Had Ford made it a more global car, it might have stuck around the way it currently is, Aussie-built or otherwise.
Those Capri's were shockingly built and poorly engineered
By the time they got it half decent no one cared anymore and Mazda owned the segment from pretty much day one
What is that ugly seam on the roof/C pillar?
I think another issue with the Capri in the USA was it's styling, it was bland for the market, especially a small convertable. I think that was a part where Detroit was still misreading about the Japanese success. They thought American's wanted bland to ugly cars as that's what the Japanese were successfully using to penetrate the USA. Detroit missed the mark and gave us bland & poorly built cars, which made matters worse. Not understanding that Americans will happily buy a bland car if it is well built/minimal problems. But give us a well built and great styling & you have a winner.
I will say in the Capri's defense, that it was a convertible a tall driver could live with. I sat in one at an auto show and it was thinkable. The instrumentation was clear and unobstructed by the steering wheel, the sun visors were high enough. But the quality issues and just my own sense of caution about insurance rates for someone my age (early 20s back then) guided me to buy a Mazda Protege.
It wasn't just the styling of the AU that killed it
A lot of them were used as Taxis (Falcons have been for years the prefered vehicle for Taxi use) and if you were tall you would hit your head getting in and out of the back , then once in there your head hit the roof lining and rear window seam
VT Commodores had more head room and a more generous door opening
Speaking of doors
Once you opened the front door in the rain about 3 litres of water would spill onto your legs due to the poor sill design
I totally see it.....they all have round black rubber tires and red taillights!
What a trendsetter......
The Jellybean Taurus was imported a couple of years earlier but flopped spectacularly and it was too late to change the AU
They brought forward the BA by a couple of years but It still had the problems with the rear seat and door openings
The point of it is that the AU Falcon debuted the sharply sloping boot and bonnet (in combination with Ford's new arced design language) that so many 4 door "coupes" now carry as standard. The design was so strongly rejected by the Australian public that the Commodore was outselling it 2:1. At the time these were to two highest selling cars in the country and Commodore was often selling in numbers of 8000 a month (the current #1 is around 4000 a month).
In fact it forced Ford to rush a facelift out after just 2 years. Unheard of at the time.
And then the first generation Mercedes CLS came out and if you can't see the similarities of design there well then you should have gone to Specsavers.
Ford Australia was forced to take on the global styling that was also heavily present in both Taurus and Falcon.
Mulally's comments that Ford hurt Taurus by turning it into a football apply equally to the Falcon, you see the
reversal happening in both with later versions trying to make fronts and rears less rounded.
The real issue is that FoA always had the development cost hurdle to jump with successive Falcon evolutions,
that got more expensive as buyer demands increased and sales began to fall thanks to increased competition.
Hat Taurus-Falcon-Thunderbird-Fairland-Mustang all been on common or closely related platforms,
things could have been quite different but the main failing of Ford was that it regionalized products too well
and the lack of global integration wound up killing Falcon, the very things taht justified falcon and made it
unique also signed its death warrant...
One last try before the end...
Notice the similarity with Mustang...
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)