6.4L Power Stroke Diesel Engine fitted to 2008 - 2010 F250, F350 and F450 pickup trucks and F350 + Cab Chassis

More Diesel woes for Ford?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
  #16  
Old 01-13-2007, 04:50 PM
FishOnOne's Avatar
FishOnOne
FishOnOne is online now
Lead Driver
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: The Great State of Texas
Posts: 6,204
Received 1,469 Likes on 910 Posts
I hate to say it, but this type of activity is usually the beginning of the end. The navistar produced power stroke will one day be a figment of your imagination. With the complexity of the 6.4, I doubt warranty repairs will improve...Causing more friction between these two companies...It's a sad day to read this expecially between two very old companies that have been sucessful together. New management, new problems... Oh well... I'm sure the other big three will take advantage of this news.
 
  #17  
Old 01-13-2007, 06:09 PM
96_4wdr's Avatar
96_4wdr
96_4wdr is offline
Post Fiend
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Washington state
Posts: 5,720
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
look for Navistar International to bring out a line of hvy duty PU style trucks....built in Mexico....leave the antiquated costly US plants behind

International has a rich history of reliable pu trucks
 
  #18  
Old 01-13-2007, 07:22 PM
SLE's Avatar
SLE
SLE is offline
Posting Guru
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: North Dakota
Posts: 1,708
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Bring on cat, good riddens cornbinder!! seriously though, this could very well be the begining to the end.
 
  #19  
Old 01-13-2007, 08:19 PM
1968gtcs's Avatar
1968gtcs
1968gtcs is offline
Senior User
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: California
Posts: 204
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Ford better have a plan "B" in mind. Maybe Ford/CAT. Now that would be the altimate ride having a 7L CAT in a SuperDuty.
 
  #20  
Old 01-13-2007, 08:32 PM
Strut61's Avatar
Strut61
Strut61 is offline
Senior User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Columbia County. Pa
Posts: 321
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Really curious what this means to those who have trucks ordered.......expecting the 6.4???
 
  #21  
Old 01-13-2007, 08:32 PM
rollerstud98's Avatar
rollerstud98
rollerstud98 is offline
Postmaster

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Airdrie Alberta
Posts: 4,863
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
how much does the 6.4 powerstroke weigh?
 
  #22  
Old 01-13-2007, 09:05 PM
shocky111's Avatar
shocky111
shocky111 is offline
Senior User
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: IN
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by 150ford
Ford needs navistar on Navistar needs Ford. Navistar would go belly up with out Fords business an Ford knows it. My guess is Navistar is trying to take advantage off Ford. Navistar better watch it. Its like the 100 lb tacle facing the 300 lb linebacker. Navistar doesnt have the resources to fight Ford. Ford will win. There just too powerful. Its just greed involved here. Navistar wants to rape Ford but Ford says were not buying it. Theywill come to there senses.
Dude, I really hate to be rude but heres a lesson for you. The only reason the failure of the big three did not happen sooner is the result of their ability to reach deep into the pockets of its suppliers. When steel cost went off the charts, the Big 3 refused to entertain piece price increases that would share in the increase in raw material. Not only did the Big 3 tell their suppliers to "pack sand" on the rising cost of raw materials, they also expected their annual payback, no options, they took it.

So, with all the bankrup suppliers unable to feed the "big 3" machine, the big 3 are now in trouble. These folks have operated to fat and inefficient for to long, this had to happen and the UAW is right along with them.
 
  #23  
Old 01-13-2007, 09:09 PM
Percys Armory's Avatar
Percys Armory
Percys Armory is offline
Posting Guru
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,211
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
what was in the contract?

Originally Posted by shocky111
Dude, I really hate to be rude but heres a lesson for you. The only reason the failure of the big three did not happen sooner is the result of their ability to reach deep into the pockets of its suppliers. When steel cost went off the charts, the Big 3 refused to entertain piece price increases that would share in the increase in raw material. Not only did the Big 3 tell their suppliers to "pack sand" on the rising cost of raw materials, they also expected their annual payback, no options, they took it.

So, with all the bankrup suppliers unable to feed the "big 3" machine, the big 3 are now in trouble. These folks have operated to fat and inefficient for to long, this had to happen and the UAW is right along with them.
 
  #24  
Old 01-13-2007, 09:16 PM
shocky111's Avatar
shocky111
shocky111 is offline
Senior User
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: IN
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I'm not sure what your referring to, UAW contract or part supplier contract?
 
  #25  
Old 01-13-2007, 09:46 PM
jaybird's Avatar
jaybird
jaybird is offline
Senior User
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: NORTH CAROLINA
Posts: 398
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by shocky111
Dude, I really hate to be rude but heres a lesson for you. The only reason the failure of the big three did not happen sooner is the result of their ability to reach deep into the pockets of its suppliers. When steel cost went off the charts, the Big 3 refused to entertain piece price increases that would share in the increase in raw material. Not only did the Big 3 tell their suppliers to "pack sand" on the rising cost of raw materials, they also expected their annual payback, no options, they took it.

So, with all the bankrup suppliers unable to feed the "big 3" machine, the big 3 are now in trouble. These folks have operated to fat and inefficient for to long, this had to happen and the UAW is right along with them.
UAW,big 3 and US in general has suffered from the ongoing higher need and demand from YES "CHINA"

China is king of the hill in everything they own the world just about but hey I'll take 1 of them 7.0 cats SD's if they offer them to us;now that would be a true king of the hill!
 
  #26  
Old 01-13-2007, 09:48 PM
Percys Armory's Avatar
Percys Armory
Percys Armory is offline
Posting Guru
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,211
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I guess the one stating the price. I don't know how the contracts work, but can you easily change the terms? I always thought a contract was binding. anyways on the brighter side 25,000 engines were reported shipped.
 
  #27  
Old 01-13-2007, 10:06 PM
shocky111's Avatar
shocky111
shocky111 is offline
Senior User
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: IN
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Percys Armory
I guess the one stating the price. I don't know how the contracts work, but can you easily change the terms? I always thought a contract was binding. anyways on the brighter side 25,000 engines were reported shipped.
If material cost rises such as it did with metals ( thanks China) the supplier eats the increase. Seldom is there success in trying to renegotiate.

To boot, the big three and a few others will let you have full quoted price the first year. After that, the supplier starts reducing the original price 3 to 5% every year.

The big 3 will not or I should say seldom entertain price adjustment. Honda on the other hand has been awesome to work with.

Man, i just love the spell check of this forum, its fantastic.
 
  #28  
Old 01-13-2007, 11:08 PM
jarepackard's Avatar
jarepackard
jarepackard is offline
Cross-Country
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 88
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
For all those speculating that the current lawsuit will hold up shipment of Superduty's equipped with the 6.4 or future shipments let's not jump to conclusions, nor create rumors that simply have no basis with the limited info we have at hand. The sky is not falling, If Nav is indeed in breech of contract Ford has every right to demand payment. Other aspect to this would be if Nav stops shipping 6.4's they would be in a second breech of contract. Could be quite costly to their bottom line.

In Ford's current state without a backup they need Nav as much as Nav needs Ford.

Now what this means for the future I don't know, but I would say the most significant factor being weighed in the future of Ford/Nav is how this engine performs.
 

Last edited by jarepackard; 01-13-2007 at 11:19 PM.
  #29  
Old 01-14-2007, 07:10 AM
killaford's Avatar
killaford
killaford is offline
Elder User
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 695
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by jarepackard
I would say the most significant factor being weighed in the future of Ford/Nav is how this engine performs.


i would say at this point its now how it will perform, it wheather there will be a diesel option or not.
 
  #30  
Old 01-14-2007, 08:49 AM
G & L's Avatar
G & L
G & L is offline
Junior User
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
$1,490 for a 5-speed auto tranny would be MSRP price. always look for a invoice price. allow dealer to tack on no more than $500 at the end of any total price of a vehicle if you used all invoce prices.
 


Quick Reply: More Diesel woes for Ford?



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:13 PM.