Ford to drop Explorer Sport Trac, Mountaineer

[1SICKLEX]

Ford to drop Explorer Sport Trac, Mountaineer

http://www.leftlanenews.com/ford-to-...untaineer.html
07/27/2009, 1:56 PMBy Andrew Ganz
Ford Motor Company will apparently stop production of the Ford Explorer Sport Trac pickup and the Mercury Mountaineer SUV (pictured) about this time next year when the automaker retools its Louisville, Kentucky, assembly plant to build the new unibody Ford Explorer.

The move, hardly a surprise given the dwindling sales of the two models, will give more capacity for other vehicles at the Louisville plant.

Mercury managed to move just 10,596 Mountaineers last year. Essentially a rebadged version of the Explorer, the Mountaineer was conceived for the 1997 model year during the SUV boom in an effort to stretch automaker’s lineup. When the Mountaineer goes, Mercury will be left with just a trio of products: The aging Grand Marquis, the Mariner and the recently redesigned Milan. It is possible that Ford will create a version of the Edge/Lincoln MKZ for Mercury dealers to sell.

Demand for the Sport Trac, which is grouped together with the Explorer in the automaker’s sales figures, has dropped from about 60,000 units annually to a pace that will likely top out at around 10,000 units this year.

[bitkahuna]

mercury is ford's 'buick' but with little effort behind it. and the milan's front end is hideous. but the mercury grand marquis is certainly an iconic brand name.

[IS-SV]

That junk won't be missed. Eliminate the dead/dieing products.

[4TehNguyen]

damn IS-SV beat me to it

[MPLexus301]

Originally Posted by is-sv

that junk won't be missed. Eliminate the Mercury brand.

Much agreed!

[IS-SV]

Originally Posted by MPLexus301

Much agreed!

For sure, no matter how you do the math from a business standpoint the Mercury division cannot be justified.

[mmarshall]

No, it's not time for Mercury to throw in the towel just yet. If Buick, as I suspect, turns off a lot of potential older, traditional buyers with the new 2010 LaCrosse, and Cadillac does the same thing by dropping the DTS, Mercury may find an emerging, potentially larger market for the Sable and Grand Marquis. Lincoln might (?) have also benefitted from this, but they were foolish enough to restrict the Town Car to limo/fleet-sales only now.

[4TehNguyen]

I dont see the point of Mercury when Lincoln exists

[mmarshall]

Originally Posted by IS-SV

For sure, no matter how you do the math from a business standpoint the Mercury division cannot be justified.

The problem is that the math/buisness conditions that will likely exist several years from now could be (and very likely will be) quite different from what they are today. Today, as you note, dropping Mercury would probably be tossing out just the bath water, but (see my above post), if Mercury finds a new market for its Sable and Grand Marquis (which there is a significant chance for), you could be tossing out the baby along with it.


We saw what happened to Chrysler after their buisness managers at Mercedes decided to cut the Plymouth and Eagle divisions. The company went into a tailspin that it never recovered from, forcing M-B to sell off the company......and which led to bankrupcy. After Oldsmobile was dropped at GM, they likewise went into a several-year tailspin, and also ended up in bankrupy. GM, I'm afraid, is making the same mistake with Saturn...instead of doing what they should have done and brought back the superb Saturn plastic-body vehicles, they foolishly just dumped the whole division altogether and sold it.

It's interesting to note that Ford, unlike GM and Chrysler dropping some of their divisions, has NOT dropped the Mercury division.....and, unlike them, has avoided bankrupy and actually turned a 2.3B profit in the second quarter.

[werewolf]

Mercury is big in the midwest (at least in my hometown).

It says 'I buy American but Ford is no longer cool enough for me'

[Kaydee]

no more exploder to roll over on the highways anymore...good riddance

[mmarshall]

Originally Posted by Kaydee

no more exploder to roll over on the highways anymore...good riddance

Irrelevant today. That problem was solved a number of years ago by better tires, a chassis/suspension redesign, and, of course, more sensible driving, tire PSI checks, and vehicle loading on the part of owners.

[IS-SV]

Originally Posted by mmarshall

The problem is that the math/buisness conditions that will likely exist several years from now could be (and very likely will be) quite different from what they are today. Today, as you note, dropping Mercury would probably be tossing out just the bath water, but (see my above post), if Mercury finds a new market for its Sable and Grand Marquis (which there is a significant chance for), you could be tossing out the baby along with it.


We saw what happened to Chrysler after their buisness managers at Mercedes decided to cut the Plymouth and Eagle divisions. The company went into a tailspin that it never recovered from, forcing M-B to sell off the company......and which led to bankrupcy. After Oldsmobile was dropped at GM, they likewise went into a several-year tailspin, and also ended up in bankrupy. GM, I'm afraid, is making the same mistake with Saturn...instead of doing what they should have done and brought back the superb Saturn plastic-body vehicles, they foolishly just dumped the whole division altogether and sold it.

It's interesting to note that Ford, unlike GM and Chrysler dropping some of their divisions, has NOT dropped the Mercury division.....and, unlike them, has avoided bankrupy and actually turned a 2.3B profit in the second quarter.

Not a very good business case above, but certainly a lot of trivia and misc. info about Chrysler, Saturn, Eagle, Olds, Plymouth. Certainly some good examples of where not to take a car company.

But like any good auto company, they can save Mercury with competitive vehicles and I think that is the intended path. I'm from a Ford family myself since 1965 and know plenty about their history and business. And Ford's performance on US car operations have been mediocre at best despite current state of Mercury, but they are trying hard to change that.

[SLegacy99]

I thought Ford was going to begin selling European Ford's as Mercury's. ...I think that Mercury should become a small, all hybrid niche brand.

MERCURY BRAND JUNE 2009 U.S. SALES
----------------------------------

June % Year-To-Date %
---- ------------
2009 2008 Change 2009 2008 Change
---- ---- ------ ---- ---- ------

Grand Marquis 1,639 2,548 -35.7 11,572 16,741 -30.9
Sable 502 2,121 -76.3 5,365 9,426 -43.1
Milan 2,390 2,973 -19.6 12,889 20,426 -36.9
Mariner 2,371 2,975 -20.3 12,215 18,554 -34.2
Mountaineer 430 1,040 -58.7 2,653 7,448 -64.4
---- ---- ---- ----

Mercury Brand 7,332 11,657 -37.1 44,694 72,595 -38.4

[IS-SV]

Originally Posted by mmarshall

Irrelevant today. That problem was solved a number of years ago by better tires, a chassis/suspension redesign, and, of course, more sensible driving, tire PSI checks, and vehicle loading on the part of owners.

Agreed, Ford paid millions in settlements, ancient history now. Since then Ford actually did proper engineering to improve safety aspects on SUV's (not the case with the original Explorer and Bronco II).