Ford may sell jets

[Raskal]

Europe heavily subsidizes diesel and gives citizens tax breaks for buying a diesel car. That is one of the many reasons diesels are more popular across the pond. With diesel here much more expensive than regular, along with the extra cost up front, there really is no incentive to buy one. You'd have to drive one around 200k miles just to break even.

It's not heavily subsidized in the EU. Diesel is cheaper to refine, it's the same here but our refineries are set up for around 15% diesel creating less supply.

Diesel is also considerably more efficient burning at a lower compression with more energy released per burn than gasoline.

Now to the most promising thing of all, bio diesel. Currently there is a lot of research in algae growth to use for diesel. No oil needed, the algae creates its own. Of course fuel can be made from many sources (vegetable oil is an example).

 

[Hand Commander]

I fully agree with bushwick. I'm totally content paying 5 bucks a gallon for auto gas. Aviation fuel and any other commercial transportation fuel should be the only ones getting a price break. Having a car for personal use IS A LUXURY. Unfortunately most of the US has been built with the notion that everyone will have a car and driving is an everyday part of life. Suburbs, drive thru's, outlet malls, massive freeways to accomodate mass commuters. I refuse to waste time sitting in traffic everyday. I can't really think of a more unproductive use of time and resources. I'm fortunate enough to live in PDX. Great public transportation, super bike friendly (single speeds and fixies with no brakes seem to be all the rage, still haven't figured that one out), old school neighborhoods that have everything you need within walking distance. And when I do drive to work, I live 8 mins from the hangar. I know its not like PDX everywhere but hopefully people will continue to evalute their energy consumption while fuel prices are on the decline. American auto makers deserve whatever is coming their way right now in my opinion. Its sucks for the thousands of skilled laborers and I think the scrutiny of corporate jet usage by executives from congress is pathetic, but they have chosen for decades to make crappy vehicles with poor gas mileage. I agree european cars are the way to go. The vw tdi is great. Doesn't drive like the old diesels. Plenty of torque, no lag, and quiet. Has been available in the US for a decade.

 

[BoilerUP]

The US exports the majority of their refined diesel to Europe; Europe exports the majority of their refined gasoline to the US.

 

[Regul8r]

Define "Crappy" Vehicle

2008 IQS Nameplate Rankings (Problems per 100 Vehicles)

Toyota-104
Mercury-109
Honda-110
Ford-112
Cadillac-113
Chevy-113
Pontiac-114
Lincoln-115
Buick-118
INDUSTRY AVERAGE-118

Best-Porsche-87
Worst-JEEP-167

Certainly, Mopar builds a Crappy vehicle. But for the most part, Ford and GM are better than industry average...and the trend for the past years is a positively improving one. This isn't because GM or Ford build a "crappy" vehicle...many people are still entrenched with that stigma created in the 70s and 80s...all to Honda and Toyota's benefit. Kind of like SWA being the "lowest" fare around. I would put this more on Ford and GM not really setting themselves apart from the industry and continually producing bland vehicles.





http://www.jdpower.com/corporate/news/releases/pdf/2008063.pdf

 

[Hand Commander]

Sorry, I should clarify. "Crappy" is a matter of opinion, mostly toward styling and handling. I'm biased. I did quality control for 3 years at an Audi, Volkswagen, Porsche dealership. American cars have never appealed to me. I've always liked Audi/VW's and I know they don't exactly have a good reputation. The only american car I would ever buy would be one of these www.sportsmobile.com. Diesel of course. Thanks for the info.

 

[ksu_aviator]

Everyone loves the free market screwing everyone until they get screwed then suddenly it is not so good.....

What does this have to do with the free market? The direct reason Ford would sell their aircraft is so that they to can suck at the governmnet teet. I don't see any free market there.

Now, if Ford was selling the jets solely to cut costs for the sake of cutting costs, then that would be a different thing.

 

[metrodriver]

Quote from boilerup:
GM is also starting to look more into diesel cars, with them putting a new 2.8L diesel into the European Cadillac CTS and considering the 4.5L Duramax diesel as an option for the domestic CTS.

See, that's one of the problems with the big 3:
why do they have to put a truck engine in a Caddi for the domestic market? If the 2.8 European engine creates an exciting machine, and I'm sure it will, then that's what they should stick with. No need for a bigger engine (that's designed for a different purpuse in the first place) with resulting loss of efficiency.

 

[stupidpilot]

They don't subsidize diesel?

Diesel engines are about 30 percent more efficient than their gasoline counterparts, but emit more small particles responsible for smog. They benefit from environmental tax breaks in some countries, including subsidies for biodiesel -- a fuel made from oil crops such as the bright yellow rapeseed that dots much of northern Europe.

 

[BoilerUP]

See, that's one of the problems with the big 3:
why do they have to put a truck engine in a Caddi for the domestic market? If the 2.8 European engine creates an exciting machine, and I'm sure it will, then that's what they should stick with. No need for a bigger engine (that's designed for a different purpuse in the first place) with resulting loss of efficiency.

The 4.5L produces power that is between the standard V6 and the high-displacement CTS-V, with zero modifications required to the car's design to install. Additionally, it produces that in-between power (somewhere around 400hp I think) with fuel economy in the 30mpg highway range. While admittedly poor for a diesel automobile, its KILLER mileage for any sedan that can run low 13s in the quarter mile.

Additionally, the 4.5L is available NOW domestically and the 2.8L is not.

Progress is progress...

 

[SansPlane]

The only american car I would ever buy would be one of these www.sportsmobile.com. Diesel of course. Thanks for the info.

Since this is a "Ford" thread and you brought up Sportsmobile I will throw in: http://www.earthroamer.com/

 

[Raskal]

They don't subsidize diesel?

Diesel engines are about 30 percent more efficient than their gasoline counterparts, but emit more small particles responsible for smog. They benefit from environmental tax breaks in some countries, including subsidies for biodiesel -- a fuel made from oil crops such as the bright yellow rapeseed that dots much of northern Europe.

Yes, biodiesel is subsidized in some areas, just like ethanol is here. Political games are everywhere.

 

[jj21211]

Well, soon GM will announce a big change in their flight dept. Sickening. How many 'luxury jet' rides have Pelosi/Reid etc. been on? Hypocritical A-Hoes!At GM, they fly Gulfstreams, made in America, employing hundreds of highly skilled workers. Then there are the flight crews, ground support, dispatchers, etc. Then, they purchase fuel and services all over the world, and pay huge taxes and fees in the US. I mean, the ripple effect is considerable. What is dissapointing is, the US carmakers have had 20 years to fix the quality issue, and, yes, they've come a long way, but they're not exactly closing the gap by that much...

 

[atpcliff]

Hi!

For all practical purposes, GM/Ford HAVE closed the Quality gap. But, it doesn't matter if they're made well, if they're not the type of cars Americans want, they won't compete well in America.

Tucker was RIGHT!

They should have hired him as a consultant, instead of taking him to court.

cliff
YIP

PS-I even saw as recently as a year ago, the CEO of Toyota was finding out from Americans what type of vehicles Americans wanted, while the Wagoner at GM didn't need to find out what Americans wanted, because GM know more than the American people about vehicles.

 

[BoilerUP]

For all practical purposes, GM/Ford HAVE closed the Quality gap. But, it doesn't matter if they're made well, if they're not the type of cars Americans want, they won't compete well in America.

Folks keep saying this...what kind of cars exactly do "Americans" want?

Up until the start of 2008, it was the SUV...and people were buying Tahoes, Explorers, and pickup trucks in droves. Enter a spike in oil/fuel prices and all of the sudden "The Big 3 are and have been out of touch with American car buyers!"

GM is now developing the Volt and rushing it to market, and while I don't know the current status of it, GM had been planning a MASSIVE nationwide hydrogen fuel cell vehicle test which would have dwarfed Honda's small hydrogen Civic test in California.

Styling is always subjective, but the new Malibu looks better IMO than the new Camry does...and the newer Accord sedans have been god-awful looking since the last redesign.

I understand the "sins" of the 90s and early 2000s when the Big 3 ignored their cars to focus on their more profitable trucks...but the current issues aren't due to their crop of vehicles TODAY, its due to what they offered 3/5/8/10 years ago.

 

[Rick James]

Diesel is cheaper to refine, it's the same here but our refineries are set up for around 15% diesel creating less supply.

Diesel is also considerably more efficient burning at a lower compression with more energy released per burn than gasoline.

Diesel is no longer cheaper to refine with the requirement for ultra low sulfur diesel (ULSD)

Also, diesel cumbusts at about double the compression of gasoline powered vehicles as there are no spark plugs.

 

[metrodriver]

I don't call $7.00 a gallon subsidized, gasoline is about $8.00 a gallon. The largest part of the fuel price in Europe are taxes.
People in England are furious because the cost of oil has more than halved, however the price at the pump has only dropped 20% (all because the taxes are so high).

You know why ethanol in the US is so expensive? It's all being exported to Europe.

GM (and I guess the other big 2 too) had a design philosophy that a car had to last 10 years or 100k miles, and then things had to fall apart. And so the alternator failed at 50k, powersteering at 65, plastic trim parts broke easily, at 9 years the dashboard cracked, after 11 years the ceiling fell down. What failed too early would be improved, what was too good would be degraded. This I've heard from someone who was actually involved in that process. Your neighbor with the 15 year old 180k Honda changes the oil and never anything breaks. A little spit and polish and it would look like new. So what would be your next car?
To satisfy the demand for small cars they would import cheap junk from Korea. Ford Aspire (aka asswipe), rebranded Kia's, Geo: (Metro=Suzuki Swift, Prizm = Toyota Corolla; were actually the better ones), the other models came from Isuzu. Their own designs were not good either: Dodge Neon, Stratus, the smaller Caddi (forgot the name). Nothing that would last, nothing that had any kind of decent road behavior. GM took a German product, changed a lot: different engines, plastic body panels, cheap interior and called it a Saturn. The best Ford Taurus was the SHO: power (Yamaha engine) and a good transmission. The standard's version automatic had a high failure rate.
Another design mistake: the original Ford Rollover (Explorer). Ford never admitted it. However, after being hit with law suits (that Ford blamed on tires) they very suddenly came with a re-design that had a completely different (independent) suspension. POOR design, nothing else.

GM and Ford might have nice vehicles now. I agree. But, how do they hold up? If I buy one 8 years from now with 120k will it give me another 7 yrs/100k, or will autozone / junkyard be visited as frequently as the grocery store?
When these cars are still in the rental fleet (usually untill 2 years/ 20k) you can see the first signs: plastic parts broken, little electrical problems, trim that's letting loose. The last Malibu I drove a year ago had only 4k on it. Nice car, no complaints.

If you look back 15 years, which cars have been fighting for best title of best selling cars? The Japanese brands and the Ford Taurus (which later in it's life started to have issues and lost out quickly). If the Japanese can sell so many cars in that market, why is there no Big 3 product that can compete with it? Same lasting quality, same ride characteritics and economy and there would be a very profitable product. Bigger cars? Please don't compare a Crown Victoria to a Lexus, Acura, BMW or M Benz.

Again poor leadership at the Big 3, let them walk to work, ride a commercial airliner (in coach!) and ask the folks next to them what they think about their products.

 

[ASA_DFW]

CNN just reported that Ford will sell 5 of its corporate jets. Is that the entire fleet?

 

[G4G5]

http://money.cnn.com/2008/12/02/news/companies/automakers_plans/index.htm

 

[Regul8r]

Anyone else hear that Ford and GM liquidated their flight departments today? I ever see a congressmen stepping off a corporate jet, I'm going to punch the fat f--k right in the nose!

 

[siucavflight]

Anyone else hear that Ford and GM liquidated their flight departments today? I ever see a congressmen stepping off a corporate jet, I'm going to punch the fat f--k right in the nose!

What a congressmen does with his own money is irrelevant to this situation.
When a corporation comes and asks for billions of dollars in our money, how they spend it becomes our concern.
Two very different situations.