Drew Dowdell

Ah okay, I misunderstood you.

Only one of their own making. At the time they were doing this, it was largely a self preservation project. It was announced in November 2006, well before there were signs of doom for the economy as a whole. and By November of 2006, Ford had to have seen the writing on their own wall. You don't lose $12 billion in two months at the end of the year. By the time they had gotten to November, they had already burned through all of the 3 prior year's profits and then some. At this point, the possibility of a recession was only being referred to as "If", and protecting themselves from that potential "if" was a wise choice... but lets be realistic, they had no choice. Even in a good economy, they couldn't continue losing $12b a year much longer. Note: At the time of the financing, if they hadn't gotten the loans, they would have run out of cash in two years no matter what the economy did.

No @ccap41 there are definitely directional wheels.

Eh, positive, but they're not out of the woods yet. They're only profitable this quarter because they sold a lot more pollution credits.... they still aren't profitable yet from selling consumer products.

You would just do the same kind of tire rotation on the MKZ with what @Stew is suggesting.

No, I'm not suggesting it was pure luck. I'm suggesting that Ford was already had a huge gash in the hull before the crap hit the fan. Ford lost more in 2006 than they had made in the 3 prior years combined (2005 : $2.0B, 2004 : $3.5b, 2003 : $3.5b). The net result was that while 3 of the 4 years of the range 2003 - 2006 were profitable, the net total was a loss of $3.7b. 2002 was a net loss of $1b as well. In 2007 they increased their loss record from $12.7 billion to $14.7 billion, losing $11b just building cars. In 2008 they lost another $5.0 billion building cars, reducing the loss to $2.7 billion with financial services. It wasn't until 2009 that they swung around to profit again and haven't had a loss year since. Even in a good economy, had Ford not acted they would have gone under. GM's albatross was largely GMAC. Ford Credit largely only financed vehicle sales where GMAC financed houses and even things like appliance purchases. The difference being that before the crash, GM was making money building cars and it was the housing market that torpedoed them. Ford was losing money making cars with not enough results from Ford Credit to make up the difference. Chrysler had been a basket case ever since the Germans got ahold of them, but at least they had the German's balance sheet to lean on during that time. Chrysler actually was doing okay before that merger.

Actually, I'm citing the condition of the ship prior to the storm. It is an irony that had Ford been in better shape before the collapse, they wouldn't have taken out the mortgages they did ahead of time, and all three would have gotten full bailouts. It's only due to how bad off they were before hand that they survived. I'll give credit where it is due; The moves Ford made were absolutely the right ones to make given their situation, storm or no storm. NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Struggling Ford Motor Co., which posted a record $12.7 billion net loss in 2006 DETROIT, March 14 -- General Motors Corp. today posted net income for 2006, excluding special items, of $2.2 billion By 2007, GMAC was imploding as the housing market went south, but GM's car business was up $7 billion in revenue. In contrast, in 2007, Ford lost $5 billion building cars, but reduced to a $2.7 billion loss due to profits from their financial arm * PDF Warning By 2008, the full storm was on them both. Daimler-Chrysler as a whole had a net profit of $7.2 billion in 2006, but Chrysler division took a $1.2 billion loss. In 2007, Daimler split off Chrysler, so it's harder to put a finger on who earned what that year.. but I think we can all agree that Chrysler was pretty damaged by that point.

It's not about drag racing so much, but there is a level of thrust that the LaX just can't match. The LaX you have to really wind out to get the power out of. I haven't driven the MKZ 3.0TT, but I have driven the Fusion Sport. There is a substantial difference in pull between the LaX and the Fusion Sport. It's not a V8, but it's about as close as you can get without those two extra cylinders.

... *sigh*... and I just got rid of my dad bod...

My kids would never behave as badly as some of the middle-aged children here do.

Thank you. That means a lot.

I like both the back and the front.... just not so much on the same car. I always felt the pre-refresh MKZ looked slender and feline. As a whole, the car worked visually. I like the new Continental look, but in this case it looks like a mask on the body of a vehicle that it doesn't fit. Updating the MKZ tail end to the Continental looks should have been done also.

Oh the irony...since that is probably never going to happen

I"m not a sporty kinda guy. I like my posh leather chair, I like my quiet, I prefer stately elegance, but when I want to go somewhere, I want to get there fast. Grace, Space, Pace.

Sept. Chevrolet Volt sales - 2,031 And that's a single model against an entire model lineup.

I like the Lincoln more.

You've got your timeline out of wack. One corporation was in financial distress well before the financial crash hit, that's why they took the steps they did. Three ships were sailing along. The seas were calm and the skies were clear. In spite of the fair weather, one ship had a leak and was taking on water at an alarming rate. Someone in the chain of command recognized this and ordered damage repair teams to address the issue. It would take a lot of work, a lot of reinforcing, and while the repairs were expected to be successful, it would be months or years before the damage was repaired. The other two ships, though decades since being overhauled, nonetheless were operating within acceptable parameters and picking up speed. All three ships kept sailing. A few months later, a massive hurricane entered the three ships' path. On the Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Scale of 1 - 5, this Hurricane was an 8. All three ships took a massive beating in the storm and had their hulls ruptured and were beginning to sink.... two started sink far faster than the first ship was sinking back in the calm days. All three ships sent out distress calls. Due to the severity of the storm, none of the privately run maritime rescue operators were willing or able to come to the rescue. Fortunately, the US Navy also heard the calls and heard the refusal of the private maritime operators to help, so the Navy dispatched a Carrier group. Once the Navy arrived, they found two of the ships so badly damaged that they had to be tied to the Navy vessels to keep them afloat. The Navy provided pumps and some relief crew to both of the badly damaged ships. For one ship, the Navy provided a new captain, a guy with years of experience on the USS American Telephone And Telegraph. For the other, being in international waters, the Navy relied on its Nato Allies and an Italian Cruiser came to help. Allowing the Italian Cruiser to help seems to have been a mistake as it had no rudder, no fuel, and only baloney for supplies. The third ship, while it was not sinking as fast as the others, it already had its damage control teams in place from the damage it has sustained during the time of the calm seas. And while it didn't need to be strapped to the side of a Navy vessel, nor did it need water pumps, the Captain did take on emergency rations from the Navy and specifically asked the Navy to stick around in case things got worse. You see, the Navy was getting antsy; They didn't want to be in this storm any more than the three ships did. As the Navy worked on the biggest of the three ships, they found that during the storm more than half of the supplies had been so badly damaged they could no longer be used. The Navy ordered the captain of that ship to toss them overboard. Of the eight, three of them promptly were tossed. The forth, when tossed overboard, hit a small exotic sailing craft and sunk it. The Navy, convinced that the only way to save the largest ship was to lighten its load, ordered it to continue to shed weight. The captain of middle ship, the one with only moderate damage, was still nervous. He had good reason to be. You see, even though these ships operated independently, they shared a lot of the same suppliers. If the largest ship and the smallest ship both sank, the companies that sell fuel, food, uniforms, etc to all three would all probably go out of business. If that happened, even if only the middle ship survived the storm, where would it then be able to buy its supplies once the storm had cleared? In the end, the US Navy stabilized the largest ship. The rip in the hull has been repaired better and lighter than new, the water is pumped out, the fuel has been refilled, and it is riding high and steaming forward again. The Italian Cruiser's Captain took over operations of the smallest ship, ate its crew, and is still in the process of sending all of the USDA Grade A Beef back to his Cruiser while loading the smallest ship up with baloney. What crew is left on the smallest ship is hoping the Captain takes a lifeboat soon and takes his baloney with him because it has really stunk up the place. The third ship though, the one that didn't get the same level of assistance from the Navy and preferring to try and go it alone still has issues. Though the hull has been repaired, without the Navy's pumps it is still heavy and low in the water. The crew is still trying to bail the water out of the lower deck by hand and it is slow work. All of the extra reinforcement to the hull makes the ship slow to change speed, slow to react to rudder changes, and really degrades the fuel economy of the ship. Some say it is noble that the middle ship didn't use the Navy's pumps or repair teams. Some say it was smart of the captain to start repairs before the storm ever hit... but it was more self preservation on his part before the storm ever even appeared... and by declining assistance he is still weighted down by stuff from before the storm and a number of stale supplies.

a 1 through 8 naming scheme.... ground breaking....

GM's story is quite different. They were profitable right up till the quarter prior to Bear Stearns collapsing. They didn't go for the financing because at the time they were on a good trajectory. The economy collapsed and everyone tried to survive in their own ways. It wasn't GM or Chrysler's fault.

Chris is generally not "just a person taking pictures". But anyway, he said he was not there for any track or instrumented tests but that nearly everything that passes through C&Ds hands gets evaluated that way.

You don't know Chris, so don't make any assumptions.

Yeah, I know that dealerships swap out wheels often . The photographer in the article, @Chris_Doane is long time member here and I'm friends with him on Facebook. I'll just ask him.

Ah that makes sense. I didn't look at the two cars to look at an apples to apples comparison. $10k is a much more reasonable difference.

City dwellers

Over a Fusion Sport? What else would add to the cost besides interior materials and engine block metal type? They both use a CCD suspension, same AWD system (I see nothing about the MKZ getting the twinster).