Comments on: The Ford Ranger Rides Again?

By: justpbob

justpbob — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 15:43:25 +0000

Star Tribune, rather.

By: justpbob

justpbob — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 15:24:56 +0000

An update on the fate of the Saint Paul Ford plant, in today's PiPress.

By: yoder

yoder — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 22:31:52 +0000

"You can have two of the following three: safe, comfortable or fuel efficient, but not all three."

I just can't agree with that line of thinking. I understand that for every pound of weight you will affect the fuel efficiency, but our auto and engine designers are all quite capable of increasing fuel efficiency and performance to compensate. They have been able to do this since the 70's but have chosen not to. This has all been a black hole of fatalist thinking by the design teams who have taken the easy way out for twenty years, coupled with the management's "bottom line trumps everything".

If the big three had been working fuel efficiency into their design specs from the beginning they could have been incorporating minute improvements into their engine designs over the past twenty years. By now we would have F-350 super duties that got 35 mpg and they would be riding high on these high fuel prices while the rest of the world's automakers were running to catch up.

But that did not happen.

By: Lunch!

Lunch! — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 15:58:51 +0000

Hanso’s tentacles are everywhere.

By: kevin

kevin — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 15:55:44 +0000

I thought the Hanso Foundation ran DARPA?

By: justpbob

justpbob — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 15:49:25 +0000

Good point, Octaneboy. Tied to just about all of those 2,000 jobs are families members who could lose not only the income, but the health and dental insurance, the retirement benefits, you name it. The closing of the Ford plant would have a negative impact on many more than 2,000 workers.

By: Lunch!

Lunch! — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 15:46:52 +0000

It’s simple inertia in most cases. If the institution were traditionally innovative, then they would continue to be so. Even some gov’t agencies. Look at the awesome that is the CBO, DARPA or the BLS(pre its recent decapitation/lobotamy).

By: Tom B.

Tom B. — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 15:45:15 +0000

You can have two of the following three: safe, comfortable or fuel efficient, but not all three.

Might be a little safer out there if the typical Minnesotan didn't treat the freeway system like their own personal NASCAR track...

By: kevin

kevin — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 15:34:11 +0000

But I imagine Ford is like any business that is over a hundred years old, riddled with little fiefdoms and petty rivalries while shackled to an institutional culture that frowns upon innovation.

Or government. Innovation: bad. Institution: Good.

By: Lunch!

Lunch! — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 15:22:07 +0000

Oh and the reason why older rangers got better fuel efficiency is the improved safety and noise dampening(not very effective if you ask me) on newer models added to the weight… You can have two of the following three: safe, comfortable or fuel efficient, but not all three.