Ford car production ain't what it used to be

Page 1 of 2  
Ford car production ain't what it used to be
Automotive News December 3, 2007 - 12:01 am ET
Fifty-seven years ago, Ford Motor Co. passed Chrysler Corp. to become the
No. 2 producer of cars in North America behind General Motors. Ford held that position from 1950 through 2006, but this year things have changed. Ford has slipped from second place in car output to fourth place.
From January through October of this year, Ford built 711,889 cars at six plants in North America. That's down from 998,989 cars in seven plants through the first 10 months of 2006.
It's been a tough decade for Ford cars. Consider the first 10 months of 2000. During that stretch, Ford produced about 1.5 million cars in North America.
Ford loses its place North American car production, excluding light trucks. Ford has slipped two places since last year. Jan.-Oct. 07 Jan.-Oct. 06 % change 1. General Motors­­ 1,403,701 1,657,582 -15.3% 2. Toyota Motor Corp. 835,332 799,996 4.40% 3. Honda Motor Co. 722,918 705,168 2.50% 4. Ford Motor Co. 711,889 998,989 -28.7% 5. Nissan Motor Co. 697,748 578,853 20.50% 6. Chrysler LLC 659,316 678,582 -2.8%
The dropoff this year was mainly caused by the demise of the old Taurus - representing a decline of 174,124 units in 2007 from 2006. But other Ford cars are down, too. Focus production is off 34,697 units; Mustang, 28,947; Fusion, 15,923; and the new Taurus/Five Hundred, 11,104.
Toyota Motor Corp. is the new No. 2 in 2007, and Honda Motor Co. also passed Ford. Nissan Motor Co. is close on Ford's heels.
Nissan has had the biggest gain this year in North American car output, rising from 578,853 through October 2006 to 697,748 in the first 10 months of this year - and passing Chrysler LLC in the process. Ramping up Versa production in Aguascalientes, Mexico, is the main reason.
Where does Ford rank in total light-vehicle production - if you include all those F-150s it builds, as well as other Ford and Lincoln trucks and SUVs? Still a solid No. 2 behind GM.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The people who work for Ford are the same people pushing for Iraq War... Like the Surge for example, if the Surge is working then why pushing for another $50 billion Surge? Soon we all will line up for soup, sooner or later the country will realize the mistake like Ford motor, making huge trucks years after years, same idea, same people.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Yup. Contract demand 479799025B. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Retired Shop Rat: 14,647 days in a GM plant. Now I can do what I enjoy: Large Format Photography Lifetime member; Vast Right Wing Conspiricy Web Site: www.destarr.com - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Well Ford is going to be #3 in US sales as of 2007 and that isn't my opinion, it's a fact you can take to the bank. As for Toyota beating Chevy in 2007, that is a toss-up right now.
So these two pickups are the best sellers, so what? That will be scant consolation if Ford and GM go under. It is profit that counts at the end of the day. Either Toyota or Honda could afford to buy both GM and Ford just to put them out of their misery.

Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Fact is something already happened. Calling your own prediction as fact? No it aint no fact, I'm afraid you will be disappointed, because what already happened may not repeat itself. Because Ford moves too slow, the Chinese carmakers will beat all of you up again, with cheaper and good gas cars. Go to Habor Freight, and Walmat and enlighten yourself. The Chinese investors now are buying American banks. I used to hear you called the Chinese hyping, man we're 180 degree direction!! Sad sad... I am poorer and poorer with you, make no mistake, I am trying to wake you up.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Ford is too far behind now to catch up. Baring a miracle which isn't going to happen, Toyota will outsell Ford in the US in 2007. It's a done deal.

So far that hasn't happened. In fact they haven't sold a single car here yet. Regardless of what the Chinese do, Ford is #3 and dropping.

Familiar with both of these retailers. OK if you need something cheap. I wouldn't use Harbor Freight tools to work on my go kart.

Hell, they are buying America thanks to Bush's deficit financing of the disaster in Iraq.

Haven't a clue what you are talking about. If you are referring to something I said on Usenet, please provide a Google Groups link.

I am not poor.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 3 Dec 2007 23:17:11 -0500, "Ed White"

True but... Toyota's basis (what they sold in November 2006) was a record month, as was November 2007. Ford is up 0.6% over being in the toilet. Toyota outsold Ford in November by 15,000.
If you look at the year rather than just one month, Toyota is up 4% and Ford is down 12% versus 2006.

Good. I am glad to see any of these stupid trucks fail in the marketplace. Maybe it will influence them and the other automakers to build more sensible vehicles. I would guess that 90% of the pickups I see (admittedly it is an urban environment) are being used for jobs that could be better served by a subcompact.
I think $3 gas is doing a lot of good.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Whall, you see part of the problem is that most of the auto pundits out there, like the people that write the reviews in Car and Driver and such, have not reconciled to the fact that a basic truck is extremely utilitaritian and functional. You can haul plywood, a motorcycle, a couch, move across town, you name it. If you take the tailgate off of it or put on a tonneau, it becomes a fairly fuel efficient single-passenger commuting vehicle - not as good as a sedan of course, but if you don't have to commute a great deal, so what.
There's enough of the new car buying public that recognize this that light and mid sized trucks are always going to sell well in the US.
Personally I can't stand the look of the things - any pickup truck after 1955 looks like a Mexican/white trailer trashmobile in my book - and I'll never be caught dead owning one. I do my hauling with a trailer. But I see the point that dealing with hauling out a utility trailer from the shed and linking it up takes a lot more time than just walking out to the street and tossing whatever piece of crap you need to haul into the truck bed then driving off.
New car buyers generally either buy for image reasons (ie: Prius) or for functionality. Trucks are extremely functional, it's no wonder they are as popular as they are. Most of the auto pundits out there are so focused on the image thing they have lost touch with the functionality end of it.
Ted
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Pickups get better mileage with the tailgate up, and no cover. The bed creates a vortex behind the cab that maximizes the aerodynamics. With no tailgate and/or a cover, the vortex cannot form.
---JRE---
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 12/6/07 10:26 AM, in article 4758221d$0$27497$ snipped-for-privacy@newsreader.iphouse.net, "NoOneYouKnow"

different pickups with and without tailgates. The results depended on the truck. Some did better with the tailgates in place, some with them removed. Its not a given that removing the tailgate improves mileage.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

From CR Online:
Truck tailgate Q. My neighbor told me to remove the tailgate of my truck for better mileage. What is your take on this matter? A. Several years back, CR said that lowering or removing the tailgate gate made only a marginal difference in gas mileage and in most cases simply does not improve mileage. We are still sticking with that report. Also, the tailgate is part of the structure of the vehicle and when removed, makes the bed of the truck weaker.
You might aslo want to review:
http://web.archive.org/web/20030310154714/mars.acnet.wnec.edu/~ehaffner/base.jpg
http://web.archive.org/web/20030414234420/mars.acnet.wnec.edu/~ehaffner/Net.htm http://web.archive.org/web/20030414232437/mars.acnet.wnec.edu/~ehaffner/remove_gate.htm
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
E Meyer wrote:

few people know that... i'm impressed.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Best way to improve mileage when you own a pickup: sell the friggin thing unless you really _need_ a truck and buy a car instead.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

It'd be interesting for them to do it with newer trucks, which are more aerodynamic than trucks from "several years ago". While pickups aren't really sold for their fuel efficiency, the better aerodynamics contribute to increased towing capacity and acceleration - things trucks are sold for.
Perhaps if I phrase it this way: pickup trucks are designed to produce less drag with the tailgate up and no cover. That's how they're wind tunnel tested, and if you watch one of those tests, it's pretty easy to see the vortex and resulting slipstream. All things being equal, less drag usually means better mileage.
In reality, it probably has more to do with speed than anything. At highway speeds, you're probably better off with the tailgate up so the vortex/slipstream can form. At slower speeds, it's less likely a vortex will form, so you're probably better off with the tailgate down.
The point being that the OP's assertion that taking the tailgate off or putting a cover on would increase your mileage is more or less a myth.
Speaking of, I'll see your CR and raise you a Mythbusters. :-)
---JRE---
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 10 Dec 2007 08:38:15 -0600, "NoOneYouKnow"

You have any illustrations of this alleged vortex? I'm having some difficulty visualizing how a deep bed interrupting airflow can produce less drag than a smooth surface cover from an engineering point of view. I could see it having weight/force distribution advantages, but from a drag viewpoint, it doesn't seem to make logical sense.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Go check the back episodes of Mythbusters, they did an episode on that. Tailgate up produces less drag than tailgate down. They even did a miniature model test in water and used oatmeal flakes to show the pattern.
Charles the Curmudgeon
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
still just me wrote:

Throw some tissue in the back and go for a ride. On many trucks, the tissues will move in a circular fashion, forward along the floor, up the front wall, backwards in mid-air, and back down to the floor. At the right speeds, the debris will continue around and around.
I've seen it with cans, paper, leaves, etc...
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Drive around in a pickup with a few dry leaves in the bed. Notice that, while some fly away, many blow upward behind the cab then fall back to the bed towards the back, even at highway speeds.
The thing to remember is that the air caught by the tailgate has to go somewhere. Since it can't go upward due the additional air being caught by the tailgate, it goes down, then towards the front of the bed, then up the back of the cab and back into the bottom of the main airflow... where much of it is caught by the tailgate again. This is called a "locked vortex" and it essentially creates a differential pressure zone within the bed that the main airflow rides upon as it goes over the bed.
---JRE---
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 11:20:57 -0600, "NoOneYouKnow"

Thanks. I guess if it creates a high enough pressure that it could hold the other airflow in a better pattern. Maybe :-)
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
on 12/12/2007 6:58 PM still just me said the following:

cover on the bed that starts from the top of the cab to the top of the tailgate, like a military hummer, making the PU a fastback.
--

Bill
In Hamptonburgh, NY
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.