Edsel Confidential
- Thread starter Ryan
- Start date
Thank you for finding this. Many of us have read and been told the history but, I have never seen these.
Timing and having the best product will always count in the path to success, some lessons are hard to learn. Too much analysis and not enough understanding I think.
I worked with Roy Brown in '70 - '71, he had transferred to Ford of England Design after the Edsel group was disbanded and returned to Dearborn in '64 or so. Good man.
Allen
Timing and having the best product will always count in the path to success, some lessons are hard to learn. Too much analysis and not enough understanding I think.
I worked with Roy Brown in '70 - '71, he had transferred to Ford of England Design after the Edsel group was disbanded and returned to Dearborn in '64 or so. Good man.
Allen
Last edited:
vtwinsideways
Senior Member
Simple math- too many engineers and statisticians, not enough car guys.
Uncle Bob
Well-known member
I'm reminded of a saying an old boss of mine had (stated somewhat less colorfully than he did); "Hindsight is 20-20....................if you had an eye in your butt you'd be perfect!" It's easy to second guess their decisions looking back.
Perhaps the best lesson is that successful marketing decisions (actually all business decisions) really aren't that easy, which would help explain why so many people fail in business and so few prevail. Second, and only slightly behind, when the private sector makes a big mistake while spending it's own money, they pull the pin as soon as possible. If this were a government idea we'd still be funding it (I guess the diehard Edsel guys would like that).
A couple years later the Falcon hit the market, probably had a bunch of market planning and engineering effort expended too, and is considered a "success", or at least not a colossal failure like the Edsel. But it only lasted 10 years (or really only 9 if you ignore the Fairlane based finale). On the other hand, the Falcon spawned the Mustang, which, despite the Mustang II, has been a long term success. And the Mustang probably didn't have near the market study that the Edsel had. There is something to be said for gut feel...............but it has to be a savvy gut.
Perhaps the best lesson is that successful marketing decisions (actually all business decisions) really aren't that easy, which would help explain why so many people fail in business and so few prevail. Second, and only slightly behind, when the private sector makes a big mistake while spending it's own money, they pull the pin as soon as possible. If this were a government idea we'd still be funding it (I guess the diehard Edsel guys would like that).
A couple years later the Falcon hit the market, probably had a bunch of market planning and engineering effort expended too, and is considered a "success", or at least not a colossal failure like the Edsel. But it only lasted 10 years (or really only 9 if you ignore the Fairlane based finale). On the other hand, the Falcon spawned the Mustang, which, despite the Mustang II, has been a long term success. And the Mustang probably didn't have near the market study that the Edsel had. There is something to be said for gut feel...............but it has to be a savvy gut.
Last edited:
Milt/Las Vegas
Senior Member
That's like saying the Oldsmobile was an ugly Chevy.
the oldsmobile isnt an ugly chev its a different rig.there was nothing different about an edsel except its looks.every ford part fits.they tried to make them appear different with push buttons in the wheel and that sort of thing.they ever tried to fool people into thinging they had different motors by playing with the cubic inches.
2002p51
Junior Member
Exactly. If you read the story in the latest Rodder's Journal of the Ford exec who drives his '34 coupe to work everyday and parks it in the executive garage you'll see that Ford has real car guys in the front offices now.
I also like that guy who's now the CEO of Dodge. He gets it.
The "Edsel Story" may have had a boring presentation, but the story itself was pretty interesting.
Thanks for posting it.
Milt/Las Vegas
Senior Member
A 58 Edsel was very innovative,and almost nothing bodywise interchanged with Ford or Mercury which by the way were completely different from each other.You touched on one item that was unique to the Edsel(the push buttons in the center of the steering wheel)well it had items all over the car that were unique.Bodywise the smaller Olds shared a lot of body parts with Chevy and Pontiac.GM would have smarter to have shared their engines cost wise which they eventually did.
Milt/Las Vegas
Senior Member
Oh by the way Darrell the 58 Olds/Buicks were probably two of the ugliest,except for some of Chryslers products in 60/61.
i have a 58 edsel parts car.its the cheap version based on ford.i remember one years ago with a 57 ford front clip.perfect fit.front doors are the same all glass.all you would have to do is change dash and steering coluum which all bolt on and all you would have left is the *** end.a complete con job.i bought this parts car just to study it.
My parents bought a 58 Edsel Corsair new--a car I absolutely loved. While I would jump at the chance to buy one today, I still think it's one of the ugliest cars ever made. Nobody mentioned that the turn signals were visible from the side--a safety feature that wouldn't be mandated until 1968. The E475 engine also had soft cams. My dad had ours replaced and Ford covered the cost, although he had to drive to NY state to a Ford factory. And the linkage for that nifty push button trans didn't like snow--it was uncovered underneath. I agree with Milt--58 was a horrible year design, not just Buick,Olds & Edsel, but even Ford and especially the poor 58 Packard.
perrysmith
Senior Member
Chassis-0wise, the low end Edsels had Ford Chassis, essentially. That would be Rangers and Pacers. The Citation and the other one had larger Merc Chassis. They were certainly different enough overall to be considered unique automobiles. I have owned a coupled or leastwise, a couple have passed through my hands. In my research, I was struck by the number of owners who pleaded that they were VERY good autos. I believe that. The rubber seals in my 58 Pacer, were all as good as they left the factory. My 66 Olds on the other hAnd, will need everyone of them replaced. The paint held up quite well. My Pacer was a true barn find with about an 1/2 inch of dust dead birds and mice on it. I sold it before I got aroung to starting it, but if the rest were an indication, it would have run fine. I am told those steering wheel pushbuttons were troublesome. It was not a lemon due to quality, it debuted in a recession year, and the front styling did not appeal to people. Ask the man who owned one, you will see!