El Kabong

Ford is disintegrating before our very eyes, sales-wise.

*Looks around Forum* *Sees who ain't here* ...yup. It's good to be back. Better to be vindicated. "Vin"-ning in this case referring to winning, not whining. I like multilingual puns.

Far be it for me to question your expertise in said field.

I like cheese.

According to a guy in another place I post in who's a bit of a numbers cruncher they went from 87 days to 71 overall, adjusted for the extra sales day in December. I'm not going to post the link but I trust the guy, not least because fans of other brands never attacked him

It would appear that GM has reduced inventory to more acceptable levels without resorting to drastic measures. Good stuff!

(didn't read first seven pages because lazy. Shoot the messenger if I say redundant things. I'm good for it) The LT5 is an interesting development. It has the displacement of an LT smallblock, but if it's based on the LS architecture then how much, if any, did they modify the block? Is it earmarked for Cadillac as well? If so, what do we do with the rumoured 4.2 TT V8? There is no indication that it a forced-induction engine. But that doesn't mean it can't be a series hybrid. How hard did GM work on minimizing the sizes of the cylinder head and intake? Will it fit under the hood of a Stingray, or is it for a mid-engine? Will it screw up the C of G? Whatever it winds up in, it's going to be something both special and distinctive. If it's a front engine, non-hybrid application it's appeal will likely be subjective, like Ford's 5.2L V8. But if it's a mid-engine, hybrid (or both?), it's probably gonna destroy.

I don't know about anyone else, but I think this General Motors outfit has some potential.

It's always something with Dearborn. $h!e just gets old, and eventually you see the results.

Is Flat Rock up and running again? Look. All I know is that they were shouting from the rooftops about how this car was designed to go global. Then we find out that the 5.0 is constipated and the 5.2 is a non-starter in RHD markets. That doesn't sound like a very serious effort, especially in a segment where the V8 is still considered the norm.

A rationally planned global car would not have those compromises. Just a dispassionate observation.

My point was that when you're trying to make the same model in different markets losing that kind of power and torque to meet local laws is pretty chintzy. It's the kind of thing you'd see from Lamborghini circa 1985, when the Countach lost its six-pack of Webers and 35hp to meet US regs.

You cannot put Clark Kent's heart in Clark Griswold's body. You need to tune the chassis as well as put on gumball tires. Its even worse than that-C/D discovered that the tires were ringers, which is a moldy old trick Lincoln has been called out on before. It is interesting that as time goes on their reviews sound increasingly like me. A coincidence-but hardly a surprising one. Because Ford keeps cheaping out. And GM wised up to that long ago.

So anyways, I've just been on C/D's website, and it turns out the half-assed thinking thing has struck again-this time with a Lincoln's tires: http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2017-lincoln-mkz-30t-awd-test-review Memo to Ford: get the foundations right already. GM is just laying down the law all over the place ...meanwhile, GM just took an automatic ZL1 onto the Ring, left it in Drive, and beat a Shelby GT350R. Laying. Down. The. Law.

So... that justifies losing 25hp? okie dokie

Quoting facts isn't trolling. But nice to see that you can't even respond to facts with anything but mental diarrhea. Sad sad sad that you can't post intelligently

The British rating system isn't so far removed that Top Gear would call it 412hp. There's a lot more going on there to get those numbers than that. In the larger picture, that doesn't really change anything in regards to the main point of this article. One month of GM turning up tre heat on the Mustang is all it took for Ford to idle Flat Rock. Ford appears to have went all-in on numbers for PR purposes while overlooking the qualities that make a good product. And the beancounter's bluff was called.

The power descrepancy between LHD and RHD models. Some would argue that it was all on paper. I do not, and I'm pretty sure R&T would not either. In any event, it would appear that whatever your opinions of all that, the profit margins that it generates were not enough to keep the Flat Rock plant from going down, uh, flat: http://www.motortrend.com/news/2049252/ If GM only needed to make Camaro incentives larger than Mustang's for one month for this to happen, the Mustang's profit status has been iffy for quite some time.

Ford is currently experiencing severe YOY sales declines relative to both GM and FCA. Ford is currently showing much poorer financial results than GM. And they appear to insist on doing shortcuts with product planning and engineering, as we once again see here: http://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars/videos/a31086/here-are-all-the-differences-between-the-us-and-european-mustang/ So... yes. The article definitely has merit. Anywell: onward! Ford definitely needs to address the large SUV segment if it wants to get back into the financial game. Economics of scale with the Expedition would go a long way, if they retain as much commality with the F-series as possible. IRS is probably an expense they cannot afford anymore. Also, overhaul all the sedans. Not easy, but given time, doable.

Much has been written about the current Mustang (not least by Ford itself) concerning its conception as a "global car." In particular, much emphasis has been placed on the S550's ability to be sold in RHD markets. However, there has been a bit of ambiguity about the car's power output, particularly in V8 form. Top Gear's review of the 5.0 placed output at 412hp, without explanation. Now, we know why. R&T is reporting that some folks have discovered the exhaust on RHD cars is severely compromised in order to clear the RHD steering hardware: "Our friends in England and other right-hand drive nations make a very particular sacrifice: thanks to different steering packaging requiring different, more restrictive exhaust headers, leading to a loss of 25 horses from the 435-horsepower 5.0-liter V8." This compromise probably goes a long way to explaining why there is currently no RHD Shelby GT350, and also raises questions about Ford's seriousness about the project in the first place. Read more at the link: http://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars/videos/a31086/here-are-all-the-differences-between-the-us-and-european-mustang/

Congratulations to McLaren on winning this year's BDC with the 570S. As a GM guy I'm pleased to see that the 1LE was able to provide better numbers than the Z/28 that was a previous BDC winner, while cutting thirty grand off that car's sticker price and using tires that will last longer than a month. The things that kept it from winning were details that were easily fixable (outward visibility, interestingly, was not one of them). GM realized that relying on yesterday's recipe for success doesn't necessarily work today.

I think it would be interesting to ask posters why they change their handles sometimes. I'm sure there would be a variety of answers.

I have no problem. I'm just trying to make sense out of why you'd make a pretty awful confession. You're the one with no cred. I'm just pointing that out too

Sorry man. No cred, no believe the story

Practice what you preach Look. Nobody put a gun to your head and told you to post that you were TEXTING WHILE DRIVING. IN A PUBLIC FORUM, NO LESS. That's all on you man. I can't help it that you actually did something that daft