FordExcursions.com Forums
supercrewjohn
 |
|
• Monrovia, CA, USA |
|
• Registered on 6/13/2005 |
|
• 45 posts |
|
|
|
 Posted:7/25/2005 15:02 |
|
|
This is very sad. Excursions are one of the most versitile vehicles available. A 2500 Suburban does not compare with the towing power comfort or space as the excursion.
Has it been suggested to ford that the excursion is an extension of the f-250 superduty product lines and should share all of the same parts, and frame so that they could then just use spare line time to produce the Excursion or offer it as a special order vehicle like the SVT. In this case would the only component different would be the actual SUV frame? I am asuming that this plant also does not run 7 days x 24 right? From an MRP II or Kanban standpoint this would seem simple to plan. What are others opinions on this? |
|
LANDYOT
 |
 | 
• Subscriber since 11/23/2003 |
|
• Newport News, VA, USA |
|
• Registered on 7/15/2003 |
|
• 1,110 posts |
|
|
|
|
Posted:7/25/2005 16:00 |
|
|
|
From a LEAN perspective, I don't know why the Excursion is supposedly on a separate line at that plant. The X already shares chassis, engine, and transmission items with other models, plus a lot of the sheet metal is the same. The Excursion's long pole is all of the extra outfitting of interior items. Even so, it's not all that much more than a fully equipped F350 DRW. |
|
David Rush
 |
|
• Greenville, SC, USA |
|
• Registered on 4/11/2004 |
|
• 233 posts |
• 1
|
|
 Posted:7/25/2005 22:42 |
|
|
OK boys--prepare to puke. Below is the response I got from the "tree huggin, communist, Marxist, Stalinist, narcicisstic, egomaniacal, demented sociopath" who wrote the story. He's not anti-Excursion--hahahahahahahahaha--what a freakin joke! I don't know why I get irritated at these things--after all I expect nothing short of excellence in assaninity from the media types. I think we need to get "Arnold" to an Excursion ad with the final line--"I'll be back---you tree huggin sissies!!!"
Read and wretch!
Thank you for your note Mr. Rush,
The descriptions I have of the Excursion in the story are neither positive or negative. The story says the Excursion is the biggest mass-produced SUV on the road. When Ford released the vehicle, this was a selling point.
In describing why GM can afford to sell the Suburban while Ford can't afford to sell the Excursion, I have to point out that the vehicles are drastically different. The Excursion is much larger and heavier than the Suburban. Again, when large SUVs were popular, this was a selling point. Now that large SUVs are falling out of favor (something I attribute more to a larger number of vehicle choices and changing fashions than to high gas prices), the Excursion sticks out because of its size.
You say my "tone" denotes hostility toward the vehicle. The story stated that large SUV sales are falling. This is a non-biased observation of sales trends. I do not praise or insult the American buying public for choosing different vehicles. I simply observe that large SUV sales are sharply down this year. This is showing up even more with the Explorer, the other SUV that Ford builds here.
If I had said, "Americans have finally woken up to the fact that large SUVs are killing the environment and draining their wallets," that would have been a biased tone. To observe that large SUVs are declining, then note that the Excursion is the largest SUV on the road is simply observation and explanation. Large SUVs are becoming less popular, so Ford has less reason to build its largest SUV. Those paragraphs were in the story to explain to readers why Ford decided to cancel this vehicle. Early in the story, I said the cancellation came as no surprise, these paragraphs describing the poor sales and large size of the SUV were the explanations for that assertion.
You claim there was no reason to include comments from the Sierra Club, again I disagree. Ford's relationship to the environmental community often hinged on the Excursion. The group praised Bill Ford Jr. in 2002 when he promised to cancel it, and the groups stepped up their attacks on Ford in 2004 when he went back on that promise. Also, the Sierra Club's actions may have played a role in the falling popularity of SUVs in general and the Excursion particularly.
The Sierra Club has taken out advertisements in magazines, newspapers and television stations attacking SUVs. Their rhetoric on the Excursion was particularly sharp. In several public forums, the Sierra Club successfully used the Excursion as an example of automakers ignoring greater social needs (energy independence and environmental purity) for big profits. Ford never tried to counter the claims, they simply said they were providing what buyers wanted to drive.
That said, I believe I played the Sierra Club's statements where they belonged and treated them with a proper dose of skepticism. Had I led the story with "Environmental groups won a victory yesterday by killing off the worst SUV on the road," that would have been a clear example of bias. Putting three paragraphs at the bottom of the story, including a quote that offered Ford a minor compliment, is not promoting an environmental agenda. Like it or not, environmentalists are a big part of the SUV issue. To ignore them simply because I don't share their views would be a form of bias.
You claim that using Becker's quote shows my bias. By that, you assume that you know my views on this issue. You assume that I dislike large SUVs like the Excursion and that I'm happy that Ford is going to cancel it. And you come to this conclusion because of two inches at the bottom of a 25-inch story. I have no love or hate of any SUV on the road. I think small cars, especially two-seat convertibles like the old MGs or the BMW Z4, are more fun to drive than SUVs, but as I can afford neither a sports car nor an SUV, that's pretty much the end of my opinions on the matter.
Finally, you ask if I had anything favorable to say about the Excursion in the story. To you this is a balance issue. The only negative comment in the story was Becker's quote saying Ford was in the "dirty car" business with the Excursion. On the positive side, I called the Excursion the largest production SUV on the road (again, that was considered a positive when Ford began marketing the vehicle), I said it sold well in its first year and I said it was one of Ford's most profitable products. So that's three positive comments about the vehicle versus one negative. If you decided to include factual assertions such as the Excursion's poor fuel economy and high weight, then we have three positive versus three negative, something a lot of observers would consider balanced.
I understand that the Excursion has a very loyal group of followers, and you don't like to read about bad things that happen to your treasured SUV. While I respect your passion for this product, I don't share it. If I did share it, I would have no business writing about the Excursion for a newspaper. My job is to present the information available as dispassionately as possible, and in this case, I believe I succeeded. I would urge you to read the story again. Pay attention not only to what information I included but where I placed that information. In the news business, the most important information goes first and the least vital stuff goes last. In that context, examine where I put the Sierra Club's importance in this article.
Again, thank you for writing,
Robert
Oh Robbie boy--quote mileage figures for a Suburban--opps 15/19 14/18 with the footnote that these are GM estimates---not EPA---I get 11/16--- 
Well Robbie boy being the cry baby you are--->   |
|
supercrewjohn
|
|
• Monrovia, CA, USA |
|
• Registered on 6/13/2005 |
|
• 45 posts |
|
|
|
|
Posted:7/26/2005 10:47 |
|
|
|
Exactly.. I agree with you. the only difference seems to be in the X wheelbase which is 137 vs the 143 or 150 something of a crew cab with a 6 3/4 bed. If you legthened the x so that it matched the wheelbase of the crew cab that would an even more comfortable ride. |
|
supercrewjohn
|
|
• Monrovia, CA, USA |
|
• Registered on 6/13/2005 |
|
• 45 posts |
|
|
|
|
Posted:7/26/2005 10:50 |
|
|
How can we contact the nazi that wrote that article? I belive we should send a number of articles to that gentleman demostrating that the X may not be for everyone, however there is a segment of our economy that does have a need and use, and by the way, does this gentleman have any plastic's in his house  |
|
E. Long
 |
• Subscriber since 1/1/2001 |
|
• Atlanta, GA, USA |
|
• Registered on 1/23/2001 |
|
• 2,229 posts |
• 1
|
|
|
Posted:7/26/2005 12:12 |
|
|
I guess his comments like, "Also, the Sierra Club's actions may have played a role in the falling popularity of SUVs in general and the Excursion particularly." are what lead me to believe that he's giving the Sierra Club more credit than they deserve. It's all speculation at this point, who knows what Ford is thinking. Considering the types of people in the market for Excursions (us), I think they take the Sierra Club comments with a grain of salt.
The Excursion is a niche vehicle and maybe there's only a handful of us out there that want them. The first year of the Excursion was an extreme success because no other vehicle like it had been offered before. Now in its 5th year of production, sales are slowing considerably, perhaps because the market niche is not as big as Ford previously thought. At the large profit margins the Excursion brought home for Ford, the Sierra Club's comments couldn't have meant much to them, particularly because the Excursion is so similar to the SuperDuty line-up. Maybe Ford always knew that the Exucrsion line had a 5-year shelf life and that's why they never spent the bucks to defend its production?
The only thing the Sierra Club's comments would have done would be to hurt sales overall on Ford vehicles as a result of people boycotting Ford for being in the "dirty car" business. People who dislike the Excursion were probably never in the market for one anyway.
Also, his comments about a vehicle being "fun to drive." MGs, BMWs, etc. can't tow 10,000 lbs and are built for a completely different purpose. I don't think dump trucks are fun to drive either, but they certainly serve their purpose in certain markets. The comparison he made doesn't make sense to me.
-Eric
'67 Galaxie 500 - 390 FE, .030" over, FE to AOD adapter, disc brake conversion. The Daily Driver.
'00 Excursion - 7.3L PSD, LANDYOT Gen-II Radius Rods, Factory Tech Valve Body, 200K+ miles and going |
|
|
|
