Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Automotive News & Views Cars of My Past
189 messages, Last post on Jul 05, 2007 at 2:53 PM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
Replying to: hpmctorque (Mar 27, 2007 4:20 am) One thing that hurts Ford more than most cars is their longevity. One study of cars in one state (Ohio?) took the registrations of all brands in a given year, and then looked at what percentage were still registered in ensuing years. At 12 years, Ford moved into #1, and each year thereafter, the margin got wider. Why does this hurt Ford? Well there are a lot of old cheap Fords still running, and usually become a persons first car. Since they are old, the teenager longs for that newer other brand with less rattles and problems. And the old Fords with their $30 starters and $50 alternators are kept running while the $300 alternator on the old Toyota is too expensive to keep the old junker running, so they are scrapped out. Looking at the list of first cars on this Forum adds evidence to this When I was a kid, this same situation used to work against Chev and for Ford, but that changed in the 60s. |
|
|
At 12 years, Ford moved into #1, and each year thereafter, the margin got wider. Interesting - I thought I was the only person who knew that. For some reason, Ford Bigots bother me the most, because 90% of them have never had one. They just know someone who did in 1957, and couldn't keep the back doors closed or something.... Young Adults are fascinating - I hear all the time, "I don't like Fords" from them, but they have no idea why. Ford has some real repair work to do to their image. In the 60's, they had some terrific advertising, where they actually showed the car!! (Gasp) instead of some lifestyle ad where only the liftgate and a headlight are featured, but the girls inside surf. It showed a Mustang driving in the mountains, the music was upbeat with a message that Ford was winning the car war. It inspired me to get one, and old used one, but I liked it and stayed with Ford mostly, for years. And most of them treated me well. They were the cars of my past by and large. I still think they were the best cars in some models and years. But though they may run forever, the company doesn't, and stalls frequently, runs with fits and starts and the transmission slips often in the Board Room. I sincerely hope ARM can put this old company back on the road again. But he won't be there forever either, and who knows who will come after him, if there is an after him..... History of this company is fascinating - but inconsistent. |
|
|
Few people seem to know that GM really started with the merger of Durant (Buick) and Cadillac: Hope my memory has that correct. Shortly thereafter, Oldsmobile was added to the list; Durant was thrown out, and together with car racers Francois and Louis Chevrolet, started Chevie. It was later merged with Durant back at the head of his GM company. Now here is the interesting part. Who founded "Cadillac"? None other than Henry Ford. It was the first Ford Motor Company; Henry was thrown out by his bankers, who changed the name to Cadillac, and Henry Started a second, new Ford Motor COmpany, which is the current company. Henry hated banks thereafter; his primary backer in the second company was (drum roll please) Dodge Brothers. SOunds like corporate incest if you ask me.
|
|
|
Replying to: cptchetco (Mar 30, 2007 7:56 am) Yes, and then the Dodge Brothers walked out on him too, and started Dodge. Henry was tough to get along with, and he never listened to anybody, except maybe Clara, his wife, on occasion. |
|
as one of those who has an illogical hatred of Ford. Or, at least, I did when I was younger, but have pretty much grown out of it, although I still like to rag on them from time to time. But hey, if I'm in the right mood, I'll rag on Mopar, and I've had more Mopars than anything!  I think I got most of my Ford hatred infused within me by two people: My Dad, and my Granddad on my Mom's side. Dad was always a Chevy man, and his parents always drove Fords, so I think part of that Ford hatred was just kind of a rebellion against his parents. As for my Granddad, he was a shadetree mechanic, and I think his main thing is that he better understood the way GM cars were put together, and could work on them better. The way GM did things just made sense to him, whereas the way Fords were put together just seemed stupid to him. And I can understand that logic, to a degree. Often when you're used to the way one thing works, any other way just seems alien, stupid, wrong, or whatever. Heck, I've even noticed it with the GM cars I've had...the Mopars just seemed easier to work on. Still, I wouldn't write off a Ford product in my future, if they made something that really caught my eye. And I'll admit that, if forced to choose right now between a Fusion/Milan, Sebring/Avenger, or a Malibu/G6/Aura, which fall into about the size category I'd go for, more or less, I'd probably lean toward Dearborn. Although I do kinda like the Aura.
|
|
|
Replying to: andre1969 (Apr 01, 2007 5:26 pm) |
|
|
Replying to: andre1969 (Apr 01, 2007 5:26 pm) However, Ford had more wiring problems, and made continual production line changes making it difficult for mechanics. No two cars seemed to be the same. For example, I restored a 1941 Ford Convert; there are no less than 8 different distributors and 3 carburators, and two different hood raising arrangements all in the same car. Mechanics of the era were not Ford fans, unless they were racers. In 1955, Chevie came out with an exciting car, and had the best of both worlds for the next few years. For some inexplicable reason, during the mid 1960s, its cars started to be the ones with electrical problems. We used to joke that the reason the Impala had six tailights is so that the odds were, at least one would work. The front suspensions were problematic, and they started making production line changes without any reference to the model #s. Meanwhile Ford got control of its traditional wiring problems and had been using a more rust resistant steel alloy in their bodies. Also FOrd standardized its Starters, Alternators, Oil filters etc. (This is no longer the case, since it uses so many different engines derived from US, Germany and Japan.) As a result, Ford parts became far cheaper than the competitors and the basic car lasts longer, not necessarily more trouble free, but relatively cheap and easy to repair, so they go on and on being repaired while the owner wishes he could get a newer car of some other brand. Another example is for long after GM had followed the Japanese into selling "modules", you could still get the specific part for a Ford. A failed bearing in an "A" arm could be purchased for about $15-20, instead of $300 for an "A" arm assembly, when the only thing wrong was the one bearing. So instead of junking the 1980 Citation, you would be working on your Pinto changing the bearing lying in the driveway while your Mom was hollaring at you to come in and change your clothes.
|
|
|
Replying to: cptchetco (Apr 03, 2007 8:37 am) That is the truth!! Having driven mostly Fords when I was younger, I ran into that all the time - a prejudice that will last for ages..... |
|
| I have a photo copy of the 1941 Ford shop manual. It was in looseleaf notebook form. The changes during the production year are amazing. More than I had remembered. The front fenders came in 4 different styles. Not to change thelooks, or fore diferent models, Just because for some reason, they made a change. 1 piece, 2 piece, 3 piece and 2 piece welded. They didn't quite interchange either, bolt holes didn't match. Early '41s had hood raisere like the 40, later models did not. and on and on. Damn nice cars though. drove mine across the US and back with the only problem being some overheating climbing the Rockies. Drove 70 all day long; 20mpg. No problem keeping up with modern traffic, and passed when I needed to. Had to make a couple emergency stops...may not have been as short as the best modern cars, but definitely adequate. | |
I had a 1983 AMC Concord D/L as my first ride. Durable but not exciting to drive. Had to give to my dad when I when away to school almost 10 years ago.  Next Car a 1992 Dodge Monaco (nee Eagle Premier ) I don't know what demons made me to get that car. Roomy and comfortable yes, Horrible reliability and numerous engineering goofs. It was so troublesome it made an 86 Hyundai Excel look like Toyota Corolla for reliability.  After 6 months of the French connection disaster and lots $$$ I traded nightmare in with much appreciated help mom and dad on 1996 Oldsmobile Ciera SL Series II. Not exactly a chick magnet car it was much reliable and fix able that the Monaco. It too has had few GM issues and being ex rental car. After 4 years of driving the dull dowdy rattle trap.  I bought used 2002 Saturn L200 about 3 years ago. Gave my dad back the Oldsmobile as extra spare family car. After 66k in 3 years. the Saturn has not left me stranded yet (knock on veneer or plasti wood). Only 4 repairs aside maintance. Steering rack replaced under warranty due too groaning noises and leaking, Gas gage sending unit replaced under warranty. Wheel stud/ lug got cross thread unfortunately had to replace the one wheel hub assembly. The timing chain was replaced with a update chain tension er design to avoid an know early eco tech design issue.
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views Cars of My Past
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
