Filed under: Ford, Lincoln, Mercury
Ford's head of design says 'no' to blatant badge engineering
We recently told you about Ford's not-so-earth-shattering announcement that shared platforms are the key to future success. Judging by your comments, this should have been the assumption rather than the proclamation. But a couple of you pointed out what could be the tragic flaw in this plan - badge engineering gone bad. Well, Peter Horbury, design chief for Ford, Lincoln and Mercury, has stepped up to assure us this won't be a problem if he has anything to say about it. And being in his position, he has a lot to say about it.
Although the marketing department seems to be capable of differentiating the various platform mates within the FoMoCo family, buyers aren't always as capable of discerning the differences. "The next step is to be independent in the areas you can see, touch and feel," said Horbury at a recent press event. Horbury added that the '08 Lincoln MKS sedan will be the best example of this separation. Although built on the same platform as the Ford Five Hundred the MKS exterior shares "not a single piece" with the Ford. "To be honest, the more differentiation we can create, the more we can build a stronger brand for Lincoln, which stands on its own," Horbury said. "It also helps to make the Fords look like something else, like something special."
Sounds good, and the results on the Zephyr/MKZ have been pretty favorable, but we'll have to wait and see. Lincoln seems to be focusing on styling touches from its glorious design past, but will it ring true with buyers?
[Source: Automotive News, sub req]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Mondo 4:06PM (11/13/2006)
Everybody's hating on Ford but the Fusion, MKZ and Milan are all decent cars for the segment. Problem is, it's a highly competitive segment. Given that, differentiation is key because American brand loyalty is no longer. In other words, why the heck would I buy a Mercury?
Reply
James 4:23PM (11/13/2006)
I believe this is a good move on Fords part. They have really improved their vehicles with cars like the Fusion and Five Hundred, but need to design them so consumers can see the difference between the brands. I never understood why people bought a Mercury Sable over a Ford Taurus - I could not see the justification in the more upscale brand. Great to hear Ford is going to work on doing more then just changing the logos.
James
Reply
steven 4:35PM (11/13/2006)
I co-sign w/ Mondo.
Mercury is a pure waste of money.
Reply
ron 4:37PM (11/13/2006)
James - The main reason we chose the Merc Sable over the Ford Taurus wagon because we liked the front end styling better on the Sable. I don't know how the cost of an identically equiped Taurus compared with the Sable - the Ford dealer wasn't interested in talking to us about anything other than an Explorer (this was in 2002).
Reply
Andrew Eller 4:49PM (11/13/2006)
Why is the article talking about the five hundred while the car pictured is the fusion???
Reply
Infinihertz 4:53PM (11/13/2006)
I've never bought a Mercury, but I've priced Fusions vs. Milans, and all other things being as equal as possible, the Milan is maybe $1500 more. Less if you're looking at a high-end Fusion. So as it stands now, I consider it to be essentially as ron said: a $1000 grille and tail lights, plus some interior upgrades. Considering how much people pay for spoilers and other accessories (myself included), that doesn't seem too unreasonable to me. However, I would like more differentiation. The MKZ seems to have it now (the Zephyr only kind of did).
Reply
Lee Gibson 4:53PM (11/13/2006)
I just want a Mazdaspeed 6 wagon. I don't care what badge you slap on it...just build it and sell it to me for less than $28k.
Reply
Daniel 5:05PM (11/13/2006)
There should not be any product where the Lincoln has the same engine as the Ford/Mercury. A couple mm stroke, slight revision of intake and exhaust and remapping the brain does not require major effort and it would yeild what could be called a different mill with higher and smoother torque curve for the Lincoln.
Lincoln needs to be differentiated in the drive train in addition to styling. This would not be a big difference but customers could fee a bit better about paying the premium for the Lincoln.
Offering the exact same engine in the mass market Ford and the Top End Lincoln is a non-starter.
Reply
GOKARTN 5:23PM (11/13/2006)
Shouldnt Lincoln either be put out of it's misery or make it share more with it's PAG cars. If Ford wants Lincoln to be seen in the same light as Cadillac, it needs to be sharing basic platforms with Jaguar, Volvo, Aston Martin and Land Rover, rather than the lowly Ford's.
It needs to be a car with the driving dynamics of the premium European brands, with elegant Continental American style. A Jaguar XJ with angular shapes, suicide doors and a 4 door ragtop.
Reply
dakota 5:49PM (11/13/2006)
"A couple mm stroke, slight revision of intake and exhaust and remapping the brain does not require major effort and it would yeild what could be called a different mill with higher and smoother torque curve for the Lincoln."
You've got to be kidding right? Do you even realize the cost of just doing "slight" changes? It's not as simple as you think it is.
Reply
Daniel 6:33PM (11/13/2006)
Hey Dakota - No I am not kidding. I know this stuff costs more but Lincolns are supposed to cost more!!!!! That is why the Lincoln should not be the same as the Ford.
And, it does not cost that much more. Two mm on the stroke basically requires the crank to be ground with different specs. Less restrictive exhaust and intakes are not major expenses and these could be derived with assistance of top aftermarket firms. The computer mapping is next to no cost at all once the initial programing is completed.
I would even look into the Lincolns using some neat trick stuff like ARP bolts, carbon fiber engine covers and several other visible tricks to set these high end cars apart from the crowd. Balance shafts to make engines nearly vibration free would be great. FoMoCo needs to sell some sizzle along with the steak.
A Lincoln should be a Lincoln - not a Ford with more chrome.
Reply
iQuack 8:17PM (11/13/2006)
They can call it whatever they want, but the Mazda-derived Ford/Mercury/Lincoln are badge engineered cars except for a few details.
Best to ignore all of them and buy a Mazda 6 IMO. Why buy a Mazda that's been digested and regurgitated by Ford?
Mercury is redundant. Ford should bury this corpse because Lincoln dealers now have a popular priced, higher volume car to sell in the Zephyr (or MKZ or whatever they're calling it this week).
Reply
Jeff Banks 8:31PM (11/13/2006)
"A Lincoln should be a Lincoln - not a Ford with more chrome"
Couldn't have been said better. I think most people genuinely like the Ford Fusion, myself included. It's a good basic car and thats what it should be. Lincoln needs to be recessitated out of the 80's giant car mindset and be placed head to head to compete with Lexus. For Mercury, Ford needs to take a page from the Honda/Acura relationship.
Reply
SilverAero 9:21PM (11/13/2006)
Mercury is really not needed like oldsmobile, why should their be a middle brand between fornd and lincoln. With all due respect to mercury's past, i think it should be killed and so the funding can promote the others ford and lincoln.
The only reason i can think for keeping it is if ford quickly moves to make mercury a Hybrid brand or something to differentiate it from the market.
Reply
ken 10:07PM (11/13/2006)
To All: You BUY a Mercury because Jill Wagner says so. If you don't know who she is, you're either gay or shriveled up. Google Jill Wagner once. Tell me you wouldn't do ANYTHING she asks you to do given the chance?
Reply
Howard Kerr 10:46PM (11/13/2006)
The '86 through '95 Sable and Taurus....yeah, absolutely no difference in appearance there (please note sarcasm)....so no reason to cross-shop. While we are on the subject "why buy a Pontiac when it's nothing more than a fancy Chevy?"
If you really examine the pricing for many Fords and there Mercury counterparts, you are going to see that you are paying for more than different tailights and grille. Mercurys lately, often only have 2 trim levels to Ford's 3 trim levels. In other words, the Ford starts out cheaper and has a commensurate LOWER level of specification. (Something standard on a Mercury will often be optional on a Ford.)
As for dakota suggesting it's not a big deal to make a few subtle changes to an engine and therefore producing a Lincoln (or Mercury) specific powertrain...shows how little he knows about modern cars. To give an example of how complex the variables are when computing classes of cars for vehicle emissions certifications... similar cars that are more than 150 pounds different may be in different classes for emissions testing/certifying. Boring and/or stroking and engine creates a whole new powertrain as far as the E.P.A. is concerned. When GM bored out the 3.1 liter Chevy V6 to 3.4 liters...GM had to certify this new powerplant, it does not "piggy back" on the old 3.1. And, if the block is already at it's limits...well it can't just be simply bored or stroked. Right now, many of the engines in Ford's modular line of engines (the 3 liter DOHC V6 and the 5.4 liter V8) are at the limits and will require a new range of engines to replace them. Do you really think Ford didn't introduce the 3.5 V6 because they couldn't get around to figuring out how to make a bigger than 3 liter V6?
Reply
drolds1 2:21AM (11/14/2006)
Where do you get that information from? Tell us what the few details are. Nothing could be further from the truth. Just for starters, the Fusion is 3.4 inches longer than the Mazda, its wheelbase is 2.1 inches longer, and it's 2.1 inches wider. My club has a Ford engineer as a member and we're well-informed about this project There are thousands of other difference that you can't see as well. This is not badge engineering. Check your facts before shooting from the hip. According to your definition, a Bentley Continental GT is a "badge-engineered" VW Phaeton also.
Reply
JJ 4:22AM (11/14/2006)
Howard Kerr said, "Do you really think Ford didn't introduce the 3.5 V6 because they couldn't get around to figuring out how to make a bigger than 3 liter V6?"
Actually, I think Ford did the 3.5L Duratec only partially to have a bigger V6.
The bigger "carrot" was a lower cost V6. A die cast block and DAMB vs. those complex roller finger followers and hydraulic lash adjusters should show up big on the bottom line.
The other win on the 3.5L is the water pump. It is no longer hanging off the back of the engine, meaning the 3.5L can be mounted North-South. Besides replacing the 3.0L Duratec, the new 3.5L could also replace the 4.0L in the Mustang, Explorer and SportTrac
Reply
JJ 4:44AM (11/14/2006)
drolds1, RE: Fusion vs Mazda6
Actually this is "badge engineering", but in this case (Fusion vs. Mazda6) it was done RIGHT ! This couple of inches in wheelbase and width as well as trunk/overhang make the Fusion a totally different car, which is a good thing. (I have owned both a Mazda6 and a Fusion.)
The real point is, is the grille on a Milan going to make you drive to the other side of town and pay a couple bucks a month more ?
The MKZ is now the **ONLY** Lincoln product that has a powertrain different than its Ford/Mercury cousins.
The base MKX is thousands more than an loaded Edge. Is the Lincoln name and grille worth it ?
I also think Ford is insane to **NOT** put the XC90/Yamaha V8 in the MKS. The world needs a Hot Rod Lincoln !
Reply
carbuzzard.com 8:19AM (11/14/2006)
Mr. Kerr is right. The costs of certification are huge. Long gone are the days when engineers could grind a new camshaft, pop on a bigger carburetor and call it a HiPo version of the engine.
But as to "badge engineering," the first time I heard that phrase was back in the early Sixties when it referred to the ludicrous practice at BMC (or whatever they were called back then, and does it really matter?) of, say, slapping a "Wollesly" grille on an Austin and changing nothing else about the car. When you start changing wheelbase and track and major parts of the body, that's platform engineering. Consider the Audi A4 vs the VW Passat: same platform, but the Audi puts its engine in longitudinally, the WV's is transverse...and that's basically the same engine...though not identical (note different hp based on exhaust restrictions, etc).
Obviously there are different degrees of badge vs platform engineering, but in the best of worlds, platform engineering allows different divisions to muck around the the corporate bag of tricks and use what's best for each division. Although Mazda took the lead with this platform, Ford made it its own.
Alas, Mercury vs Ford tends more to be "feature/package engineering." More comes standard on the Mercury, for example. But get rid of Mercury? Could a Lincoln dealers stand alone? Hmmmm.
Reply