Ford May Stop Making Minivans

[VIPFREAK]

That's GM for ya and why they are in the position they are in.

 

[YSSMAN]

The only reason why GM built it is because the GM Fanboys went crazy over the concept vehicle and they begged Lutz to put it into production. It is nothing more than a spiritual successor to the Prowler and Thunderbird, but fortunatley the SSR has enjoyed a bit more success than those two.

 

[VIPFREAK]

The only reason why GM built it is because the GM Fanboys went crazy over the concept vehicle and they begged Lutz to put it into production. It is nothing more than a spiritual successor to the Prowler and Thunderbird, but fortunatley the SSR has enjoyed a bit more success than those two.

yep... and ignored the fact no one outside wanted it.

The Prowler did the best out of all of them and it was liked by the public just not practical. It was the engine power that killed it because it was lackluster.

 

[Joey D]

I, personally, think the SSR looks like crap. I can only barely see what it was supposed to resemble in retrospect.

Well it ends production in March.

 

[Tornado]

The SSR isn't a truck...it's kinda like a El Camino throw back thing.

It sits on a truck chassis and weighs more than a Chevrolet Tahoe. It's a truck.

 

[Joey D]

It sits on a truck chassis and weighs more than a Chevrolet Tahoe. It's a truck.

Errr carpeted bed, convertable, can't tow anything, doesn't have a payload rating. I still refuse to call it a truck. And for the record I never cared for this thing.

 

[VIPFREAK]

Well it ends production in March.

If only GM boys wanted it they should've just made it limited run of like 10. Not that anyone could afford it or would want to.

 

[Joey D]

If only GM boys wanted it they should've just made it limited run of like 10. Not that anyone could afford it or would want to.

There are a ton of em around me, they sold decently well around here I would say. But I never really thought they were stellar. I've driven one before and they are reasonable quick, but they are uncomfortable as hell to drive.

 

[VIPFREAK]

And what could you do with them? and why did they try to get rid of them afterwards...

 

[skip0110]

It was a big mistake to build a sporty vehicle on a truck platform.

But then again, at that time GM did not have any other suitable RWD platform to build it on.

 

[Joey D]

It was a big mistake to build a sporty vehicle on a truck platform.

But then again, at that time GM did not have any other suitable RWD platform to build it on.

Meh the Syclone was great and it was just a S-15 with a huge ass motor in it.

But GM has the Zeta (GTO) and the Sigma (CTS) are pretty much the only ones they have...besides Kappa (soltice) and Y-body (Vette). And I just proved what a nerd I am by rattling those off the top of my head.

 

[Tornado]

It was a big mistake to build a sporty vehicle on a truck platform.

But then again, at that time GM did not have any other suitable RWD platform to build it on.

But that still doesn't explain why it weighs so much more than the donor vehicle. Hell, it weighs more than the vehicles in the next size class.

Errr carpeted bed, convertable, can't tow anything, doesn't have a payload rating. I still refuse to call it a truck. And for the record I never cared for this thing.

It's a moot point anyways. Designed to look fast and then outrun by a Volkswagen New Beetle Cabrio. Rediculous. Not to mention how much faster the T-Bird and Prowler were (as an aside, I think DCX actually managed to make money off of the Prowler. Not so for the T-Bird or SSR). You say tomahto, I say tomayto.

 

[skip0110]

Meh the Syclone was great and it was just a S-15 with a huge ass motor in it.

They only sold a few, and the market promptly forgot about it. I think they are cool, but I wouldnt classify them as a success.

But GM has the Zeta (GTO) and the Sigma (CTS) are pretty much the only ones they have...besides Kappa (soltice) and Y-body (Vette). And I just proved what a nerd I am by rattling those off the top of my head.

They're all too upmarket. Plus the Zeta was at the end of it's developemnt cycle, and a rebody would ahve been too expensive (although the Holden SS Ute would have been a good candidate); the Sigma is probably too flimsy (as a unibody) to have a bed rather than a roof.

But that still doesn't explain why it weighs so much more than the donor vehicle. Hell, it weighs more than the vehicles in the next size class

Wasn't aware it was so heavy.

 

[Joey D]

They only sold a few, and the market promptly forgot about it. I think they are cool, but I wouldnt classify them as a success.

They were only made for a few years, cost 30,000 base (which is a lot for a S-15)...but they sold decently for there price. Kinda like the Sleaths I guess.

They're all too upmarket. Plus the Zeta was at the end of it's developemnt cycle, and a rebody would ahve been too expensive (although the Holden SS Ute would have been a good candidate); the Sigma is probably too flimsy (as a unibody) to have a bed rather than a roof.

They might keep the Zeta...I don't think they are 100% sure what they are going to do. But ya unibody = lame truck....*cough*Ridgeline*cough*

 

[YSSMAN]

Well there was a point in GM history where the GMT360 platform was going to be the new baisis for RWD sedans and coupes. Remember the Bel-Air concept from a few years ago?

That was based of the same platform as the Trailblazer and used a turbocharged version of the 3500 I5 from the Colorado/Canyon trucks.

As far as the Zeta platform goes, apparently it is still somewhat up in the air. The Camaro concept was based on a "Zeta Lite" platform to cut costs, as it was origionally said by GM that Zeta was too expensive for the US market. Either way, the new GTO is supposed to reside on the Zeta as well, so we will see what has happened.

Sigma is another platform that needs to be tapped. It has shown that it is perfectly capable under the CTS and CRX, and the modified version beneath the CTS-V is another great example of what GM has to work with but refuses to use.

 

[skip0110]

Well there was a point in GM history where the GMT360 platform was going to be the new baisis for RWD sedans and coupes. Remember the Bel-Air concept from a few years ago?

That was based of the same platform as the Trailblazer and used a turbocharged version of the 3500 I5 from the Colorado/Canyon trucks.

I had forgotten about it when I made my post, but I do remember it. I interpreted it as simply a concept with very little chance of production--much the same as the Nomad concept of a few years ago, which was based on the old F-body platform and thus had very little chance of production. I think GM correctly assesed the demand for full-frame sedans: slim.

Sigma is another platform that needs to be tapped. It has shown that it is perfectly capable under the CTS and CRX, and the modified version beneath the CTS-V is another great example of what GM has to work with but refuses to use.

Sigma is a good platform under the CTS and SRX (I'm assuming thats what you meant), but I'm doubtful if it's up to handling high-torque smallblocks, after hearing reports of very nasty wheelhop in the CTS-V. Sigma II, which we'll see in '07, will probably be a lot better developed (and hopefully will replace the aging W-body across the GM lineup).

 

[Blackbird.]

Well it ends production in March.

Wouldn't bother me if it continued, but it seems logical why it'd discontinue. It just didn't sell. I mean I can see some chevy trucks that it trys (stress that word) to resemble but it's real faint.

 

[Joey D]

I think GM is planning to bring that Australian car/truck thing to the US under the El Camino name. I think I read that in Autoweek or something.

 

[Poverty]

Theres a galaxy replacement concept out. I saw the pics in the top gear mag. Looks very nice and is bigger than the last one.

 

[YSSMAN]

Galaxy as in the proposed crossover or Galaxy as in the huge American coupe/sedan?

...I'm all for GM importing and rebadging Holden products in the US as they sell the most exciting vehicles in any GM lineup (with the exception of the Y-body, Kappa, etc...)

 

[1X83Z]

...Funny think about the Blackwood, I can remember Ford saying their sales goal was 12,000 Blackwoods per year, but in the first year alone they (if I remember correctly) sold just shy of 1000 units.

i don't know what their goal was, but i do know sales ended up at around 2000. this was funny because the 2000 were all produced during calendar year 2001, when ford thought the vehicle would be a hit. unfortunately for ford, it failed. by the end of model year 2002 ford had sold only about three-quarters of the run, so they had to get new vin numbers and call the remainder "2003 models." that almost never happens anymore.

Well, no minivan ever proposed to be sold in the US ever looked as aggressive as that van.

as i said earlier - the ford galaxy (a model which was actually co-developed with volkswagen and is also known as the seat alhambra and volkswagen sharan) is too small for this market. the largest engine it's sold with in europe is a 198hp 2.8l v6, while the going rate for the us market is about 250 horsepower from a 3.5-liter. it wouldn't gel with our market.

Now that Chevrolet has dropepd in the 395HP LS2 and have the optional Tremec T56 manual available, it is the truck it should have been from the first place...

yeah - i bet the guys who bought the 5.3-liter ones are pretty upset now. sort of like the guys who bought the 5.7-liter gtos. regarding green lighting it... i read a great article in some economy-based magazine which mentioned that supposedly there's a saying at gm that out of the last ten projects showed to bob lutz, he's green-lighted eleven. maybe that's why his duties were scaled back. the article also strongly implied that the corporation and specifically rick wagoner has to keep him in check.

But that still doesn't explain why it weighs so much more than the donor vehicle. Hell, it weighs more than the vehicles in the next size class.

my figures show the ssr's weight at 4760lbs and the tahoe's at just over 5000.

 

[Tornado]

my figures show the ssr's weight at 4760lbs and the tahoe's at just over 5000.

Your figures are correct. They also don't prove anything. The Tahoe is an SUV, If you compare it to other 2WD trucks, you find what backs up my point. The '06 Ford F-150 4X2 Regular cab starts at 4670. The Chevrolet Silverado 2WD starts at 4211. The Toyota Tundra 2wd starts at 3935. The Doidge Ram starts at 4560.

 

[Joey D]

There is so much metal on the SSR it's not really surprising...go find one on a dealers lot and open the door...they weigh a ton.

 

[YSSMAN]

I was surprised by how heavy the SSR felt when I looked at it. If you knock on the pannels they sounded like metal which surprised me considering how huge the fender flares are. The doors weigh a ton, and I wouldnt be surprised if a lot of owners have problems opening them carefully in parking lots.

The interior was dissapointing, if anything... A mish-mosh of pieces from the Corvette, Silverado, and a few one-off pieces just for the SSR. If there was a pretty part of the truck beyond the overall exterior look it has to be the engine bay, but you have to special order the cool engine cover and the whatnot under the hood...

 

[skip0110]

I was surprised by how heavy the SSR felt when I looked at it. If you knock on the pannels they sounded like metal which surprised me considering how huge the fender flares are.

GM had to develop a new stamping process to be able to mass-produce those flares.

 

[Blackbird.]

as i said earlier - the ford galaxy (a model which was actually co-developed with volkswagen and is also known as the seat alhambra and volkswagen sharan) is too small for this market. the largest engine it's sold with in europe is a 198hp 2.8l v6, while the going rate for the us market is about 250 horsepower from a 3.5-liter. it wouldn't gel with our market.

Doesn't mean they couldn't have put an existing engine in the Aerostar or Freestar into that van over here in the US.

 

[skip0110]

Doesn't mean they couldn't have put an existing engine in the Aerostar or Freestar into that van over here in the US.

The Aerostar was RWD (what a mistake that was, based off the E-series van I believe)...so it's engines would not fit.

The Freestar uses huge 3.9 and 4.2 L V6es, which I doubt would fit under that sloping hood.

 

[1X83Z]

Your figures are correct. They also don't prove anything. The Tahoe is an SUV, If you compare it to other 2WD trucks, you find what backs up my point. The '06 Ford F-150 4X2 Regular cab starts at 4670. The Chevrolet Silverado 2WD starts at 4211. The Toyota Tundra 2wd starts at 3935. The Doidge Ram starts at 4560.

look - i wasn't making an opinion statement by posting those figures, nor do i have any idea why you brought it up. it's completely irrelevant to the discussion. regardless, you're comparing the ssr (which is a convertible and comes with all that weight-adding stuff) to literally the most stripped-down, cheapest trucks on the market. i don't even know if toyota sells short-bed short-box 2wd tundras, except in the car guides. i think the comparison is unfair - if you want to compare apples to apples, do ssr vs. trucks that actually are produced. or ssr vs. other convertible trucks. oh wait...

 

[1X83Z]

The Aerostar was RWD (what a mistake that was, based off the E-series van I believe)...so it's engines would not fit.

the majority of aerostars (which were indeed built on the e-series platform - called econoline at the time) featured something ford called "electronically-controlled all-wheel drive." point taken though and i agree whole-heartedly. i bet they could fit the 3-liter dohc that every other ford product uses, but it wouldn't be class-competitive, nor would it be an improvement over the 2.8-liter they currently use overseas.

at the end of the day, ford doesn't have an engine that is class-competitive in the minivan market, regardless of whether they have a competitive product.

 

[YSSMAN]

Speaking of convertable trucks, anyone remember the Dakota Convertable from the late '80s and early '90s?

...Wow, what a stupid idea that one was...