Here is an article on Car of the Year Flops

[DavidA]

Re: Here is an article on Car of the Year Flops

Dot: I knew you'd be there to correct me. I never was good at statistics as you well know.

[lasuvidaboy]

Re: Here is an article on Car of the Year Flops

Based on production numbers, I wonder if the 1955-'57 was considered a 'flop'? Speaking of flops, the entire 1958 Detroit line-up was considered a huge flop due to the severe recession of that year.

[4LOWBIRDS+7]

Re: Here is an article on Car of the Year Flops

Based on production numbers, I wonder if the 1955-'57 was considered a 'flop'? Speaking of flops, the entire 1958 Detroit line-up was considered a huge flop due to the severe recession of that year.

YOU FORGOT THE RAMBLERS.

[Peterfurlan]

Re: Here is an article on Car of the Year Flops

Again be objective and research before you post. Yes we were in a recession in 1958. But the 1958 Thunderbird sold over 16,000 more units than the 1957. I don't
know maybe four seats are better than two. At any rate I would think Ford considered
the 1958 to be a success. In Fords eyes the 1955-1957 Birds were flops or they would have continued production. A company like Ford is not there to keep a few
people happy and continue production of a loser they just want to make tons of
money.

[5bird7]

Re: Here is an article on Car of the Year Flops

John, Ford never considered the early Tbird a flop but they had already intended to make it a 4 seater by the beginning of the 56 model year as it takes two years to get a car to production. The 55 met production requirements and then some but they are in the car business to make money and a 4 seater outsells 2 seaters.

[jerrym3]

Re: Here is an article on Car of the Year Flops

I don't know the production number on my 03, but it was built Feb, 2003.

(Dot, do you know when production changed from the 02 to 03?)

True, a car can hit it's design target (and not be a flop in that respect) and yet not make it's sales target (flop) due to many reasons.

I don't know what Ford projected regarding sale forecasts for the retro. (Maybe someone does?)

I do believe that the car hit it's design target (medium priced, semi-luxury, two seater cruiser with a hint of "retro"), but I don't know why Ford made a few nice improvements on the 03 and then let the car stay mostly as-is. Improvements to the 2004 and up retro (and the LS) might have helped boost sales.

Does anyone know if there were improvements on the drawing board that didn't make into production for 2004 and later?

(Consider all the changes Ford made to the 57 even though the 4 seater was the future TBird.)

[5bird7]

Re: Here is an article on Car of the Year Flops

Nov 14, 2002 was the last day of 2002 production. The 03s started the next week.

It's planned production was 100,000 units, at 25,000 per year - 4 years. After that it was expected to be shelved. (fiberglass molds don't last for long periods). The only reason any extensions were considered would have been if sales didn't meet the 25k/year. It could have been extended to a 6 year production to get closer to the 100,000 mark. As it was, a 5th year was in the works and the gears in motion to do it, until March 10, 2005. There were even a couple of models painted in the new colors according to word on the line but those would have been repainted after the word came down that they would end production of the model with the 05.

Jerry, I don't recall that Jim Youngs mentioned any changes in the works for the 06 other than color and trim. When he worked on the supercharger project, it was planned to be introduced with either the 05 or the 06 year, but the SC program ended in early 2003 due to lack of interest from dealers and customers.

[jerrym3]

Re: Here is an article on Car of the Year Flops

Nov 14, 2002 was the last day of 2002 production. The 03s started the next week.

It's planned production was 100,000 units, at 25,000 per year - 4 years. After that it was expected to be shelved. (fiberglass molds don't last for long periods). The only reason any extensions were considered would have been if sales didn't meet the 25k/year. It could have been extended to a 6 year production to get closer to the 100,000 mark. As it was, a 5th year was in the works and the gears in motion to do it, until March 10, 2005. There were even a couple of models painted in the new colors according to word on the line but those would have been repainted after the word came down that they would end production of the model with the 05.

Jerry, I don't recall that Jim Youngs mentioned any changes in the works for the 06 other than color and trim. When he worked on the supercharger project, it was planned to be introduced with either the 05 or the 06 year, but the SC program ended in early 2003 due to lack of interest from dealers and customers.

Thanks

I wonder, if Ford had added some serious improvements in 03/4/5, would sales have come closer to the 100,000 mark?

[5bird7]

Re: Here is an article on Car of the Year Flops

We could ponder that question forever, Jerry. As it was, Ford really didn't get word out to a lot of dealer salesmen, many thinking the 02 was the only year that Ford would make the tbird. Never figured that one out when the info was available if a salesman would look for it.

[qruml23]

Re: Here is an article on Car of the Year Flops

Here a link to see the 50 worsts cars of all time until 2008 to give you a better idea.

Speaking of the greatest lemons in car industry:

http://www.time.com/time/specials/pa...658545,00.html

So, a flop does not mean this is a lemon and vice-versa ! Furthermore, if Ferrari could not
reach their target sales of 10,000 cars a year for example, it does not mean this is a flop also.

[DaiUyTed]

Re: Here is an article on Car of the Year Flops

Here a link to see the 50 worsts cars of all time until 2008 to give you a better idea.

Speaking of the greatest lemons in car industry:

http://www.time.com/time/specials/pa...658545,00.html

How did I miss ever having at least one of those?

[BUCK ROGERS]

Re: Here is an article on Car of the Year Flops

That List is BULL~! - How can you have the AMC Gremlin & a 71 Pinto on there & NOT a 60's Renault Dauphine Push Button "Automatic" ?? - ( Really a 3 Speed Manual with a Rube Goldberg assortment of geared Racks & Cogs & Levers & Solenoids & Micro Switches & Electric Motors, yadda, yadda that did all the Shifting & Clutching...) - Not to mention only 3 Lug Nuts per wheel & the PRE-warped Aluminum Head.

- I will put that French POS up against ANY POS out there ~!

[V8 Cat]

Re: Here is an article on Car of the Year Flops

How did I miss ever having at least one of those?

I'm grateful I missed them all (50 worst cars of all-time). I can't imagine anything worse than having some of those added to my "personal list of lemons". What misery those must have caused.

[BUCK ROGERS]

Re: Here is an article on Car of the Year Flops

& of course that List not CAR OF THE YEAR FLOPS but...

71 Pinto Auto topped out at 112MPH - 4 speed 71 Pinto about 110MPH & would chirp 1st, 2nd & 3rd... I guess it's the whole Gas Tank = Fireball thing...

95 Explorer darned reliable, did'nt we blame it all on Firestone?

ALL HUMMERS ARE BUMMERS - ALL OF THEM... ask any GM Warranty Guru.

To give Chevy some credit I've ridden in some nice SSR's.

[lasuvidaboy]

Re: Here is an article on Car of the Year Flops

Based on the 2-seat design and price, I wonder how Ford could have possibly thought that they could sell 100,000 units of the 'Bird. The original 2-seaters sold 16,155 units in '55, 15,631 in 1956 and 21,380 in 1957 according to a book I have on Postwar American cars. The new 4-seat model in 1958 sold almost 38,000 units while the '59 sold 67,000 and the 1960 version sold a wopping 93,000 plus units. The four seaters were a huge success for Ford until GM got into the personal luxury coupe market.