.
An SUV for SUV people.
And a true 4x4 for 4x4 people.
You are going to build them to LAST so you can change the exterior completely every year. Don't see what you like this year...wait one year or two. Something fresh will be out.
You are right on with the fuel too. I want diesel. My neighbor wants gas. And that popular science guy at the end of the block wants Propane. And the tree-huggers want batteries. GIVE IT TO THEM!

I don't know about the concepts. But I want METAL cars. Not plastic. If you get in an accident it's totalled due to the cost of the parts made from PLASTIC.

[Muddy Oval]

"And a true 4x4 for 4x4 people."

Those won't sell enough to be worth it. The Rubicon does OK, but the bread and butter is the cheaper trim levels. People are in love with the IDEA of a 4x4, but most people don't use them as such.
Most of the self-proclaimed 'wheelers' buy used vehicles. That's not a target demographic for a new car company. All the people complaining that they can't buy a Defender new are usually the ones driving something they bought used and inexpensively. Would they really drop $40K-$50K on something as basic as a Defender and really wheel it? I also think if most people spent a few minutes in one, they'd realize how plain they are.

[OkieRover]

Muddy I know exactly what your saying about the Escort.
We had a 1992 and it was great. We only traded it in cause the wife wanted a minivan. We got an Aerostar. Which burnt to the tires due to a recall that we never got. Then we got a Windstar. Which was a total piece of crap. All the electrics failed a one point during it's life. And the dealer couldn't find any of the problems we had.
During this time I bought a 1993 Ranger pickup. (designed by Mazda). I couldn't kill it. 180k miles in 7 years and still had the original clutch AND clutch plate. I should have kept it. The lady that bought it drove it 20k more miles and sold it for the same 2000$ she bought it from me for 2 years later.

[OkieRover]

Originally Posted by Muddy Oval

I also think if most people spent a few minutes in one, they'd realize how plain they are.

My best friend just bought 2 1995 Isuzu Troopers. The only thing electrical inside the cab is the radio and lights. HE LOVES IT.
Of course he bought them used and he has less than 2000$ in the one he's driving. The other was a take it or leave it, so he made it a parts car.

I told him at lunch the other day that if my 93 Range Rover had all the electrics pulled out it would be great. Basic and simple. Less to fix. Less to worry about.

I do love comfort and the gadgets are nice, but when they start failing it's a bad scene.

[Muddy Oval]

I admit I had a 95 Escort as a daily driver to keep the miles off my Jeeps and M3 etc. The stupid thing wouldn't die- I beat it, drove it like I stole it, drifted through turns and even autocrossed it once when my autocross car blew the clutch the day before a meet. Great car, bad image- but for $9995 brand new, it was a bargain.

Range Rovers had a lot of neat features that were cutting edge back in their day. Heated door locks, best brakes, off-road capability that was unmatched at the time (because they used SOFT suspensions). As they age, they may become $4000 used trucks but the replacement parts are still for a $44,000 truck.

[Dragunov]

I see more '96-'98 DIs' than any other rovers on the road around here, after that, I see alot of '99-'02 DIIs'.

I think ford should bring back the DI. It has the looks, the off roadability
and reasonable "Reliability" that work. I've had and seen just as many if not more "reliability" problems with other 4X4s' (Don't get me started on my cousins 4runner). Use 5.0 injectors in it, better gaskets,
and a simpler engine management system. Offer it in "LE" trim. Leave the good 'ole buick 241 c.i.d V8 alone. It is a good engine if maintained right. I beat the crap out of mine on a regular basis and have yet to encounter any problems. What I most frequently hear from wannabe LR owners is "If they still made one of those (DI), I'd buy one!" I told a fellow yesterday who was admiring my truck that they don't make these anymore, He said that it was a bloody shame because he would love a new one. I've had people walk right up to me and ask if mine was for sale, I've been offered cash on the spot for it. (I think it's the color, Arrest-me red)
I refuse to sell it.

I'll tell you this much. I've apparently found a really good DI and I intend on keeping it period!

Are you listening Ford???