Turbo-charged 4-cylinder Explorer to cost more
Ford's 2011 Ford Explorer.
Ford will ask buyers to pay more for fuel-efficient technology
Yes, I had to read this two or three times also. But a hat tip goes to Automotive News for bringing something to light that I think has gone underreported.
Over the last year or so, with two of the three domestic auto makers suffering a complete melt down, I’ve held a certain amount of respect for Ford. They addressed some of their own financials problems, correcting potential future pitfalls in-house. As an added bonus, they avoided accepting government bailout money. But this recent announcement by the Explorer’s chief engineer, Jim Holland, makes no sense.
“We really want to make a statement that the old baggage on fuel economy with the Explorer is gone,” he said. “To get great fuel economy it takes technology, and it’s our view that people will pay for that.”
So to reaffirm, a smaller engine will cost you more in Ford’s 2011 Explorer. I don’t get it. With so much in the news about fuel efficiency and new government standards, why is Ford going to make if more difficult to buy its most efficient Explorer?
Obviously, Holland and Ford’s boardroom feel the need to recoup the expense of developing new fuel efficient engines. And I get that. Developing new technology always incurs high costs, especially in the auto industry. And this new engine ticks all of the “latest and greatest” boxes with direct injection and a turbo.
This discussion is not unlike what is bantered about regarding hybrids. You pay a premium for a hybrid car’s green power train. But how many people know that the gas they save doesn’t cover its cost? And yes, I understand many people buy a hybrid strictly on the premise that they are helping the environment. Which is fine. But the 2.0-liter, 4-cylinder that Ford will make an option in the new Explorer will be used in other Ford models. Recouping the cost of its development will be much easier for Ford than a company like Tesla trying to recoup the cost of developing their electric drive train.
Obviously time will tell and we’ll know from sales statistics if Ford is on the right track here. What do you think? Is Ford making a mistake here charging a premium for better efficiency? Or do you think buyers are more willing to pay more for that efficiency so they pay less at the pump?
Let me know in your comments below.
