Sticking With A Sure Thing: a Late 90's One Ford philosohpy?

[TheMann]

Sticking With A Sure Thing
Part One: Great Success and Failure
​

In 1996, then CEO of Ford Motor Company, Alexander Trotman was looking at the sales projections for the planned 1998 release of the Australian market AU Falcon, when a simple question pooped in his head: “Why weren't we going to sell these in North America?” At first glance the idea of re-engineering the AU Falcon for Left-hand drive seemed an expensive prospect, but he reasoned, with Ford's massive sales in the US, it should at least cover the costs of development. Fortunately for Ford Motor Company, this was one of the best Decisions that could have been made.

By the 1998 Launch Date for the Falcon and it's American Siblings, extensive design and development work had been done. All of the five models possessed new and powerful engines. With the Crown Victoria, Falcon, and Grand Marquis having a standard Ford of Australia four-liter single over head cam straight six, producing a then-astounding 211 Horsepower and 263 pound-feet of Torque, and an Optional Windsor V8, which was standard on the Fairlane and Lincoln Town Car . The more expensive Lincoln Continental and Ford Fairlane LTD were equipped with 4.6 Liter dual over head cam Modular V8s producing 275 Horsepower and 275 pound-feet of torque, and the Lincoln Mark VIII's 290 horse InTech V8 was available as an option on both.

While the reception of the styling on the Falcon and Crown Victoria's “New Edge” styling was cool at best, the demand in North America for the sporty and powerful new models was so much that the factory in Wixom, Michigan that built the North American models had to add a second, and later on a third shift, just to keep pace with demand. With the Numbers tallied up from all the disparite Models, the Ford “Falcon Family” of models had outsold the previous best sellers, the Ford Taurus and Toyota Camry, with the Falcon Family having outsold the Camry by almost two thousand vehicles.

Unlike it's stable-mates, the Lincoln Navigator, released at the same time as the Continental and Town Car, was not a strong seller, in fact one dealer complained in a letter to Board Chairman Jacques Nasser and CEO Alexander Trotman; “The Navigator seems to serve no purpose beyond taking up space, as I have only sold four of the ten I ordered since the day they arrived, nearly three months ago now, while I have continuously sold out of Town Cars, Continentals and Grand Marquis, even at some points receiving offers of nearly three times the asking price for them.” The Navigator would only sell a grand total of Nine-hundred Vehicles in the 1998 Model Year, out of almost two thousand produced, while Lincoln would sell nearly thirty thousand Town Cars in the first six months of sales alone. The decision was clear- the Navigator would be not be produced for model year 1999.

For another of Ford's unsuccessful products, there was a chance at salvation. The third generation Ford Taurus SHO, plagued by engine troubles to an unusual degree, would receive a new engine. It's unique 3.4 liter dual overhead cam V8 would be replaced by a different Engine, the smaller and slightly more powerful 3 liter Jaguar AJ-30 V6 for the Mark 4 Taurus and SHO to be released for model year 2000, the AJ-30 would produce 240 horsepower in the SHO, an Improvement of five horsepower over the previous V8. This Lighter, more powerful engine would allow the Taurus to truly compete against it's competitors and win a place on Car and Drivers' 10 Best List for 2000, beating out the BMW 3 series and Audi A6.

Ford's new philosophy of commonality and performance paid off in other areas as well, with the Success of the “Generation 4.5” Mustang and Ford Cougar, a re-badged Mercury, for Model Year 1999, and Ford's New Compact for the New Millennium: the humble Focus, a rather surprising Titan of the automotive world and the culmination of the Ford 2000 Initiative which replaced three different models in North America alone.

Yes, In 2000 it seemed as if Ford had not only found unparraled success and profitability for an automaker, but that it had caught it's chief competiton flat-footed. Unfortunately the latter was somewhat untrue.

Interesting, but it has a number of serious problems that I can already see.

1) The Taurus and the Falcon are in different size classes, the Falcon is somewhat bigger. It's also more complex to assemble, being rear wheel drive. IMO the Falcon would work better on top of the range, above the Taurus.

2) The Navigator was successful because of CAFE laws (which were amended to exempt SUVs from them by Congress in 1994) and the fact that American cars universally got bigger and bigger over the 1990s. That also explains partly why the Mondeo/Contour, a best seller in Europe, flopped badly in North America. Removing the Navigator would require junking the CAFE laws, which would be a bitch to do at a time when most of the Big 3's profits came from large trucks and SUVs.

3) Replacing the Yamaha V8 with the AJ V6 is trading one troublesome no-torque aluminum engine for another. IMO, you'd be better sorting the problems out with the Yamaha 3.4 rather than junking it, and perhaps using it as a low-boost turbo to get more beans out of it at the bottom end of the rev range. And the Taurus is not gonna get to be a rival to the 3 Series or A6 by just changing the engine. Take it from somebody who has driven all of them, and a family member of a person who owned a '98 Taurus SHO.

 

[TheMann]

However, Ford's success was not without imitation. In 2000, hoping to ape the Falcon-Family launch three years back, that had sent them scrambling for a solution, GM introduced four new models, all on the V-platform. The Buick Roadmaster Mark 3, Chevrolet Caprice Mark 5 and Pontiac Bonneville Mark 9, they were more or less the exact same model, with less differentiation than their Ford competitors, and all were based off the Holden VX Commodore. The Fourth Model was the Cadillac Statesman, a barely disguised re-badge of the Holden WH Statesman, which was based off the previous VT Commodore.

Oh how I love people who do this, get me my Aussie rules beast years earlier than IOTL. GM should have done this IMO in the mid-90s, as the Caprice/Roadmaster reached their sell-by date.

GM tried using the same aura of performance and style to sell their V-platform cars that ford had used with the Falcon-Family, but they were unfortunately a bit too late, as the Fickle Public had turned their attention to Sport-Utilities like the Ford Explorer and Jeep Grand Cherokee yet again, sales weren't even close to what Ford had pulled off previously, and were in fact less than the contemporaneous sales of the Falcon-Family.

The V-platform cars were also penalized by a number of unfortunate problems, including the Cadillac Statesman's penchant for triggering the pyrotechnic seatbelt pretensioners and cut off the fuel pump if someone leaned too far forward, likely to grab something, a fact that GM tried to cover up for 3 months, before an Incident with famed Rapper Jay-Z's Statesman resulted in his paralysis. This horrifying act unfortunately put a black mark against the otherwise superb V-platform models, killing the sales of the Statesman and requiring GM to pull it from the market, shredding all of the unsold cars, in late 2000. The sales of the other V-platform cars would never recover from the stigma.

1) A seatbelt tensioner problem is not gonna paralyze somebody. Period. The belts themselves aren't anywhere near strong enough for that.

2) While GM is particularly bad at badge engineering, they are not gonna sell the same car with different badges, particularly with Cadillac, which GM was trying desperately to revive in the late 1990s.

3) The public's views aren't gonna taken a sudden dive from trucks to cars and back to trucks again in 24 months. The public can be fickle, but not that much so.

4) GM in 1998-99 was smarting rather badly from attempted coverups of fuel tank deficiencies in years past, a fact which cost them a multi-billion-dollar class action lawsuit loss in 1997. Covering more problems of that nature is bad for business, because its too obvious to really cover up easily.

By comparison, Ford's contemporary issues with Firestone were nothing. Whereas GM had tried to cover up the problem, Ford, still led by the Dream Team of Nasser and Trotman, had brought the Issue out into the daylight, launching a recall of unheard of proportions, spearheaded by Television Ads in Prime Time hours, to replace the dangerous Firestone tires with safer alternatives. For MY2002 Ford would introduce stability control in all of their Ford, Mazda and Mercury branded SUVs. All in all Ford did not turn a profit in the Second Quarter of 2000 for North America, but it had built up a strong reputation for honesty and integrity that it holds on to vigorously today.

Firestone tried for months to cover up the deficiencies in their tires, so Ford would either have to admit and take responsibility for Firestone's mistakes or fight over it. Them taking responsibility over it would send GM and Chrysler into the roof, as Goodyear and BFGoodrich and other companies would try the same thing with them, and cost Ford billions in lawsuits. And the fact that the Explorer's suspension design was rather poor contributed to the problem. If you want to dodge this problem you have to design a better Explorer and not use the Firestone tires.

Ford's other brands were in a different place with their Competition in 2000, Jaguar's launch of the S-type the Year before had proven to be a success, with the new model barely keeping pace with it's rivals, the Audi A6 and BMW 5 series. The S-type's Platform mate, the Lincoln LS had been released at the same time in a completely Different Climate, with Cadillac still suffering from the fallout of the Statesman, it led Lincoln to domination of the Luxury Car market in the US. However, Ford still couldn't compete in the “Big Leagues” of Luxury SUVs, their last attempt, the Navigator was an utter failure, and often compared to the Edsel in terms of Ford's missteps. Then an announcement, almost perfectly timed arrived, BMW was looking at selling Land Rover! Nasser and Trotman leaped into action, and although Ford was still incorporating the newly acquired Volvo Cars, They lodged a bid for the famed brand, competing against Volkswagen, Honda, and Renault. Ford was fortunately able to lodge the winning bid, setting the Company up for it's ongoing Successes.

The first product of Ford's purchase of Land Rover was the MY2002 introduction of the new Lincoln Aviator, a re-badged Land Rover Freelander mark 1, with a an almost completely redone body shell. Unlike it's predecessor, the Navigator, sales took off , people just couldn't get enough of the useful sized and stylish Lincoln, even when it was sold next to the Mercury Mountaineer, a larger, Ford Explorer-clone with a somewhat smaller price tag. Among the People who Purchased the new Lincoln were Florida Attorney General Charlie Christ and President Al Gore himself. Ford internal memos reveal that Nasser and Trotman were highly uncomfortable with the idea of selling a Range Rover based vehicle as a Lincoln because of it's large size, somewhat poor fuel economy, and the fact that it was a brand new model supposed to debut at the same time as the new Lincoln.

Ford's other new product launch for 2002, the eleventh generation Ford Thunderbird was successful, how ever it's success was quite short lived. While on sale for only a scant four years, it proved one thing: Retro Styling sold well. The Initial success of this luxury coupe, based off of the Jaguar S-type and Lincoln Ls, was enough to convince the higher ups at Ford of Doug Gaffka's so-called “Retro-Mustang” project.

Interesting again, but again, it has some issues.

1) The S-type Jaguar is a different beast to the sport sedan 5 series and high-tech A6. The LS is a potential success, but its success wouldn't last long, namely as even if the problems with the Statesman did hook, Cadillac's CTS was on the way (a 2003 launch) and it would blow the LS into the weeds - better styling, better features, better built and nicer to drive.

2) The first-gen Freelander is not a good car. It was poorly built, heavy, inefficient and had a long list of reliability problems. Basing a successful SUV on that borders on ASB. A better idea would be buying Land Rover and using their expertise to design a better Freelander, and have the two similar under the skin but very different on the outside SUVs hit the road in 2004 or so.

 

[NothingNow]

Wow, this is a Lot of stuff to cover.

Oh how I love people who do this, get me my Aussie rules beast years earlier than IOTL. GM should have done this IMO in the mid-90s, as the Caprice/Roadmaster reached their sell-by date.



1) A seatbelt tensioner problem is not gonna paralyze somebody. Period. The belts themselves aren't anywhere near strong enough for that.

2) While GM is particularly bad at badge engineering, they are not gonna sell the same car with different badges, particularly with Cadillac, which GM was trying desperately to revive in the late 1990s.

3) The public's views aren't gonna taken a sudden dive from trucks to cars and back to trucks again in 24 months. The public can be fickle, but not that much so.

4) GM in 1998-99 was smarting rather badly from attempted coverups of fuel tank deficiencies in years past, a fact which cost them a multi-billion-dollar class action lawsuit loss in 1997. Covering more problems of that nature is bad for business, because its too obvious to really cover up easily.



Firestone tried for months to cover up the deficiencies in their tires, so Ford would either have to admit and take responsibility for Firestone's mistakes or fight over it. Them taking responsibility over it would send GM and Chrysler into the roof, as Goodyear and BFGoodrich and other companies would try the same thing with them, and cost Ford billions in lawsuits. And the fact that the Explorer's suspension design was rather poor contributed to the problem. If you want to dodge this problem you have to design a better Explorer and not use the Firestone tires.

Thanks for Reading and replying! Constructive criticism makes things much better.

1) The Incident, well known ITTL, is where the Pre-tensioners were accidentally triggered, and triggered the rest of the system while on the Highway, with the vehicle being rear-ended just about 2 seconds later.

2) The Statesman is a different looking and feeling car from the rest of the V-car line up, and looks quite different from the other models.

3) The People for the most part that bought the Falcon-family models and V-cars were mostly traditionalists and people liking the Sportier look of the classic American sedan, with many replacing their older body on frame sedans. Although there were many that were convinced to buy the cars by their virtues when compared to SUVs.

4) Well, I wasn't aware of that, but let's just go with the "GM sometimes acts like a horde of stubborn idiots" theory.

Ford's basic response ITTL was 1)This is obviously Firestone's Fault, even if Firestone denies it, 2) SUVs are dangerous in the hands of untrained drivers under normal conditions, 3) We're Sorry for your loss, and are willing to pay for the Funeral. Do you take checks?

Interesting again, but again, it has some issues.

1) The S-type Jaguar is a different beast to the sport sedan 5 series and high-tech A6. The LS is a potential success, but its success wouldn't last long, namely as even if the problems with the Statesman did hook, Cadillac's CTS was on the way (a 2003 launch) and it would blow the LS into the weeds - better styling, better features, better built and nicer to drive.

2) The first-gen Freelander is not a good car. It was poorly built, heavy, inefficient and had a long list of reliability problems. Basing a successful SUV on that borders on ASB. A better idea would be buying Land Rover and using their expertise to design a better Freelander, and have the two similar under the skin but very different on the outside SUVs hit the road in 2004 or so.

Okay, so it's a bit of a Ford Wank.
1)The CTS is very successful ITTL, but Cadillac still can't beat Lincoln's overall sales.
2)The Freelander/Aviator ITTL weren't that reliable anyway, and most SUVs are heavy and inefficient, The Build quality on the Lincoln was better thanks to the Lincoln being built in the US to dodge the import duties. when I fix this up for the Timelines and Scenarios board I'll fix that stuff and expand it some more.
The new Freelander/Aviator should be coming in an update or two, and they will be much better vehicles.
In fact President Gore only bought one because Tipper wanted it, He wanted an LS V6.

 

[NothingNow]

Interesting, but it has a number of serious problems that I can already see.

1) The Taurus and the Falcon are in different size classes, the Falcon is somewhat bigger. It's also more complex to assemble, being rear wheel drive. IMO the Falcon would work better on top of the range, above the Taurus.

2) The Navigator was successful because of CAFE laws (which were amended to exempt SUVs from them by Congress in 1994) and the fact that American cars universally got bigger and bigger over the 1990s. That also explains partly why the Mondeo/Contour, a best seller in Europe, flopped badly in North America. Removing the Navigator would require junking the CAFE laws, which would be a bitch to do at a time when most of the Big 3's profits came from large trucks and SUVs.

3) Replacing the Yamaha V8 with the AJ V6 is trading one troublesome no-torque aluminum engine for another. IMO, you'd be better sorting the problems out with the Yamaha 3.4 rather than junking it, and perhaps using it as a low-boost turbo to get more beans out of it at the bottom end of the rev range. And the Taurus is not gonna get to be a rival to the 3 Series or A6 by just changing the engine. Take it from somebody who has driven all of them, and a family member of a person who owned a '98 Taurus SHO.

1) The Crown Victoria is the top of the range car, while the Taurus lives in the Midsize slot.
2) True, but ITTL Lincoln dealers manage to mangle things that badly.
In the mean time the Escalade does quite well, but after the Lincoln Blackwood proves that the Lincoln Designers and Dealers are unable to make an appealing large SUV or Truck at that price point, Ford just sort of gives up on Lincoln SUVs, and sticks to pushing Land Rovers and upmarket F-Series.
3)ITTL It's held as the worst SHO ever, but it does keep the nameplate alive and is quite a good performer for what was essentially an 11th hour feat of engineering. However, the mark 5 SHO would be something that can match an A6 or 545i. As I've worked it out the Mk5 will have AWD and a really powerful Turbocharged version of the Volvo-Yamaha V8. ITTL It's something of an Apology.

 

[NothingNow]

Oh, and I should have part Ten done sooner or later, hopefully by the end of this week.

 

[TheMann]

Wow, this is a Lot of stuff to cover.

Thanks for Reading and replying! Constructive criticism makes things much better.

I wholeheartedly agree, and I'll be getting to the rest of it as I have time to do so. I do work in the industry right now. I'm not meaning to insult you, because this looks quite good and clearly you're putting much thought into it.

1) The Incident, well known ITTL, is where the Pre-tensioners were accidentally triggered, and triggered the rest of the system while on the Highway, with the vehicle being rear-ended just about 2 seconds later.

Even then, the only way to get a paralysis in a rear-ender is whiplash, and an explosive tensioner would automatically yank the head back against the seat and headrest, thus making whiplash impossible unless the headrest has been removed, which is a safety violation that in Canada at least gets you a $110 fine. I'm not seeing paraylsis being possible in any accident caused by the seatbacks, seatbelts or any other such safety device.

2) The Statesman is a different looking and feeling car from the rest of the V-car line up, and looks quite different from the other models.

Fair enough. I would hope that be the case, too. The Statesman would probably end up replacing the Deville in ITTL Cadillac lineup.

3) The People for the most part that bought the Falcon-family models and V-cars were mostly traditionalists and people liking the Sportier look of the classic American sedan, with many replacing their older body on frame sedans. Although there were many that were convinced to buy the cars by their virtues when compared to SUVs.

That's reasonable enough, and God knows that anything that puts fewer SUVs on the road is good in my book. That does also make sense, considering that the buyers of such vehicles are usually people who need more room but don't want to compromise on performance.

4) Well, I wasn't aware of that, but let's just go with the "GM sometimes acts like a horde of stubborn idiots" theory.

Yeah, they far too frequently act like stubborn idiots, but I still think you ought to retcon that one. It too obvious. Having the cars not sell well because of better rivals from abroad as well as Ford and Chrysler is plenty. GM's cars in the 1990s were almost universally absolute garbage, and that didn't change until profits started dropping on trucks and SUVs and Bob Lutz came around and kicked some ass at the Renaissance Center.

Ford's basic response ITTL was 1)This is obviously Firestone's Fault, even if Firestone denies it, 2) SUVs are dangerous in the hands of untrained drivers under normal conditions, 3) We're Sorry for your loss, and are willing to pay for the Funeral. Do you take checks?

I can see the point, but this tactic would still result in a long line of big money lawsuits, and apologies for it would almost certainly be used as an admission of guilt, which would make the lawsuits settlements bigger and more numerous. Firestone would also sue Ford for that action, leading to another long line of suits between Ford and Bridgestone/Firestone.

Okay, so it's a bit of a Ford Wank.
1)The CTS is very successful ITTL, but Cadillac still can't beat Lincoln's overall sales.
2)The Freelander/Aviator ITTL weren't that reliable anyway, and most SUVs are heavy and inefficient, The Build quality on the Lincoln was better thanks to the Lincoln being built in the US to dodge the import duties. when I fix this up for the Timelines and Scenarios board I'll fix that stuff and expand it some more.
The new Freelander/Aviator should be coming in an update or two, and they will be much better vehicles.
In fact President Gore only bought one because Tipper wanted it, He wanted an LS V6.

I think if you want to really nail this one, what you ought to do with the Cadillac/Lincoln fight is have the two companies aim at different markets. Cadillac goes for BMW's jugular, with well-tuned sports sedans with powerful, efficient engines and designs aimed at drivers who want to get a more sporty feel. Lincoln, by contrast, goes for the high-tech, feature-heavy market occupied by Mercedes-Benz and Lexus, comfortable cars that are still terrific things on the road, but built more for comfort than performance. A person who drives a BMW 330i or Infiniti G37 probably wouldn't consider a Lexus IS350 or Mercedes C320, because they are very different automobiles that have very different target markets. Cadillac and Lincoln can go a similar route.

 

[TheMann]

1) The Crown Victoria is the top of the range car, while the Taurus lives in the Midsize slot.
2) True, but ITTL Lincoln dealers manage to mangle things that badly.
In the mean time the Escalade does quite well, but after the Lincoln Blackwood proves that the Lincoln Designers and Dealers are unable to make an appealing large SUV or Truck at that price point, Ford just sort of gives up on Lincoln SUVs, and sticks to pushing Land Rovers and upmarket F-Series.
3)ITTL It's held as the worst SHO ever, but it does keep the nameplate alive and is quite a good performer for what was essentially an 11th hour feat of engineering. However, the mark 5 SHO would be something that can match an A6 or 545i. As I've worked it out the Mk5 will have AWD and a really powerful Turbocharged version of the Volvo-Yamaha V8. ITTL It's something of an Apology.

1) So the Crown Victoria goes to bed, with the Aussie Falcon taking over as Ford's range-topper? That makes more sense IMO.

2) So the Aviator does well, but the Navigator and Blackwood flop, leaving the luxury SUV market mostly to the Escalade and its rivals. This works well for now, but with the BMW X5, Mercedes ML-series and Lexus SUVs on the horizon, you'll have to make the next Aviator one hell of a machine.

3) Good. I drove a modern Taurus SHO a few months back, and that thing is F-A-S-T. It's a hoot. I still prefer my Pontiac G8, but its a great sport sedan and quite worthy to carry the name, if you ask me. So, if I have this right, the Mk5 Taurus SHO will have the Yamaha V8 with turbos? A good idea indeed. I would also perhaps kick up the idea of this Yamaha going racing, too. Ford V8s were the primary power for the Panoz Roadster Le Mans car, which was fairly successful. In 2001 Panoz brought out a new car, the LMP07. You could butterfly the fact that the LMP07 was a slug, and have Panoz and Ford fully team up for a run at Audi's dominance at Le Mans, using the Yamaha 3.4 as a base for a turbocharged version. Thus, you also get GM, Chrysler and Ford all running at Le Mans simultaneously.

 

[TheMann]

Sticking With A Sure Thing
Part Three: Style and Substance
​

While Ford of North America's Engineers and Designers were working on the Ford Thunderbird, Lincoln Aviator, and Lincoln Ls, Their Australian counterparts were hard at work on a much more pressing project, the first real overhaul of the Mark 6 Falcon, the BA Falcon, to be released in September 2002 for the 2003 model year.

The BA Falcon-Family would have new engines, with the long in the tooth Windsor V8 being replaced by a new 5.4 Liter Modular engine, either a single overhead cam on the baser short wheelbase models like the Crown Victoria, Falcon, and Grand Marquis, or a double overhead cam version on the Sportier Mercury Maurader or more luxurious Fairlane, LTD, and Town Car. The base engine for the BA Falcon was the brand new Barra straight-six, a four-liter engine like it's predecessor, but possessing double overhead cams and variable cam timing, creating a more powerful and efficient engine. The BA Falcon-family would receive new styling, with the Fords adopting styling closer to the mark 2 Mondeo, and with the LTD and Town car sharing styling similar to that of the Lincoln Ls.

Partnering with the Australian Development team for the BA falcon was a team from Castle Bromwich, the home of Jaguar. The Jaguar development team were working on the new Aluminum-bodied Jaguar XJ, called the X350 and Lincoln Continental mark 10, to be released the same year as the BA Falcon. The X350 was a completely new car, unlike it's predecessor, the X308, which was merely a warmed over Mark 2. The higher ups at Ford and Jaguar had agreed that a replacement for the now almost twenty year-old Mark 2, which could no-longer keep up with it's German rivals. The X350 and Continental were far larger, but also lighter and more fuel-efficient than their predecessors and the competition.

Like the Mark 2 at it's introduction, back in 1986, the X350 was a massive leap forward and a technological tour-de-force. The X350 and Lincoln Continental, although differing on the available engines and exterior styling, shared a number of advances under the skin. Such advances included the aforementioned Aluminum unibody frame cut weight by nearly 30% over the same body in the traditional Steel, additionally the X350 and Continental had an advanced multi-link suspension system, with Air Suspension on all 4 wheels providing computer-controlled adaptive dampening and rear self-leveling, with ride height also being controlled by the on-board triply-redundant computer system. Additionally, Volvo developed Anti-Lock Brakes, Traction Control and Dynamic Stability Control were included as Standard to improve safety and comfort for the passengers. An additional, although not-often mentioned and rarely advertised, inclusion to the standard systems, was an integrated Trailer Brake Controller, intended to improve the towing experience.

The new XJ and Continental would debut in late 2002, slightly later than the BA Falcon-Family of Cars, but they would prove to be the most important thing coming out of that development Project. With these two very expensive cars, from a far more expensive project, would provide many of the Safety systems and technologies every Ford product uses today.

Their engines, however were the not the case. With the Continental using the same 4.0 Liter Jaguar AJ-35 V8 as the updated Ls V8, tuned to produce 280 horsepower and 286 Pound-feet of torque, and a 5.4 Liter Modular double overhead cam V8 shared with the Falcon XR8 and the New Mercury Maurader Sport Sedan, that produced a highly impressive for the era 385 horsepower and 385 Pound-feet. The new XJ had a rather different selection of engines, with a 2.7 Liter Diesel V6 and 4.0L Barra 182 available under the XJ6 moniker, the 4.0 Liter AJ-30 and 4.2 Liter AJ-34 available as the XJ8 and a special Supercharged 4.2 Liter AJ-34S shared with the Jaguar S-type R, that produced Four Hundred Horsepower and 408 pound-feet from a comparatively small and light engine, served as the powerplant for the XJR.

A great set of updates, though I'm a little wondering about the new engines, and the 5.4 modular engine is a massive thing - hope you can make it fit in the Falcon. In the Mustang Cobra R, it needs convoluted headers and trimming the valve covers just to fit in the chassis, and a massive hood bulge to fit the intake manifold.

Ford would also be advised in this case to redo the Taurus, as the later models were warmed-over versions of the ones introduced in 1996, which considering that all of the opposition had had major overhauls by then, would be looking quite inadequate by that point.

 

[TheMann]

Ford has had an unusual relationship with it's Sport Utility models and MPVs, as while SUV and MPV buyers are a large portion of their customer base, Ford's product designers and management can't really seem to understand SUV buyers as well as they do Car or Truck buyers. In interviews, Ford's upper management often states that this is because SUV buyers are in general notoriously faddish and seemingly child-like when compared to Car, Truck, and MPV buyers, who more often than not can be easily wooed with fuel efficiency, reliability and practicality.

Thus, Ford's many misses with the SUV market, like the Navigator, can be easily explained as a lack of communication and experience. Mostly Ford seems to get it somewhat, but not entirely right. The Bronco, the early Explorers and Excursions are all fairly good examples of this. The Ford 2000 initiative, which made Ford the most competitive Car-maker in the world didn't exactly help with this, thanks to it's de-emphasis on the Larger, vehicles with limited global appeal.

With Ford's global focus in mind, it comes as no surprise that their First SUV of the new millennium was a world car, and intended to sell well everywhere. This was the mark one Ford Escape, sold as the Maverick in Europe, and rebadged by Mazda as the Tribute. This new SUV, introduced in MY2001, was smaller and more practical than Ford's previous designs, and was a clean break from traditional SUVs, it was a car-based, unibody vehicle, that would not have a V8 that was standard on the Expedition and optional on the Explorer/Mountaineer twins. Instead the Escape would launch with a transverse 2 liter Zetec gasoline four banger, the work-horse 3 liter Duratec V6, and for the European market, the rather new two-liter Duratorq TDCI diesel-four, which had been introduced on the mark 2 Mondeo just the year before, front-wheel drive was standard with all-wheel drive as an option on all models. This new, small and practical SUV was a hit, over the next few years the Escape/Maverick and the sportier Tribute would out sell the Expedition, and later the Explorer, face lifted at the same time, annually.

Later on, in 2003 as Ford was phasing out the elderly and Inefficient Vulcan V6 and Zetec engines, replacing them with the beloved 2.3L Duratec four, which replaced the base engine on the Taurus/Sable and on the previously sluggish Escape four-cylinder, giving both a much needed performance boost.

MY2003 also saw a pair of new people-movers from Ford. The first was the launch of the Focus-based Connect, a rather compact cargo or passenger van called the Transit Connect or Tourneo Connect in Europe, depending on the configuration. The second was the Ford C-Max, a compact MPV, and the first vehicle on Ford's GCD platform, that would serve as the replacement for the unpopular Mercury Villager, previously based on the Nissan Quest, as the mark 3 Villager, in North America and additionally replace the mark 1 Mazda Premacy, as the mark 2 Premacy or in some markets the Mazda5. It was available with a number of Ford Duratec and Duratorq engines, with the most popular engines being the 1.8L Duratorq and 2.3L Duratec four cylinders. The C-Max sold very well in Europe, as did the Villager and Mazda5 in North America.

The Release of the C-Max/mk3 Villager had caught Europe off guard, as the new vehicle had space for seven, and two sliding doors instead of the typical sedan doors, making for a much more practical vehicle than the competition. Most notably the engineers at Nissan, who reportedly kicked themselves after Ford managed to not only leave them hanging, but to make a car that virtually had an entire segment to itself.

The next year would see a bigger change for Ford's MPV lineup, as the Windstar was updated for a third generation, which was almost a clean break, dropping the optional 4-door body style, adding short and long wheelbase versions, adding all wheel drive and moving on to the GCD platform. The American engine offerings were sparse, with the 3 Liter Duratec and 3.8L Essex V6 being the normal offerings and on special order the Lion Diesel was available. The Lion engine was not very popular for a minivan and would be withdrawn in 2005. However, Ford's continuing issues with the dirty and underpowered Essex engine, would drive the creation of a new transverse V6 - the Cyclone, which would power several of Ford's most notable models of the Early 21st Century.

One problem I can see here is that the C-Max did not, by any stretch, have the market to itself in Europe or America, because in the latter the first smaller MPV was the Renault Scenic, and in North America the C-Max would be up against larger minivans in the minds of many customers. That's why it was not brought to North America for the longest time, it would be taking sales from the Windstar. That's also why the Opel/Vauxhall Zafira never came to North America.

 

[NothingNow]

I wholeheartedly agree, and I'll be getting to the rest of it as I have time to do so. I do work in the industry right now. I'm not meaning to insult you, because this looks quite good and clearly you're putting much thought into it.

Even then, the only way to get a paralysis in a rear-ender is whiplash, and an explosive tensioner would automatically yank the head back against the seat and headrest, thus making whiplash impossible unless the headrest has been removed, which is a safety violation that in Canada at least gets you a $110 fine. I'm not seeing paraylsis being possible in any accident caused by the seatbacks, seatbelts or any other such safety device.

Really, it was bad luck and stupidity that did him in, but he was high profile enough for it to really catch on the news.

Yeah, they far too frequently act like stubborn idiots, but I still think you ought to retcon that one. It too obvious. Having the cars not sell well because of better rivals from abroad as well as Ford and Chrysler is plenty. GM's cars in the 1990s were almost universally absolute garbage, and that didn't change until profits started dropping on trucks and SUVs and Bob Lutz came around and kicked some ass at the Renaissance Center.

I'll change it to that when I fix everything for the Final version of the TL.

I can see the point, but this tactic would still result in a long line of big money lawsuits, and apologies for it would almost certainly be used as an admission of guilt, which would make the lawsuits settlements bigger and more numerous. Firestone would also sue Ford for that action, leading to another long line of suits between Ford and Bridgestone/Firestone.

Hm. Didn't think of that. The Firestone suits would be thrown out fairly quickly once it becomes clear that Firestone was at fault, and ford could win money back on their counter-suits.

I think if you want to really nail this one, what you ought to do with the Cadillac/Lincoln fight is have the two companies aim at different markets. Cadillac goes for BMW's jugular, with well-tuned sports sedans with powerful, efficient engines and designs aimed at drivers who want to get a more sporty feel. Lincoln, by contrast, goes for the high-tech, feature-heavy market occupied by Mercedes-Benz and Lexus, comfortable cars that are still terrific things on the road, but built more for comfort than performance. A person who drives a BMW 330i or Infiniti G37 probably wouldn't consider a Lexus IS350 or Mercedes C320, because they are very different automobiles that have very different target markets. Cadillac and Lincoln can go a similar route.

I'd have to say yes on that, which does make a bit of sense. Lincoln and Jaguar will still build high performance sport sedans every so often.

1) So the Crown Victoria goes to bed, with the Aussie Falcon taking over as Ford's range-topper? That makes more sense IMO.

2) So the Aviator does well, but the Navigator and Blackwood flop, leaving the luxury SUV market mostly to the Escalade and its rivals. This works well for now, but with the BMW X5, Mercedes ML-series and Lexus SUVs on the horizon, you'll have to make the next Aviator one hell of a machine.

3) Good. I drove a modern Taurus SHO a few months back, and that thing is F-A-S-T. It's a hoot. I still prefer my Pontiac G8, but its a great sport sedan and quite worthy to carry the name, if you ask me. So, if I have this right, the Mk5 Taurus SHO will have the Yamaha V8 with turbos? A good idea indeed. I would also perhaps kick up the idea of this Yamaha going racing, too. Ford V8s were the primary power for the Panoz Roadster Le Mans car, which was fairly successful. In 2001 Panoz brought out a new car, the LMP07. You could butterfly the fact that the LMP07 was a slug, and have Panoz and Ford fully team up for a run at Audi's dominance at Le Mans, using the Yamaha 3.4 as a base for a turbocharged version. Thus, you also get GM, Chrysler and Ford all running at Le Mans simultaneously.

2) the Next one will be a Volvo XC60-sized vehicle and actually share parts with the Freelander and XC60, I'm thinking it's really going to compete with the SRX, X3 and RX more than the bigger SUVs, which are more of Land Rover's deal. TTL Ford's put a lot more money into growing Land Rover and Jaguar's dealer networks, many of which are also Volvo or Ford Lincoln Mercury dealerships.
3) The Panoz/Ford LMP idea sounds good. I'll have to do updates on racing soon enough.

A great set of updates, though I'm a little wondering about the new engines, and the 5.4 modular engine is a massive thing - hope you can make it fit in the Falcon. In the Mustang Cobra R, it needs convoluted headers and trimming the valve covers just to fit in the chassis, and a massive hood bulge to fit the intake manifold.

Ford would also be advised in this case to redo the Taurus, as the later models were warmed-over versions of the ones introduced in 1996, which considering that all of the opposition had had major overhauls by then, would be looking quite inadequate by that point.

The 5.4l Modular fit IOTL, and the part about the engines was lifted straight out of OTL.
The Taurus will get a mid lifecycle update, and a better update than OTL, but in the end they're focused more on the Focus and Falcon, although the Mark 5 update will be in the works from 2002, having been delayed somewhat, but all the better for it.

One problem I can see here is that the C-Max did not, by any stretch, have the market to itself in Europe or America, because in the latter the first smaller MPV was the Renault Scenic, and in North America the C-Max would be up against larger minivans in the minds of many customers. That's why it was not brought to North America for the longest time, it would be taking sales from the Windstar. That's also why the Opel/Vauxhall Zafira never came to North America.

It's got the same issues that the Mazda5 had OTL, but strangely enough IOTL every shipment of Mazda5s has sold out, and the Mazda5 isn't advertised. Between the Mercury and Mazda versions TTL's Ford sells about 15-20,000 vehicles in the US every year, a slight improvement over OTL's rates. It's done better than that IOTL since the economy went in the shitter thanks to it's size and relative economy compared to other models. Diesel Love™ helps maintain sales ITTL as well.

 

[NothingNow]

After I finish this TL off, somewhere around TTL's 2015 or 2016, I'm going to do another In the Same Universe describing Gore and his Successor's times in office.

 

[NothingNow]

Sticking With A Sure Thing
Part Ten: ...And Midsize Sedans.
​

Ford has always made good money on it's Midsize sedans, since even at a relatively thin profit margin, the massive global volume more than makes up for it. Since the Ford 2000 initiative began in the nineties, Ford has steadily consolidated the number of separate platforms and models in production, streamlining vehicle production and development while reducing costs. This has lead to some specialization on the part of the various development teams, with certain teams being switched over to roles in the Tuner divisions, or other divisions of the company.

Perhaps most importantly with the renewed push for fuel efficiency and reducing emissions since 9/11. Ford's specialization allowed the creation of an “efficiency skunkworks” tasked with assisting the other Development Teams with Fuel Economy and developing new systems to further that. Because of the skunkworks Ford was one of three automakers who weren't scrambling to produce vehicles compliant with the American 2007 Fuel economy Standards.

To clarify, the US government's 2007 Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards, were set down in the American Security Act of 2002, and while partially intended to reduce the amount of money going into the coffers of rouge and hostile states like Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, and then onto terrorist organizations, they also helped to reduce domestic energy consumption and pollution. The American Security Act raised CAFE's 2007 standards for Passenger cars up to 30 Miles per Gallon, and the standard for light trucks became 24MPG while raising the threshold for what qualified as a Heavy truck to a gross vehicle weight rating of five tons or ten thousand pounds, an increase of over fifteen hundred pounds over the previous threshold, intended primarily to cut down on the number of Sport Utility Vehicles that flouted the standards.

Needless to say Ford's engineers and designers had their work cut out for them, and they, along with their counterparts at

MY2007 saw Ford release the European designed Mark 3 Mondeo, sold in North America as the Mk 5 Ford Taurus and Mercury Sable, on a larger derivative of the GCD platform. The new model was available in both a Sedan and Station wagon. The North American engines were mainly modified versions of the engines from the Mk 4 Taurus and Sable, with the new Variable Cam Timing headers causing a slight power bump, as new transmissions replaced the ancient AX4N Automatic, and the addition of an optional two liter Duratorq turbodiesel engine, all tuned to improve efficiency over the previous generation, with the Europeans getting the usual choice of Four-cylinder gasoline and diesel engines, with a 2.5 liter Volvo Modular Turbo-five replacing the older 2.5l and 3.0l V6 engines. The Mk 5 Taurus SHO, sold in Europe as the Mondeo ST354, an all-wheel drive Sport Sedan or wagon, powered by a three hundred fifty horsepower twin turbocharged Volvo-Yamaha B8444T V8, derived from the B8444S introduced in the MY 2005 Volvo XC90. A Hybrid version, using a 2.3 liter Atkinson cycle four-cylinder engine and an electric motor that produced a combined 220hp, similar in power to the American V6 and European five cylinder engine. The Mk5 Sable would also be sold with the Hybrid drivetrain as an option.

In 2007 Lincoln upgraded the V6 Engines on the LS and MKX with the 3.5liter Cyclone V6, tuned to produce 265 hp and 250 lb·ft of torque, replacing the older, less powerful Duratec 30 V6. The ZF 6HP26 6 speed Automatic Transmission and Tremec T-56 6 speed manual replaced the older Ford 5R55S 5 speed Automatic and Getrag 221 5 speed Manual transmissions respectively on the V6 and V8 models for the LS, MKX and Jaguar S-type, while the LS supercharged, which used the AJ-34S V8, remained unchanged.

The second generation Jaguar X-Type, introduced MY2008, and based on the same GCD platform, featured vastly improved engines and transmissions over the first generation, including the new 3.2 liter AJ-I6, a rebadged version of Ford's SI6, which produced ten percent more power over the older AJ-V6 engine, and a 2.2 liter Duratorq turbodiesel engine. The new X-type was available with optional AWD in both the Sedan and Wagon body styles. The X-Type was more or less an unrepentant clone of the mk2 S60's chassis with the the Freelander2's engines, and different styling.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
So What do you Folks Think about the TL so far, since it's about halfway done?
Questions, Comments and Constructive Criticism are always welcome.

 

[NothingNow]

Did I confuse anyone with the American Security Act?

 

[NothingNow]

Working on another Update that should be Done by Thursday, and cleaning up the older posts for a thread in the Timelines and Scenarios forum and/or My Website.

Here's a preview of the next update:

"In fact one can argue that the whole SUV craze still hasn't really ended after nearly thirty years, with the full sized monstrosities being replaced in suburban driveways by smaller and more efficient compact Crossovers, as part of the general return to midsize and fullsize Station Wagons and Sedans, since Crossovers often have similar fuel economy and handling to a Station Wagon while being easier for the elderly to get into and out of. Ford, while being the leader of the fullsize revival in the Noughties also helped to create the modern compact and luxury Crossover classes with the first generation Escape and the mark one Aviator."

And a related Photo.

 

[modelcitizen]

this is fun.


subscribed

 

[modelcitizen]

not only are all the history enthusiasts apparently more knowledgeable than I am to an emasculating degree, but the car nuts on here know more than I do too... oh hey. each one, teach one

 

[NothingNow]

not only are all the history enthusiasts apparently more knowledgeable than I am to an emasculating degree, but the car nuts on here know more than I do too... oh hey. each one, teach one

You'll get used to it. but you might want to find some niche, like obscure Hungarian Microcars.

 

[NothingNow]

Sticking With A Sure Thing
Part Eleven: Bantam Crossovers of Destiny
​

American car buyers are noted in the industry for their finickiness and love of sometimes absurd fads, like the monstrous fins and acres of chrome almost required in the fifties, or the absurdly massive body on frame Sport Utilities of the Nineties, as symbolized by the Cadillac Escalade or the Hummer H2. One can argue that the whole SUV and Truck craze still hasn't really ended after nearly thirty years, with the full sized monstrosities being replaced in suburban driveways by smaller and more efficient compact Crossovers and pickups, as part of the general return to midsize and fullsize Station Wagons and Sedans, since Crossovers often have similar fuel economy and handling to a Station Wagon while being easier for the elderly to get into and out of. Ford, while being the leader of the fullsize revival in the Noughties also helped to create the modern compact and luxury Crossover classes with the first generation Escape and the mark one Aviator.

The mark 2 Aviator and the Freelander2, launched for model year 2006 were roughly the same size as their previous marks being only two inches longer, and with the slightly better packaging on the GCD platform's Crossover version, the amount of interior space increased quite perceptively. The styling changed significantly for both models, and the Freelander's three-door body style failed to return. The Aviator and Freelander2, joined by the five inch longer Volvo XC60 in 2008, shared Ford's petrol SI6 engine in both the Turbocharged and naturally aspirated varieties, with the Freelander2 and Aviator gaining the improved Peugeot DW12 2.2liter diesel four cylinder, and a hybrid version based off that of the mark one Escape, however the XC60, used a Volvo D5 diesel. All three models shared the same transmissions, and had similar Land Rover and Haldex designed All Wheel Drive systems, based off the Discovery3's Terrain Response system.

Following the Aviator in 2007, was Lincoln's attempt at a larger Crossover, the seven-seat Transcontinental, based on the same platform as the Volvo XC90, which had received a cosmetic update at the same time. The Transcontinental came with a choice of a two hundred sixty three horsepower Cyclone V6, a 4.4liter Volvo-Yamaha V8 producing three hundred thirty horsepower, or a 3.6 Liter Lion diesel V8. The Transcontinental sold well enough and at a fairly high profit margin, never really matching the sales of the Aviator, but proved to be serious enough competition for the Audi Q7, BMW X5, Cadillac SRX, and the Mercedes-Benz GL-class.

In between the Launch of the Freelander2/Aviator and the Release of the XC60, Ford almost snuck in an overhaul of the Escape/Maverick for 2007. The Overhaul featured revamped styling, improved vehicle dynamics, better transmissions and a whole host of other modifications, the most important being the addition of Land Rover's Terrain Response system, and the replacement of the old diesel engine with the newer DW12 and it's subsequent addition to the North American Lineup.

Launched at the Same time as the XC60, the Mazda CX-7, was more or less the exact same car and differed mainly on the styling and the engines fitted, only sharing the DW12 Diesel with the Freelander2 and Aviator, as Mazda insisted on sticking with their version of the 2.3l Duratec four cylinder. A turbocharged version of the 2.3l engine was also available and was a detuned version of the engine that had been used previously on the Mazda6 MPS and Mazda3 MPS, which in this guise produced 244 horsepower and 258 pound-feet of torque. The turbocharged version used an Aisin F21 six speed automatic transmission and had optional All Wheel Drive, again based on Land Rover's Terrain Response system. The CX-7 sold fairly well, although it did compete more than a bit with the similar sized Mazda5 MPV.

 

[NothingNow]

I'm wondering what I should do for Part 12.
Should I do Trucks and Commercial Vehicles or something else?

 

[NothingNow]

So yeah, it's been a bit long, but I've been busy with starting College, moving to a new laptop and everything else, so I'll probably have part twelve done this weekend. I think it'll cover Commercial vehicles.
And here's a Picture of the Mercury Sable to tide you all over.