There was discussion somewhere in this forum (that I haven't been able to find since) based on a factory photograph of a car mid way through manufacturing where folks spotted hardpoints, structural arrangements, etc that were identical to those same components on the S197.

Did that turn out to be correct despite official word from Ford that this platform was a clean slate?

 

I'm not saying it is or isn't, because I truly don't know.
However.


I would say this. Just because something looks the same or similar doesn't mean the idea or structure wasn't reused for it in a new platform.
If it does the intended job better than changing that, then why change it?

Ford says it's a new platform, and it may be.
But that doesn't mean the new platform didn't borrow great idea's from previous or current iterations.

 

Pure conjecture at this point, but I'm going to guess that the new car has A LOT in common with the outgoing car. I'm not saying the new car is just a re-skin, but given that Ford has no other cars that use the basic platform (unlike GM with the Camaro and Fiat with the Challenger), it's hard to imagine that they would shell out tens of millions of dollars (or more) for a clean-sheet design on what is essentially a niche vehicle in terms of overall volume. That also wouldn't jibe with Mulally's "One Ford" mantra where platforms are shared across model lines globally.

 

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/...gines/3820457/

For what it's worth . . .

 

Like D2C?


What made it over from the expensive Dew98 platform?
The floorpans?
Pretty niche considering it was the only car that ran on it for 10 years.


Nothing says they couldn't do that again.
It's not like they said in 2005. "Riding on an all-new platform, well, except for the floorpan design"

 

It seems like when they say "all new" they mean that they modified the current platform so much that it pretty much is all new. If Lincoln had a RWD car I think ford would have put more money towards the platform.

 

Some of you might have seen this article -
http://www.forbes.com/sites/matthewd...t-of-a-fusion/

"Can you talk about the chassis? It’s all-new, right?
Yes it’s all new. So when we started out, because we’ve been consolidating our platforms across the globe, we looked at whether it was time now to take the Mustang and put it on another platform. We did a lot of study on that, and the answer was “No, we would have to compromise too much.” So all of our senior executives aligned around the fact that we will have this as a unique platform, which was a big deal as we’re trying to get our platform strategy down. And when we started out, we were not going to do an all-new platform. The design guys were coming up with great designs, but it was not a far enough departure from today’s car. So we had to free the constraints for the design. When we freed the constraints, half the car got torn up.


What does that mean, “free the constraints?”
So for instance, that whole dash and cowl area was going to be locked down, we weren’t moving that. The problem is, without changing that, we kept getting the look of today’s kind of car. So when we allowed them to move that A-pillar back, it tore up a lot in the underbody, but it really enabled them to get a beautiful design. And then when we decided we needed to tear up the front suspension to enhance and match the new independent rear suspension, that really tore up the whole front end, because we used to have rails with cross members in it, and now we have a full subframe up front. The whole front end is completely different. So there is not a piece of sheet metal on this car that is carryover from the previous. It’s an all-new platform."