 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Ford / Ford Cars / February 2007What Idiot Designs Ford Interiors?
Looked at the 07 Sport Trac yesterday. Exterior was nice. Some decent features/options. However the interior was AWFUL!!! Whoever forgot door handles where they should be and a foolish looking dash. It was not truck looking at all. The sae idiot who designed the 500 interior must have done this too- no wonder its not selling!!! The Sport Trac is demonstrates why Ford is failing. Some great features- rubber floor mats, composite beds, storage nooks, lockable tonneau, power rear window, good towing capacity, decent MPG , 4 adults comfortable, etc. Then there are AWFUL features that will undoubtedly turn buyers off- bland interior styling(trying to mimic German?), unintuitive door handles, no mp3ipod jack, roof rack crossbars EXTRA?, power seat optional on $28k vehicle?, no skid plates. Iknow no vehicle is perfect but most are thought out and designed better than Ford's. If they had the Sport Trac in Yellow I'd consider it but the interior was just too hard to adjust too And all this time I thought style was a matter of personal taste.... > And all this time I thought style was a matter of personal taste.... Yeah, but there are cultural norms as well. When was the last time you saw a modern car with Cruiserline Ventiports? At one time Ford sold a lot of vehicles. Now they don't. One reason may be poor design/styling that just turns people off. I'm not saying Toyota is an innovator in design but they put handles /levers buttons etc where they should be so that vehicle operation is intuitive. People who buy trucks arent usually looking for madern art design. Old fashioned gauges and not some weird modern ash designs. Why is the 500 failing? I bet interior design is a big reason as it is a nice highway cruiser but comfort and familiarity are vital > And all this time I thought style was a matter of personal taste.... > > - Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - > At one time Ford sold a lot of vehicles. Now they don't. One reason > may be poor design/styling that just turns people off. I'm not saying The Ford Escape has too many buttons and not enough display. One mere case in point is the cruise control. Cruise always turns itself off in the ford. It stays the way I left it in the Honda. In the Ford, there are six steering wheel mounted buttons for cruise. In the Honda there are three. In the Ford, a "cruise control on" message covers my MPG readout. In the Honda, there is a separate green LED for cruise.  Signature--- Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley Lake, CA, USA GPS: 38.8,-122.5 On Feb 25, 6:28 pm, d...@84.usenet.us.com wrote: > One mere case in point is the cruise control. Cruise always turns itself > off in the ford. It stays the way I left it in the Honda. Eh? I never saw a car that would START with cruise control turned on! How can that possibly be safe? And doesn't starting the car with the brake depressed turn off the cruise anyway? > In the Ford, there are six steering wheel mounted buttons for cruise. In > the Honda there are three. And in my Jeep there's a lever on the steering column that can be pulled up, down or towards the driver, and a button on the end that can be pushed. Your point? > On Feb 25, 6:28 pm, d...@84.usenet.us.com wrote: > > One mere case in point is the cruise control. Cruise always turns itself > > off in the ford. It stays the way I left it in the Honda. > Eh? I never saw a car that would START with cruise control turned on! > How can that possibly be safe? And doesn't starting the car with the > brake depressed turn off the cruise anyway? I think you are confusing on/off with resume and cancel. If you hit the brake, cruise is canceled, but it is still on. If you hit resume, it resumes. There are a two more buttons labeled on and off. > > In the Ford, there are six steering wheel mounted buttons for cruise. In > > the Honda there are three. > And in my Jeep there's a lever on the steering column that can be > pulled up, down or towards the driver, and a button on the end that > can be pushed. Your point? In the Honda, there are fewer buttons than in the Ford to accomplish the same task. Signature--- Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley Lake, CA, USA GPS: 38.8,-122.5 >> > In the Ford, there are six steering wheel mounted buttons for >> > cruise. In >> > the Honda there are three. How do you figure 6? I figure 4 for most current Fords - on/off (1), resume (2), set + (3), set - (4). In some fords set+ and set- are really one rocker switch, in others they are two separate switches. So at the most I count 4 switches, and sometimes only 3. >> And in my Jeep there's a lever on the steering column that can be >> pulled up, down or towards the driver, and a button on the end that [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > the > same task. Is this a good thing? I don't agree. My Nissan, like a Honda has 3, but they reuse buttons. The Nissan has a on/off (1), coast/set (2), accelerate/resume (3). So what is the difference? The Ford method seems clearer to me. With the Nissan, you first have to turn the cruise control on. The on/off switch is alternate action, so once you press "on", it now becomes the "off" switch. Once the cruise control is on, to set speed, you press the coast/set button. Once you have set speed, you can now use the coast/set button to slow down, or the accelerate/resume button to speed up. If you cancel speed with the brake pedal, you can now use the accelerate/resume button to resume the previous speed or the coast/set button to set a new speed.. Once this is done, you can now you the accelerate/resume button as a speed increase button and the coast/resume button as a slow down button. Do you really think it is better to assign multiple functions to the same button depending upon what you did last, than to just have separate button for each function? And don't even get me started on the ridiculous cruise control stalk thingy on my SO's RAV4. Not only did an idiot design it, he/she was so embarrassed by it, he/she tried to hide it under the steering wheel. It is absolutely the worst factory cruise control "control" ever. Ed > <dold@84.usenet.us.com> wrote in message > >> > In the Ford, there are six steering wheel mounted buttons for > How do you figure 6? I figure 4 for most current Fords - on/off (1), > resume (2), set + (3), set - (4). In some fords set+ and set- are > really one rocker switch, in others they are two separate switches. So > at the most I count 4 switches, and sometimes only 3. On the left side, there is on/cancel/off. On the right side there is resume/set/coast. That seems like six to me. > The Ford method seems clearer to me. That's nice. Signature--- Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley Lake, CA, USA GPS: 38.8,-122.5 On Feb 27, 1:07 pm, d...@84.usenet.us.com wrote: > > <d...@84.usenet.us.com> wrote in message > > >> > In the Ford, there are six steering wheel mounted buttons for [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > On the left side, there is on/cancel/off. On the right side there is > resume/set/coast. That seems like six to me. None of my Fords have had a cancel button. Not a bad idea though. What is the difference between an on/off rocker and an alternate action push button? It is not like Honda has fewer cruise control functions than Ford, they just cheaped out and make button do double duty. Poor human factors design does not equal good design - although I often think Toyota thinks it does - or maybe they think different is better no matter how weird it is. They consistenttly inflict some of the dumbest controls on their Customers I have every seen. Non-intuative, poorly loaceted, and poorly labeled. The inside out heater control knobs are insane (and I see Honda picked up that silly idea as well). Ed > None of my Fords have had a cancel button. Not a bad idea though. http://www.fordvehicles.com/suvs/2007escape/ photo gallery, interior, page two. The steering wheel shows the same rocker and button setup that I have, but the place on the left where I have a "cancel" is a blank piece of plastic. A blank piece of plastic. That was obviously well thought out in advance. Oh, wait! It's different between the Escape and the Escape Hybrid. Wow! That's intuitive. On the Hybrid, there's a cancel button. On the non-hybrid, there's a blank piece of plastic, and you tap the brake pedal to cancel. A blank piece of plastic... which design is the cheap one? The one that doesn't have a separate button, or one that used to, eliminated it, but didn't get rid of the blank piece of plastic where the button used to be? > What is the difference between an on/off rocker and an alternate action > push button? It is not like Honda has fewer cruise control functions I think it is sensible to have the same button do multiple things, pending the last state. Do you have separate on and off buttons on your Ford radio, or do you press the volume knob once to turn it on, and again to turn it off? AM/FM/FM on a single button? preset #1 for three different radio stations or a CD selection? Functionally, it's whatever you're used to. A friend thought that his Oldsmobile, with reverse at the rearmost position on his console shift, was perfectly intuitive, and couldn't figure out why it was mandated to move to a prndl layout. Signature--- Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley Lake, CA, USA GPS: 38.8,-122.5 >> At one time Ford sold a lot of vehicles. Now they don't. One reason >> may be poor design/styling that just turns people off. I'm not saying [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > In the Ford, a "cruise control on" message covers my MPG readout. In the > Honda, there is a separate green LED for cruise. I hate to tell you but you are comparing apples to oranges.. You are probably comparing a vehicle that is over 5yrs old, with a brand new vehicle that takes advantage of the cluster, a/c, pcm, bsm, and abs all being on the same buss. I will put that in laymens terms now. That new explorer you were lookin at, is basically a rolling computer anymore. I dont know bout you, but I think $28K isnt bad for an explorer sport trac... Ford Tech Price was reasonable- the interior design was just awful. A truck should be a truck. The homos Ford supports may like that style in the edge but a truck is sacred > <d...@84.usenet.us.com> wrote in messagenews:ert62e$nro$1@blue.rahul.net... > > big...@backpacker.com wrote: [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > > Ford Tech <bigjohnson@fudgepacker.com> wrote in message news:1172525841.385783.302210@v33g2000cwv.googlegroups.com... So... some true colours are coming out... Basing preferences on faggotry (is that a word?).... If someone waves their preferences in my face, I can be the biggest homophobe that you have ever seen...... but I can't say I'm going to go looking for them. I think that is a sign of denial..... Styling is and will always be a matter of taste.... I didn't say I liked the interior on anything. Your opinion is/was appreciated - but I don't think that it would ever affect my purchasing decision. Case in point.... the door handles on my 02 SuperCrew, my 94 F150 and my sons 97 Ranger are all in different locations.. is one more faggoty than the other? What makes one door handle "manly" and another "faggoty"? I need to know this because I wouldn't want to be labelled by my choice.... Consumer choices are always shifting... for many, they are driven by what they read and hear since modern people seem to be unable to make their own decisions and wont accept responsibility for their actions.... But what the f.ck do I know... I'm just another old timer wasting everyones valuable oxygen... <I ordered a black truck but didn't like it.... I thought that it would be light black but it came dark black...> > I hate to tell you but you are comparing apples to oranges.. You are > probably comparing a vehicle that is over 5yrs old, with a brand new > vehicle that takes advantage of the cluster, a/c, pcm, bsm, and abs all > being on the same buss. 2003, so almost 4 years old. So the newer one is worse in user interface? Signature--- Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley Lake, CA, USA GPS: 38.8,-122.5 > At one time Ford sold a lot of vehicles. Now they don't. One > reason [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > buttons > etc where they should be so that vehicle operation is intuitive. Boy, I disagree with this. My SO has a 2007 RAV4. I have never been in a vehicle with such weirdly layout controls in my life. Most of the stuff you can get used to but the people who laid this car out should have been fired already. The gearshift alone should have had at least 5 people fired - the idiot who designed it and his manager, the product assurance engineer and his manager and the head of the design department should all be on the street. The cruise control "control" is poorly placed and illogical. The dash light dimmer switch is poorly placed. The power mirror switch is poorly placed. The HVAC control knobs are a train wreck. Overall, the RAV4 has the worst control layout of any vehicle I have ever personally driven. Most of the stuff you get used to over time, but there is no excuse for inflicting crap like this on an unsuspecting public. And don't get me started on the quality of the interior - everything fits together, but it looks cheap. Ed. I was talking to a guy that bought a new Ford Edge. I asked him what he traded. He said his wife's RAVE. I asked why he did not buy another. He said the RAVE had nearly 90K on the clock in four years and still ran great but everything was coming apart inside. Seats and floor mats were worm, handles and door panels were falling off. We bough the Toyota because of their reputation for quality. I never had a Ford where things were falling off in four years. The interior on my 02 Sport Trac has none of those problems and it has 120K on the clock. Seems there are two side to every story ;) mike >> At one time Ford sold a lot of vehicles. Now they don't. One reason >> may be poor design/styling that just turns people off. I'm not saying [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > Ed. Toyota trucks? You are kidding, right? Ford sold 35% of the trucks sold in the US in 2006. Toyota only sold 5%. You certainly are entitled to your own opinion, but it seems your opinion of what buyers prefer, is that of a comparatively small percentage of buyers LOL mike > At one time Ford sold a lot of vehicles. Now they don't. One reason > may be poor design/styling that just turns people off. I'm not saying [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >> >> - Show quoted text - > Toyota trucks? You are kidding, right? Ford sold 35% of the trucks sold > in the US in 2006. Toyota only sold 5%. North American Light Trucks 2006 SALES Ford F-Series 796,039 Tundra 118,062 That looks like about a 5% to 35% ratio last year, but it is really two different markets. Toyota didn't have a full sized truck until this year. Or maybe he was talking about cars, where it appears that majority of North American buyers do prefer Toyota over Ford. Signature--- Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley Lake, CA, USA GPS: 38.8,-122.5 >> Toyota trucks? You are kidding, right? Ford sold 35% of the >> trucks sold [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > different markets. Toyota didn't have a full sized truck until this > year. Oh so all those Toyota ads touting the 2006 Tundra as a full size truck were blatant lies? Or the irritatiting radio commercials that constantly referred to the 2006 Tundra as "huge" were lies? I suppose the new 2007 Tundra Tag Line - "this changes everything" is a plain admission that the previous Tundra was a bad design. I actually preferred the size of the previous Tundra. Too bad they were so overpriced. Even with the Toyota loving press kissing Toyota's a*$, about the best that they can say about the new Tundra is that it is as good as a Silverado. Talk about a weak endorsement. Seems like they have moved from a solid last place in the full size truck market to a close third. Moving ahead of Nissan is not exactly a triumph. > Or maybe he was talking about cars, where it appears that majority > of North > American buyers do prefer Toyota over Ford. But what exactly is a car? Is a Freestyle a car or a truck (it goes into the truck sales, even though it is clearly just a Five Hundred Station Wagon). Is an Edge a car or a truck (again, it is counted as a truck for sales). Do people buy Explorers to replace trucks or cars? The line between cars and trucks and SUVs is so blurred as to be almost meaningless. It is my opinion that Ford put too much money into trucks and SUVs and let the car side slide. On the other hand, it seems to me that Toyota did pretty much the same thing. Pundits say Ford let the Focus slide, but didn't Toyota do the same with the Corolla? And the Camry only just got refreshed last year - and even that was a weak update. Toyota did bring in models from other geographies as the "Scion" line up, but at the end of last year, sales of those models were dropping like a rock. So why is Toyota praised for following a similar strategy to the one that Ford gets blasted for? Ed > <dold@84.usenet.us.com> wrote in message > > Toyota didn't have a full sized truck until this year. > Oh so all those Toyota ads touting the 2006 Tundra as a full size > truck were blatant lies? Or the irritatiting radio commercials that > constantly referred to the 2006 Tundra as "huge" were lies? I suppose I think so ;-) I have a Dodge Dakota. My Brother In Law had a Tundra. It was an odd size. I think it was about the size of the Dakota, with a longer bed. It "looked" large, unless you had something to compare it to. Overall, I was not impressed... I didn't like it much at all. But that was then, this is now. The new Tundra looks like it might be a real truck. > > Or maybe he was talking about cars, where it appears that majority of > > North American buyers do prefer Toyota over Ford. > But what exactly is a car? Is a Freestyle a car or a truck (it goes Toyota outsells Ford in total units, whatever you call them. Signature--- Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley Lake, CA, USA GPS: 38.8,-122.5 Toyota sill does not have a full size truck, it seems. The best they have to offer can only tow 10,500 LB. Fords best can tow 24,500 LB Ford needs to run a TV ad showing a Ford towing a Tundra AND its 10,500 LB load. LOL mike , >> Toyota trucks? You are kidding, right? Ford sold 35% of the trucks sold >> in the US in 2006. Toyota only sold 5%. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > That looks like about a 5% to 35% ratio last year, but it is really two > different markets. Toyota didn't have a full sized truck until this year. > Toyota sill does not have a full size truck, it seems. The best they have > to offer can only tow 10,500 LB. Fords best can tow 24,500 LB Ford needs > to run a TV ad showing a Ford towing a Tundra AND its 10,500 LB load. > LOL So what? That is far more than the average person needs. Jeff > mike > , [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >> different markets. Toyota didn't have a full sized truck until this >> year. >> Toyota sill does not have a full size truck, it seems. The best they >> have to offer can only tow 10,500 LB. Fords best can tow 24,500 LB Ford >> needs to run a TV ad showing a Ford towing a Tundra AND its 10,500 LB >> load. LOL > > So what? That is far more than the average person needs. A Ranger is more of a truck than the average person needs.... A friend just told me bout a relative that bought a Ford F450 SuperDuty Diesel and then spent big buck for new wheels, tires and a lift kit. I asked what he does....he is an office worker..... Insanity. Ed An office worker ....with a thirty-five foot boat? ;) mike >>> Toyota sill does not have a full size truck, it seems. The best they >>> have to offer can only tow 10,500 LB. Fords best can tow 24,500 LB [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Ed Toyota is trying to compete with the GM and Ford trucks when in reality the only 'truck' they can beat in any comparison test is the so called Honda 'truck' the Ridgeline, based on a FWD car chassis LOL mike >> Toyota sill does not have a full size truck, it seems. The best they >> have to offer can only tow 10,500 LB. Fords best can tow 24,500 LB Ford [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Jeff |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.