Ford of Germany has turned out excellent vehicles for many decades.
The latest version of the acclaimed Ford Focus is essentially a Ford of Europe creation.
I bet the winning Ford Engine is designed in Europe, too. Most of what is taking place will all automakers was leading edge a few years back in Europe; namely smaller displacement, fewer cylinders, with turbocharging.
The base 5 series BMW, Audi A6, and Jags are all turbo 4 cylinder power plants. They have MORE horsepower and torque than V8s and 6s of just a few years ago. And higher fuel economy, as well.
One thing I've noticed in my constant business travels is it seems domestic brands in the US are released several years behind Europe. A good example is the Ford Mondeo in the UK. I saw the new model Taurus in the US and recognized it as the Mondeo from about 3 years ago. (the 2011 Mondeo has similar technology's the 2014 Taurus. The 2012 Mondeo had the same body styling (with new Aston styled grill) as the 14 Taurus).
One thing I've noticed in my constant business travels is it seems domestic brands in the US are released several years behind Europe. A good example is the Ford Mondeo in the UK. I saw the new model Taurus in the US and recognized it as the Mondeo from about 3 years ago. (the 2011 Mondeo has similar technology's the 2014 Taurus. The 2012 Mondeo had the same body styling (with new Aston styled grill) as the 14 Taurus).That is true. Until now, Ford placed the previous version of the Focus in the US, while Europe got the latest version.
That is true. Until now, Ford placed the previous version of the Focus in the US, while Europe got the latest version.
It shows you that US manufacturers' managements have not felt Americans were particularly discriminating.
But Americans have been, discriminating enough to buy German, Korean and Japanese cars.
BTW some of what the new Chrysler Corp is selling, comes from Fiat, namely the new Dart II.
Interesting. Any thoughts on why?
The new Dart (a) is butt-ugly, and (b) has nothing whatsoever in common with the original Dodge Dart.
They should have just called it the Dodge Neon 2.
My first thought is simply regulations. Different things are required in different markets and there are also different requirements in the manufacturing process. It may be easier and cheaper to roll out some things first there.
The other thing it may be is the diversity of the European market may allow for more experimentation to see what people like in the markets that have higher mark-ups. Roll out two or three different option packages and looks there then focus group it to see which ones go over best here. Then transfer that model to the domestic market.
The new Dart (a) is butt-ugly, and (b) has nothing whatsoever in common with the original Dodge Dart.You got that right!
Ya, but the engine is Ford's 999cc 3-cylinder turbo-diesel I believe.
Ford of Germany has turned out excellent vehicles for many decades.
The latest version of the acclaimed Ford Focus is essentially a Ford of Europe creation.
I bet the winning Ford Engine is designed in Europe, too. Most of what is taking place will all automakers was leading edge a few years back in Europe; namely smaller displacement, fewer cylinders, with turbocharging.
The base 5 series BMW, Audi A6, and Jags are all turbo 4 cylinder power plants. They have MORE horsepower and torque than V8s and 6s of just a few years ago. And higher fuel economy, as well.
The new Dart (a) is butt-ugly, and (b) has nothing whatsoever in common with the original Dodge Dart.Oh... don't get me started on modern automotive designs.
Oh... don't get me started on modern automotive designs.
It seems like ever since the late 1990s or so, pretty much every vehicle in existence has looked the same. Ever eager to make their cars as aerodynamic as possible, cars have become ugly (those swept-back headlights are not flattering), homogenous and bland. You could not make a car like the beautiful '66 Polara (my personal favorite) today.
Of course, the ever increasing mileage pressures (made even more onerous with the ethanol mandates) have not helped.
Ethanol will kill the internal combustion engine. It's destroying my car as we speak; and just about pricing me out of the food market. Seen the cost of bread lately? Or anything that uses good ole corn products? What do they feed hogs these days.It goes beyond engine damage and food prices.
From Europe no doubt, as I hinted. The once Big 3 have essentially abdicated design of modern, efficient passenger vehicles to Europe, Japan and Korea. They build and sell, from various sources.
GM waits until Toyota has refined and advanced hybrids and plug ins, to enter the market--and basically fail to keep up.
A one liter turbo diesel is adequate to power small-medium passenger vehicles. Over 50%of passenger vehicle sales in Europe are diesels. Now.
And to prove the point, GM-Chevy has introduced diesel power in their Cruz line. Quite similar to the VW Jetta.
Leading from behind seems to be the new model, for America.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_EcoBoost_engine
1.0 L EcoBoost I-3[edit source]
Ford EcoBoost 1,0 Motorblock.jpg
Ford has announced a 1.0-litre, three-cylinder turbocharged engine for the EcoBoost family developed at Ford's Dunton Technical Centre in the UK. Production is to start in April 2012. The 1.0 comes initially in two versions: 74 kW (101 PS; 99 hp) and 88 to 92 kW (120 to 125 PS; 118 to 123 hp). The more powerful version delivers a maximum of 170 N·m (125 lb·ft) from 1,400–4,500 rpm and 200 N·m (148 lb·ft) on overboost, which makes for a broad torque curve when compared to on-road diesel engines. The engine block is cast iron instead of aluminium for up to 50% faster warm-up, at the expense of additional weight.[12][13] Due to natural vibrations of a 3-cylinder design, the flywheel has been deliberately unbalanced to ensure smooth running, without the use of energy sapping balance shafts. The engine also features an internal timing belt, bathed in the engine oil, for long life and greater efficiency. The exhaust manifold is cast into the cylinder head, reducing warm up times and therefore further aiding efficiency. All this is packaged in an engine block the size of an A4 sheet of paper.[14] With the introduction of 2013 Ford Fiesta facelift, Ford introduced naturally aspirated version of 1.0 EcoBoost engine. There are two versions producing 65 hp and 80 hp, both engines uses DI and Ti-VCT like turbocharged versions, start-stop technology is available too. There is no official name for this version of 1.0 l engine, Ford brands it in the official specification press simply Ti-VCT.
The engines are produced in Cologne, Germany and Craiova, Romania with production to later expand in Chongqing, China. Production is expected to be 700,000–1,500,000 units per year. The engine is available in Ford Focus, the Ford Focus-based C-MAX and Grand C-MAX, and the Fiesta-based B-Max. Ford has claimed it may be available in the future for the North American markets.[15]
Ford has announced that this engine will be available for the American market starting with the all-new 2014 Ford Fiesta Sedan and Hatchback. It was announced at the 2012 Los Angeles Auto Show, when the car featuring it was introduced.
Applications[edit source]
(100 hp)
2012— Ford Focus
2012— Ford C-Max
2012— Ford B-Max
2013— Ford Fiesta
(125 hp)
2012— Ford Focus
2012— Ford C-Max
2012— Ford B-Max
2013— Ford Fiesta
2013- Ford Ecosport
Point taken. It is fairly recent, that Ford have brought their best stuff to the US in a timely manner.
I'm not sure I would exactly call that leading from behind. Since Ford presumably owns its European operations, including the design studios, it would seem to follow (so to speak) that Ford is, in fact, on the leading edge of design, it just does that designing in Europe rather than the US.
We had one - yep ONE - candidate in 2012 who was anti-ethanol. The corn lobby defeated him in Iowa's primary.You hit the nail on the head. The corn lobby, thanks to Iowa being first in line, has a disproportionate influence in American society, and I strongly suspect that they're part of the reason why that high-fructose corn syrup junk pervades so much of our food. (Pardon my digression here, but you can't possibly tell me it tastes the same as sugar. You can mask the corny taste with certain acids, which is how they do it in soda, but I can notice the difference.)
Point taken. It is fairly recent, that Ford have brought their best stuff to the US in a timely manner.
Until the current model, Europe used to be one model ahead of us with the Focus.
And the winning engine isn't used in the US at present.
I think you are correct in that the design culture has moved from the US to Europe, as it seems it is Ford's European designers, not its American designers, who are on the cutting edge.
Wasn't Ford also planning on releasing a new Mustang model that was based on a European platform?
Meanwhile Nascar goes around and around ovals, in low tech vehicles, to the delight of their undemanding fans.
Ok. You done took yo ignant stick and poked it right there at my lil ole heart.Since your involvement, GM and Chrysler have failed. GM got their best cars from their Australian subsidiary near the end. There are no no American interests represented in Formula 1, the premier auto racing series.
Let's talk after you have visited a NASCAR shop and checked out the engine building department. Where do you think all the technology in tire development, fuel efficiencies, weight to performance improvements, safety apparatus come from required to meet US specific mandated standards?
PS: Worked the circuit 1988-1996; know the best in the field. Please retract that "undemanding", "low-tech" crap as a matter of professional courtesy. Or come on down here and I'll take you to Charlotte. You can see for yourself, seeker of truth.
You go to Charlotte, I go to Laguna Seca. At Sonoma the Nascars have to turn both left and right.
Ok. You done took yo ignant stick and poked it right there at my lil ole heart.
Let's talk after you have visited a NASCAR shop and checked out the engine building department. Where do you think all the technology in tire development, fuel efficiencies, weight to performance improvements, safety apparatus come from required to meet US specific mandated standards?
PS: Worked the circuit 1988-1996; know the best in the field. Please retract that "undemanding", "low-tech" crap as a matter of professional courtesy. Or come on down here and I'll take you to Charlotte. You can see for yourself, seeker of truth.
I look at NASCAR like a precision sniper rifle and F1 like a smart-bomb. Snipers generally use the most basic of platforms, a simple bolt action rifle, and have fine tuned their rifle, ammunition, as well as their own skills to maximum performance. Smart-bombs are packed with millions in technology to reach out and touch the enemy from miles above.
Both maximize the performance for the application they are using and require immense skill and knowledge. The platforms are worlds apart but they are both effective for the use they were designed for. Apples and oranges.