digg

Join DiggAbout

Donkeys and Elephants and Delegates,oh my!
Check out the most popular Elections 2008 content on Digg.

See the original image at gas2.org

Ford Decides To Start Producing More Fuel-Efficient Cars

gas2.org — Like GM, Ford Decides They ’d Better Start Producing Smaller, More Fuel-Efficient Cars

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • skewl, on 07/25/2008, -1/+34The World’s Most Fuel Efficient Car: 285 MPG, Not A Hybrid
    • claybodie, on 07/25/2008, -1/+18That would be VW's 1L car, here: http://gas2.org/2008/03/12/the-worlds-most-fuel-ef ...
      • kingmanic, on 07/26/2008, -3/+9Thats not a car. It's a motorcycle with a casing. Still impressive for a motorcycle.
      • marx2k, on 07/26/2008, -1/+1It's got 4 wheels? It's a car
      • EtherGnat, on 07/26/2008, -0/+1It's only 285mpg if you're using the larger imperial gallons. For those of us in the USA it's 235mpg (confusing ain't it?). It costs the same to run as a gas vehicle that gets 197mpg due to the higher cost of diesel; about a quarter to run what it would cost to run a Prius.

        That's impressive, but not terribly surprising considering the Prius is 4.5 times heavier and has 13 times the horsepower of the 1L.
    • santaliqueur, on 07/26/2008, -0/+14The world's most efficient prototype. It's not useful unless you can buy it.
    • s1mph0ny, on 07/26/2008, -1/+1A prototype already put into production. It will cost an obscene amount, but it's no longer just a prototype.
    • Rickler, on 07/26/2008, -1/+2..., has nothing to do with the article.
    • Nubli, on 07/26/2008, -1/+2285 mpg and no power whatsoever.
    • LeeSoong, on 07/26/2008, -3/+4Meh.

      Still uses burning fossil fuels.

      Solar recharged compressed air cars:

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QmqpGZv0YT4

      no big battery, no pollution, light weight construction,
      and the future of automotive technology.
      • Spuy767, on 07/26/2008, -1/+3Cause that's practical. Use a fuel with a much lower energy density, but use the same inefficient, complicated internal combustion design. That car is an epic fail.
      • LeeSoong, on 08/04/2008, -0/+1There is no combustion engine in a compressed air engine - ah, because there is no combustion:

        http://www.engineair.com.au/

        Burning fuel or transporting heavy batteries is not as efficient as a simple clean compressed air engine:

        You can pick up an Air Engine with one hand:

        http://www.engineair.com.au/images/airmotor1.jpg

        And since there is no combustion, you don't need a catalytic converter, complex exhaust system, etc.

        One Air Engine explained:
        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dq8aZVLpf-c

        The air coming out of an air car is usually cleaner then the air surrounding the car - because it has been filtered twice, once on the way in, and again on the way out.

    • plnegative1, on 07/26/2008, -1/+1It'd be fun getting hit by a truck in that thing....
  • jstohler, on 07/25/2008, -2/+109Hey, Ford -- mail this idea to 5 years ago when it might have done you some good.
  • Nezacant, on 07/25/2008, -8/+51Think they'll try to make cars that don't suck next?
    • itsme92, on 07/26/2008, -2/+6Yep. It says they're going to start selling their European models over here. Ford Europe makes some really good cars, I've been wondering for a while why they don't sell them here.

      Even though I think they're Euro models will sell well, Ford, as well as GM and Chrysler, still have a long uphill battle due to their union obligations that put them at a several thousand dollars cost disadvantage compared with Toyota, Honda, etc.
      • KayIslandDrunk, on 07/26/2008, -4/+2Maybe because they're ugly as hell and most don't pass our safety requirements?
      • carpespasm, on 07/26/2008, -0/+2Honestly, I wish I were able to buy an ugly little tin can if it meant I don't have to shell out 60 bucks at the pump at least once a week. There wouldn't be anything stopping auto makers from making very safe cars if we lowered safety standard (or at least made them less weight dependant). I'd kill for a kei car in the US.
      • marx2k, on 07/26/2008, -0/+5@KayIslandDrunk: Yeah, because America doesn't have some ugly cars rolling around on the road.
      • KayIslandDrunk, on 07/26/2008, -2/+1@marx2k Have you seen the three announced cars Ford is planning to bring to the US?
      • marx2k, on 07/26/2008, -0/+2Can't be any worse than the PT Cruiser, the HHR, etc..
      • KayIslandDrunk, on 07/27/2008, -0/+1@ marx2k Can you show me where I said that the US didn't make ugly cars? I'm just saying the ones they're thinking of bringing over are hideous.
    • linagee, on 07/26/2008, -0/+3You'll think it doesn't suck once they force it down your throat. What, you thought that car companies actually design around what people want, or what they want people to like? Advertising is a powerful thing to sway people's minds.
  • thethinktank, on 07/25/2008, -8/+7Hopefully this will mean they'll make a stronger push toward flex fuel capable cars as well. 2nd gen biofuels FTW!!
    • skiblur, on 07/26/2008, -1/+1$15 corn on the cob! FTW!!
      • Spuy767, on 07/26/2008, -0/+1That's FTL.
      • york2600, on 07/26/2008, -1/+1Corn is the cheapest ***** ever thanks to our subsidies. Even with rising corn prices it's still insanely cheap. Oh no. Corns not 25 cents a pop. What will I do? End of the world
      • EtherGnat, on 07/26/2008, -0/+2@york

        Who do you think pays those subsidies? You're paying for it one way or the other, whether it's at the grocery store or not.
    • hansolo, on 07/26/2008, -0/+3Biofuels does not have to mean corn.

      Look at Brazil and their use of sugar.

      There are many other alternatives than corn and we should shed the shackles of corn corporations (AMD, etc) and move forward.
  • AlaskaLoneWolf, on 07/25/2008, -1/+24Wow, I guess the mail service at Ford runs a little on the slow side.
    • LeeSoong, on 07/26/2008, -0/+3Did they get the memo ?


      - Yeah. Now Ford, if you could come in on Sunday, that would be Great.

      And remember, it's Hawaiian Shirt day.

      Ok then...
  • richdinatlanta, on 07/25/2008, -1/+14I think the conversion will not be an easy nor quick process since they are so late to the game. I hope they can withstand the lean times until the production move is made; they are already feeling the pinch as they slip behind Toyota in sales for the first time ever.
    • secrity, on 07/26/2008, -0/+3They could go a long ways simply by selling some of their European models is the US.
  • claybodie, on 07/26/2008, -0/+47Funny how it takes losing billions of dollars to make them finally realize the inevitable...
    • carpespasm, on 07/26/2008, -0/+3pfft, They didn't see the problem. The president's been losing trillions and still hasn't realize the inevitable.
  • davidryal, on 07/26/2008, -1/+20Didn't I hear about an eco-revolution at Ford a few years back when a young, eco-friendly CEO descendant of Henry Ford took over? Looks like that went a long way... to crapsville.
  • badwithcomputer, on 07/26/2008, -4/+19They should really start producing Japanese cars if they want a product people are interested in.
    • grumpyrain, on 07/26/2008, -0/+16They actually have some nice cars ..... in Europe.
    • wazzledoozle2, on 07/26/2008, -4/+5Check out the Ford fiesta. It's coming to North America.... in 2010. Bravo Ford, you might as well give up selling cars on this continent.
    • heliox, on 07/26/2008, -2/+5From thier quarterly report:

      "Overseas, Ford posted a $582 million profit in Europe and $388 million in South America. The company also made $50 million at its Asia-Pacific-Africa division."
      • ma6ic4l, on 07/26/2008, -2/+5Compared to Honda:

        "Honda, Japan's No. 2 automaker, earned a better-than-expected 179.6 billion yen ($1.68 billion) in the April-June quarter, up 8.1 percent from the same period the previous year."

        http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080725/japan_earns_honda.h ...

        The american auto industry has performed so badly, their boards of directors should be arrested for defrauding investors.


    • mike17032, on 07/26/2008, -2/+1Ya you keep over paying for those rice burners.
      • ShrimpCrackers, on 07/27/2008, -0/+1Ahem, underpaying. Americans vote with their wallet, and they have voted many times.
  • hep2djive, on 07/26/2008, -13/+5I still prefer my Dodge
    • Spuy767, on 07/26/2008, -0/+4The ugliness of Chrysler's stable cannot be expressed in mere words.
    • marx2k, on 07/26/2008, -0/+4Al Bundy loved his Dodge
  • ecochildsplay, on 07/26/2008, -1/+15It's about time!
  • Fangsinmybeard, on 07/26/2008, -1/+11It's about GD "f"ing time!
    • santaliqueur, on 07/26/2008, -1/+10It's about god-damn ***** time you use real curses.
  • MadMeninc, on 07/26/2008, -8/+20wow if this was 2003 i would say FORD is doing a great job, but after years of selling dangerous, gigantic gas guzzling, behemoths to stupid redneck. But this is 2008 and the only people making cheap fuel efficient cars is INDIA!, INDIA is making better cars then then USA. That just makes me sick, then i bought a Mercies Smart, and everything was good! (it gets 50 MPG and cost 12,000.00 NEW)
    • s1mph0ny, on 07/26/2008, -7/+12Congratulations, you have the worlds nicest golf cart.
    • cheezintern, on 07/26/2008, -6/+8Let us know how you're doing after a 'redneck' in a ford expedition gets into a fender bender with you.
      • wazzledoozle2, on 07/26/2008, -2/+5http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ju6t-yyoU8s

        Ford Expedition may have larger crumple zones, but the fiberglass body would still be totaled.
      • JAWS, on 07/26/2008, -0/+3Seriously, at the core of the SmartCar is the Mercedes racing roll-cage. It's likely a damn-sight better in a collision than an SUV that will likely as not roll because it's center of gravity is too high.
    • Hurricane, on 07/26/2008, -0/+3Unless you count all the small "Japanese" cars built in the USA.
      • ShrimpCrackers, on 07/27/2008, -0/+1...for tax purposes, and using Japanese manufacturing machinery.
    • plnegative1, on 07/26/2008, -2/+1MadMeninc trucks are bought because some people actually do manual labor and have to carry ***** around. It doesn't make you a redneck to drive one you dumb *****. Sorry they're not a pussy like you that drives some tiny car to carry around his macbook and would cry if he had to move anything large and heavy that can't fit inside a car.
  • clickwir, on 07/26/2008, -3/+14Wow... so surprised. Yet again Ford is years late with the idea that many others have not only had, but implemented AND done it well. Go Honda.
  • Jb611, on 07/26/2008, -7/+6Like The Submitter, I Capitalize The First Letter Of Each Word.
  • Insanekingkong, on 07/26/2008, -1/+11Hmm.... I wonder if this decision has anything to do with this revelation: http://www.ecomodder.com/blog/2008/07/25/ford-post ...
  • fredrockbluff, on 07/26/2008, -3/+2henry would be pissed
  • EpiXl33t, on 07/26/2008, -4/+10too little too late
  • DeFex, on 07/26/2008, -1/+6remember that horse? well its has been gone for a while, why not shut the door now.
    • heliox, on 07/26/2008, -1/+3So should all manufactures g back to V8's and SUVs?
      Don't be a dick
  • Qtip42, on 07/26/2008, -9/+1I blame the CEOs and I blame the industry in general. The automotive industry is so used to polishing turds at the start of every year that they completely forgot how to innovate. This is what happens when you OVER REGULATE an industry.
    • cheezintern, on 07/26/2008, -0/+4I dunno about over regulation. More like give the industry everything their lobbyists have ever asked for....i.e. cafe standards, or lack thereof..
    • Qtip42, on 07/26/2008, -2/+2I'd love to hear more responses as to why I'm being dugg down. The regulation comment I'm sure can be argued but I'd love to know who thinks auto makers are really "innovating" ......They can give something a new body with a different engine and more options but that's it. They've dumbed down car owners so much that they get amazed when they put an ipod dock or a computer in the car. Extra tv? no problem. Bluetooth? sure...

      But god help you if you ask for an alternative engine or anything with current computer technology. You'd think with car updates every year they could keep up with technology trends at least.

      oh and dont ask for a luxury interior in any of these tiny rides that get decent mileage now. Luxury and tiny don't go together.

      There is absolutely no innovation in that industry.
      • FairDinkumMate, on 07/26/2008, -0/+1I think you need to look at these same companies offerings overseas to understand how much poor regulation & the subsidising of oil in the US has affected things. Ford for example, sell 'flex fuel' cars in Brazil, highly efficient diesel cars in Europe and generally much more modern fuel efficient engines in ALL of their foreign markets. GM does the same thing. These companies do innovate, just not in North America!
        Artificially reduced oil prices in the US combined with a huge lack of effective emission standards virtually forced these companies to not innovate in the US as there was no demand at the time for the type of vehicles they were selling in the rest of the world. That said, they were both very slow in catching on to the moving sentiment(obviously accelerated by oil prices going through the roof). Both Ford & GM not only can but do already build the vehicles required now, so they definitely have the technology. It will just take them time to make the necessary adjustments to their North American manufacturing & design facilities. Let's hope that SOMEONE, ANYONE in government realizes that the best way to reduce oil dependence is by tackling supply & DEMAND and either regulates or otherwise encourages the automotive companies to help achieve this.
      • Qtip42, on 07/26/2008, -0/+1Ok that narrowed what I said down a little better. They need to bring the tech over here if they've got it. I shouldn't be so quick to say they dont innovate at all, rather, dont innovate in america.
  • bizsumpark182, on 07/26/2008, -1/+6Well I guess its better late then never.
  • blackdude, on 07/26/2008, -1/+11"Like GM, Ford Decides They ’d Better Start Producing Smaller, More Fuel-Efficient Cars" before they run out of business.
    • linagee, on 07/26/2008, -1/+2Too little too late. They are deciding they want to be in a race that Honda / etc has been in for years now...
  • blacktriangle, on 07/26/2008, -2/+6Its too late.
  • DeFex, on 07/26/2008, -4/+4some people insist on buying crap, they made it look like old crap from the 70s they firs had sex in.
    • santaliqueur, on 07/26/2008, -1/+6Random Digger: "It's like sex, except I'm having it!"
  • brickbat, on 07/26/2008, -1/+6You are a god damn genius Gump.
  • kingmanic, on 07/26/2008, -2/+30profit margin on SUV : Gigantic
    profit margin on luxury car: Good
    profit margin on hybrid: Acceptable
    profit margin on economy car:terrible, sometimes very close to a loss after incentives

    The above points are why most of the Car companies pushed SUV's. The profit was huge as the materials weren't that much more expensive then an economy car but the margins were. This cash cow hid a lot of under lying problems and management problems. The waves of incentives domestic companies offered to keep up sales volumes with generally better made domestic imports (Many of Toyota's, Honda's etc... cars are made in the US/Canada.) The problems with incentives is they undermined the value of the car by undermining the resale value. Mass "lease" and fleet agreements also reduced the long term value proposition of domestic cars but to let the foreign companies eat their market would do something similar. So they instead hid a lot of their mistakes within the profit margins of SUV's.
    • santaliqueur, on 07/26/2008, -12/+2If your retarded logic held up, these companies would not be in such financial trouble, since the "gigantic" profits on SUVs and trucks would carry them through hard times.
      • TheMachine1, on 07/26/2008, -1/+11Kingmanic logic's is fine. People in the US mostly wanted SUV's and trucks and paid a premium for those. Now that gas has skyrocket you can not even sale a used SUV or truck at all but deep discounts.
      • linagee, on 07/26/2008, -0/+1Gigantic profits are already going somewhere and that's in their pockets. Overseas companies are not as greedy.
    • linagee, on 07/26/2008, -0/+2But an SUV is a HUGE vehicle! Surely it costs exponential amounts more! (/sarcasm)
  • BluFire, on 07/26/2008, -1/+4bout time
  • matt2m, on 07/26/2008, -4/+3For the love of god I hope one of the euro models they bring over here is the euro focus. Also they should make a turbo diesel i know its more expensive per gallon but around 55 mpg will make it worth it. But no matter I am getting an 07' G35 no matter how high a gallon of premium is.
    • secrity, on 07/26/2008, -2/+2I hate diesel; anything that touches diesel gets dirty, and the fuel and the exhaust smells horrible.
      • computershack, on 07/26/2008, -1/+3That's because you're talking about the ***** you get in the USA. In Europe, we've moved on a fair bit with diesel technology like the rest of our automotive industry whilst the USA has remained firmly in the last millennia.
      • secrity, on 07/26/2008, -0/+1At one of the few filling stations near me that sells diesel; the concrete in front of the (single) diesel pump is badly stained with diesel fuel, and the stench of diesel fuel is very strong in the station. The concrete in front of the gasoline pumps isn't stained and there isn't any gasoline smell -- even though there may be a dozen gasoline pumps.

        I live sort of near to an Interstate highway and if the wind is coming from the wrong direction I can smell the exhaust from the vehicles on the highway -- I only smell diesel exhaust, not gasoline exhaust.

        Somebody in my condo complex owns a newer diesel powered pickup truck, the only reason I notice that it is diesel powered is because I can smell the exhaust. I very seldom smell the exhaust from gasoline powered vehicles, and when I do, it is because the engine is running too rich.
    • webweave, on 07/26/2008, -0/+0Well I love my Jetta TDi wagon. I burn bio diesel made right here in my area and I get 55 mpg on the highway. The slick little 5 speed is a blast to drive. It's big enough to fit all my music gear into the back. Who else makes a car like this? NOBODY! Oh wait a minute there are tons of them in Europe but only one in America, how stupid.
  • mattmedwards, on 07/26/2008, -3/+18As someone who has lived most of his life in the Detroit metro, Ford's epiphany does not suprise me one bit. The Big 3 are so mired in the past glory days of Detroit, they can't fathom a USA without Ford, Chrysler, and GM. The UAW is to blame for this as well, making outrageous demands that shackled the automakers indefinitely to exborbinant pension plans.

    Case in point: my uncle graduated from high school, got an assembly job at GM, quickly made over 60,000 a year with FULL medical and a FULL pension, which he was able to tap after only 2 decades of work. Those were back in the days when you could have a decent middle class existence with a high school diploma.

    Compare that to your average $60,000 earner in this generation. Goes to high school, pays $80,000 for a good college, the goes to grad / professional school, thereby sinking another 80-100,000 in loans that must be paid back. The you can start that job making 60-70k a year.
    • kingmanic, on 07/26/2008, -0/+5The big 3 have management vs worker type cultures. The Japanese ones tend to go a different route. Actively trying to work with the workers. I "hear" that Toyota and Honda don't have as many union problems because their management and workers are less "us vs them". The less confrontational nature has saved them money but I don't know that much. It may be PR. Jap execs have changed in the past 20 years but there is still perceived to be a higher price placed on loyalty to ones workers.
    • ma6ic4l, on 07/26/2008, -0/+4When it was created, the UAW's initial pension/health care concept was to pool benefits into an industry wide fund, which would have mitigated the long term burdens on individual companies. The manufacturers rejected this out of hand. Had they taken the deal, their long term labor costs would have been spread out dramatically.

      The manufacturers showed the same foresight up until now in predicting demand for gas guzzlers.

      Do a little research before blaming labor for the american auto industries problems please.
      • mattmedwards, on 07/26/2008, -0/+1OK I wasn't aware of that. I will look into this. Didn't mean to blame the UAW exclusively. (I'm pro-union and I have belonged to several unions myself.) Overall, I think the Big 3 and the UAW haven't kept up with the times. There is plenty of blame to go around.
  • lostray423, on 07/26/2008, -0/+0durrrrrrr, no *****!
  • tofslie, on 07/26/2008, -0/+8I think people need to read the article before spouting off "WILL TAKE FOREVER TO GET DA CARS".

    They already have 6 models in Europe that are smaller and more fuel efficient. (and the styling is much much better) They plan on releasing them to the US in 2010.

    It is ridiculous they have not introduced them earlier when Toyota and Honda started eating away where it hurts.
    • corripio, on 07/26/2008, -0/+1Yup, and they were pretty much the first American company to offer hybrids and had plans to offer more vehicles as hybrids (back when gas was still $1.50). They were one of the few American companies that has actually been bringing these products to the table, not just talking about it.

      //Still don't like Ford, still think the car industry is run by idiots.
  • heliox, on 07/26/2008, -9/+4You diggtards never stop amazing me.
    You praise and cum all over Honda and the other companies that do fuel efficient cars
    Now that a US car company does, it's not good enough, or too late or whatever.
    • meekamoo, on 07/26/2008, -2/+3err... well it IS too late?

      While the rest of the world started producing fuel efficient car's a LONG time ago when the problem started. If US car co's started doing this a long time ago then things would be different. Look at how many gas guzzlers are on the roads right now. The oil price problem is here NOW and these cars will take years to filter down into the public. If they started when they should have the process would already be underway as we speak.

      • FairDinkumMate, on 07/26/2008, -0/+1@meekamoo - I kind of agree with your sentiment but I think your reasoning is off.

        Both Ford & GM produce innovative cars including 'flex fuel' in Brazil & highly efficient diesels in Europe, not to mention just plain old much more efficient gasoline engines in the rest of the world. So, the US car co's DID start doing this a long time ago, just not in North America.

        These companies have operated in a North American market where the government subsidised oil(keeping down the price of gasoline) which spurred consumer demand for luxury & size ahead of fuel efficiency. The rest of the worl meanwhile was taxing oil, spurring consumer demand for efficiency & innovation. The taxing of oil was a deliberate strategy in most countries to force consumers to demand better fuel efficiency, which forced car companies to deliver it. This strategy has been in play in Europe, Australia, etc since the 70's oil shock. In 1970, global vehicle fleet fuel efficiency was virtually level(in fact the US lead the way!) but in 2008 the European vehicle fleet is twice as fuel efficient as that of the US. How did the US fall so far behind in 35 years? You can't simply blame the companies for not innovating as the same companies compete in both markets.
    • computershack, on 07/26/2008, -0/+3That's because you're about a DECADE behind the rest of the world.
    • linagee, on 07/26/2008, -0/+2Truth hurts.
  • andy314159pi, on 07/26/2008, -5/+2Karma marginalized Ford and it couldn't be funnier.
  • f15ric, on 07/26/2008, -4/+1Critics, but what have the majority of you geniuses done to make a better car?
    • Lewie, on 07/26/2008, -1/+5What do you want us to do, start our own car companies? What we (I) have done is buy fuel efficient cars, rewarding the companies that make them. If Ford wants my business, they can start mimicking Japanese and European companies.

      Even if I was an engineer and wanted to build a fuel efficient vehicle 2 years ago, Ford Headquarters would've said "Shut the ***** up and slap those steel I-beams on that Excursion".
  • o0justice0o, on 07/26/2008, -5/+5Honda: Yeahhh, did ya get the memo? (office space fashion)
  • thallium205, on 07/26/2008, -6/+4Wow... all without government intervention.. this is freedom people. This is a shining of example that the free market can adapt quicker and more fair than anything the government could ever do.
    • Elliuotatar, on 07/26/2008, -0/+4Um, what?

      Ford is making their cars more fuel efficient because gas prices are high. It's no surprise that they'd do this without government intervention.

      But try taking away the EPA regulations and see what happens. Not all government regulation is about saving people money. Much of it is about saving people from themselves. And that's what gas mileage regulations are really about. Not saving a few bucks on gas, but preventing our cites from becoming like Beijing.

      This "free market" you speak of won't work in that kind of situation, because even if people would like to purchase clean cars or safe cars, if they're twice as expensive than the dirty unsafe ones, you get a chatch-22 where people won't buy them because they're expensive, and the price won't come down because people won't buy them.
      • linagee, on 07/26/2008, -0/+1The public is short sighted and won't see pollution pouring from cars before it's too late? Hrm...
    • FairDinkumMate, on 07/26/2008, -0/+2Do some research thallium & you may understand why the same car companies(Ford & GM) sell VERY efficient cars in Europe, South America & generally the world & gas-guzzler in the US. The European market has much higher(taxed!) fuel costs & it has driven innovation & efficiency. The US market has had much lower(subsidised) fuel costs & where is it now - it went from the leading technological vehicle market to the most backward in the developed world in 35 years!

      If anyone in the US government had the balls to even cut the oil companies subsidies over the past decades, the US vehicle fleet wouldn't be where it is today & the entire economy wouldn't be as susceptible to foreign controlled oil interests.
  • RUGERSP101, on 07/26/2008, -2/+10A few years ago I bought a Ford Focus brand new for less then 13,000 off the lot. Its fuel economy is slightly worse then a Prius, and the carbon it emits per mile driven is slightly better. Its easy to point fingers at truck and suv manufacturers now that oil is super high, but just remember SUV's were popular because people wanted them, not because Ford or GM decided to make them. The public at large has made poor and short sighted decisions, and now that the effect is being felt personal responsibility goes out the window and all the blame lands on these "evil" corporations.
    • Hurricane, on 07/26/2008, -1/+1How well is the Focus holding up?
    • Elliuotatar, on 07/26/2008, -4/+1If you buy a new car in the next few years, get a Versa. You'll love it. I had a Focus myself until last year. The Versa has the same specs for storage capacity, mileage, weight, and power, but I get tons of compliments on the looks, and where the Focus felt underpowered, with squishy brakes, the Versa feels just right. I don't know how a car with the same power to weight ratio can feel so much different as far as acceleration and braking goes, but it does. Also the Versa has a higher safety rating. One of the best in its class.
  • Hurricane, on 07/26/2008, -3/+1The 2 words "quality" and "Ford" have not had much connection for a few decades now.
    I think them and GM should merge, and bring some more jobs back into America while they are at it.
  • Elliuotatar, on 07/26/2008, -3/+4I used to have a Ford Focus. I've vowed never to buy another. I now have a Nissan Versa.

    I hope in addition to making the cars smaller and more fuel efficient they also improve their designs.

    The two cars are identical in every way specs wise, yet the Versa has one of the best safety ratings, noticeably snappier acceleration and braking, and actually has windshield wipers which return to the default position when you turn them off. Also, the console doesn't feel cheap.

    And Ford wonders why they're doing so poorly.
    • secrity, on 07/26/2008, -0/+3I have a Focus, and I like it. On the open Interstate at 65 - 70 MPH it gets over 40MPG
  • Matrix_Prime, on 07/26/2008, -3/+3Ford isn't going to be in business long enough to have any impact in the "fuel-efficient" market.
  • wh3873, on 07/26/2008, -2/+2It can't be, market forces correcting a problem. People want better gas mileage and now they are going to get it. This is how things are supposed to work. To be honest I would buy a car that pollutes more if it got better gas mileage. Welcome to a free market, it works, deal with it.
  • pigfister, on 07/26/2008, -6/+1imo everyone should boycott all American brands because of the warmongering, murdering, ***** that control the country.

    boycott ford....
  • sphira, on 07/26/2008, -1/+2who needs fuel efficient cars when there are going to be few drivers -

    http://digg.com/other_sports/We_re_no_better_than_ ...
  • computershack, on 07/26/2008, -3/+10All they need to do is fire everyone who works in the US division of Ford and just import their cars from Ford Europe instead. Better build quality and far better gas mileage for a neglible if any drop in performance. Ford can design and build good cars - just not in America. In Europe, the MK3 Ford Mondeo is compared to the likes of the 3 series BMW, Merc C Class and Jaguar and Jeremy Clarkson from Top Gear said it was one of the best cars of the year.

    Quote:
    " And this of course brings us nicely on to the Ford Mondeo. Every single time I drove one I emerged from the experience thinking, “Why doesn’t everyone own one of these?” It was just so simple. A perfect poached egg, on a perfect piece of toast.

    It handled beautifully, it was surprisingly fast, it was roomy and practical, and if you actually took away the familiarity it was also extremely good looking. Much better than a BMW 3-series, or a Mercedes C-class. Better too than the Jaguar X-type that it spawned. "

    Jeremy Clarkson - The Times supplement.

    Currently getting 60MPG out of my four year old Ford Mondeo TDCi 2 litre and that's with 109,000 miles on the clock. Does 0-60 in under 10 seconds - from a diesel. Still looks like new - there's no indication of wear even on the usual places you'd expect to find it such as the drivers seat.

    So yeah, Ford can build decent cars but they only manage to do it in markets that expect high quality unlike the US where people seem to put shoddy design and workmanship down to "that's just the way they are."
  • liuite, on 07/26/2008, -1/+2Fuel Our Roadster Daily
    For Our Rich Daddy
  • karokeking, on 07/26/2008, -2/+1Ford wakes up, smells coffee..........
  • Crana, on 07/26/2008, -0/+6Ford have some really efficient (and nice!) cars in Europe so it really shouldn't be so hard for them. Hell, A Ford Fiesta probably gets about 50mpg.
  • CJPixels, on 07/26/2008, -1/+1It seems to me all automobile makers of large gas guzzlers should have been thinking and planning and putting into effect fuel efficient cars a long time ago.
  • balthisar, on 07/26/2008, -1/+1Wow. It's incredible how so many of the above comments are so ignorant of today's realities.
  • corripio, on 07/26/2008, -1/+1Just get a bike and drive less.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 65 of 65 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.