Fordnatics List Archive

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: (email redacted)

>In fact, it seems Ford
>is doing better financially than GM. And that of course is the ultimate
>bottom line, like it or not.

>> but the LT1 powered GMs are another story...

>Well GM is supposedly going to quit making the RWD big cars in a year or
>two. If they do, it sure as hell isn't because they are making profits
>hand over fist with them.

Unless you own a lot of stock in Ford, wouldn't you rather see them make
something that can compete with the competition? Ford's performance image
is in decline, an image that has a trickle down effect to the other models.
Like GM, I think Ford should sacrifice a little profit on a couple models
to improve their image, this will pay off in the long run. I'm getting
tired of the LT-1's trauncing the late model 'stangs, SHO's, and SC's at
the track (I talking stock vehicles here, so don't tell me how your
Paxton'ed Mustang eats Camaros). Even the supercharged Bonnevilles are
having their way with the other auto. Fords.

Like I've said before, put the Lightning engine in a couple models, give us
something to be proud of. I'd love to see it stuffed into a Crown Vic.

TODD

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: murpda00 <(email redacted)>

> >Well GM is supposedly going to quit making the RWD big cars in a year
or > >two.
Correct me if I am wrong, but I am quite sure that this rumor was
dispelled by the higher-up Bowtie Boys two months ago. It was a rumor that
started from the possibility of using the Caprice factory to build trucks,
thereby eliminating the RWD production, but because those fleet sales can
be the bread and butter of GM, it isn't true.
Dan>
>

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: Roberto Arturo Schafer <(email redacted)>

> Unless you own a lot of stock in Ford, wouldn't you rather see them make
> something that can compete with the competition? Ford's performance image

Not if it means they won't make anything because they went belly up. If
you buy it, they will make it. You want a fast car, why should Ford lose
money on it? Why not just cough up the cash (or loan)? The reality is
Ford would have a tough time getting rid of a huge number of really
fast cars. Not to mention that it might trigger some politician to ban
fast cars or at least try.

Besides, no one I see is praising the Lightning. From what I have read,
it does much better than the 454SS with about 100 cubic inches less.

And it is tradition. Ford seems to always be a step behind, then take a
small lead, and quickly be behind again. This is what led to the
creation of an "off the shelf" motor named the 428CJ.


Rob

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: Roberto Arturo Schafer <(email redacted)>

> thereby eliminating the RWD production, but because those fleet sales can
> be the bread and butter of GM, it isn't true.

I thought it sounded stupid. But who would have thought that Chrysler
could be run into the ground? Or Pan Am? (Yes I know deregulation
didn't help...)


Rob

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: (email redacted)

TODD Wrote:

> >In fact, it seems Ford
> >is doing better financially than GM. And that of course is the ultimate
> >bottom line, like it or not.

Ford is doing better than GM.

> Unless you own a lot of stock in Ford, wouldn't you rather see them make
> something that can compete with the competition? Ford's performance image
> is in decline, an image that has a trickle down effect to the other models.
> Like GM, I think Ford should sacrifice a little profit on a couple models
> to improve their image, this will pay off in the long run. I'm getting
> tired of the LT-1's trauncing the late model 'stangs, SHO's, and SC's at
> the track (I talking stock vehicles here, so don't tell me how your
> Paxton'ed Mustang eats Camaros). Even the supercharged Bonnevilles are
> having their way with the other auto. Fords.

> Like I've said before, put the Lightning engine in a couple models, give us
> something to be proud of. I'd love to see it stuffed into a Crown Vic.


I agree with you on all this and can only hope that Ford is gearing up to give
us something that will compete at the same level. Ford in general seems to be
letting up on its performance versions. However, your statement on the LT-1s
trouncing SHO's and SC's...Those are not meant for the LT-1s market. Now the
Caprice really competes against the Crown Vic so I can agree that there is not
a comparison there. Would a hopped up Crown Vic really sell? They had a
problem with the SHO selling originally. These factors are what the market
types are dealing with. The Mustang currently does not hurt for sales, and
SVT hopefully will give more affordable performance than they are currently.
I think there needs to be more of a variety available on the option sheets as
far as powertrain is concerned. It used to be that way(60s 70s) and that may
be the key. It won't happen though because of the regulations in place.

I don't think the problem is Ford. I think the problem is the consumers. They
will build it if we will buy it. Every time Ford has stepped out and produced
something as a special edition, it has been done in limited numbers thus driving
the price up due to retooling and availability. We have seen this in the past:
Turbo GT, SVO, Turbo T-bird, XR7 Supercharged six, SC, SHO, Cobra, Cobra R. And
with the exception of maybe the Cobras cars have not sold in great numbers.
Plus, let's look at the facts, Ford has not needed anything that was faster than
what they had, up until now. Now that there is a demand out there for something
faster or comparable to the F-bodies, I feel(and hope) that Ford will send out
something comparable. The problem is that Ford will be hard pressed to match
the F-bodies price-wise. I say this because GM does not make much money on them
and Ford won't want to put themselves in that position. Basically, they would
have to do it without raising current prices.

Maybe instead of a "Special Edition" car they should just get down and give us
the cars and if they don't sell well then change it. Not test the market with
higher priced Spec. Ed. that only a few people are willing to pay for. We will
just have to wait and see.

Scott D.
93 SHO 5-speed

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: Shel Belinkoff <(email redacted)>

I've been reading this thread for a while now, and there seems to be an
obvious omission in all this talk about Ford's performance image. Ford is
not an Amercan car company. They are a "world" car company, and their
long term goal is to be the most successful comany in the world. The U.S.
market is only a part of their plan.

If you look at Ford on a global, rather than a local, level, you'd have
to include Jaguar and Aston Martin in their stable. These are certainly
performance cars, and over the next few years, we'll probably see some
pretty wonderful, albeit expensive, models coming from these companies.
Look at how Ford has turned Jaguar around. And with their ability to cut
costs, use platforms and parts across a wide range of marques, the
high-end cars may end up costing less than they would if they were made
by small, independent companies. The future looks very interesting and
promising, IMO.

Shel Belinkoff
(email redacted)
_________________

On Fri, 5 May 1995 (email redacted) wrote:

> > Unless you own a lot of stock in Ford, wouldn't you rather see them make
> > something that can compete with the competition? Ford's performance image
> > is in decline, an image that has a trickle down effect to the other models.
> > Like GM, I think Ford should sacrifice a little profit on a couple models
> > to improve their image, this will pay off in the long run.

> I agree with you on all this and can only hope that Ford is gearing up to give
> us something that will compete at the same level. Ford in general seems to be
> letting up on its performance versions.

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: (email redacted)

Sorry guys, I had these messages returned so I resent a revised version back.
So it may be posted twice.

Scott D.
93 SHO 5-speed

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: Roberto Arturo Schafer <(email redacted)>

> not an Amercan car company. They are a "world" car company, and their
> long term goal is to be the most successful comany in the world. The U.S.
> market is only a part of their plan.

Ford is already very successful in the world. It alternates with Fiat for
highest sales in Europe. Fords are quite plentiful over there. Even
Chrysler is trying, in Seville and Madrid I saw a few Chyrslers (American
made only, but they are putting in more plants over there) plugging along.
But only a few Opels and one lone Z28. But keep in mind, products from
Ford of Europe are made for that market. The Sierra didn't do so well
here in the U.S., neither did the European Granada.

> If you look at Ford on a global, rather than a local, level, you'd have
> to include Jaguar and Aston Martin in their stable. These are certainly
> performance cars, and over the next few years, we'll probably see some

Yes, but.... These cars aren't going to compete with most GM products.
Nor are they going to compete with most Ford products. Jags may compete
with a Mercedes, Rolls, or even a BMW. But not much. People looking at
these cars are out for the image, and each brand give a much different
image. The Aston's are bought by the Rolls crowd. All the ones that
rolled through the shop in SB were owned by Rolls Royce owners. It was a
second car.

This means more profit for FOMOCO. Perhaps allowing it to indulge in
racing and making high profile, low profit, high performance Ford models.
But this is not a guarantee. As far as technology trickling over. It
will probably be a fairly one way street. Aston's pretty much just use
Bosch electronics and old reliable technology. Jag.... Well, at least
the British government privatized it before they ran it into the ground.

Rob

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: (email redacted) (Bob Allen)


>This means more profit for FOMOCO. Perhaps allowing it to indulge in
>racing and making high profile, low profit, high performance Ford models.
>But this is not a guarantee. As far as technology trickling over. It
>will probably be a fairly one way street. Aston's pretty much just use
>Bosch electronics and old reliable technology. Jag.... Well, at least
>the British government privatized it before they ran it into the ground.
>
>Rob
>


I have to agree with what you are saying as a whole, but the above paragraph
I partly disagree with. The new Aston Martin DB12 (I think that's the name,
anyway the new A M with the V12) utilizes FoMoCo Modular technology. I
believe it was published in SuperFord of HotRod last year. Also the new
supercharged straight six in the Jag, BING! Eaton product per SuperCoupe. I
see the technology trickling both ways. Ford may not be a sticker-glam
company, but they are very shrewd/frugal. Remember the motto that Henry
Ford always went by: "It sells, so why should I change it?" Ford knows
what is and what isn't and if they can use winning technology from someone
else they will. After all why else do you think they invest so heavily in
other companies. Just makes good business sense. But like I said I think
what you had to say overall was right on.

Bob"Blue Oval flowin' through my veins" Allen

p.s. I apologize for the reply on an old message. Just got back from a
stint in Germany(427 E-mail messages in que this morning). 187km/hr in a
Opel(GM) Vectre(midsize). Pathetic!!! Pathetic Car!!!! That speed was
attained only by drafting a BMW, slingshotting, downhill with the wind
behind me. I can't wait 'till I am 25 so I can rent from Hertz!

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: Roberto Arturo Schafer <(email redacted)>

> >This means more profit for FOMOCO. Perhaps allowing it to indulge in
> >racing and making high profile, low profit, high performance Ford models.
> >But this is not a guarantee. As far as technology trickling over. It
> >will probably be a fairly one way street. Aston's pretty much just use
> >Bosch electronics and old reliable technology. Jag.... Well, at least
> >the British government privatized it before they ran it into the ground.

>
> I have to agree with what you are saying as a whole, but the above paragraph
> I partly disagree with. The new Aston Martin DB12 (I think that's the name,
> anyway the new A M with the V12) utilizes FoMoCo Modular technology. I
> believe it was published in SuperFord of HotRod last year. Also the new
> supercharged straight six in the Jag, BING! Eaton product per SuperCoupe. I
> see the technology trickling both ways. Ford may not be a sticker-glam

Actually it seems that you agreed completely. Both examples as I see it
are one way. Ford improving Jag and Aston. Let's face it, the British
have come up with excellent innovative products over the years. Then
they go and produce the same exact thing for 30 years. It takes a NEW
company to come up with something new, and the go down the same track.
No wonder the British car and motorcycle industry went to hell.
Naturally the same can be said of the U.S. motorcycle industry.... I
hope Ford forces British industry to wake up. They aren't a stupid
people, nor lazy, but, sometimes one does wonder if they are actually
"intelligent" when it comes to business. Still they are smart enough to
be the biggest foreign investors in the U.S..

Rob