Re: GM: Kill Pontiac

Page 1 of 2  
Would you say Lincoln Mark VIII was simply a Ford Fairmont with a different body since they both originated from the Ford Fox chassis? ;)
mike hunt

noname wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
----- Original Message -----
Newsgroups: alt.autos.pontiac,rec.autos.makers.ford.mustang,alt.autos.ford Sent: Monday, March 28, 2005 3:06 PM Subject: Re: GM: Kill Pontiac

In terms of capability that pretty much sums it up. The Mark VIII was a reduced function Fairmont with a more expensive looking interior, an improved ride, and less interior noise.
Ed
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Ya right. LOL
mike hunt
"C. E. White" wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
So exactly what can a Lincoln Mark VIII do that a Fairmont could not do? I am not talking about costing more, looking nicer, or riding better, I am talking about real capability - hauling people and cargo, etc.....
Ed
snipped-for-privacy@mailcity.com wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
No, the GM vehicles we are talking about are almost exactly the same underneath. Not talking about any ford product. Never mentioned Ford. That's a unibody car. We are talking about a vehicle with a real frame. The idea is that when someone uneducated in automotive construction techniques buys a Hummer and thinks they have some unstoppable military issued supertruck when in fact what they have is a rebodied Tahoe/Suburban/Yukon.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@mailcity.com wrote:

That would be a MK VII (7). I usually joke that mine is a Cougar with a gland problem. I have also referred to it as a Fairmont in disguise. ;)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Did they do that good job of disguising the Mark VIII from the Fairmont by changing the outer body shell, interior, wheel base, microprocessor, engine, transmission, rear and the suspension?
mike hunt
Tom Adkins wrote:

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

I remember when Lee Iococca was speaking about one of the cars derived from a car that as derived from a car that was derived from a K-car platform is based on the K-car: It is like calling an ax "my grandfather's ax" after replacing the handle three times and the head twice.
Jeff
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@mailcity.com wrote:

I don't believe the VIII is a Fox platform, Isn't it an MN12 platform? The VII is a Fox car. No, it's not just a warmed over Fairmont, but it is based on the same chassis. There's no denying that it's roots were the Fairmont/LTD/Mustang of the mid 80s. One could say they are siblings. The Cougar and Fairmont references are tongue in cheek references to it's lineage.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 16:39:54 -0500, Tom Adkins

The VIII is the MN-12 platform, the same as my 93 T-Bird was.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dave Starr, Senior Shop Rat Emeritus: 14,647 days in a GM plant. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
The VIII and VIII were both built off the old fox chassis but hardly can one call them the same chassis any more than to say the H2 is a Yukon underneath, as the poster chose to imply
mike hunt
Tom Adkins wrote:

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

The Mark VIII is an MN12 variation, not a Fox relation at all.
Ed
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
The is technically correct, but the MN12 was it self a variation of the Fox ;)
mike hunt
"C. E. White" wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@mailcity.com wrote:

They share nothing of consequence. You seem to think if they share a bolt, then they are variations. I suppose using your twisted logic, the new Mustang is a variation of the Corvette chassis (which is just about as true as some of your ridiculous claims).
Ed
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
The new caddy shares the Corvette chassis not the Mustang. The Volvo 90, Freestyle and 500 have little in common but they too share the same basic chassis as well
You are free to believe what ever you wish. In sure they must have some fasteners in common. I know my 2005 Mustang GT convertible has the same door handles as my 2005 Lincoln LS. But of course that has nothing to do with the basic chassis they share LOL
mike hunt
"C. E. White" wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@mailcity.com wrote:

Sigh as you like it. But when they don't even share basic suspension designs, I still say it is wrong to claim they are variations of the same chassis. Just becasue at some point they thought about using the LS chassis, doesn't mean the Mustang chassis is a variations of that design. Over the past 4 years stories have claimed all sort of things. In the end almost nothing is shared (chassis wise). If you don't even share suspension locating points, you aren't sharing much. Sharing the door handles is probably more significant than the chassis parts they do actually share. If you could point to one shared suspension compoennt (not including fasteners) I might feel differently.
Ed
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I have tried to explain to you on several occasions what a basic chassis is and its hard points. I told you why manufactures try to make as many vehicles off that chassis as possible. I told you how a vehicles based on that chassis can be so different, when used to build another vehicles. If you want to continue to believe what you wish that is your prerogative. I'll not try again.
mike hunt
"C. E. White" wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@mailcity.com wrote:

Of course the fact that you are wrong never entered your mind. You keep repeating old information. I have no idea why.
Ed
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Ya what would I know about this subject. I only have a degree in metallurgy, worked in auto manufacturing for thirty years as field engineer at the VW PA assembly plant and a structural design engineer for GM and Ford. Obviously you would know more. ;)
mike hunt
"C. E. White" wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@mailcity.com wrote:

At least in this case, the answer is yes. Thanks for acknowledging this. I am fairly confident that you are basing your whole twisted logic on press stories that are years old. Your years of experience have nothing to do with your claim. I don't understand why you continue to ignore the copious references that refute your claim. At some point did Ford consider using the DEW platform for the new Mustang? - yes! Does the new Mustang share some basic dimension with the LS? - no (neither wheelbase nor track, although the wheelbase is almost the same as a Thunderbird). Are some parts shared? - yes (but that is true of most Ford products). Are the "hard points" shared - no (the Mustang has different rear suspension mounting points and a completely different front structure). Is the suspension design shared (even the basic design) - No. Using your logic, we might as well claim the new Mustang is a variation of the Model A- after all, both have four wheel on the ground.
I don't doubt that when the initial layouts were done the LS chassis was a starting point. However, by the time the Mustang became a reality almost nothing of the LS design is left. From the articles available, it appears the Mustang shares one piece of the floor pan with the LS, although I suspect even this is a variation made off of the tooling and not the same physical part.
Ed
Add pictures here
<% 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.