NNY S2k

^^^Just wondering in case I win the Lotto
Levi

Legal Bill

So it looks like this decision is for North America. I'm not worried about Ford. they made the right moves before companies like GM and Chrysler had to go begging for a bail-out. They are now reading the tea leaves that the American buying public left for them. Sedans are dying here and fuel economy is no longer the big difference between SUVs and cars that it once was. Nothing is guaranteed, but this does not strike me as a risky move. Ford is looking to cut over $25B in costs with this and other moves which, together with the new US tax code makes them much more profitable now and in the future.

And, if you take a look at this old article from C&D, it seems that Ford will be lowering its own CAFE requirements by simply dropping the smaller cars from its line-up.

https://www.caranddriver.com/feature...ations-feature

boltonblue

Well CNBC is questioning if it will actually cost the CEO Hackett's his job?

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/30/ford...ove-fatal.html

They note he has no experience in the car business but is a furniture guy.
Personally I don't know how you can run that company without gasoline in your blood but that's just me.

dlq04

It's the Board of Directors at Ford that need to be replaced. Their vision for the future based on CEO's they have hired has reversed itself to many times IMHO.

Legal Bill

Is Ford abandoning the segment, or have the North American buyers already abandoned it? I can't help but see the reality all around me. The motivation for buying SUVs vary and one could argue that the manufacturers forced the public into the segment, but that is where it has gone.

The part I'm still not clear on is the company's commitment to cars for other markets. From what I have read, they will maintain their car lines in other countries, but at the same time they are looking for further cuts. So at some point they have to decide which unprofitable ventures are worth maintaining.

The GM approach mentioned in the CNBC article paints the picture of a US based company building the cars in China and then selling them to the US market. While that may sound good from a spread sheet standpoint, where does it leave the balance of trade and manufacturing jobs, and what makes GM think it can control such a relationship or limit China's penetration of the North American automobile market?

I think Ford and GM's approaches both have their share of risk.

MsPerky

It is a shame because, for the most part, I really hate SUVs.

dlq04

I don't think any of the US auto makers have a grasp on where they are going when it comes to volume sales, profits, and the future. Hybrids? EVs? Ride sharing? Economy? Performance? Big cars? Small cars? Build here? Build across the border? CAFE? Self driving vehicles? Brand loyalty? Dealer relationships? Dealership service? Robots? Etc. There are more questions than answers.

If you believe history it always starts with a good product! And you need good entry level priced cars (below $20k) to get first time buyers. Then you hope they become brand loyal, i.e. today's Civic buyer will be a CR-V buyer ten years later. And image really matters - look at Cadillac, they have been trying so hard to change the 'old person image' by building cars of performance and showing what they can do at "The Ring". Has not worked yet since it often takes decades to change a car company's image; if ever. And, look at GM's approach to introducing new products. Why is the Bolt a Chevy? If they want Cadillac to be the top dog like Audi is a VW, they should be putting the latest a greatest in Caddy's.

Ok, quess that's enough thoughts for one day.

Scooterboy

I personally don't have a problem with Ford's decision. Going back to '72 I have never had a Ford car that was any good. I say car because I had a Ranger that was great and had no troubles with unlike the current Ranger I have!

Jet sitter

I have researched and looked at several SUV's and while I like the looks and handling of the Mazda CX-5 the best, I just can't get excited about driving an SUV. The reason for an SUV is you require additional storage, or for the "safety" aspects of the car. Personally, I don't need any extra space and I don't see that an SUV is a safer vehicle to drive. They take longer to stop and are not nearly as compliant in an emergency situation as a sedan. Every brand that I tested the first words out of the salesman's mouth is the "command driving position" you have in their vehicles. While I can understand that being higher, above some of the traffic, would be of benefit, the actual ability to control is reduced by size and the high CG. I compared my 2000 Accord with the new 2018 1.5 Accord and found the dimensions very close. The trunk is 3.5 cubic feet larger, the back seat has 2" more of legroom, but up front there is actually more room in my 2000. Gas mileage is about 4 mpg more than I get. Stopping distance from 60 MPH is actually 9' longer, unless you get the 2.0 Sport, than it's the same. The 0-60 times on the 1.5 equal what my 2000 Accord does. Of course they have a host of Honda safety suite items; lane departure warning, blind spot monitoring, and automatic braking. The lane departure warning on an Accord will drive you nuts, it's way too sensitive! Blind spot monitoring is similar. I swear, if a Canadian goose walks behind your car, it will set off the BSM. Which leaves us with the automatic braking. I didn't have any occasion for it to work, so I cannot comment. My plan is to wait until later this year or possibly next year and make an offer on a 2018 Accord 2.0 Sport. If the dealer accepts it, fine, if not, I'll keep driving my tried and true 2000 Accord "Goldie".

dlq04

As you say, new does not always mean better. I just had new leaf springs and shackles installed on my 21 year old truck. Next, is to drive it to TN for a used truck bed, since that's the only area rusting badly. I have no interest at looking for a replacement.

When I was testing SUVs I was caught out by the lane departure warning on the Honda. First thought, what the hell just happened!! I would be turning that off ASAP. Still have not replaced the Audi. Lots to like about more garage space, insurance savings, etc. but it is also nice to have one newer car in the fleet..... so the clock is ticking.