The 65 mpg Ford the U.S. Can't Have

Ford's Fiesta ECOnetic gets an astonishing 65 mpg, but the carmaker can't afford to sell it in the U.S.

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/08_37/b4099060491065.htm?chan=autos_autos+--+lifestyle+subindex+page_top+stories

If ever there was a car made for the times, this would seem to be it: a sporty subcompact that seats five, offers a navigation system, and gets a whopping 65 miles to the gallon. Oh yes, and the car is made by Ford Motor (F), known widely for lumbering gas hogs.

Ford's 2009 Fiesta ECOnetic goes on sale in November. But here's the catch: Despite the car's potential to transform Ford's image and help it compete with Toyota Motor (TM) and Honda Motor (HMC) in its home market, the company will sell the little fuel sipper only in Europe. "We know it's an awesome vehicle," says Ford America President Mark Fields. "But there are business reasons why we can't sell it in the U.S." The main one: The Fiesta ECOnetic runs on diesel.

 

I have to question the motives of writers of articles like this. They are off on some facts and loose with their reasoning. The cost is evaluated by converting the price of the Fiesta in the UK (£12,445) to US dollars ($25,700) and according to the UK sites the car, a navigation system isn't available. Lastly, they failed to mention one teeny weeny fact. That this car CAN NOT be sold in the US unless it had the R&D effort ($$$$) to reduce NOx emissions. But then again it's a Business Week article. Sounds better to bash Ford.

Next week, "The 51 mpg Toyota the US Can't Have: Toyota's Aygo (non-hybrid gasoline) gets an astonishing 51 mpg, but would cut into hybrid marketing"

 

European pricing includes the sales taxes too, so in the case of the £price quoted above, that includes 17.5% VAT. Actual comparable price would be lower....

 

Good point, that is yet another reason to not use currency exchange rates to convert foreign prices to US (or other).

 

Call me crazy, but I can't hink of a single reason why it's a good business model to make hot-selling cars available only in Europe. But then, Ford is in a freefall plunge towards bankrupcy for many reasons -- this being one of them.

 

I can think of a couple of good reasons. The article says Ford would have to produce 350,000 diesel engines per year to make the investment in a US version feasible. Given that no diesel car has ever been able to sell a fraction of this volume in the past, that's pretty risky. If it isn't a diesel, there would be nothing to differentiate it from a lot of other small cars, which remains a limited segment (compared with crossovers and family sedans. This doesn't look like the place for Ford to stake all it's remaining assets.

 

I would buy one at 25K !!!

 

It makes sense for Europe because Ford has to do nothing to get a stinky, filthy diesel approved in Europe. Well, maybe install a particulate trap, but that's it. It's an easy sell for them because there's little responsibility for how it pollutes the land with smog and soot.

I would no sooner want any more dumping of dirty diesels in the North American market than I would want a ban on small two-stroke gasoline engines to be rescinded. They are filthy and frankly I'm tired of the condescending attitude of car manufacturers who try to paint North America as behind the times for its restrictions on consumer diesel. Europe has yet to catch-up with us on some measures.

 

It's all relative, the Europeans don't want those Greenhouse Gas Producing hybrids, since the HCH produces 11% and the TPH 6% more CO2 gas than the Ford Fiesta in question. HC emissions are also 1/2 to 1/3 for the Fiesta over those "dirty" hybrids. Of course, NOx is 10-20 times higher for that dirty diesel Fiesta. Comparing a Cady Escallade (non-hybrid), the HCH and TPH are still dirtier in HC and NOx measurement. But CO2 is 3-4 times for the Escy than the hybrids. Pick your poison.

 

Upon what are you folks basing your "dirty, filthy diesel" assertions?

All of the 2009 50-state diesel cars (Mercedes Bluetec and VW Jetta TDI) have already been certified ULEV II by CARB and they're generally at or below SULEV levels for all regulated emissions except NOx, well below for PM and CO. Plus, they don't have the direct and indirect evaporative HC emissions issue (which aren't addressed by the "tailpipe" emission regs) that gasoline vehicles do. That's "filthy"?

Granted Ford would likely have to add additional exhaust aftertreatment to the European model to be sold in the U.S., but the European manufacturers seem to have been able to do it without prohibitive costs.