According to You: What was Ford’s biggest missed opportunity?

Good afternoon and welcome back to According to You!

The answers you provided for this week’s prompt were pretty fantastic, and we were even lucky enough to catch the eye of celebrated designer Richard “Dick” Nesbitt, a man whose career at Ford Motor Company speaks for itself. Happily, Dick embraced the “missed opportunity” brief and shared with us some behind-the-scenes information about Ford’s Carrousel minivan proposal, a project he worked on while at Ford’s design studio. We were honored to receive the “Selected and approved” Carrousel renderings, directly from his collection of historical assets. It includes the “Nantucket” proposal, an advanced version of the design that was refined and initially slated for the 1975 model year.

It never reached production. Fundamentally based on the full-frame Econoline and its thirsty V-8, the oil crisis and a round of cost cutting at Ford led to the project’s demise. (Eventually, the Aerostar of the mid-1980s assumed the Ford minivan mantle.) Still, Nesbitt was kind enough to share details about what the development process looked like in those days:

“My Carrousel design proposal was selected and approved for development in 1972. I was a designer with Ford Design assigned to the Light Truck and Tractor Design Studio. My proposal and another (by Ford designer Jim Grey) was done as a full-size ‘Squire’ clay model. I got the passenger side and rear, Jim Grey got the front and driver’s side. After several design clinic reviews, my proposal was selected. I was asked to design a new front for the drivable prototype supervised by Project Engineer George Peterson.”

Nesbitt was also kind enough to show us his “Family Van design concept,” made in 1963 … when he was still in high school! The decades of ideation behind the minivan proves that some ideas are just waiting for the right company to make them. On that note, let’s proceed with more examples of missed opportunities at the Blue Oval.

Not keeping Iacocca

Any automotive historian knows the great Lee Iacocca, and the idea for the aforementioned Carrousel vanished for a decade amid his departure from Ford. He was instrumental in the creation of the Ford Mustang. He saved Chrysler. And @audiobycarmine made it very clear what Ford did wrong, summed up in four words: “Lee Iacocca as CEO.”

Then again, Iacocca wasn’t perfect. He was quoted in Bob Lutz’s book, Icons and Idiots, with this poorly aged gem: “You picked a good time to leave Ford, lemme tell ya! Those potato cars (Taurus and Sable) they’re coming out with are gonna bomb.”

Killing off cars

This one is pretty self explanatory, but let’s keep in mind that all the cars Ford canceled (Focus, Fiesta, Taurus, Fusion) were in their late days only selling with heavy incentives and considerable frustrations for dealers and Dearborn executives alike. Maybe they didn’t have to all die in one fell swoop, but clearly the higher-ups at Ford were confident something had to change. Still, maybe just throw us one car aside from the Mustang?

@Russel: I was all set to buy a Focus ST when Ford killed pretty much everything car-like other than the Mustang. Talk about a slap in the face to anyone who didn’t want a truck, SUV or Mustang. Why does Ford think people don’t want cars? All they need to do is look out the window (do ivory towers have windows?) and play “count the Corollas”. So my contribution would be “cars” in general. (BTW, I bought a WRX.)

@Owen: Ford’s biggest mistake was dropping all their car models – not everyone wants or can afford a $100K SUV or pickup truck. It gauls me they dropped the Focus Station Wagon back in 2008. I’ve owned a 2005 since new and it’s the best Ford I’ve ever owned. I’ve been buying new Ford’s for 44 years. My first one was a 79 T-Bird which I still own. Ford just doesn’t listen to their customers and neither does GM or Chrysler. My next car won’t be a Ford sorry to say because they aren’t making anything I want to buy anymore….very, very sad.

@Mike: I think the demise of the Fusion, Focus and Fiesta in the US market will be a decision that they will regret. And will Ford please stop teasing us with that ActiveX Fusion based Station Wagon (there, I said it, the unmentionable word, Station Wagon). I’m a lifetime Ford guy. I wanted an all wheel drive wagon (not an SUV) and they forced me to schlep over to Buick for a TourX. (A lovely car that, par for the course, GM killed as soon as I bought one!) And now I’m over to Subaru for an Outback (which has the worst ergonomics and is a rolling driver distraction to operate.)

@snailish: Ford giving up on North America getting the Focus. I have a decades-long bias against little cars ingrained by my upbringing. I test drove a 2019 Focus amongst other things and had to eat crow. It was a great car and I seriously considered buying it, and the RS version is still tempting (just not at the price point they seem to demand still).

Turning to Personal Luxury

In the late 1950s, Ford did the right thing by switching the Thunderbird to a four-seat, personal luxury touring car. But 1958 isn’t 2023. The T-bird outsold the Corvette for decades until Ford killed it first 1997, revived it, and then killed it once again in 2005 (when it went back to its 1955 roots). Now that the Corvette can boast nearly twenty years of unanswered sales from the big bird, do we think going the luxury route was really the right move?

@DUB6: Considering how many Corvettes there are in the world, and how many things center around that brand (clubs, parts, collections, sales, etc.), it seems to me that Ford missed its opportunity when it turned the Thunderbird into a personal luxury car. Starting as a 2-seat American sports car to compete with the plastic Chevy, the T-Bird of the mid-’50s has shown that it could be every bit as attractive and fun as early Corvettes, but FoMoCo abandoned the idea too quickly. When I think of where it could have gone (think Ford GT, for instance), it just seems to me that continuing to put Thunderbirds up against Corvettes might have given Ford a sports car following that rivals Chevy’s entry.

@Tim: The T-Bird is an interesting animal. On one hand, it was a two-door, two-seat sports car to begin its life, and it should arguably have stayed that way. Imagine what it might have become over the generations. However, one wonders if the market truly hard room for both the Thunderbird and Corvette. On the other hand, one could argue that Ford took the proper approach and make the T-Bird into the car that more people wanted. Sales figures certainly leaped ahead after the it morphed into the car that no one really wanted yet many more people really wanted. In my mind, the first-gen Thunderbird was great, and after that, it took a long time to be great again. We had a turbo coupe in the ’80s, and although it wasn’t at all like Gen 1, it was a pretty great car in its segment.

@snailish: I agree that T-bird has been several different things entirely, and if properly developed several of them probably could have lasted decades. I’d love to see a modern SuperCoupe personal luxury effort.

Not following Europe’s lead?

Ford of Europe has made some extremely impressive cars for middle-class Europeans, while Dearborn’s expertise remains larger, thirstier vehicles for Americans. That said, good luck finding a European with catalytic converters and/or fuel injection back then … but I digress.

When Ford of Europe first worked hand-in-hand with the U.S. mothership on the 1980 Escort, it became the first “World Car” and inspiration for today’s Fusion (USA), Mondeo (EU), and Taurus (China). It was truly a shared initiative, and you can read the details about it here. But could the two businesses collaborated more, and sooner? Hagerty Community member @Thomas might be on to something:

“I believe the largest of Ford missed opportunity was not using their Europe/ UK division’s to design and assist with the development of the small / efficient cars and engines that the North American market required in the ’70s. The Pinto and others just didn’t achieve their goals and let the Japanese makers in the market get established as a leader of that segment. Ford of all the BIG 3 had the global work force and talent to create something special, if they did maybe there would be a small Ford on the road in place of the Corolla!”

Killing models and bringing them back

Vehicles cease production for reasons other than low demand, but it’s still a shame to see the rise and fall of famous brands from the Blue Oval. As @Michael put it:

“Ford has a weird thing of taking a successful product then killing it only to bring it back. The Ford Ranger should have never stopped production. Ford should have made the third generation Ranger with 4 doors. The market seems to respond to a non-full size 4 door truck. The Ford Taurus which saved Ford was discontinued then brought back now discontinued. Ford should have built a better performance model of the popular Fusion. A six speed turbocharged sport suspension Fusion would have attracted those who didn’t want to pay BMW pricing but wanted a performance midsize sedan.”

Ford did build the Fusion Sport with the F-150’s beefy 2.7-liter twin-turbo V-6, but with a six-speed automatic only.

Excursion, Flex, and Ranchero

And the flip side of the previous thought is the fact that Ford killed off some seriously cool machines … for good.

@snailish: Ford Flex… one of the most neglected sales success stories ever. They are good and people loved them. But it seemed like Ford didn’t even want to admit they offered them.

@Charles: Ford really blew it when they kept the Explorer instead of keeping the Excursion with just using Diesel motors: just look on eBay to see what the internet thinks. My 2004 Excursion with the 6.0 Diesel has 282,000 miles on and still gets almost 20 mpg at 80 mph, it still has all front and rear end parts as originally installed at the factory.

Screwing Robertson screws

This was a new one to me, but apparently we coulda had more of these instead of the fasteners we now see in America had it not been for Henry Ford. Or as @snailish put it:

“Henry Ford played hardball with the Robertson screw inventor, resulting in an inferior option (Phillips) becoming a standard. We continue to pay the price for this today (every time I have to deal with a rusty screw on my Mustang…)

Something more Model A-like?

My apologizes to the product planners behind the Ford EcoSport, but the anodyne styling did not do it any favors. Some of our commenters think a Model A for the modern era could have been a success. Would the EcoSport have been a good candidate with proper treatment?

@Old Coot: With how new cars are getting lighter and the population older (ie, we don’t like to crawl DOWN into these stupid little roller skate cars with our bad knees and backs), and with the common love of Model A’s, Ford is missing a sales opportunity by not making a new Model A look-alike, with a 3-cylinder engine / plug-in hybrid. Sure these old body styles are not streamlined, and not as safe as many cars to day, but with a little head scratching I think they could make it safer and give us old coots one more chance to enjoy nostalgia (with updated tech) before cars are phased out and we all are forced to live sterile boring lives in high rises.

@Dennis: Agreed 100%. They all should go both ways. I like my AWD in winter but a little wagon set up to run with low hp and be a gas sipper. I don’t know how they think? A lot of people don’t want a computer screen or pull a 40’ trailer. Some just to want to get 50+ mpg. My Escort wagon 5 speed manual could get 34 mpg with a radio and a/c. Keep it simple stupid. Not everyone is feeling e cars are the answer.

@Ben: I agree with the Old Coot about diving into low slung vehicles. I’ve owned some nice Mustangs, but found that the older I get the harder it is to maneuver entry and exit. My solution was the Dodge Challenger. Good looking, easy access, 2 door and extremely comfortable!

Separation of Body and Frame?

Let’s face it, modern trucks are hard to deal with when the warranty expires. They are very complex, and components can be rather hard to access. Some think Fords should still be easy to repair for fleet managers and shade tree wrenches. Hagerty community member @Dale puts this notion into context:

“Ford’s biggest missed opportunity is the current F-150’s and Super Dutys. Ram is catching up to Ford’s trucks (if you believe Consumers Report’s testing). The switch to weight reduction with aluminum bodies was a great move, but there is a big gorilla in the garage that no one is talking about. I am referring to cab and box removal required for serious (gas and Diesel) engine service.

Remain a leader, and take the bold step of designing a tilt front end to ease engine service. All service mechanics and fleet managers will thank you, Ford. It is not rocket science – they did it with the immensely successful C-Series – why not now with their light duty trucks (and some SUVs)? Will GM or Ram beat Ford to it?”