Ford invents the Turbo Charger...

[Dean]

Making news today... Just as Al Gore invented the Internet, Ford which recently invented the "Turbo charger" is demoing the "New Technology" in Colorado...

"The chief advantage, according to Ford, is that it offers V8 power with V6 fuel economy."

http://cars.about.com/b/2009/07/16/g...s-ecoboost.htm

OK, they appear to have invented Direct Fuel Injection as well...

The funny thing is that my STI (When it is running) offers V8 power with flat 4 fuel economy...

Welcome to the 1980s Ford...

[cody]

[AtomicLabMonkey]

Umm. Where did they claim to have invented either one?

[Dean]

They didn't... Just like Al Gore didn't really claim to invent the Internet... It is just this great "new" technology they are introducing... Next they will introduce the overhead cam and heated windshield washer nozzles.

[AtomicLabMonkey]

It's new for them. "Ecoboost" is just marketing hype, every mfg. does it.

[Dean]

I know, and I am making fun of them reintroducing Turbo chargers 30+ years after European and Japanese cars made them commonplace.

Heck, in the '60s the Corvair had one. There were a number of weak U.S. automaker attempts in the 70s and early 80s as well during the gas shortage.

I find it amusing that after years of whining about Cafe standards rather than doing something, now that at least for these 4 years, the direction is clear, they try an lightly embrace turbo technology.

Oh, and don't forget the $3000 incremental cost for a turbo 6 vs. a V8...

[100_Percent_Juice]

I wish I had an ecoboost subaru.

[sperry]

Since when are turbos new to Ford?


















^^ Direct injection like the EcoBoost, even!

[Dean]

They aren't, but they are marketing like they are this amazing new invention they can charge a premium for...

[100_Percent_Juice]

They are claiming it runs a little different than a standard turbo. It seems the same to me http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yu_moia-oVI

[Dean]

Yeah, it is made by BorgWarner, the same folks that made the Queen's corset/body parts...




Stupid cache...

[sperry]

Originally Posted by Dean

Yeah, it is made by BorgWarner, the same folks that made the Queen's corset/body parts...

owned.

[DaveWRX]

What are y'all talking about, I invented the turbo and Internet haha

[Dean]

I was thinking about Austin's comment about "marketing", and that is who is really responsible for the failure of U.S. auto industry. Companies run by marketing people and "Your father" rather than enthusiasts and engineers.

Build great cars, and they almost market themselves. The A4 didn't save Audi U.S. because of marketing, it was a great car despite standard Audi reliability issues.

Do we really need ads for Corvettes?

Did ads really sell Imprezas, Lancers, Minis?

Even the greatest ad is not going to make me want a Aztec or Scion Xb much less most of the U.S. product line. Wait, did I just unmake my point? Hope not... Lay off all the marketing people and hire drivers and engineers with a mental age of about 17-30! We only need 1 car for our parents/grandparents to drive. Heck, there is more engineering, style and cool stuff in a Honda Odyssey mini van than most U.S. cars. They are going to get passed by Kia and Hyundai at this rate.

Oh, and did anyone hear that the dealers who got shut down are whining to congress and may get their franchises back... Great...

I hope Toyota has a TDI pickup available to replace my F-150 by the time I want one.

[Kevin M]

There's a big difference between marketing campaigns for the vehicles being sold, and a complete corporate strategy built around marketing principles and trying to convince people to buy cheaply made junk. It's okay for the car companies to advertise; it's stupid for them to think a marketing campaign will sell an inferior product.

[100_Percent_Juice]

Originally Posted by Kevin M

it's stupid for them to think a marketing campaign will sell an inferior product.

Yet its been working for years.

[Kevin M]

Originally Posted by 100_Percent_Juice

Yet its been working for years.

No it hasn't. If it had, the Big 3 wouldn't be on the verge of bankruptcy. If GM's auto business has been a success, I'd hate to see what failure is.

[sperry]

Originally Posted by 100_Percent_Juice

Yet its been working for years.

You mean all those years that saw the big three lose all their market share to Japanese manufacturers and eventually resulted in the bankruptcy of two of them?

Truth is, it hasn't been working for years.

Edit: damn typing on an iPod is slow.

[100_Percent_Juice]

Originally Posted by Kevin M

No it hasn't. If it had, the Big 3 wouldn't be on the verge of bankruptcy. If GM's auto business has been a success, I'd hate to see what failure is.

So you are saying that their cars have only now become crap or that it has taken 30 years to finally catch up with them? Do you remember when the H2 came out? Do you think that so many people bought them because it was an incredible machine or because 50 Cent had one and it was the P I M P thing to have? Marketing has been able to sell crap for years. Just because they are getting beat by competition now doesn't change that fact.

[knucklesplitter]

Marketing has it's place, and it helps the shittiest crap sell despite itself, but it only goes so far, particularly with tangible longer-term pieces of engineering like automobiles. Something like a http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Mouth_Billy_Bass will benefit greatly from marketing because it really doesn't need to be useful or even remotely nice to sell like crazy. But people have cars for years and spend a lot of time in them, so if the car sucks then no amount of marketing can save it.

The H2 wasn't all about marketing though. It was a grown man's Tonka Toy that made him think he was driving a real Humvie (which were awesome pieces of engineering in their day). It appealed hugely to the neanderthal over-compensating needle-dick crowd just by showing up on the market. And then when Schwartzenegger got one and when 50 Cent put dubs on his it became iconic... until gas prices skyrocketed. Another thing that helped it was that the leftist liberal treehuggers just absolutely hated it, so that made it even more appealing to many people. I bet they could have done 0 formal marketing and that repugnant POS would still have been successful.

[100_Percent_Juice]

My original comment was to Kevin saying "it's stupid for them to think a marketing campaign will sell an inferior product." It has been working for years, its just now falling on its face because Americans have realized that there is a better alternative than what they have been fed. I agree with what you said. Even the best marketing cannot sustain the sale of a crappy car. The H2 is just a single example of many crappy cars that when first introduced sold like hotcakes because of marketing and now you don't see them anymore.

[Dean]

Originally Posted by 100_Percent_Juice

My original comment was to Kevin saying "it's stupid for them to think a marketing campaign will sell an inferior product." It has been working for years, its just now falling on its face because Americans have realized that there is a better alternative than what they have been fed. I agree with what you said. Even the best marketing cannot sustain the sale of a crappy car. The H2 is just a single example of many crappy cars that when first introduced sold like hotcakes because of marketing and now you don't see them anymore.

The U.S. industry has been failing for 30 years and the down economy caught them. The industry probably would have limped along for another 10-20 before with the good bits being bought by foreign competitors as they slowly died without the recession.

GM used to have 50% U.S. market share. In the '70s, the big three had 80%+, now it is half that. They failed to recognize the change in consumer wishes and kept trying to market the same old thing, or worse, the new thing that is way off the mark.

This graph is pretty interesting. It really shows them just failing to compete. No amount of "baseball, Hot Dogs, Apple Pie and Chevrolet" patriotism marketing can/could save them. They became uncompetitive both from a product and a cost perspective. You can't compete when you are paying the guy bolting seats into a car $70K+ including benefits...



People bitch about Wall St. wages, but most are proportional to the amount the employee brings to the bottom line. In the auto industry, the exceptional wages and benefits actually take away from the bottom line and profitability of the company... It will be very interesting now that the UAW owns a chunk of GM and Chrysler how they reconcile wages and the companies ongoing existence.

[knucklesplitter]

Originally Posted by Dean

They became uncompetitive both from a product and a cost perspective. You can't compete when you are paying the guy bolting seats into a car $70K+ including benefits...

How do Honda, Toyota, BMW, etc. do it producing cars in the US? They pay their line workers, engineers, and admin. staff pretty damned well. When I lived a few miles from the BMW plant in SC in the 90's they let the salaried people have company cars. Michelin US line workers can make $50k++ along with good benefits including a pension and 4 weeks paid vacation after 10 years, and Michelin is pretty competitive (and most of their BFG/Uniroyal plants are unionized too).

[Dean]

It is/was mostly the legacy costs. Just like Social security and Medicare for the baby boomers will bankrupt the U.S.A., the pensions and medical for UAW was going to kill the big 3.

And there is a difference between $50K and $70K for line workers...

[100_Percent_Juice]

This is starting to look a whole lot like Deja Vu.