CD3 Design Comparison

[Meelaan]

I put together the provided image to give forum members interested in discussing Ford's efforts sell the same car three ways (not including the Mazda 6) a tool for comparison purposes. Are the styling variations are successful in their independent efforts to carry the visual identity of each marque? My opinion is that the execution was as successful as possible given the company's financial restrictions.

 

The Club:

Ford's application of recent concept car aesthetics to the front end of the Fusion can be applauded. What's laughable though is how much this grill treatment duplicates a product it also happens to share names with. Yes, the Fusion car with it's three blade grill design shaves closer for comfort (the two in the lower valance match the total for Gillette's top model). But while Ford loves to flaunt the front of the fusion as a corporate style statement, the rear end design was forgotten completely. We see a default license plate on the trunk lid (so you always get a pleasant rattle upon shutting the lid). Fortunately, Mercury and Lincoln buyer's won't be bothered by that cheap sound effect. It's also odd how much the cheap-looking taillight lenses make the entire rear of the car look like a late model Honda Prelude (in a bad way because that design is ten years old).

 

The Axe:

The Milan in particular has formerly established a more unique design philosophy for Mercury which we'll see an almost carbon copy of in the redux of the Montego (the 2008 Sable). Initially, the latest Mercury design effort was installed on the Mountaineer a few years ago. I can only suppose that due to that model's sales success Ford sees a formula that works. It's conservative, yet stylishly daring. Perhaps arguably European-influenced.

 

The Arrow:

Lincoln has gone forward with the intent to perfect the automobile's version of the tuxedo. However, no one told them Cadillac's pretty much wrapped up that honor. Lincoln's solution? Giant taillamp lenses. On everything. The reaction will be based on individual taste, but at least the front end treatment of the MKZ will offend no one. Simple, squared off, and proportionate, the front of the MKZ is serious and sophisticated. This variant also gets a completely unique dash design, which I can't really see as anything particularly special. Looks like cardboard boxes stacked up in front of the driver. For whatever reason, this interior has been receiving critical praise.

 

All together, the triplets appear to hit their targets... Ford's got a new fleet vehicle that can be had for private use in good trim; Mercury has a visual identity that appeals to entry-luxury buyers; and Lincoln has the bold, "I-got-money" car.

[urnews]

A very humorous report, Meelaan. The photo was a big hit, too. First time I've seen such a comparison. Well done. What I wanted when we were shopping was a Mercury tail end on the Fusion body. We finally decided on the Fusion because of its "bold" front end. Our 2007 SEL AWD Fusion had a MSRP of $27,105, which is definitely Camry and Accord territory. We considered both to be bland compared to the Fusion. I just hope we don't regret our decision down the road (in the years to come).

[Meelaan]

A very humorous report, Meelaan. The photo was a big hit, too. First time I've seen such a comparison. Well done. What I wanted when we were shopping was a Mercury tail end on the Fusion body. We finally decided on the Fusion because of its "bold" front end. Our 2007 SEL AWD Fusion had a MSRP of $27,105, which is definitely Camry and Accord territory. We considered both to be bland compared to the Fusion. I just hope we don't regret our decision down the road (in the years to come).

 

Glad you liked the post, urnews. While it can be taken as humorous, it's quite an honest assessment of Ford's three musketeers. To understand the necessity for all three and not merely two of any of them, you do have to really study what the designers were motivated and steered by. Each looks arguably distinct because of the redifined attitude each marque now possesses.

[akirby]

Glad you liked the post, urnews. While it can be taken as humorous, it's quite an honest assessment of Ford's three musketeers. To understand the necessity for all three and not merely two of any of them, you do have to really study what the designers were motivated and steered by. Each looks arguably distinct because of the redifined attitude each marque now possesses.

 

Actually the only reason Mercury exists is to keep the Lincoln dealers in business. If all dealers were Ford/Lincoln/Mercury dealers Mercury would have been killed a long time ago.

[Meelaan]

Actually the only reason Mercury exists is to keep the Lincoln dealers in business. If all dealers were Ford/Lincoln/Mercury dealers Mercury would have been killed a long time ago.

 

Your entire "If-then" suggestion is both irrational and impossible. If all Ford dealers sold Lincoln, Mercury would never have been invented, so you wouldn't have what you're playing up as an issue to begin with.

 

There are places in this country where you may have a Lincoln dealer and no Ford dealer. In those places, the Lincoln dealer needs some mainstream products to retail for customers who would like a Ford product, but not a Lincoln price. For that reason, we have vehicles like Sables, Milans, Montegos, Grand Marquis and Montereys. In my city, there is no Ford dealership, so this storyline does occur.

 

Consider why Chrysler-Plymouth stayed around as long as it did. Chrysler was limited to only selling the most expensive level of trim on its models. Well, if there wasn't a Dodge dealer around and you wanted a Dodge, you could go to your Chrysler dealer and get a Plymouth. They even sold Plymouth-badged trucks for this reason.

 

Plymouth eventually degraded to playing the roll of basic-mode-of-transportation, so it's a parallel to the Mercury storyline, but clearly not an identical situation. It does justify why you can get a base four-cylinder Milan with cloth seats and a stick.

[akirby]

Your entire "If-then" suggestion is both irrational and impossible. If all Ford dealers sold Lincoln, Mercury would never have been invented, so you wouldn't have what you're playing up as an issue to begin with.

 

There are places in this country where you may have a Lincoln dealer and no Ford dealer. In those places, the Lincoln dealer needs some mainstream products to retail for customers who would like a Ford product, but not a Lincoln price. For that reason, we have vehicles like Sables, Milans, Montegos, Grand Marquis and Montereys. In my city, there is no Ford dealership, so this storyline does occur.

 

It is neither irrational nor impossible. Existing stand alone Ford and Lincoln/Mercury dealers could be combined or expanded to be Ford/Lincoln/Mercury dealerships. This also falls in with Ford's plan to reduce the number of dealers.

 

However, you seem to agree with my point which was that Mercury only exists to give the Lincoln dealers a lower priced, higher volume product to sell. If you buy that, and all Lincoln dealers suddenly became Ford/Lincoln dealers then they no longer need the Mercury lineup to fill that void.

 

Is that so hard to comprehend?

[Meelaan]

It is neither irrational nor impossible. Existing stand alone Ford and Lincoln/Mercury dealers could be combined or expanded to be Ford/Lincoln/Mercury dealerships. This also falls in with Ford's plan to reduce the number of dealers.

 

However, you seem to agree with my point which was that Mercury only exists to give the Lincoln dealers a lower priced, higher volume product to sell. If you buy that, and all Lincoln dealers suddenly became Ford/Lincoln dealers then they no longer need the Mercury lineup to fill that void.

 

Is that so hard to comprehend?

 

But Lincoln needs to exist in a separate environment from the blue collar identity of Ford. That necessary distance means Lincoln must have separate dealerships to keep the riff-raff away from the $40,000 cars. Well, if you still want to sell the mainstream Ford products at those more exclusive dealerships, now you need a median brand identity that is neither identified as the "Bubba" or the "Daddy Warbucks." That median identity is Mercury.

[akirby]

But Lincoln needs to exist in a separate environment from the blue collar identity of Ford. That necessary distance means Lincoln must have separate dealerships to keep the riff-raff away from the $40,000 cars. Well, if you still want to sell the mainstream Ford products at those more exclusive dealerships, now you need a median brand identity that is neither identified as the "Bubba" or the "Daddy Warbucks." That median identity is Mercury.

 

So how do you explain all the current Ford/Lincoln/Mercury dealers (like my local dealer)? Are you saying that taking away Mercury would hurt Lincoln in a F/L/M environment? That doesn't make any sense.

[Meelaan]

So how do you explain all the current Ford/Lincoln/Mercury dealers (like my local dealer)? Are you saying that taking away Mercury would hurt Lincoln in a F/L/M environment? That doesn't make any sense.

 

This is real simple, but I'll break it down to molecules for you:

 

There can only be Lincoln-Mercury dealerships and Ford dealerships OR only Lincoln-Ford dealerships. There would never be a case for Lincoln-Mercury-Ford dealerships.

 

Why? Because the purpose of Mercury as a brand is to bring Ford's product line into the Lincoln dealerships.

 

Two reasons for this: 1. So they can sell standard Ford products to customers who do not have a Ford dealership in their area and 2. since Lincoln only has around four different models at any given time, they need a broader range of inventory to make their dealerships viable.

 

But why can't Lincolns be sold alongside Fords? Two reasons: 1. It cheapens the Lincoln brand to have it marketed alongside a Focus or Ranger and 2. Ford customers are typically not at the income level that the Lincoln price bracket demands, otherwise all F-150s would look be priced like Mark LTs.

 

It's easy to follow, really: Mercury exists to make the bottom tier products both available and more amicable to the Lincoln audience. The derailing of Mercury usually occurs when the cars are indistinguishable from their Ford counterparts or when Mercury is forced to sell a compact variant (Lynx, Tracer, Mystique) that cheapens the brands already difficult image.

[akirby]

This is real simple, but I'll break it down to molecules for you:

 

There can only be Lincoln-Mercury dealerships and Ford dealerships OR only Lincoln-Ford dealerships. There would never be a case for Lincoln-Mercury-Ford dealerships.

 

So you're saying that the HUNDREDS (THOUSANDS?) of existing Ford/Lincoln/Mercury dealerships across the USA don't really exist? I better tell my salesman so he can find a real job at a real car dealer.

 

If you re-read post #4 what I was saying is that if every Lincoln dealer also sold Fords then we wouldn't need Mercury, which is what you just said (ignoring the F/L/M comment).

 

Stop while you're behind.

[Meelaan]

So you're saying that the HUNDREDS (THOUSANDS?) of existing Ford/Lincoln/Mercury dealerships across the USA don't really exist? I better tell my salesman so he can find a real job at a real car dealer.

 

If you re-read post #4 what I was saying is that if every Lincoln dealer also sold Fords then we wouldn't need Mercury, which is what you just said (ignoring the F/L/M comment).

 

Stop while you're behind.

 

I have never heard of a "Ford-Lincoln-Mercury" dealership. They are two separate divisions within FoMoCo. Now, granted Mr. John Doe can buy a franchise for whatever dealerships he wants and combine Kia with Honda for all anyone cares. This doesn't mean it's a "Kia-Honda" dealership. It just means that the same company owns both dealerships.

 

The Lincoln-Mercury dealership I bought my car from also has a Ford dealership just across the street. Does this mean it's a Ford-Lincoln-Mercury dealership? No. Refer to last partagraph's example.

 

If Lincoln dealerships also sold Ford-branded vehicles, Mercury would not be necessary, agreed. However, as stated--they are two distinct auto divisions and as treated as such, do not operate this way. There are Lincoln dealerships... and there are Ford dealerships... And as pointed out before, it's hard to run a dealership based on only four unique models, so to keep the place classy, they dress up some Fords so they're presentable to the Lincoln audience.

 

Does this cost Ford more than its worth? While arguable, I don't think it does. Lincoln's image would be cheapened by being marketed and retailed alongside lesser brands like Ford. The fix? An entry-luxury identity called Mercury.

 

Makes sense to me.

[akirby]

I have never heard of a "Ford-Lincoln-Mercury" dealership. They are two separate divisions within FoMoCo. Now, granted Mr. John Doe can buy a franchise for whatever dealerships he wants and combine Kia with Honda for all anyone cares. This doesn't mean it's a "Kia-Honda" dealership. It just means that the same company owns both dealerships.

 

There are 2 Ford/Lincoln/Mercury dealerships within 10 miles of me and 6 more within 65 miles. They're usually in smaller towns but not always. It's no different than GM's Cadillac/Buick/GMC dealers. There are hundreds of these across the U.S. One service department, one showroom, 3 brands. It works just fine.

[urnews]

Salisbury, MD, a city of about 30,000 people, has had a Ford, Lincoln Mercury dealer for about 50 years.

[Meelaan]

Salisbury, MD, a city of about 30,000 people, has had a Ford, Lincoln Mercury dealer for about 50 years.

 

Well, in Louisiana, most Ford dealerships don't sell Lincoln-Mercury products, and vice-versa. I can see why the case was being made that Mercury is unnecessary if all the Ford dealerships also sell Lincoln. however, that's clearly the exception, and not the rule.

 

I am surprised to find dealers in Baton Rouge and also in the New Orleans area that sell Ford-Lincoln-Mercury (6 out of 13). It doesn't make sense to sell all three because the whole purpose of Mercury is to sell Fords at Lincoln dealerships.

 

But I guess if a dealer wants to do it, no one's going to stop them. Ford's pretty desparate to get their products out into the public any way they can. Perhaps it's part of an intentional plan where they forced high volume selling Ford dealers to begin carrying Lincoln-Mercury products?

[akirby]

Well, in Louisiana, most Ford dealerships don't sell Lincoln-Mercury products, and vice-versa. I can see why the case was being made that Mercury is unnecessary if all the Ford dealerships also sell Lincoln. however, that's clearly the exception, and not the rule.

 

I am surprised to find dealers in Baton Rouge and also in the New Orleans area that sell Ford-Lincoln-Mercury (6 out of 13). It doesn't make sense to sell all three because the whole purpose of Mercury is to sell Fords at Lincoln dealerships.

 

But I guess if a dealer wants to do it, no one's going to stop them. Ford's pretty desparate to get their products out into the public any way they can. Perhaps it's part of an intentional plan where they forced high volume selling Ford dealers to begin carrying Lincoln-Mercury products?

 

Not all Mercuries have been Ford clones. The recently departed Cougar was a good example - no Ford version at all.

 

And even for the Ford/Mercury twins there is enough unique styling on the Mercurys such that they will appeal to different buyers. If your Milan was sitting next to a Fusion (same color, same equipment) - wouldn't you still prefer the Milan? By the same token some will prefer the Fusion over the Milan based strictly on styling. Some like the Mountaineer but not the Explorer and vice versa.

 

IF you must keep Mercury to help the standalone Lincoln dealers then there's no reason not to sell Mercurys at Ford/Lincoln dealers.

 

There is a good bit of cross shopping between Lincoln and Ford - more than you might think. When we bought our Aviator we cross shopped the Explorer and Mountaineer. I cross shopped the Fusion, Milan and MKZ. Now we're doing the same with the Edge/MKX. It also happens with the Expedition and Navigator. Having them all in one dealership is convenient. And given that Lincoln isn't trying to sell $100K vehicles I don't think they really require a stand alone dealer (yet).

[Meelaan]

Not all Mercuries have been Ford clones. The recently departed Cougar was a good example - no Ford version at all.

 

And even for the Ford/Mercury twins there is enough unique styling on the Mercurys such that they will appeal to different buyers. If your Milan was sitting next to a Fusion (same color, same equipment) - wouldn't you still prefer the Milan? By the same token some will prefer the Fusion over the Milan based strictly on styling. Some like the Mountaineer but not the Explorer and vice versa.

 

IF you must keep Mercury to help the standalone Lincoln dealers then there's no reason not to sell Mercurys at Ford/Lincoln dealers.

 

There is a good bit of cross shopping between Lincoln and Ford - more than you might think. When we bought our Aviator we cross shopped the Explorer and Mountaineer. I cross shopped the Fusion, Milan and MKZ. Now we're doing the same with the Edge/MKX. It also happens with the Expedition and Navigator. Having them all in one dealership is convenient. And given that Lincoln isn't trying to sell $100K vehicles I don't think they really require a stand alone dealer (yet).

 

I see where you're coming from now. But isn't Ford just making the whole experience unnecessarily more complicated for the buyer by making them cross reference three versions of the same vehicle? Perhaps this is why you never see Nissan/Infiniti dealerships, but rather one or the other. I've never seen a Honda/Acura dealership (where both brands are marketed and sold in the same building). And as has been pointed out before, their vehicles are for the most part clearly different from one brand to the other.

 

With Ford, your base Milan has 90% in common with your base Fusion. And your top of the line Milan has 90% in common with your base MKZ. Too much common ground, it seems.

[akirby]

I see where you're coming from now. But isn't Ford just making the whole experience unnecessarily more complicated for the buyer by making them cross reference three versions of the same vehicle? Perhaps this is why you never see Nissan/Infiniti dealerships, but rather one or the other. I've never seen a Honda/Acura dealership (where both brands are marketed and sold in the same building). And as has been pointed out before, their vehicles are for the most part clearly different from one brand to the other.

 

The imports don't have the legacy dealerships to support. If Ford could start over today with new dealers they'd probably do the same thing. Having to support the legacy dealer network is a huge ball and chain for the domestics.