Recent Comments:
GM's OnStar will track your annual mileage... but only for your benefit {Autoblog}
Jul 24th 2008 4:23PM I wasn't thinking from a GMAC 'Insurance' perspective, I was thinking of a person on lease who has a contract for 12,000 miles goes over, and has his brother-in-law roll the odometer back.
Honda and Nissan working to mass-market carbon fiber {Autoblog}
Jul 24th 2008 3:51PM Oh, one more thing about Carbon Fiber (as it is used today on the US Military Airplanes) - when exposed to destructive blasts, it becomes worse than asbestos.
The tiny fibers embed in your lungs and cause irritation.
So First Responders (to a car crash or fire) would have to wear full respirators and passengers will be at risk.
Heck, they probably already are at risk, but there isn't enough experiential data to form lawsuits yet....
GM's OnStar will track your annual mileage... but only for your benefit {Autoblog}
Jul 24th 2008 3:47PM The other "benefit" will be that GMAC will be able to know the true mileage of a vehicle coming off lease. If "something" were to happen to the odometer and the display mileage was questioned, this would show if the od had been tampered with.
Another "benefit" would be for GM Service to send reminders that at x-thousand of miles, you need GM Service Oil Change / Tire Rotation / Brake Check / Fluid Fill / etc. 'cause ya know, it's all about the customer's needs....
... I must have misplaced my tinfoil hat this afternoon - I'm in a 'conspiracy' mood.... :)
Honda and Nissan working to mass-market carbon fiber {Autoblog}
Jul 24th 2008 2:37PM Then they will come back and say "we had no government help!"....
Ford posts $8.7B Q2 loss, will convert three truck factories to car production {Autoblog}
Jul 24th 2008 12:21PM
I think great points are made about Ford's investment in flexible manufacturing. Even if fuel prices drop, Ford is in a much better place to respond.
As for product, even if there isn't much demand for the small cars, having a common GLOBAL platform is just good business sense. In a way, this "crisis" is good for Ford because it finally gives the CEO the power to shake loose the reigns of power from the local fiefdoms that have resisted all change in the past.
As for the size of the vehicles - think long term. If hybrid / hydrogen / biofuel / whatever becomes cheap, I guarantee that Americans will return to big cars and huge trucks. The Law of Unintended Consequences will be a hard smack in the head to people who think that the future will be small cars. Eventually, someone will build a Excursion / Suburban sized vehicle that gets 50+ mpg and it will sell like mad. Think about it.
Mercury rising: Thursday announcement expected to lay out Euro-infused future {Autoblog}
Jul 22nd 2008 1:50PM As a current owner of two Mercury's and having bought only Merc's and Lincoln's for 20+ years, my opinion is that Fords should be brought over as Fords.
If FoMoCo wants to do something with Mercury, it should not negatively impact the Ford brand. Bringing a European Ford product to America as a Mercury brand is ill-advised, in my opinion. It will cause customer confusion (e.g. Euro Focus / Mercury 'whatever'). They don't need more customer confusion.
Personally, I think Mercury should continue to exist as a bridge between Ford and Lincoln with mostly re-badged Ford's that are upscale and stylish without being 'over-the-top' like Cadillac. It seems to me that selling multiple products based upon the same basic engineering is a good business move - as long as the secondary products do not take away from the primary product. Most importantly, the secondary products needs to have sufficient profit to cover their expenses. period. If that requires a $5k or $10k price increase and their are sufficient customers to justify it, then it should be done. But if there isn't, then it shouldn't be. simple.
No emotions - just facts.
Mercury dying: No updates planned past 2010 {Autoblog}
Jul 15th 2008 3:06PM @P.V. Up until the 60's Mercury's had better manufacturing - more welds, cross-beams, etc. Even the head gaskets on a Mercury were better than those of a Ford - more water holes for better cooling, which gave better performance and longer life. Modern Mercury's have better interior materials and softer ride.
Also, I want to comment on Lincoln. It isn't just the product. It is also how the customers are treated. Find someone with a Lexus, BMW, or Infinity and travel with them to the dealership for service or repair. You will find that visiting a Lincoln Mercury dealership is a lot like visiting a Ford dealership. The others are like visiting a premium dealership and you are treated like someone who has purchased a luxury automobile.
Unfortunately for Ford, they don't have much control over how their dealerships treat their customers.
Mercury dying: No updates planned past 2010 {Autoblog}
Jul 15th 2008 2:56PM I can see the Mercury will be gone.
But I find it hard to believe that it isn't cost effective to have a Mercury version of many of the Ford products. Most of the R&D is already paid for. Just some styling & technology updates. Even if they are small sellers, if they don't cost much to bring to market, then they don't need to be big sellers.
It just seems to me that a company should be able to offer variants that maximize the investment in the frame / body / chassis / drivetrain at minimal cost and maximum profit. It seems odd to not do so.
bummer
Ford Racing Invitational '08: The aftermath {Autoblog}
Jun 17th 2008 8:50AM "looser"
and
"loose"?
nice article.
Ford's Mark Fields calls plug-in hybrids a "national priority" {Autoblog}
Jun 12th 2008 8:42AM As a Capitalist, I disagree with the idea that the FedGov should be helping at all. However, when so many other companies are lining up at the trough (Airlines, Banks, etc), why not throw your hat in the ring?
Also, IIRC, Bill Ford Jr. said something about how the FedGov needed to step up and help the Big 3 (at the time) with their employee health care obligations. I was against that too. But the result was that the Big 3 and the UAW stepped up and solved that problem. Just like I think domestic auto will step up and solve this problem.
He does make a good point about going from dependency in the Middle East (oil) to dependency in the Far East (China) for our automotive energy needs. It is a bad idea, either way.
