Ford, you pay for more

[Arran]

Re: Ford, you pay for more

The real reasons why BMW bought Rover is one of the world's best kept secrets as it was a company that did not easily fit into BMW's business model. The theory it was for the New Mini is a myth as it was a car on the drawing board at the time of the takeover and nobody knew if it would be profitable or not. In fact BMW has not made a penny in profit from the New Mini yet after factoring losses resulting from the takeover of Rover.

According to Cabinet Papers from the 1980s the government (which owned BL) wanted to sell it to Ford but ended up selling it to BAe. I think that the longer term future of Rover would have been a partner or the British / European division of Honda, rather than owned by Ford, BMW, or VW.

Remember that Rover made Land Rovers as well as cars which were admired products and in demand by government departments, farmers, and suburbanites to take their kids to school. BMW sold off Land Rover to Ford because it was a segment that they weren't strong in but Ford had no interest in the Rover 75.

[Arran]

Re: Ford, you pay for more

Ford cars in the 1980s were very conventional when it came to technology. In some respects a bit old fashioned. The most radical product from Ford before the Mk3 Escort was the Fiesta as it was a FWD small car. Ford had previously stuck with RWD and did not attempt to produce anything smaller than the Escort because they believed that small cars equalled small profits. There was anecdotal evidence that the Mini only just broke even despite being one of the best selling cars. The philosophy of Ford was "we don't make cars we make money". The Mk3 Escort was actually an enlarged Fiesta sharing the same technology and some components. This would later be replicated in the Tempo in the US and the Mondeo. Volkswagen and most Japanese manufacturers were also conventional when it came to technology.

In contrast some mainstream BL cars had unconventional technical features including hydraulic suspension and cogs in the sump gearboxes. These were not always appreciated by Mr and Mrs Average and were offputting in some export markets as mechanics were unfamiliar with them or they required special equipment to service. The Maestro and Montego which replaced them were deliberately designed to be conventional using the same technology - like McPherson strut suspension - as other leading cars in their class.

[80sChav]

Re: Ford, you pay for more

Ford cars in the 1980s were very conventional when it came to technology. In some respects a bit old fashioned. The most radical product from Ford before the Mk3 Escort was the Fiesta as it was a FWD small car. Ford had previously stuck with RWD and did not attempt to produce anything smaller than the Escort because they believed that small cars equalled small profits. There was anecdotal evidence that the Mini only just broke even despite being one of the best selling cars. The philosophy of Ford was "we don't make cars we make money". The Mk3 Escort was actually an enlarged Fiesta sharing the same technology and some components. This would later be replicated in the Tempo in the US and the Mondeo. Volkswagen and most Japanese manufacturers were also conventional when it came to technology.

In contrast some mainstream BL cars had unconventional technical features including hydraulic suspension and cogs in the sump gearboxes. These were not always appreciated by Mr and Mrs Average and were offputting in some export markets as mechanics were unfamiliar with them or they required special equipment to service. The Maestro and Montego which replaced them were deliberately designed to be conventional using the same technology - like McPherson strut suspension - as other leading cars in their class.

I dont know if this is strictly true Arran about what you say about Ford's beinh conventional in the 80s - yeh I agree they was miles in front of most rivals, but as much as I admire "the Box Escort" some models of that have been utter rubbish from articles/books I have read

Escorts certainly got better on the Mk 2, though it really really was duplicated a 2nd time by the Orion as this was box shaped in the 80s too and both was near on indentical - with the Orion a slight drop in class from what I have read and can gather/gleam

The Sierra was full of convention and class no doubts indeed, as was the Granada from re-collection - though I'm not up on them too well, but I know thy had a mixed response. Personally I'm more a fan of the "high shaped Granada's" than the Cortina style flat roofed ones

80sChav

[Arran]

Re: Ford, you pay for more

The rumour goes that Ford created the Orion so that Cortina owners could buy a three-box saloon and didn't have to buy the jellymould Sierra. When the Sierra was facelifted in 1987 the Sierra Sapphire saloon was launched. Originally the Orion was only available in GL and Ghia spec but a few years later a plainer L spec was produced in response to consumer demand.