Ford sueing Ferrari over "F150" name

[Dave B]

From Adam Cooper:


To no one’s great surprise Ford has taken legal action in Detroit against Ferrari for using the F150 name on its new car.

It seems that nobody in Maranello had noticed that one of the world’s biggest vehicle manufacturers had been using the designation for its most popular truck since 1975.

Ford is particularly irate over the existence of the http://www.ferrariF150.com website, and has accused the Italian company of cybersquatting and trademark infringement, according to paperwork filed in US District Court in Detroit.

Full story: http://adamcooperf1.com/2011/02/09/ford-sues-ferrari-over-use-of-f150-name/


Also reported by Joe Saward:



Ford also wants damages and is asking for Ferrari to give up any revenue and profits earned in the U.S. through the use of the F150 name. Ford also wants $100,000 in damages pursuant to the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, which protects against Internet domain names that confuse the public over the true source of products and services.

Full story: http://joesaward.wordpress.com/2011/02/09/ford-sues-ferrari/

Same name, obviously, but do they really think anybody would be confused and accidentally order the wrong one? :crazy:

[Mark]

Obvious.. It's just the name of a car they'll be using for one year, Ferrari should change it.

[Roamy]

WOW like who really gives a sh!t. Ford would be so lucky as to have that sh!tbox associated with a Ferrari. Here is a dumb company that just got tons of free advertising and is now suing the golden goose. And while I am at it my daughter bought a new ford explorer and this sh!tbox should be banned from the earth. 12 miles to the gallon. This is a total loser and with the carbon issue in the world and Ford brings out this- they should go under. There is no excuse for a grocery store SUV getting 12 mpg. In this country they need revenue bad. Police are ticketing everything they possibly can. What the hell does any one need a ford mustang for?????? Although it gets better mileage than the pig explorer. The freaking f150 ford probably gets 8 mpg.

[Mark]

12 MPG? Even though that's American gallons that's shocking..

Ford in Europe (and probably elsewhere) has some very good models, and very fuel efficient too, it's long been the case that the US division is dragging the rest of the company down!

[Roamy]

12 MPG? Even though that's American gallons that's shocking..

Ford in Europe (and probably elsewhere) has some very good models, and very fuel efficient too, it's long been the case that the US division is dragging the rest of the company down!

Yes Mark I was shocked as hell. I even thought of renting a trailer so I could haul and extra tank. This car is pathetic- And seriously should be banned as probably every other engine in the world over 5 cylinders with a large cu in displacement. We don't need this stuff for transportation. Now with that being said what about ferraris and porsches - tax em

[Dave B]

Reminds me of a message from an Englishman I know in New York. He said they've banned smoking to improve air quality, but still allow thousands of V6 petrol engined taxis that do 15mpg. Crazy!

[Roamy]

yes and v-8 s too -- we do need to get knocked upside the head !

[Mark]

Reminds me of a message from an Englishman I know in New York. He said they've banned smoking to improve air quality, but still allow thousands of V6 petrol engined taxis that do 15mpg. Crazy!

A V6 in a taxi is completely crazy.. In fact a petrol engine in a taxi is crazy!

[Dave B]

yes and v-8 s too -- we do need to get knocked upside the head !

You're correct: the standard "Yellow Cab" has a 4.6L V8! :crazy:

https://www.fleet.ford.com/showroom/2009fleetshowroom/2009-crviccomm.asp

[Rollo]

Ford also wants damages and is asking for Ferrari to give up any revenue and profits earned in the U.S. through the use of the F150 name. Ford also wants $100,000 in damages pursuant to the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, which protects against Internet domain names that confuse the public over the true source of products and services.

It will fail.

Saab took Porsche to the International Court in the Hague over its use of the number "901" for a particular model number, when they claimed that they had use of all three digit numbers with a "0" in the middle. Consequently International Copyright and Trademarks Laws (of which the US is a signatory) says that you can not copyright or trademark letters, numbers, or letter-number combinations unless they are a meaningful and distinct word.
Microsoft can not for instance sue someone for using the word "Word" because it happens to be the name of a word processing package. Neither can Ferrari sue Peugeot for coming out with a car called a "308".

As for trademark infringement, no-one looking at "ferrarif150" in their right mind is looking for Fords. Simple common sense dictates that this is stupid.

[555-04Q2]

As for trademark infringement, no-one looking at "ferrarif150" in their right mind is looking for Fords. Simple common sense dictates that this is stupid.

Ford is American, therefore stupid is as stupid does.

[Hawkmoon]

Ford are stupid. The law suit is stupid.

Having said that, I hope Ferrari change the name because I don't like it. If they do change it I just hope they don't use F2011, which they probably will because they have all the imagination of a house brick when it comes to naming their cars.

[MrJan]

Ford in Europe (and probably elsewhere) has some very good models, and very fuel efficient too, it's long been the case that the US division is dragging the rest of the company down!

Indeed, I'm currently looking at getting a second hand 2l TDCI Mondeo and, from what I've seen, can apparently expect around 50mpg from it. The US needs a complete cultural shift though, which I believe is slowly happening, until they can accept that small engines can still deliver the power of a V8 then the manufacturers will keep building and selling the gas guzzlers.

[Mark]

Indeed, I'm currently looking at getting a second hand 2l TDCI Mondeo and, from what I've seen, can apparently expect around 50mpg from it. The US needs a complete cultural shift though, which I believe is slowly happening, until they can accept that small engines can still deliver the power of a V8 then the manufacturers will keep building and selling the gas guzzlers.

From what I can see however, the big engines they use put out similar, or less, power than their smaller equivalents, or at least most of the power isn't needed or used.

[SGWilko]

From what I can see however, the big engines they use put out similar, or less, power than their smaller equivalents, or at least most of the power isn't needed or used.

All the time Ameyreeecans had cheap fuel, they had 'muscle' cars, cos that's their mentality. Now most of their oil wells have dried up, they can't work out why their cars cost so much to run due to fuel price rise. Diesels in consumer vehicles is frowned upon.

A very insular nation over the pond indeed.

[Mark]

A very insular nation over the pond indeed.

I wouldn't necessarily say that, you have a developed nation with over 250 million inhabitants, geographically isolated from most places, then of course you're going to be more inward looking. They also have the issue that much of the country has developed over the past 100 years or so, all the time the motor car has been present, so it's much more ingrained there than in the rest of the word - not saying that it isn't elsewhere too.

Of course cheap petrol prices are the biggest factor, when you see that the F150 is one of the best selling cars in America, and yet if you put it on sale in Europe you'd struggle to shift a single one.

[Rollo]

I wouldn't necessarily say that,

I would.

When I visited my then girlfriend (now Mrs Rollo.) in San Diego in 2006 there were large scale fights in the streets between civilians and the military in Tijuana just seven miles away across the border. I bought the San-Diego Union-Tribune daily and didn't find out anything about this until I'd arrived back in Sydney and seen the carnage on the news.

If you're not even aware of something happening seven miles away, I think that implies some degree of insularity.

[Mark]

If you're not even aware of something happening seven miles away, I think that implies some degree of insularity.

I'm not saying they aren't insular, just that there are reasons for this happening rather than just it being for the sake of it :p

Personally I think the UK is a bit too insular too, we tend to ignore what's going on in the Republic of Ireland, for example.

[ioan]

It will fail.

Saab took Porsche to the International Court in the Hague over its use of the number "901" for a particular model number, when they claimed that they had use of all three digit numbers with a "0" in the middle. Consequently International Copyright and Trademarks Laws (of which the US is a signatory) says that you can not copyright or trademark letters, numbers, or letter-number combinations unless they are a meaningful and distinct word.
Microsoft can not for instance sue someone for using the word "Word" because it happens to be the name of a word processing package. Neither can Ferrari sue Peugeot for coming out with a car called a "308".

As for trademark infringement, no-one looking at "ferrarif150" in their right mind is looking for Fords. Simple common sense dictates that this is stupid.

It was Peugeot who complained about the Porsche 901 back in the day and as a result Porsche changed the denomination to 911.

[ioan]

It will fail.

Saab took Porsche to the International Court in the Hague over its use of the number "901" for a particular model number, when they claimed that they had use of all three digit numbers with a "0" in the middle. Consequently International Copyright and Trademarks Laws (of which the US is a signatory) says that you can not copyright or trademark letters, numbers, or letter-number combinations unless they are a meaningful and distinct word.
Microsoft can not for instance sue someone for using the word "Word" because it happens to be the name of a word processing package. Neither can Ferrari sue Peugeot for coming out with a car called a "308".

As for trademark infringement, no-one looking at "ferrarif150" in their right mind is looking for Fords. Simple common sense dictates that this is stupid.

It was Peugeot who complained about the Porsche 901 back in the day and as a result Porsche changed the denomination to 911.

[ioan]

Ford are stupid. The law suit is stupid.

Having said that, I hope Ferrari change the name because I don't like it. If they do change it I just hope they don't use F2011, which they probably will because they have all the imagination of a house brick when it comes to naming their cars.

I guess that Ford has registered the F150 as a protected trademark, so they have the right to protect it if necessary by a law suit.
There is nothing stupid about protecting your own intellectual property. The idiots are in the Ferrari camp for not realizing that they are exposing themselves to a law suit.

[Mark]

I guess that Ford has registered the F150 as a protected trademark, so they have the right to protect it if necessary by a law suit.


Not in all cases, e.g. I could make a model of a fridge called F150 (Fridge 150!) and I doubt they'd be able to dispute that. But in this case it's a car, however it's not like Ferrari are making a road car called the F150, it's a racing car, and it's not for sale.

[AndyL]

Not in all cases, e.g. I could make a model of a fridge called F150 (Fridge 150!) and I doubt they'd be able to dispute that. But in this case it's a car, however it's not like Ferrari are making a road car called the F150, it's a racing car, and it's not for sale.

Indeed, a google for "f150 -ford -ferrari" shows how many products there are called F150. Just in the first couple of pages there's a loudspeaker, a digital thermometer, a mobile phone, a USB flash drive and a Yamaha outboard motor.

[SGWilko]

Indeed, a google for "f150 -ford -ferrari" shows how many products there are called F150. Just in the first couple of pages there's a loudspeaker, a digital thermometer, a mobile phone, a USB flash drive and a Yamaha outboard motor.

Ford and Ferrari have a common link.......


Vehicles.

Do the same search but add vehicle in there - search is dominated by Ford, funnily enough.

I doubt a particular confectioner would moan about a telescope called the mars, but if someone else made a choccy snack bar called mars.....

You get the point................... which is the patent/copyright is against the name F150 and a car/vehicle.............

[MrJan]

I doubt a particular confectioner would moan about a telescope called the mars, but if someone else made a choccy snack bar called mars.....

You get the point................... which is the patent/copyright is against the name F150 and a car/vehicle.............

I could understand if someone else made a choccy bar snack called mars AND tried to sell it. That's not the case here though, it's a stupid fuss that is probably just an attempt to a) drum up more publicity for the truck, b) get some money out of FIAT or c) both.

[SGWilko]

I could understand if someone else made a choccy bar snack called mars AND tried to sell it. That's not the case here though, it's a stupid fuss that is probably just an attempt to a) drum up more publicity for the truck, b) get some money out of FIAT or c) both.

You can bet your bottom Lire if Ferrari manage not to lose the 2011 WCC/WDC that the latest production car would likely be called F150th Italia.......

[chuck34]

WOW like who really gives a sh!t. Ford would be so lucky as to have that sh!tbox associated with a Ferrari. Here is a dumb company that just got tons of free advertising and is now suing the golden goose. And while I am at it my daughter bought a new ford explorer and this sh!tbox should be banned from the earth. 12 miles to the gallon. This is a total loser and with the carbon issue in the world and Ford brings out this- they should go under. There is no excuse for a grocery store SUV getting 12 mpg. In this country they need revenue bad. Police are ticketing everything they possibly can. What the hell does any one need a ford mustang for?????? Although it gets better mileage than the pig explorer. The freaking f150 ford probably gets 8 mpg.

Sorry to prolong this OT discussion. But didn't you know that the Explorer got crappy gas mileage? It's not like it's exactly hidden. If you wanted something that got good gas mileage and then bought an Explorer, is that somehow Ford's fault? And you're right, no one needs a Mustang. Has anyone ever claimed to need one?

Bottom line ... People need to take responsibilty for themselves. Do some research into the product you are buying. If you want something with good gas mileage, buy it, they're out there. If you want a diesel buy one, they're out there. People buy what they want no one (in the US at least, can't speak for other countries as I don't live ther) is forced to buy anything. Companies only produce what they can sell, what people want. If they don't, they go bankrupt and out of business. Well ... maybe not in the US anymore, anybody got a GM or Chrysler?

[Dave B]

This just in:



Ferrari has reacted quickly to the threat of legal action from Ford by renaming its 2011 car as the ‘F150th Italia.’

The name emerged on the Ferrari website today in a routine story about progress with the car at the Jerez test, while Ferrari also republished its January 25th story – where the F150 name was first announced – exactly as before, but with the new name in place.

Source: http://adamcooperf1.com/2011/02/10/ferrari-renames-car-f150th-italia/

Hopefully that will be enough to placate Ford.

[markabilly]

Well I am in favor of Ford suing their pants off.....Got all excited yesterday when a I saw an ad for a nearly brand new F150, for a mere $19,000, went rushing right over to the bank and then to buy.....it turned out to be a pick up truck :mad:

[Mark]

Apparently the FIA are insisting that since they registered with the name F150, Ferrari will actually have to race a pickup truck this year.

[MrJan]

Apparently the FIA are insisting that since they registered with the name F150, Ferrari will actually have to race a pickup truck this year.

Or, to give it the proper name, an HRT.

[Roamy]

Sorry to prolong this OT discussion. But didn't you know that the Explorer got crappy gas mileage? It's not like it's exactly hidden. If you wanted something that got good gas mileage and then bought an Explorer, is that somehow Ford's fault? And you're right, no one needs a Mustang. Has anyone ever claimed to need one?

Bottom line ... People need to take responsibilty for themselves. Do some research into the product you are buying. If you want something with good gas mileage, buy it, they're out there. If you want a diesel buy one, they're out there. People buy what they want no one (in the US at least, can't speak for other countries as I don't live ther) is forced to buy anything. Companies only produce what they can sell, what people want. If they don't, they go bankrupt and out of business. Well ... maybe not in the US anymore, anybody got a GM or Chrysler?

Well actually there were a few circumstances surrounding the purchase - which i will leave private. However the facts remain this crapheap gets nowhere near the advertised sticker mileage. In addition the point remains - autos like this need to be banned and you probably know it just as well as I. Or as a compromise levy a huge tax on such junk and help fund renewable energy sources. I think it is safe to say we are in a oil filled nightmare now and it is time for people and companies to wake up and contribute to a solution. Obviously my daughter will have to sell this roach. On a brighter side I do understand that chevy has a comparable vehicle that gets about twice the mileage. The f150 ford probably gets the same mileage as the f150 ferrari.
Although at least ford brought out a total electric car so hopefully the will quit making this roach soon.

[SGWilko]

The f150 ford probably gets the same mileage as the f150 ferrari.

I doubt it very much - given the power output compared with fuel consumption, F1 engines are, surprisingly, extremely efficient machines.

[billiaml]

If Ford lets Ferrari use F150, then it's fair game for anyone. Therefore, they can't let anyone use it.

My '01 F150 (5.4L V8) has been getting @ 9 mpg. A smaller engine would get better mpg, but I'd have trouble pulling my 21' trailer with it. I'll have to check out the new "eco boost" models.

[billiaml]

Lol -- or maybe they're still sore because Enzo didn't want to sell his company all those years ago. Wasn't Henry Ford II at the helm then? And that prompted Ford to develop the GT40? :D

[D28]

An obvious question might be why Ferrari did nothing in the 1960s when GM appropriated the GTO name for Pontiac. Looking at a copy of the Bluemel/Pourret book on the 250 GTO, it seems that Ferrari never registered that model name. The car was officially something like 250 GT Comp./62.
Anyway, I recall far more borrowing of European names in the 60s, (LeMans, Monza etc.) mostly by GM. These were deliberate choices for automobiles, not as in this case an oversight. Not many would confuse a F1 car with a pickup. I'm sure there is a simple solution.

[yodasarmpit]

Is this a joke.

[Retro Formula 1]

They were a bit silly using the name and quite rightly changed it.

End of story although I like Mark's idea :)

[Dave B]

Here's Ferrari's statement. Seems it always was called F150th Italia, and Ford were simply confused by the abbreviation. Erm, if you say so. I'd never heard the name mentioned until this afternoon, but whatever....



On the subject of the name of the new Ferrari Formula 1 car, the Maranello company wishes to point out that it has sent a letter of reply to Ford, underlining the fact that the F150 designation (used as the abbreviated version of the complete name, which is Ferrari F150th Italia) never has, nor ever will be used as the name of a commercially available product – indeed there will definitely not be a production run of single-seaters.

In fact, it has always been the case in the history of Scuderia names, that they represent the nomenclature of a racing car project and are linked to a chronological order with a technical basis, or in exceptional cases, to special occasions. This year, the decision was taken to dedicate the car name to a particularly significant event, the 150th anniversary of the Unification of Italy, an event of such great importance that the Italian government has declared, for this year only, a national holiday.

For these reasons, Ferrari believes that its own contender in the forthcoming F1 championship cannot be confused with other types of commercially available vehicle of any sort whatsoever, nor can it give the impression that there is a link to another brand of road-going vehicle. Therefore it is very difficult to understand Ford’s viewpoint on the matter.

Despite this and to further prove it is acting in good faith and that it operates in a completely correct manner, Ferrari has decided to ensure that in all areas of operation, the abbreviated version will be replaced at all times with the full version, Ferrari F150 th Italia.

[ioan]

Here's Ferrari's statement. Seems it always was called F150th Italia, and Ford were simply confused by the abbreviation. Erm, if you say so. I'd never heard the name mentioned until this afternoon, but whatever....

I don't believe them either, not to mention that Ferrari F150th Italia is downright moronic as a chassis denomination.

[billiaml]

An obvious question might be why Ferrari did nothing in the 1960s when GM appropriated the GTO name for Pontiac. Looking at a copy of the Bluemel/Pourret book on the 250 GTO, it seems that Ferrari never registered that model name. The car was officially something like 250 GT Comp./62.
Anyway, I recall far more borrowing of European names in the 60s, (LeMans, Monza etc.) mostly by GM. These were deliberate choices for automobiles, not as in this case an oversight. Not many would confuse a F1 car with a pickup. I'm sure there is a simple solution.

As we've seen in more recent posts, Ferrari has dropped the "F150" abbreviation of the name of its car.

Nowadays, there are more lawyers than there were in the 1960's. And it seems like they're always looking for someone to sue as a means of justifying their own existence. :rolleyes:

[Chris R]

You know, I just went and ordered a new F-150 and darn if they didn't deliver a Ferrari F-1 car... How they heck am I going to pick up fertilizer in that thing? and it doesn't look as though it will get through the snow very well......

[UltimateDanGTR]

Well with the name change to F150th Italia, Ferrari did the right thing.

There was no real problem here but a-la Proton/Group Lotus, Ford made something out of nothing. Luckily, this time the 'victim' party were the ones who were more noble. Thank you for common sense for once.

[Big Ben]

the whole affair makes me wonder who's dumber in this case.... the person doing the dumb thing or the one agreeing with the dumb person doing the dumb thing

[Chris R]

The problem is, I think, copyright and trade mark law REQUIRE the holder of the copyright or trade mark to defend their trademark otherwise they lose it... This happened to Xerox a number of years ago.... Obviously, Ferrari is not a threat - but any number of car markers sprouting on the Pacific Rim could take advantage of the situation in 10 years or so if Ford didn't say something now.....

[chuck34]

Well actually there were a few circumstances surrounding the purchase - which i will leave private.

Ok I won't press you on that then.


However the facts remain this crapheap gets nowhere near the advertised sticker mileage.

If it doesn't get the advertised mileage then perhaps you have a claim against Ford for false advertising or something simmilar


In addition the point remains - autos like this need to be banned and you probably know it just as well as I. Or as a compromise levy a huge tax on such junk and help fund renewable energy sources.

I don't know that it has to be banned. Why would it? There are plenty of people that love their Explorers and the like. Why is it up to you to ban such a thing. And why should there be a tax on it, just because you don't like it?


I think it is safe to say we are in a oil filled nightmare now and it is time for people and companies to wake up and contribute to a solution.

If you really believe such a thing then why don't you do something about it other than bitching? Get yourself off of oil. Stop using anything that takes oil. Most food, medicines, anything plastic, anything with steel in it, synthetic fibers, tires, the list could go on for miles.

Contrary to popular belief there still is such a thing as personal responsibilty. There is also still this thing called the "free market". I know its workings are hard to grasp. But basically if you stop buying a product, and get enough of your friends and neighbors to do the same, the market will steer itself into a different direction. Profit is a great motivator. Government doesn't need to step in and ban things nor levy punitive taxes to change things.

This will be my last post here about the subject as it is so far off topic (sorry about that). If you would like to discuss more PM me or go over to chit-chat, plenty of threads there about this.

[airshifter]

I saw lawsuit coming as soon as I heard the F150 designation. Although Ferrari did the right thing in changing the name, they would have acted just as quick if ford had called a new car the ENZ-0. Given the history of Enzo and Ford when it comes to racing, Ferrari should have known better before they even released the car.


As for US vehicles and engines/MPG, it's really very simple. More US consumers still have the choice to drive low MPG vehicles due to fuel prices and average wages. There are plenty of people in poverty ridden countries that thinks the people in Europe are living to excess and waste with their diesel guzzling small cars. It's simply a matter of economics and perspective.

[Rollo]

Government doesn't need to step in and ban things nor levy punitive taxes to change things.

Triangle Shirtwaist Factory, 1911.
Bhopal, 1984.
Deepwater Horizon, 2010.

[Shifter]

Triangle Shirtwaist Factory, 1911.
Bhopal, 1984.
Deepwater Horizon, 2010.

Supply-side faults, all of which could easily have been avoided. That's different than regulating the demand side for political reasons.


On topic portion: Even the FONT of the original Ferrari F150 logo was similar to the badge on the Ford trucks. Or as one girl once said to the confused dealership service manager: "I'm here to pick up my boyfriend's Ford Fiso"

[anthonyvop]

WOW like who really gives a sh!t. Ford would be so lucky as to have that sh!tbox associated with a Ferrari. Here is a dumb company that just got tons of free advertising and is now suing the golden goose. And while I am at it my daughter bought a new ford explorer and this sh!tbox should be banned from the earth. 12 miles to the gallon. This is a total loser and with the carbon issue in the world and Ford brings out this- they should go under. There is no excuse for a grocery store SUV getting 12 mpg. In this country they need revenue bad. Police are ticketing everything they possibly can. What the hell does any one need a ford mustang for?????? Although it gets better mileage than the pig explorer. The freaking f150 ford probably gets 8 mpg.


Yea Ford has got it all wrong. The top selling vehicle in the US. The only US car company not to need or take a bailout.
Big, strong powerful vehicles for real people

[Roamy]

Yea Ford has got it all wrong. The top selling vehicle in the US. The only US car company not to need or take a bailout.
Big, strong powerful vehicles for real people

And you know very well that doesn't make it right! So I don't need a soap box but I would like the NAPA franchise in Cuba!

[Roamy]

Oh and BTW Tony, I did not check it out but I did hear ford survival was due to the euro and brazil cars which get excellent mileage and the ford diesel. But again this is hearsay

[Mark]

Contrary to popular belief there still is such a thing as personal responsibilty. There is also still this thing called the "free market". I know its workings are hard to grasp. But basically if you stop buying a product, and get enough of your friends and neighbors to do the same, the market will steer itself into a different direction. Profit is a great motivator. Government doesn't need to step in and ban things nor levy punitive taxes to change things.


If people stop buying Ford cars in their masses they will likely just go whining to the government that they need financial help because nobody is buying their stuff - wait they already did that!

[chuck34]

Triangle Shirtwaist Factory, 1911.
Bhopal, 1984.
Deepwater Horizon, 2010.

Sorry, I didn't want to comment any more, but I just can't help myself.

Let's add to your list a bit.

Kemper Arena, 1979
Exxon Valdez, 1989
Minnesota I-35 bridge, 2007
The list goes on and on and on. All of which the government had jurisdiction to ensure that these things didn't happen. But they did. Bang-up job by the government eh?


If people stop buying Ford cars in their masses they will likely just go whining to the government that they need financial help because nobody is buying their stuff - wait they already did that!

Ford haven't taken any government money (at least not in the form of a bailout), or have I missed something? Or are you refering to GM/Chrysler? If so I also made reference to them earlier. :D And for the record, I was against the bailouts then, still am now, and will be into the future.

[555-04Q2]

Ford haven't taken any government money (at least not in the form of a bailout), or have I missed something? Or are you refering to GM/Chrysler? If so I also made reference to them earlier. :D And for the record, I was against the bailouts then, still am now, and will be into the future.

Ford was the only one of the Big 3 car manufacturers in the USA that didn't get a bailout. They initially looked at the bailout proposal, but declined and managed to pull through. Good on them.

[janneppi]

Ford didn't need a bailout, they managed fine with the 16 billion loan from Fed which it then payed back. ;)

[nigelred5]

Well actually there were a few circumstances surrounding the purchase - which i will leave private. However the facts remain this crapheap gets nowhere near the advertised sticker mileage. In addition the point remains - autos like this need to be banned and you probably know it just as well as I. Or as a compromise levy a huge tax on such junk and help fund renewable energy sources. I think it is safe to say we are in a oil filled nightmare now and it is time for people and companies to wake up and contribute to a solution. Obviously my daughter will have to sell this roach. On a brighter side I do understand that chevy has a comparable vehicle that gets about twice the mileage. The f150 ford probably gets the same mileage as the f150 ferrari.
Although at least ford brought out a total electric car so hopefully the will quit making this roach soon.

It's called Freedom cheif. You want to live in a country where freedom of choice is banned, I suggest one of the several hundred less "INSULAR" countries you have to choose from. She's getting just about the rated city mileage for virtually every model of Explorer sold. Anyone that believes real world driving will get you anywhere close to teh EPA EST highway mileage, which the BEST advertised is 20, is a fool and uninformed.

[TheFamousEccles]

It's called Freedom cheif. You want to live in a country where freedom of choice is banned, I suggest one of the several hundred less "INSULAR" countries you have to choose from. She's getting just about the rated city mileage for virtually every model of Explorer sold. Anyone that believes real world driving will get you anywhere close to teh EPA EST highway mileage, which the BEST advertised is 20, is a fool and uninformed.

That's hilarious! Freedom!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Give me ****ty mileage in useless, soft, squidgy, urban-oriented 4wd trucks, or give me death!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :vader:

[MAX_THRUST]

Free advertising for Ford, "hey did you know we have a car called a F150", guess everyone does now.....

Don't care either way what Ferrari call there 2011 car, and I don't care if Ford files a law suit. I love the fact that it seems no one picked up a phone and spoke to the other party. Lawyers, do we really need them this much. We mona about the banks but the lawyers arent much better.

[MAX_THRUST]

WE harp on about fuel consumption in the UK, then go to the US say Texas and there is no way that Texans will give up their big trucks, no matter how high gas prices go. It makes you realise what a futile effort it is to change our habbits when globally we are nothing in the grand scheme of things. Apart from anything global warming is big business that's why we are fed the propaganda/ It sclimate change and its been happening since the dinosaurs.

[52Paddy]

we tend to ignore what's going on in the Republic of Ireland, for example.

About time ;)

[NaBUru38]

Ferrari plan to rename the team Scuderia Marlboro Ferrari Gold Leaf Team Lotus Renault Lotus Ferrari. (http://takingthepits.blogspot.com/2011/01/ferrari-to-be-renamed-scuderia-marlboro.html) :p :p :p

[nigelred5]

That's hilarious! Freedom!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Give me ****ty mileage in useless, soft, squidgy, urban-oriented 4wd trucks, or give me death!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :vader:

Freedom of choice, speech, religion, assembly.... Yeah, I'll take it. Noone forced his daughter to buy an Explorer.It was her choice. I'd say is had a lot more to do with vanity, but hey, Im not critical. Running around getting groceries, picking up kids and sitting in traffic is not highway mileage. The EPA stickers clearly advertise the city, highway and combined mileage. It's also NOT up to FORD to determine what the ADVERTISED mileage is. That is determined by the same government he wants to overly interfere in a private citizens life. I knew there would be a lawsuit the second I read the story.

FWIW, I have a truck that gets about 10 mpg, which I use for it's intended purpose. I've also had three TDI's that all got 50 mpg to make my 100 mile round trip daily commute. I even work for the fed gov't, but once I punch the clock, but the f---- out of my life.

[TheFamousEccles]

Freeeeeedddddooommmmmmm!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[anthonyvop]

it's a racing car, and it's not for sale.


Actually it is.
Ferrari sells off their F1 cars to preferred clients once they are done with them.

[anthonyvop]

Oh and BTW Tony, I did not check it out but I did hear ford survival was due to the euro and brazil cars which get excellent mileage and the ford diesel. But again this is hearsay

Ford survived because they run a good business.

As for EPA mileage. You realize that it is measured under a controlled environment without any possible variables like Temperature, rain, snow, heat, road surface, wind or even a human being.

BTW Every EPA Mileage sticker on a new car clearly states "ACTUAL MILEAGE MAY VARY"

[Hawkmoon]

Actually it is.
Ferrari sells off their F1 cars to preferred clients once they are done with them.

Whilst that is true, Ford's assertion that Ferrari are trying to trade off the good name of their antiquated pickup truck is ludicrous.

[call_me_andrew]

Ford survived because they run a good business.

Actually, Ford survived because it mortgaged its factories before the real estate market collapsed. This gave it enough liquidity to wait out the credit crunch. It's not really "good buisness" as much as it is "winning the lottery."

[nigelred5]

On top of that, Ford had their eyes open just a little wider and realized quite early on with the last fuel spike they were far too reliant on Truck and SUV sales and actually took action faster. They were quicker to market with cars like the newest Taurus, revised Focus and hybrid offerings. Ford does indeed have their european FORD operations that do well, but they also owned the more desireable foreign brands that have generated capital to keep going. GM didn't fare so well selling off Hummer and Saab and ended up keeping Opel/Vauxall/Holden.

[anthonyvop]

Actually, Ford survived because it mortgaged its factories before the real estate market collapsed. This gave it enough liquidity to wait out the credit crunch. It's not really "good buisness" as much as it is "winning the lottery."


On top of that, Ford had their eyes open just a little wider and realized quite early on with the last fuel spike they were far too reliant on Truck and SUV sales and actually took action faster. They were quicker to market with cars like the newest Taurus, revised Focus and hybrid offerings. Ford does indeed have their european FORD operations that do well, but they also owned the more desireable foreign brands that have generated capital to keep going. GM didn't fare so well selling off Hummer and Saab and ended up keeping Opel/Vauxall/Holden.

So how is all that not running a good business? Ford made intelligent decisions.....GM and Chrysler didn't. Just like I made an intelligent decision when the "Crisis" was going down and saw how Ford had position themselves......Bought Ford at $1.82 a share....HeHeHe!!!

[call_me_andrew]

I wouldn't file changing products as an intelligent decision. If you know fuel prices are going to spike and change your products to prepare, that's using insider information which is wrong. If you don't know that fuel prices are going to spike and change your product you're just stupid until fuel prices spike (at which point you're stupid-lucky like Forrest Gump).

[SGWilko]

If you know fuel prices are going to spike

You really don't need to be a rocket scientist or a brain surgeon to work out that, with supplies not going to miraculously increase as we use ever more of them, the price of crude oil and thus, the end product, is only going to go one way - up.

Thus, as a car manufacturer, you pitch your products appropriately - uses less fuel, is lighter, hybrid etc etc.......

[chuck34]

I wouldn't file changing products as an intelligent decision. If you know fuel prices are going to spike and change your products to prepare, that's using insider information which is wrong. If you don't know that fuel prices are going to spike and change your product you're just stupid until fuel prices spike (at which point you're stupid-lucky like Forrest Gump).

Who in this room didn't know that fuel prices were going to spike? Who here doesn't know that they're going to spike again? Who here doesn't know that the general public wants more and more fuel efficient vehicles? That isn't using "insider information", that's knowing your market. And that is most definitely an intelligent decision.

[nigelred5]

So how is all that not running a good business? Ford made intelligent decisions.....GM and Chrysler didn't. Just like I made an intelligent decision when the "Crisis" was going down and saw how Ford had position themselves......Bought Ford at $1.82 a share....HeHeHe!!!

I never said it wasn't good business, That first part wasn't me but I was adding on. I was just spelling our more HOW it was so. They were as guilty as GM and Chrysler of running a BAD business, they just made better business decisions to right thier ship earlier, and more importantly, on THEIR OWN. Being able to look at world events and see exactly what commodity and hedge fund managers are doing isn't insider trading.

[nigelred5]

Wanna guess when fuel prices are going to spike again? Have they set a date for the "open elections" to replace Mubarik yet? you don't think the entire middle east has it's cheeks clenched right now. This weekend was just that painful gas bubble passing. The real s storm is still brewing.....

[anthonyvop]

If you know fuel prices are going to spike and change your products to prepare, that's using insider information which is wrong.


No it isn't....Not even close.

The illegal use of insider information is when you obtain inside information of a publicly traded company and then used that information in trading that company's stock.

Performing due diligence on a commodity that affects your product is a sound and perfectly legal business practice.

[anthonyvop]

Ford's better performance compared to the other US auto companies has moreto do with the selling off of dead weight like Jaguar and Volvo then the introduction of more fuel efficient vehicles. in fact their Hybrid line isn't selling so hot yet their Pickups, SUVs and Mustangs are selling quite well.

[Mark]

That's because for some reason in the US it's either massive engine or hybrid. There's not 1.2L supermini!

[nigelred5]

That's because we're generally not 1.2L supermini sized people ;) lol.


Honestly though, it can be downright frightening driving tiny little cars on our highways. I'm actually a big fan of microcars and cabinscooters and in the right area, I'm a big advocate. I had a Mini-clubman S for a couple days test driving that I was thinking about buying. Mini, but not exactly super-mini. I'm not a shy driver, nor am I afraid to drive anything by any means, but honestly, it was downright terrifying driving it at rush hour. Bumper to bumper, with tractor-trailers, brainless mommys half asleep at the wheel of 4k lb SUV's, and the normal early morning Mario Andretti's all at 80 mph in the pitch black. It gets kinda hard to stop down at Home depot to pick up ten bags of mulch, fertilizer and a couple dozen landscaping timbers on a saturday morning in my Messerschmitt, even with a little trailer.

[Rollo]

Oooh I don't know. I've driven a Mexican registered Ford Ka on I-5, I-8, I-10, I-405 etc. and it wasn't really a problem. It was scarier returning it to the hire car place in Tijuana than driving on American roads.
Actually I found driving a 1.6L Opel Corsa at 180km/h (111mph) on German Autobahns far scarier than doing 85mph in a Ka in America.

I could state the obvious, but if everyone was in smaller cars it wouldn't be so scary for you. Fortunately there is sort of a cultural shift going on and Yarises, Minis and Golfs are becoming more popular.
Do yourself a favour, get a Ford Fiesta. They're Megabrill!

[airshifter]

That's because for some reason in the US it's either massive engine or hybrid. There's not 1.2L supermini!

That is slowly changing, but we still don't get the small diesels. The new F150 trucks come with four engine options, from 6.2 liters down to 3.5 liters. The standard engine will be a 3.7 liter six cylinder.

[Hawkmoon]

That is slowly changing, but we still don't get the small diesels. The new F150 trucks come with four engine options, from 6.2 liters down to 3.5 liters. The standard engine will be a 3.7 liter six cylinder.

That's something I've never quite understood about American automakers - engine size. They always seem to equate power with engine size. Need more power? Add more litres! At the sme time the rest of the world uses smaller capacity engines and still gets the power.

Take the Dodge Viper for example. 8.0 litre V10. WTF? At the same time Ferrari were making the 355 that had the most powerful normally aspirated engine (at the time) ever produced for a production car. They did it with a 3.5 litre V8. Bigger might be 'better' but it certainly isn't smarter.

[nigelred5]

That's something I've never quite understood about American automakers - engine size. They always seem to equate power with engine size. Need more power? Add more litres! At the sme time the rest of the world uses smaller capacity engines and still gets the power.

Take the Dodge Viper for example. 8.0 litre V10. WTF? At the same time Ferrari were making the 355 that had the most powerful normally aspirated engine (at the time) ever produced for a production car. They did it with a 3.5 litre V8. Bigger might be 'better' but it certainly isn't smarter.


There's an old saying, There is no substitute for cubic inches. I've rarely seen it proven wrong. Sure, it may make that power, but at what cost, and for how long? How expensive is that Ferrari to produce, maintain and FEED? What kind of fuel economy does that F355 get.? I guess I fail to see the clear advantage. Either way, you've got to pump air and fuel and in the end, which is more effective.? It's all about the application.


See how long that Ferrari engine lasts pulling tree stumps, hauling 10K pound trailers, hauling pallets of bricks and concrete block. I'd much prefer a small TD, but a good ol v8 just keeps ticking and ticking like a timex watch even with the abuse.

[nigelred5]

Oooh I don't know. I've driven a Mexican registered Ford Ka on I-5, I-8, I-10, I-405 etc. and it wasn't really a problem. It was scarier returning it to the hire car place in Tijuana than driving on American roads.
Actually I found driving a 1.6L Opel Corsa at 180km/h (111mph) on German Autobahns far scarier than doing 85mph in a Ka in America.

I could state the obvious, but if everyone was in smaller cars it wouldn't be so scary for you. Fortunately there is sort of a cultural shift going on and Yarises, Minis and Golfs are becoming more popular.
Do yourself a favour, get a Ford Fiesta. They're Megabrill!

Well, we've got a LOOOONG way before our highways change that much, especially around here. It's not like I drive a huge car every day (Passat Wagon or my wife's A4 but neither is a big car by any means). I test drove a Fiesta about a month ago.... no thanks. Uncomfortable seating position I could not get adjusted right for me, didn't like the ergo, and worst was my kids knees pushed in my back so bad my back hurt when I got out. For what it was, I can get way more car for the same money. Checked out the Mazda2 and didn't like it either.

[555-04Q2]

There's an old saying, There is no substitute for cubic inches. I've rarely seen it proven wrong. Sure, it may make that power, but at what cost, and for how long? How expensive is that Ferrari to produce, maintain and FEED? What kind of fuel economy does that F355 get.? I guess I fail to see the clear advantage. Either way, you've got to pump air and fuel and in the end, which is more effective.? It's all about the application.


See how long that Ferrari engine lasts pulling tree stumps, hauling 10K pound trailers, hauling pallets of bricks and concrete block. I'd much prefer a small TD, but a good ol v8 just keeps ticking and ticking like a timex watch even with the abuse.

It is more expensive to make a smaller engine as powerfull as a large V8, but not that much more. And with component quality so good these days, high performance small motors are very reliable if looked after. I have never had a problem with any of my tweeked scoobies (I have even gone over 200 000 km's with no problems at all) because I look after my cars, even though I give them a good old thrashing. Quality in, quality out!

But you are right when you say therte is no subsitite for size, it just doesn't make economic sense paying for the hefty fuel bill though that V8's return.

[Mark]

But think of the power that big V8 could produce if it had been engineered properly!

There is such a thing as efficiency. "Work smarter, not harder"

[Tazio]

Ferrari modifies name of 2011 contender to ‘Ferrari F150th Italia’
I'm glad they got that straightened out. They shouldn’t try to tarnish Fords good name. ;)

http://www.gpupdate.net/en/f1-news/252392/ferrari-modifies-car-label-after-ford-complaint/

[slorydn1]

WOW like who really gives a sh!t. Ford would be so lucky as to have that sh!tbox associated with a Ferrari. Here is a dumb company that just got tons of free advertising and is now suing the golden goose. And while I am at it my daughter bought a new ford explorer and this sh!tbox should be banned from the earth. 12 miles to the gallon. This is a total loser and with the carbon issue in the world and Ford brings out this- they should go under. There is no excuse for a grocery store SUV getting 12 mpg. In this country they need revenue bad. Police are ticketing everything they possibly can. What the hell does any one need a ford mustang for?????? Although it gets better mileage than the pig explorer. The freaking f150 ford probably gets 8 mpg.

I am the PROUD owner of a 2004 Ford F150 Lariat edition. I have owned it since it was brand new in February of 2004. It now has 92,000 miles on it and has been BY FAR the best vehicle I have ever owned. It has the biggest, gas guzzling motor they offered in 2004 (The 5.4L Triton V8) and has 300hp and I have NEVER gotten below 13mpg around town, I usually get 15 on avg, and have been over 20mpg on long trips several times-and I'm not one to take lazy trips, I'm usually making pretty good time.

My truck has NEVER left me stranded-has never failed to start.

As for Ferrari using the F150 name, I can understand the issue with brand recognition. Ford has spent 35+ years and countless millions of dollars to ensure that whenever some says the words F150 everyone instantly thinks of their truck, and not some F1 car.

Does anyone really think that if Ford built a race car this year, threw some red valve covers on it and called it a Testarossa that Ferrari wouldn't be tripping all over itself to have it changed with a quickness? I'd bet it would be faster than one could even say Testarossa.

[Rollo]

That's something I've never quite understood about American automakers - engine size. They always seem to equate power with engine size. Need more power? Add more litres! At the same time the rest of the world uses smaller capacity engines and still gets the power.

You'll have to follow several strands which come together for what I think is the answer to this. There are as I see it, three main reasons why American cars generally have bigger engines even in the same model line-up, and why cars are bigger generally.



There's an old saying, There is no substitute for cubic inches. I've rarely seen it proven wrong. Sure, it may make that power, but at what cost, and for how long?

See how long that Ferrari engine lasts pulling tree stumps, hauling 10K pound trailers, hauling pallets of bricks and concrete block. I'd much prefer a small TD, but a good ol v8 just keeps ticking and ticking like a timex watch even with the abuse.

1. Torque:
The above answer is perfect :up:

The truth is that although you can screw more power out of a smaller engine by turning the wick up harder, you can overcome the problem of generating torque. Torque itself is almost a linear function of engine size and/or stroke. An Austin 7 "Chummy" was a very torquey engine because of its long stroke.

The Formula One Toyota RVX-06 2.4L V8 was quoted at 740bhp but a pathetic 274Nm of torque, whereas a road going Camry Aurion 3.5L V6 puts out 335Nm of torque.
For the record the 4.5L Turbodiesel Land Cruiser puts out a pissy 255bhp but a totally stonkin' 650Nm of torque; that will pull you up a steep dirt slope very easily indeed.

I think that the following is also important:


It is more expensive to make a smaller engine as powerfull as a large V8, but not that much more. And with component quality so good these days, high performance small motors are very reliable if looked after

2. Price Point:
Americans demand cheaper cars than the rest of the world because (and let's be frank about this), public transport in America is ****e. As a result people live in their cars a lot more and tend to put more wear on them.
Even just a small change in input expenses if you're running on tighter margins, over a wider spread of sales makes a very big difference to the bottom line.

If you are putting more wear on something, it is generally a good idea to over-engineer the product. That goes from everything from Mixmasters to Lawnmowers, from Motor Cars to big Marine Diesels.

3. Crap Petrol:
American petrol coming out of the pump is worse than that of either Europe or a comparable market like Australia.

Standard European Petrol - 95RON - 36.33MJ/L
Standard Australian Petrol - 91RON - 35.02MJ/L
Standard American Petrol - 89RON - 31.63MJ/L

Petrol for North America is of a lower octane rating (and yes I know the difference between RON, MON the displayed "headline" figure and the AKI calcs).

American Petrol is a different soup because of different requirements to do with particulates, so called "smog" and the whole confusion of LEV, CAFE etc whereas Europe and most of the world (incl Australia) is adopting EURO-IV and EURO-V standards.
The petrol itself simply isn't capable of delivering the same power per litre that other countries' petrol does. To get around the problem, it's far cheaper to enlarge the engine than to wind it up further or screw on some turbos.

[airshifter]

3. Crap Petrol:
American petrol coming out of the pump is worse than that of either Europe or a comparable market like Australia.

Standard European Petrol - 95RON - 36.33MJ/L
Standard Australian Petrol - 91RON - 35.02MJ/L
Standard American Petrol - 89RON - 31.63MJ/L

Petrol for North America is of a lower octane rating (and yes I know the difference between RON, MON the displayed "headline" figure and the AKI calcs).

American Petrol is a different soup because of different requirements to do with particulates, so called "smog" and the whole confusion of LEV, CAFE etc whereas Europe and most of the world (incl Australia) is adopting EURO-IV and EURO-V standards.
The petrol itself simply isn't capable of delivering the same power per litre that other countries' petrol does. To get around the problem, it's far cheaper to enlarge the engine than to wind it up further or screw on some turbos.

I call crap on the fuel issue. :)

Due to the differences in testing methods, US fuel will show a lower rating for the same fuel. Though I agree the minimums available may be slightly higher in other areas of the world, the maximum levels end up within a point of so of each other (when based on normally available fuels). The RON+MON/2 method used in the US is generally accepted to reduce the MON rating by 4 or 5 points, thus a 98 MON fuel contain roughly the same BTUs as a 93/94 fuel using the US rating. And in either case the fuel in any modern country is more than adequate enough for tuning on the standard engines shipped from a mass producer. Not to mention that for what most in Europe pay for fuel, we could buy 110 octane racing fuel.


I do for the most part agree with your view on torque. More directly low rev torque as compared to higher rev horsepower. The US for the most part has some of the largest vehicles when compared to others. Big heavy cars require torque to get them moving. To steal some words from Carrol Shelby "Horsepower sells cars, torque wins races." And it was Shelby and his men that used one of those primitive V8 powered cars to humble the Ferraris back in the day.

As for the F-150, one of the current engine options is a 3.5 liter twin turbo that generates 420 lb ft of torque at a low truck friendly 2500 rpm, yet still manages to make 365 HP at 5000 revs.

[Rollo]

I call crap on the fuel issue. :)

Due to the differences in testing methods, US fuel will show a lower rating for the same fuel. Though I agree the minimums available may be slightly higher in other areas of the world, the maximum levels end up within a point of so of each other (when based on normally available fuels). The RON+MON/2 method used in the US is generally accepted to reduce the MON rating by 4 or 5 points, thus a 98 MON fuel contain roughly the same BTUs as a 93/94 fuel using the US rating. And in either case the fuel in any modern country is more than adequate enough for tuning on the standard engines shipped from a mass producer. Not to mention that for what most in Europe pay for fuel, we could buy 110 octane racing fuel.

There are a few problems in the first place before you even get to the headline rate. MON and RON are determined by spinning a known engine at a known speed to give a comparison against iso-octane and n-heptane. Regular pump petrol in the US and Australia typically sit at about 82-83 MON but differ in their RON because of different additive mix.
BTU rating is somewhat cloudy as the definition of a BTU varies and according to my copy of Pears Cyclopedia (2002) can be anything between 1.054kJ - 1.060 kJ, which is why I gave petrol as a standard MJ rating (which can not change).

The Mercedes-Benz club NSW had to write to Caltex in Australia and Texaco in both the US and the UK to get the chemical data sheets about the dark arts of petrol. This all came about because of the issue of putting E10 (10% ethanol fuel) through cars which changes the RON, MON and AKI again. Fortunately my big ol' 450SEL 6.9 is a bit like Cookie Monster when it comes to petrol but with a 2.3 Cossie it's critical.

[CNR]

http://www.latimes.com/sports/sns-rt-ouksp-uk-court-formutre71g218-20110217,0,786409.story

LUXEMBOURG (Reuters) - The Formula One Group does not have exclusive rights to the sport's "F1" abbreviation, Europe's second-highest court ruled on Thursday, rejecting an attempt by the motor race organiser to block other uses of "F1."

The General Court was ruling on an appeal by Formula One Licensing, the commercial rights arm of the Formula One Group, against a decision by trademark agency OHIM in a 2007 case. "Formula One Licensing cannot prevent the registration of a (European) Community trade mark containing the words 'F1 LIVE'," the General Court in Luxembourg said in its ruling.

[555-04Q2]

2. Price Point:
Americans demand cheaper cars than the rest of the world because (and let's be frank about this), public transport in America is ****e. As a result people live in their cars a lot more and tend to put more wear on them.
Even just a small change in input expenses if you're running on tighter margins, over a wider spread of sales makes a very big difference to the bottom line.

If you are putting more wear on something, it is generally a good idea to over-engineer the product. That goes from everything from Mixmasters to Lawnmowers, from Motor Cars to big Marine Diesels.

I have to disagree there. One of the products my compant manufactures in large standby generator sets. The small block turbo charged sets last the same amount of time as the big block naturally aspirated sets do, approx 60,000 - 80,000 hours at full load if looked after. And the turbo charged sets use approx 15-25% less fuel and are cheaper to maintain.

Its the same with my cars. My turbo charged cars last as long as my naturally aspirated V8' ones do, with both giving no problems until the day I decide to sell them.

I think people overlook how well some things can be made these days. Companies manufacture goods to last "X" amount of time, so that you have to buy another one in the future. With a bit of care and spending a little extra money in the right places, most things can be made to last at least 2-3 times longer, maybe even more.

[AndyL]

The Formula One Toyota RVX-06 2.4L V8 was quoted at 740bhp but a pathetic 274Nm of torque, whereas a road going Camry Aurion 3.5L V6 puts out 335Nm of torque.
For the record the 4.5L Turbodiesel Land Cruiser puts out a pissy 255bhp but a totally stonkin' 650Nm of torque; that will pull you up a steep dirt slope very easily indeed.

Isn't crankshaft torque of only indirect importance? What moves you forwards is the torque applied to the driven wheels, which is engine torque times gearing. If you put the F1 engine in the Landcruiser, you'd be getting that torque at 16000rpm instead of, say, 4000rpm, so you could pull a gear 4 times lower at the same road speed (assuming you've got appropriate ratios). The torque applied to the wheels would then be roughly 1.7 times greater than you were getting with the diesel, despite the quoted torque figure being less than half.
Not that I'm suggesting that would be a good idea :) just making the point that looking at peak engine torque values doesn't tell the whole story.

[call_me_andrew]

Torque and horsepower don't increase exponentially with RPM. The aforementioned Land Cruiser makes peak torque at 1,600 RPM so when you reach, say, 4000 RPM, you're actually producing less torque.

[555-04Q2]

Torque and horsepower don't increase exponentially with RPM. The aforementioned Land Cruiser makes peak torque at 1,600 RPM so when you reach, say, 4000 RPM, you're actually producing less torque.

Correct :up: Most diesel engines develope their peak torque around the 1500-2500 RPM range. Petrol engines around 3500-4500 RPM. There are some exceptions though.

[airshifter]

There are a few problems in the first place before you even get to the headline rate. MON and RON are determined by spinning a known engine at a known speed to give a comparison against iso-octane and n-heptane. Regular pump petrol in the US and Australia typically sit at about 82-83 MON but differ in their RON because of different additive mix.
BTU rating is somewhat cloudy as the definition of a BTU varies and according to my copy of Pears Cyclopedia (2002) can be anything between 1.054kJ - 1.060 kJ, which is why I gave petrol as a standard MJ rating (which can not change).

The Mercedes-Benz club NSW had to write to Caltex in Australia and Texaco in both the US and the UK to get the chemical data sheets about the dark arts of petrol. This all came about because of the issue of putting E10 (10% ethanol fuel) through cars which changes the RON, MON and AKI again. Fortunately my big ol' 450SEL 6.9 is a bit like Cookie Monster when it comes to petrol but with a 2.3 Cossie it's critical.

I don't dispute that there are differences around the world, but the ratings of the fuels have significant differences. Years back one of the information pages on the BP site showed that the base fuel for what was sold in the European areas as the 100/102 MON was the same as the base fuel sold in the US as 93/94 MON+RON/2. Though I've heard of and understand the AKI rating I've never seen it shown on a pump that I recall. Yet in reality it would seem to me to be more significant in some aspects. The RON testing changes timing while running, and the ability to resist knock is tested more completely. BTUs without timing control are often wasted.

We are dealing with E10 in my area, and I hate the stuff. Reduced thermal energy for the same price. I guess the farmers like it, but I don't want to pay the same amount for a lower MPG return.

[airshifter]

Isn't crankshaft torque of only indirect importance? What moves you forwards is the torque applied to the driven wheels, which is engine torque times gearing. If you put the F1 engine in the Landcruiser, you'd be getting that torque at 16000rpm instead of, say, 4000rpm, so you could pull a gear 4 times lower at the same road speed (assuming you've got appropriate ratios). The torque applied to the wheels would then be roughly 1.7 times greater than you were getting with the diesel, despite the quoted torque figure being less than half.
Not that I'm suggesting that would be a good idea :) just making the point that looking at peak engine torque values doesn't tell the whole story.

Correct in theory. The downside in reality would be the huge differential and/or gearbox to reduce the final drive ratio enough to put down good torque to the wheels. You would also have the higher torque peak often associated with small displacement high revving engines, which would cause either slipping the clutch to get moving or a very loose torque converted in the case of automatics. I would also think that reliability would be affected very quickly, since by design most higher revving engines use light parts.

[ArrowsFA1]

Ford's dispute with Ferrari over the F-150 name has now been resolved, bringing an end to the lawsuit between the two companies.
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/89730

[RS]

And Ferrari tweaks cars name again: http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/89741

I must say I like Ferrari a little bit more after reading that :D

[Hawkmoon]

And Ferrari tweaks cars name again: http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/89741

I must say I like Ferrari a little bit more after reading that :D

It shows that Ferrari have a somewhat bemused sense of humour.

I'll still refer to the car as the F150 as I, unlike some mullet-wearing, fried chicken-eating redneck from the deep south, can tell the diference between an F1 car and a pick-up truck. :D

[AndySpeed]

I love the somewhat sarcastic tone that Ferrari use in their Horse Whisperer columns. At least they say it like it is!

[slorydn1]

It shows that Ferrari have a somewhat bemused sense of humour.

I'll still refer to the car as the F150 as I, unlike some mullet-wearing, fried chicken-eating redneck from the deep south, can tell the diference between an F1 car and a pick-up truck. :D

I live in the deep south, drive an F-150, am allergic to chicken or I'd be eating it by the ton, and yes, I know the difference between a pick up truck and an F1 car. The issue is not whether or not we know the difference between a race car or pick up truck, its the fact that some snooty ass european car maker thought that they could just snatch up a trademarked name and use it in any way they sought fit. Ford has put 35 plus years and BILLIONS of dollars into builing up recongnition for its truck's name so that the instant anyone says F150 the first thing that comes to mind is the truck and not have that clouded by some 1 year wonder of a race car (and I am saying this as a long time fan of Ferrari in F1). So to characterise it in that way is extremely insulting, not to mention uninformed and dead wrong.

Oh, and by the way, last time I checked, Austrailia is a heck of alot farther south than North Carolina :p :

Eat any kangaroos lately? :cool:

[gloomyDAY]

Uh oh! Di MontezeLOCO got a hold of a laptop once again.

I'm not sure what is so hard to understand about Ford trying to protect the F-150's name.
Damed if you do, damned if you don't.

If Ford didn't take Ferrari to court, then the Euros would be calling them stupid rednecks for letting Ferrari use their trademarked name. Now that Ford took Ferrari to court we have the Euros calling Ford stupid rednecks for defending themselves. Ford did the right thing or else Ferrari wouldn't have responded to the lawsuit by changing the name.


...fried chicken-eating...What's wrong with fried chicken?

I love fried chicken and there's nothing wrong with me.
If you don't like fried chicken, then there's something wrong with you.

[Kevincal]

It makes Ford look pathetic for suing for this. Everyone knows american car companies are doing horribly, its no surprise theyd try to sue to get any money they can... ill never buy a ford or any american car. been my experience (as an owner) they are pieces of crap. honda and toyota are the best.

[SGWilko]

It makes Ford look pathetic for suing for this. Everyone knows american car companies are doing horribly, its no surprise theyd try to sue to get any money they can... ill never buy a ford or any american car. been my experience (as an owner) they are pieces of crap. honda and toyota are the best.

Does it? As has been posted earlier in this thread, a copyright has to be protected/chellenged in order not to lose the copyright AIUI.

[ioan]

It makes Ford look pathetic for suing for this. Everyone knows american car companies are doing horribly, its no surprise theyd try to sue to get any money they can... ill never buy a ford or any american car. been my experience (as an owner) they are pieces of crap. honda and toyota are the best.

A bit of reading would have helped you not to post such nonsense because:
1. Protecting you intellectual property is very very important, unless you have none.
2. Ford had a record year in 2010, where did you read that they 'are doing horribly'?!

[nigelred5]

Uh oh! Di MontezeLOCO got a hold of a laptop once again.

I'm not sure what is so hard to understand about Ford trying to protect the F-150's name.
Damed if you do, damned if you don't.

If Ford didn't take Ferrari to court, then the Euros would be calling them stupid rednecks for letting Ferrari use their trademarked name. Now that Ford took Ferrari to court we have the Euros calling Ford stupid rednecks for defending themselves. Ford did the right thing or else Ferrari wouldn't have responded to the lawsuit by changing the name.

What's wrong with fried chicken?

I love fried chicken and there's nothing wrong with me.
If you don't like fried chicken, then there's something wrong with you.

AMEN!! I love Fied Chicken! had chicken and bisquits for breakfast and fried chicken for supper. Skipped dinner or I probably would ahve probably had it then too. I was busy at the range with my 9 year old sharpening up our 2nd amendment rights. ;)

[nigelred5]

But think of the power that big V8 could produce if it had been engineered properly!

There is such a thing as efficiency. "Work smarter, not harder"

556 bhp (415 kW)@6100rpm and 551 lb·ft (747 N·m)@3800rpm isn't enough for ya? :)

[Rollo]

its the fact that some snooty ass european car maker thought that they could just snatch up a trademarked name and use it in any way they sought fit. Ford has put 35 plus years and BILLIONS of dollars into builing up recongnition for its truck's name so that the instant anyone says F150 the first thing that comes to mind is the truck and not have that clouded by some 1 year wonder of a race car (and I am saying this as a long time fan of Ferrari in F1). So to characterise it in that way is extremely insulting, not to mention uninformed and dead wrong.

A number or name can not be trademarked because a trademark is for a distinct design or pattern. The Coke Bottle is trademarkable thing because it is a distinct shape. Logos can be trademarked because they are a distinct design.
The name "F-150" of itself isn't distinctive at all and as such and because it isn't a pattern or a design it can not be trademarked.

Names are not protected by US Law.
http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-protect.html#title
Names are not protected by copyright law.
The name F-150 wouldn't be sufficiently long enough to be considered distinctive. Someone's book or a newspaper article would be considered long enough for copyright purposes.

The actual tort which copyrights, trademarks and patents seek to remedy is that of "passing off", "piracy" or "theft". No-one in their right mind would consider that an F1 car is a pickup truck, and you are "extremely insulted" then quite frankly that's too bad because at law unless actual damage is done through a tort then the case isn't even viable.

The name of something of itself isn't sufficient to prove a tort case. The whole point of this incident is spurious.

[ioan]

Pardon me?
And how did Bernie trademark F1 if Ford can't do the same with F-150? Maybe because it isn't just a number?

[Hawkmoon]

I live in the deep south, drive an F-150, am allergic to chicken or I'd be eating it by the ton, and yes, I know the difference between a pick up truck and an F1 car. The issue is not whether or not we know the difference between a race car or pick up truck, its the fact that some snooty ass european car maker thought that they could just snatch up a trademarked name and use it in any way they sought fit. Ford has put 35 plus years and BILLIONS of dollars into builing up recongnition for its truck's name so that the instant anyone says F150 the first thing that comes to mind is the truck and not have that clouded by some 1 year wonder of a race car (and I am saying this as a long time fan of Ferrari in F1). So to characterise it in that way is extremely insulting, not to mention uninformed and dead wrong.

Oh, and by the way, last time I checked, Austrailia is a heck of alot farther south than North Carolina :p :

Eat any kangaroos lately? :cool:

Ferrari aren't producing a commerically available vehicle called an F-150. They are producing a racing car, of which there will be no more than a handfull produced, and which will run no more than 2 dozen times this year. The car won't even turn a wheel in the US, which is the primary (only?) market for their pickup truck. How exactly does Ferrari's F150 damage Ford in any way shape or form?

And yes, I have eaten kangaroo lately though it's not really to my tate. Koala on the other hand, now that's a tasty dish! ;)

[Rollo]

Pardon me?
And how did Bernie trademark F1 if Ford can't do the same with F-150? Maybe because it isn't just a number?

"F1" isn't trademarked. The F1 device with the swoosh after it is trademarked:
http://www.mycarforum.com/uploads/monthly_07_2010/blogentry-61716-1278135881.jpg

There is a distinct difference between a graphic trademark and the names "F1" and "Formula One", which because they are names can not be trademarked, nor copyrighted.

[Rollo]

Ferrari aren't producing a commerically available vehicle called an F-150. They are producing a racing car, of which there will be no more than a handfull produced, and which will run no more than 2 dozen times this year. The car won't even turn a wheel in the US, which is the primary (only?) market for their pickup truck. How exactly does Ferrari's F150 damage Ford in any way shape or form?

Exactly. :up:

Ferrari aren't "passing off" or pirating Ford's pickup truck. Therefore the tort behind the laws of copyright, trademarks and patents has not been infringed.

[Mark]

Pardon me?
And how did Bernie trademark F1 if Ford can't do the same with F-150? Maybe because it isn't just a number?

F1 itself can't be trademarked as such. There are many companies with 'F1' in the title. If you were to somehow claim that your company is related to Formula 1, using 'F1' then *that* would be a violation.

[Tazio]

Ford based its lawsuit on the fact that Ferrari uses the internet to sell product on sites that use the terms F150, and F150.com
within a domain name.
They are invoking the "Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act". I don't think Ford had much of a chance of winning in this matter.
However it must be assumed that Ferrari wouldn’t want to get into a protracted legal battle.
Tempest in teacup really IMO

http://cache.gawkerassets.com/assets/images/12/2011/02/0002xn.jpg

The Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act establishes a cause of action for registering, trafficking, or using a domain name confusingly similar to, or dilutive of a trademark or personal name. The object of the Act is to tackle the problem of cybersquatting. This Act empowers the owner to bring a cause of action against a domain name registrant who:

1. has a bad faith intent to profit from the mark; and

2. registers, traffics in, or uses a domain name that is identical or confusingly similar to a distinctive mark, identical or confusingly similar

http://definitions.uslegal.com/a/anticybersquatting-consumer-protection-act%20/

[Bagwan]

Tempest in teacup really IMO

Wee teacup , but more than enough press to fill it .

Who thought up this gambit ?
Good one .

[schmenke]

All this is great free publicity for Ford ;)

[Rollo]

http://sundayafternoonclub.blogs.topgear.com/2011/03/07/ferrari-changes-name-of-new-car-again/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=twitter
Ford yesterday revealed that it has abandoned plans to sue for breach of copyright.

http://www.ferrari.com/English/Formula1/News/Headlines/Pages/110304_F1_The_Horse_Whisperer_The_name_changes_but _not_the_sense.aspx
Therefore the name will now read as the Ferrari 150° Italia, which should make it clear even to the thickest of people that the name of the car is a tribute to the anniversary of the unification of our country.

I like this: "should make it clear even to the thickest of people". Oh I don't know Ferrari, from what I've seen, human stupidity is fairly well limitless. Now then, if they could just build a car which runs on human stupidity...

[ioan]

http://sundayafternoonclub.blogs.topgear.com/2011/03/07/ferrari-changes-name-of-new-car-again/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=twitter
Ford yesterday revealed that it has abandoned plans to sue for breach of copyright.

http://www.ferrari.com/English/Formula1/News/Headlines/Pages/110304_F1_The_Horse_Whisperer_The_name_changes_but _not_the_sense.aspx
Therefore the name will now read as the Ferrari 150° Italia, which should make it clear even to the thickest of people that the name of the car is a tribute to the anniversary of the unification of our country.

I like this: "should make it clear even to the thickest of people". Oh I don't know Ferrari, from what I've seen, human stupidity is fairly well limitless. Now then, if they could just build a car which runs on human stupidity...

Ford being classy and Ferrari showing their lack of it, why am I not surprised?!

[PSfan]

Man, I just love it when Ferrari do something incredibly stupid, so I can read some of the silly defense posts... Like:


A number or name can not be trademarked because a trademark is for a distinct design or pattern. The Coke Bottle is trademarkable thing because it is a distinct shape. Logos can be trademarked because they are a distinct design.
The name "F-150" of itself isn't distinctive at all and as such and because it isn't a pattern or a design it can not be trademarked.

Names are not protected by US Law.
http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-protect.html#title
Names are not protected by copyright law.
The name F-150 wouldn't be sufficiently long enough to be considered distinctive. Someone's book or a newspaper article would be considered long enough for copyright purposes.


Funny, thats completely contradictory to this:

What is a trademark?

A trademark is a word, phrase, symbol or design, or a combination thereof, that identifies and distinguishes the source of the goods of one party from those of others.
http://www.uspto.gov/faq/trademarks.jsp

Oh yah, just for reference:

A statement from Ford on Wednesday said: “F-150® is an established and important Ford trademark and the name of the best-seller in Ford’s F-Series, America’s best-selling trucks for 34 years and best-selling vehicles for 29 years. Through extensive sales and advertising and exclusive use, Ford has earned invaluable goodwill in the F-150® trademark. That hard-won goodwill is seriously threatened by Ferrari’s adoption of 'F150.'

“When Ferrari announced the name of its race car as 'F150,' Ford asked Ferrari to change the name. Ferrari did not respond in a timely manner, leaving Ford no choice but to take legal action to protect its important brand and trademark rights.”
http://formula-one.speedtv.com/article/f1-ferrari-versus-ford-in-court/

Please note the little R symbol after f150. I have read recently that symbolizes a registered trademark, and is illegal in some places (not sure about the US) to have that if it isn't registered.


Ferrari aren't producing a commerically available vehicle called an F-150. They are producing a racing car, of which there will be no more than a handfull produced, and which will run no more than 2 dozen times this year. The car won't even turn a wheel in the US, which is the primary (only?) market for their pickup truck. How exactly does Ferrari's F150 damage Ford in any way shape or form?


Yah, cause there wouldn't have been a slew of t-shirts, baseball caps, and die-cast cars sold all over the place with Ferrari F150 if Ford hadn't stepped in. Also there won't be any of those fried chicken loving americans driving their F150 trucks to Montreal to see a race.


http://sundayafternoonclub.blogs.topgear.com/2011/03/07/ferrari-changes-name-of-new-car-again/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=twitter
Ford yesterday revealed that it has abandoned plans to sue for breach of copyright.

http://www.ferrari.com/English/Formula1/News/Headlines/Pages/110304_F1_The_Horse_Whisperer_The_name_changes_but _not_the_sense.aspx
Therefore the name will now read as the Ferrari 150° Italia, which should make it clear even to the thickest of people that the name of the car is a tribute to the anniversary of the unification of our country.

I like this: "should make it clear even to the thickest of people". Oh I don't know Ferrari, from what I've seen, human stupidity is fairly well limitless. Now then, if they could just build a car which runs on human stupidity...

Oh and thanks for the horse whisperer, even more Ferrari idiocy for me to point and laugh at...

with the concomitant withdrawal by Ford of the summons. Therefore common sense has prevailed.
Well, common sense would have been to listen to Ford before they took your buts to court. maybe perhaps making a phone call to Fiat, who should have been well aware of the F-150s existence after buying into Chrysler. Common sense would have been to give your car a better name in the first place (Like maybe Ferrari Italia 150 instead of what you settled for now.)

Common sense would have been to accept defeat graciously and moved on instead acting like a 8 year old who was just sent to his room with-out dessert.

decided that the car will lose the F that precedes the number 150 and which stands for Ferrari
See, now I do feel thick, until now I assumed the F meant formula. So, the car was meant to be called the Ferrari Ferrari 150, Ford really should be sent a thank you for saving us that stupidity.

It appears that this could have caused so much confusion in the minds of the consumer across the Pond
which should make it clear even to the thickest of people
They really should have that written on banners at every Ferrari dealership across North America.

Oh and on to something I just thought was to funny to ignore:
http://img593.imageshack.us/img593/1905/252104278.jpg
http://my.speedtv.com/go/thread/view/55846/26961097/Ford_trying_to_stop_Ferrari?pg=9

[Rollo]

Yes but the name "F-150" of itself is NOT a trademark. To submit a trademark, you need to send in a graphic as to what that trademark looks like.

If you'd bother to check the USPTO website you would have found:
Every application must include a clear representation of the mark you want to register. We use this representation to file
the mark in the USPTO search records and to print the mark in the Official Gazette and on the registration certificate.
http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/basics/index.jsp

This would be a trademark because it is a graphic of "F-150":
http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2007/12/f150-badge_opt.jpg

You even provided the link yourself:
What is a trademark?
A trademark is a word, phrase, symbol or design, or a combination thereof, that identifies and distinguishes the source of the goods of one party from those of others.
http://www.uspto.gov/faq/trademarks.jsp
How can you distinguish the source of a good, without the trademark being physically affixed to the good?

Of itself "F-150" is NOT a trademark. See post 109.

[Tazio]

The complaint that Ford filed states quite clearly that they field the action on the grounds of
The "Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act". It is legislation that is in place for protecting Internet domain names and the commerce associated with them. Read post #115 again.
The Link I provided is the one that Ford filed in Federal court
You are right in the sense that Ferrari didn’t do their homework in this matter.
Here is the complaint I would paste iy but it is a PDF
http://cache.gawkerassets.com/assets.../02/0002xn.jpg

[Rollo]

PS Fan #120. My post was #121.

[ioan]

Man, I just love it when Ferrari do something incredibly stupid, so I can read some of the silly defense posts... Like:



Funny, thats completely contradictory to this:

What is a trademark?

A trademark is a word, phrase, symbol or design, or a combination thereof, that identifies and distinguishes the source of the goods of one party from those of others.
http://www.uspto.gov/faq/trademarks.jsp

Oh yah, just for reference:

A statement from Ford on Wednesday said: “F-150® is an established and important Ford trademark and the name of the best-seller in Ford’s F-Series, America’s best-selling trucks for 34 years and best-selling vehicles for 29 years. Through extensive sales and advertising and exclusive use, Ford has earned invaluable goodwill in the F-150® trademark. That hard-won goodwill is seriously threatened by Ferrari’s adoption of 'F150.'

“When Ferrari announced the name of its race car as 'F150,' Ford asked Ferrari to change the name. Ferrari did not respond in a timely manner, leaving Ford no choice but to take legal action to protect its important brand and trademark rights.”
http://formula-one.speedtv.com/article/f1-ferrari-versus-ford-in-court/

Please note the little R symbol after f150. I have read recently that symbolizes a registered trademark, and is illegal in some places (not sure about the US) to have that if it isn't registered.



Yah, cause there wouldn't have been a slew of t-shirts, baseball caps, and die-cast cars sold all over the place with Ferrari F150 if Ford hadn't stepped in. Also there won't be any of those fried chicken loving americans driving their F150 trucks to Montreal to see a race.



Oh and thanks for the horse whisperer, even more Ferrari idiocy for me to point and laugh at...

with the concomitant withdrawal by Ford of the summons. Therefore common sense has prevailed.
Well, common sense would have been to listen to Ford before they took your buts to court. maybe perhaps making a phone call to Fiat, who should have been well aware of the F-150s existence after buying into Chrysler. Common sense would have been to give your car a better name in the first place (Like maybe Ferrari Italia 150 instead of what you settled for now.)

Common sense would have been to accept defeat graciously and moved on instead acting like a 8 year old who was just sent to his room with-out dessert.

decided that the car will lose the F that precedes the number 150 and which stands for Ferrari
See, now I do feel thick, until now I assumed the F meant formula. So, the car was meant to be called the Ferrari Ferrari 150, Ford really should be sent a thank you for saving us that stupidity.

It appears that this could have caused so much confusion in the minds of the consumer across the Pond
which should make it clear even to the thickest of people
They really should have that written on banners at every Ferrari dealership across North America.

Oh and on to something I just thought was to funny to ignore:
http://img593.imageshack.us/img593/1905/252104278.jpg
http://my.speedtv.com/go/thread/view/55846/26961097/Ford_trying_to_stop_Ferrari?pg=9

:up:
Made my day! Cheers! :)

[ioan]

Yes but the name "F-150" of itself is NOT a trademark. To submit a trademark, you need to send in a graphic as to what that trademark looks like.

If you'd bother to check the USPTO website you would have found:
Every application must include a clear representation of the mark you want to register. We use this representation to file
the mark in the USPTO search records and to print the mark in the Official Gazette and on the registration certificate.
http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/basics/index.jsp

This would be a trademark because it is a graphic of "F-150":
http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2007/12/f150-badge_opt.jpg

You even provided the link yourself:
What is a trademark?
A trademark is a word, phrase, symbol or design, or a combination thereof, that identifies and distinguishes the source of the goods of one party from those of others.
http://www.uspto.gov/faq/trademarks.jsp
How can you distinguish the source of a good, without the trademark being physically affixed to the good?

Of itself "F-150" is NOT a trademark. See post 109.

What kind of graphics do you need in order to trademark a word?! :rolleyes:

[Tazio]

.

[Rollo]

What kind of graphics do you need in order to trademark a word?! :rolleyes:

You could have any graphic for a word. Plenty of firms have their name as a graphic; they don't even have to be all that complicated:
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_AcBUSVxs82w/TRDDoHkFasI/AAAAAAAAj6Q/0vWgn-vJ9T4/s1600/Cadbury-Logo.jpg
http://web.mit.edu/gradecakgroup/img/3M.gif

Heck even the firm I work for has the name trademarked:
http://www.merrell.com.au/images/logo.gif

[PSfan]

Yes but the name "F-150" of itself is NOT a trademark. To submit a trademark, you need to send in a graphic as to what that trademark looks like.

If you'd bother to check the USPTO website you would have found:
Every application must include a clear representation of the mark you want to register. We use this representation to file
the mark in the USPTO search records and to print the mark in the Official Gazette and on the registration certificate.
http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/basics/index.jsp

This would be a trademark because it is a graphic of "F-150":
http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2007/12/f150-badge_opt.jpg

You even provided the link yourself:
What is a trademark?
A trademark is a word, phrase, symbol or design, or a combination thereof, that identifies and distinguishes the source of the goods of one party from those of others.
http://www.uspto.gov/faq/trademarks.jsp
How can you distinguish the source of a good, without the trademark being physically affixed to the good?

Of itself "F-150" is NOT a trademark. See post 109.

your post 109 almost completely refers to copyright, not trademark:
As taken from wikipedia:

A trademark is typically a name, word, phrase, logo, symbol, design, image, or a combination of these elements.
A Name... f-150 is a name of a truck... as I pointed out from the speed article ford clearly trademarked the name hence all the little registered trademark symbols following f-150 in their press release.

Also for your enjoyment:
Effective November 2, 2003, Trademark Rule 2.52, 37 C.F.R. §2.52, was amended to replace the term “typed” drawing with “standard character” drawing. Applicants who seek to register a mark without any claim as to the manner of display must submit a standard character drawing that complies with the requirements of 37 C.F.R. §2.52(a).

[Rollo]

Also for your enjoyment:
Effective November 2, 2003, Trademark Rule 2.52, 37 C.F.R. §2.52, was amended to replace the term “typed” drawing with “standard character” drawing. Applicants who seek to register a mark without any claim as to the manner of display must submit a standard character drawing that complies with the requirements of 37 C.F.R. §2.52(a).

Again - Please READ what you've posted:
Applicants who seek to register a mark without any claim as to the manner of display must submit a standard character drawing that complies with the requirements

A drawing is a GRAPHIC!

You can not trademark a "name". A trademark is a graphic representation of something; and you keep on providing proof that this is the case.

[PSfan]

The complaint that Ford filed states quite clearly that they field the action on the grounds of
The "Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act". It is legislation that is in place for protecting Internet domain names and the commerce associated with them. Read post #115 again.
The Link I provided is the one that Ford filed in Federal court
You are right in the sense that Ferrari didn’t do their homework in this matter.
Here is the complaint I would paste iy but it is a PDF
http://cache.gawkerassets.com/assets.../02/0002xn.jpg

Not sure if that is suppose to be the same image as your post #115, but it clearly states:

"Ford files this action against Ferrari for trademark dilution, trademark infringement, false designation of origin, and cyberpiracy..."

[PSfan]

Again - Please READ what you've posted:
Applicants who seek to register a mark without any claim as to the manner of display must submit a standard character drawing that complies with the requirements

A drawing is a GRAPHIC!

You can not trademark a "name". A trademark is a graphic representation of something; and you keep on providing proof that this is the case.

Effective November 2, 2003, Trademark Rule 2.52, 37 C.F.R. §2.52, was amended to replace the term “typed” drawing with “standard character” drawing. Applicants who seek to register a mark without any claim as to the manner of display must submit a standard character drawing that complies with the requirements of 37 C.F.R. §2.52(a).

807.03(a) Requirements for Standard Character Drawings

A standard character drawing must show the mark in black on a white background. An applicant may submit a standard character drawing if:

· The mark does not include a design element;

· All letters and words in the mark are depicted in Latin characters;

· All numerals in the mark are depicted in Roman or Arabic numerals;

· The mark includes only common punctuation or diacritical marks; and

· No stylization of lettering and/or numbers is claimed in the mark.

37 C.F.R. §2.52(a).

If the applicant files an application on paper, the applicant may depict the mark in any font style; may use bold or italicized letters; and may use both uppercase and lowercase letters, all uppercase letters, or all lowercase letters, since no claim is made to any particular font style, size, or color. The applicant does not have to display the mark in all uppercase letters. If filing electronically via the Trademark Electronic Application System (“TEAS&#8221 ;) , the applicant may neither depict the mark in any particular font style nor use bold or italicized letters. TEAS will automatically convert any wording typed into the standard-character field to a standardized typeface.

[Kevincal]

sueing is for pussies

[Tazio]

Not sure if that is suppose to be the same image as your post #115, but it clearly states:

"Ford files this action against Ferrari for trademark dilution, trademark infringement, false designation of origin, and cyberpiracy..."
I was under the impression that you can be guilty of cyberpiracy without having your domain name trademarked under The "Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act". (and maybe you can) But having re-read the "Act" again it does use the terms trademark or "mark" in all of it's definitions.
And yes Ferrari behaved badly in releasing a vindictive comment!

[Rollo]

Effective November 2, 2003, Trademark Rule 2.52, 37 C.F.R. §2.52, was amended to replace the term “typed” drawing with “standard character” drawing. Applicants who seek to register a mark without any claim as to the manner of display must submit a standard character drawing that complies with the requirements of 37 C.F.R. §2.52(a).
...
If the applicant files an application on paper, the applicant may depict the mark in any font style; may use bold or italicized letters; and may use both uppercase and lowercase letters, all uppercase letters, or all lowercase letters, since no claim is made to any particular font style, size, or color. The applicant does not have to display the mark in all uppercase letters. If filing electronically via the Trademark Electronic Application System (“TEAS”), the applicant may neither depict the mark in any particular font style nor use bold or italicized letters. TEAS will automatically convert any wording typed into the standard-character field to a standardized typeface.

And the regulation you've posted still describes a graphic device. It's so gosh darn easy when you're doing all the work for me.

[Hawkmoon]

Yah, cause there wouldn't have been a slew of t-shirts, baseball caps, and die-cast cars sold all over the place with Ferrari F150 if Ford hadn't stepped in. Also there won't be any of those fried chicken loving americans driving their F150 trucks to Montreal to see a race.


Oh and on to something I just thought was to funny to ignore:
http://img593.imageshack.us/img593/1905/252104278.jpg


I say again, how does an F1 car called the Ferrari F150 damage Ford in any way shape or form? How do t-shirts and model cars steal sales from Ford? Somebody wants a model pickup truck and orders an F1 car by mistake?

How do Ferrari benefit from the "good name" of the pickup? Were they hoping to sell more F1 cars by associating with the F-150 name? Pity they don't sell F1 cars commercially. I can't see how people looking for a t-shirt with "Ford F-150" could get confused by a t-shirt "Ferrari F150" on it. Becuase if "F-150" and "F150" are easily confused then "Ferrari" and "Ford" certainly aren't. If they were, would Ford have sued Ferrari years ago for having the temerity to use an "F" in their compay name?

And as for our mullet-wearing, fried-chicken eating friends who might be inclined to drive up to the Canadian Forumla One Grand Prix, do you really think they'll go expecting to see a couple of pickup trucks wallowing around the Montreal circuit?

I agree that Ford have a right to protect their trademarks, real or otherwise. But I maintain that they were being stupid in taking legal action against Ferrari when there is no way the two cars could be confused by any reasonable person.

Oh, and that picture is brilliant!

[PSfan]

And the regulation you've posted still describes a graphic device. It's so gosh darn easy when you're doing all the work for me.

Fine, ford trademarked a variable graphic. it doesn't matter what that graphic looks like, if it depicts f-150 and its on an automobile then its covered by ford's trademark. happy?

[Rollo]

Fine, ford trademarked a variable graphic. it doesn't matter what that graphic looks like, if it depicts f-150 and its on an automobile then its covered by ford's trademark. happy?

Correct. It doesn't matter what the graphic looks like. I don't think that the law allows the trademarking of a "variable graphic" though. I would wager than every time the mark was changed, it would require a new trademark.

However a name of itself is NOT a trademark.
If a Nepalese car company wanted to call a car a Mustang for instance, then they could perfectly do so with total impunity because a name can not be copyrighted.

[PSfan]

Oh hell, I've already missed chuck and castle... hope they weren't new...


Correct. It doesn't matter what the graphic looks like. I don't think that the law allows the trademarking of a "variable graphic" though. I would wager than every time the mark was changed, it would require a new trademark.

That is why I included the "TEAS will automatically convert any wording typed into the standard-character field to a standardized typeface." The trademark in regards to the f-150 is a standard character mark, meaning it doesn't matter how its depicted on an automobile its ford's, and because of that, doesn't require its mark to be updated for every f-150 logo change.


However a name of itself is NOT a trademark.
If a Nepalese car company wanted to call a car a Mustang for instance, then they could perfectly do so with total impunity because a name can not be copyrighted.

This is a grey issue, I can't seem to find a auto trademark for mustang (though ford has used a standard character mark for mustang in regards to perfumes and air fresheners, and a whole lot of "pony girl by mustang" so its probably just hidden, heck apperantly in and around 2006 ford went on the warpath to protect its mustang trademark, so there must be one, I just can't find it... :P

FRAK THIS:

How to Trademark a Word or Phrase: http://www.ehow.com/how_5714398_trademark-word-phrase.html

Really? Can You Do That? How to Trademark a Word
Read more: http://www.brighthub.com/office/entrepreneurs/articles/42927.aspx#ixzz1FyyqCPkE

[Rollo]

This is a grey issue, I can't seem to find a auto trademark for mustang (though ford has used a standard character mark for mustang in regards to perfumes and air fresheners, and a whole lot of "pony girl by mustang" so its probably just hidden, heck apperantly in and around 2006 ford went on the warpath to protect its mustang trademark, so there must be one, I just can't find it... :P

http://www.hulasmotors.com/flash/mustang.htm
The Hulas Mustang was launched back in 1996, there has never been an issue because you can not trademark a name.

The first link you provided talks about a logo. A logo is a GRAPHIC!
http://www.ehow.com/how_5714398_trademark-word-phrase.html
Decide whether you would like to use plain text or a stylized logo in your trademark registration. If you want to use a logo,
Trademarks are for GRAPHICS. This is how they work. That's what they are. A word of itself is not a graphic and therefore can not be trademarked.

The other link you provided says that:
A trademark in other words is a distinguishing mark
http://www.brighthub.com/office/entrepreneurs/articles/42927.aspx#ixzz1FyyqCPkE
A distinguishing mark is something affixed to a physical product. A "distinguishing mark" still describes a graphic device.

Everything you've provided with regards a trademark describes a graphical device affixed to a product, or something if displayed by itself would still be that same graphic device. That's what a Trademark by legal definition.

[PSfan]

http://www.hulasmotors.com/flash/mustang.htm
The Hulas Mustang was launched back in 1996, there has never been an issue because you can not trademark a name.

Perhaps Hulas and their 1000 Sherpa and Mustangs driving around Nepal is just to small of a concern for Ford at the moment. Perhaps Hulas got a regional trademark and ford choose not to contest because of a lack of interest in selling Ford Mustangs in Nepal who knows.


The first link you provided talks about a logo. A logo is a GRAPHIC!
http://www.ehow.com/how_5714398_trademark-word-phrase.html
Decide whether you would like to use plain text or a stylized logo in your trademark registration. If you want to use a logo,
Trademarks are for GRAPHICS. This is how they work. That's what they are. A word of itself is not a graphic and therefore can not be trademarked.

If it had been written as "Decide whether you would like to use a plain text or a stylized logo," then you may have had a point, which suggest the plain text would be the logo and not just plain text or a logo.


The other link you provided says that:
A trademark in other words is a distinguishing mark
http://www.brighthub.com/office/entrepreneurs/articles/42927.aspx#ixzz1FyyqCPkE
A distinguishing mark is something affixed to a physical product. A "distinguishing mark" still describes a graphic device.

Everything you've provided with regards a trademark describes a graphical device affixed to a product, or something if displayed by itself would still be that same graphic device. That's what a Trademark by legal definition.

You inability to read "how do I trademark a word confuses me.

Heres a good one...
http://www.secureyourtrademark.com/2007/11/trademark-registration-of-common-words.html

and a follow up:
http://www.apple.com/legal/trademark/appletmlist.html

good old apple, they even tell you how to use their trademarks when you write about them:

Remember that trademarks are adjectives, and cannot be made plural or possessive.

that certainly sounds like a word and not a graphic they are describing... unless you wanna show me how to pluralize that cadbury image you pasted.

[SGWilko]

sueing is for pussies

Don't you mead sewing.....? :p

[Mark]

"even the thickest person"

I do like that, but it's not professional of Ferrari to put out those kind of words, even though they are correct!

[gloomyDAY]

"even the thickest person"

I do like that, but it's not professional of Ferrari to put out those kind of words, even though they are correct!Ferrari are completely unprofessional and wrong.

I can't believe the crap I've been reading in this thread. Ford contact Ferrari over the name F-150 and are willing to find some middle ground. Ferrari decide not to respond, so Ford's only course of action is to file a lawsuit. Ferrari, knowing they are going to lose the case, decide to change the name of their F1 car. Ford rescinds the lawsuit and bygones are bygones, but wait, there's more! "The Hoarse Whisperer" (DiMontezeloco) decides to throw a little hissy fit and write a column berating Ford.

Funny how another member is claiming that Ford are the pussies for filing a legitimate lawsuit. The real pussy is the person writing some bull**** column and is too much of a coward to reveal their own name. I wonder if Ferrari's livery was inspired by "The Whore Whisperer's" monthly rag.

[ioan]

that certainly sounds like a word and not a graphic they are describing... unless you wanna show me how to pluralize that cadbury image you pasted.

;)

Thanks for brightening up the forum! :up:

[ioan]

sueing is for pussies
Don't you mead sewing.....? :p

:rotflmao:

[ioan]

"even the thickest person"

I do like that, but it's not professional of Ferrari to put out those kind of words, even though they are correct!

I can't remember the last time Ferrari were professional, it must have been sometimes during 2007, then the pizza guys took over and blew up everything.

[ioan]

Ferrari are completely unprofessional and wrong.

I can't believe the crap I've been reading in this thread. Ford contact Ferrari over the name F-150 and are willing to find some middle ground. Ferrari decide not to respond, so Ford's only course of action is to file a lawsuit. Ferrari, knowing they are going to lose the case, decide to change the name of their F1 car. Ford rescinds the lawsuit and bygones are bygones, but wait, there's more! "The Hoarse Whisperer" (DiMontezeloco) decides to throw a little hissy fit and write a column berating Ford.

Funny how another member is claiming that Ford are the pussies for filing a legitimate lawsuit. The real pussy is the person writing some bull**** column and is too much of a coward to reveal their own name. I wonder if Ferrari's livery was inspired by "The Whore Whisperer's" monthly rag.

Fully agreed.
Were Ferrari belittling only Ford or everyone who might happen to buy the Ford F-150? Some guys from over the pond could start a nice legal action based on this Ferrari column . ;)

[chuck34]

Ford knows very well that you can trademark a name. Why do you think their late supercar was the Ford GT and not the Ford GT40?

Not the best source I know, but in this case it is acurate.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_GT40#Ford_GT
"A British company, Safir Engineering, who made continuation GT40s in the 1980s owned the GT40 trademark at that time, and when they completed production, they sold the excess parts, tooling, design, and trademark to a small American company called Safir GT40 Spares based in Ohio. Safir GT40 Spares licensed the use of the GT40 trademark to Ford for the initial 2002 show car, but when Ford decided to make the production vehicle, negotiations between the two failed, and as a result the new Ford GT does not wear the badge GT40. It is rumored[by whom?] that Safir GT40 Spares asked $40 million dollars for the rights, but this has never been verified. The partners at Safir GT40 Spares state they have correspondence from Ford declining Safir's $8 million offer. Later models or prototypes have also been called the Ford GT but have had different numbering on them such as the Ford GT90 or the Ford GT70. The GT40 name is currently licensed for use by the Pathfinder Motorsports GT40/R Competition, which is built by Hi-Tech in South Africa, which also builds street version models of the GT40."



More importantly, from the US patent and trademark office it appears that the name f-150 is very much alive and well as a trademark.
http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=toc&state=4004%3Aagqtl3.1.1&p_search=searchss&p_L=50&BackReference=&p_plural=yes&p_s_PARA1=&p_tagrepl%7E%3A=PARA1%24LD&expr=PARA1+AND+PARA2&p_s_PARA2=F-150&p_tagrepl%7E%3A=PARA2%24COMB&p_op_ALL=AND&a_default=search&a_search=Submit+Query&a_search=Submit+Query

[chuck34]

Apparently my link above times out. So try this one, simply put F-150 in the search box and see what comes up.

http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/gate.exe?f=searchss&state=4009:2o3d9v.1.1

[BDunnell]

You also have to consider that when people google F150 it will likely come up with the Ferrari, hence taking attention from a Ford product.

But, in this case, so what? People are smart enough to tell the difference. Only those with an overly high regard for the machinations of the corporate world ought to be concerned about the potential damage that could be done to the sales of a pick-up truck by the fact of a Formula 1 car having the same designation. I find the whole thing rather depressing. And chuck34's posts above are very pertinent.

[ioan]

I believe that people should read this thread and try to understand what means having a trademarked property and what it implies, things like protecting it if you don't want it to become useless.

Also I wish I would see what the naysayers would do if they had a trademark worth millions when someone starts using it with commercial intentions. I bet they would do not less than what Ford did, politely asked them to desist and than go to court.

[BDunnell]

I believe that people should read this thread and try to understand what means having a trademarked property and what it implies, things like protecting it if you don't want it to become useless.

Also I wish I would see what the naysayers would do if they had a trademark worth millions when someone starts using it with commercial intentions. I bet they would do not less than what Ford did, politely asked them to desist and than go to court.

But in this case I simply cannot see what damage would have been done to sales of a pick-up truck by way of potential confusion with a Formula 1 car. And this is, let's not forget, a pick-up truck mostly sold in the US, where the numbers of people who will be aware of the existence of the Ferrari F150 is minimal owing to the limited nature of F1 enthusiasm. In no sense would Ferrari calling its F1 car the F150 render Ford's trademark 'useless'. Had Ferrari built a pick-up and called it the F150, I would be in complete agreement with you. But they haven't.

And, ioan, while I have come to respect greatly much of what you have to say on other matters, I can't help but feel that your opinion on this subject would have been completely different two or three years ago, when your enthusiasm for Ferrari was still intact.

[Brown, Jon Brow]

But in this case I simply cannot see what damage would have been done to sales of a pick-up truck by way of potential confusion with a Formula 1 car. And this is, let's not forget, a pick-up truck mostly sold in the US, where the numbers of people who will be aware of the existence of the Ferrari F150 is minimal owing to the limited nature of F1 enthusiasm. In no sense would Ferrari calling its F1 car the F150 render Ford's trademark 'useless'. Had Ferrari built a pick-up and called it the F150, I would be in complete agreement with you. But they haven't.

And, ioan, while I have come to respect greatly much of what you have to say on other matters, I can't help but feel that your opinion on this subject would have been completely different two or three years ago, when your enthusiasm for Ferrari was still intact.

It is even harder to see where the confusion would come from when you consider that even Formula 1 fans will rarely ever call the car the F150. A majority of the time it will be referred to as simply 'the Ferrari'.

[BDunnell]

It is even harder to see where the confusion would come from when you consider that even Formula 1 fans will rarely ever call the car the F150. A majority of the time it will be referred to as simply 'the Ferrari'.

Exactly.

[gloomyDAY]

I don't know why we're going around in circles. Ferrari did something illegal, Ford countered with a lawsuit, and Ferrari fixed the problem.

I really wonder what this thread would look like if Ford came out with a new truck named the F458. Wait, here's a clue:

http://karpagamsimpressions.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/cute-baby-crying-512x384-3.jpg

[Kevincal]

Maybe Ford are still bitter they weren't able to buy out Ferrari way back when lol. ;) That's where their one-hit wonder GT-40 came from, hatred of Ferrari. ;)

[gloomyDAY]

Maybe Ford are still bitter they weren't able to buy out Ferrari way back when lol. ;) That's where their one-hit wonder GT-40 came from, hatred of Ferrari. ;) Yes, we all know about Ford's one-hit wonder (GT40) that won four consecutive times at LeMans.

[BDunnell]

Yes, we all know about Ford's one-hit wonder (GT40) that won four consecutive times at LeMans.

And, in various guises, many other international sports car races.

[airshifter]

Yes, we all know about Ford's one-hit wonder (GT40) that won four consecutive times at LeMans.

Not to mention the Shelby Daytona cars, which also ended the reign of Enzo's creations before the GT40 even hit the track.

[chuck34]

But in this case I simply cannot see what damage would have been done to sales of a pick-up truck by way of potential confusion with a Formula 1 car. And this is, let's not forget, a pick-up truck mostly sold in the US, where the numbers of people who will be aware of the existence of the Ferrari F150 is minimal owing to the limited nature of F1 enthusiasm. In no sense would Ferrari calling its F1 car the F150 render Ford's trademark 'useless'. Had Ferrari built a pick-up and called it the F150, I would be in complete agreement with you. But they haven't.

And, ioan, while I have come to respect greatly much of what you have to say on other matters, I can't help but feel that your opinion on this subject would have been completely different two or three years ago, when your enthusiasm for Ferrari was still intact.

It's not so much that this time there was any confusion. But, as others have stated over and over, you MUST challenge any use of your trademarked name, or loose it. So if Ford had not challenged this use of the name "F-150" (even though there is no real damage this time), the next time when Ferrari, or whomever, came out with a pick-up truck called the F-150, Ford would not have standing to challenge the use of that name.

I fail to see how that is a hard concept to grasp.

[nigelred5]

Yes, we all know about Ford's one-hit wonder (GT40) that won four consecutive times at LeMans.

After Enzo totally effed the Daytona coupes out of a world championship by "cancelling" the 1964 Monza race, shelby and Ford were absolutely pissed. The Makes championship in 65 and beating Ferrari's backside 4 consecutive times at Lemans proved their point. I totally believe the Pantera was also aimed squarely at Enzo.

[Kevincal]

Sure Ford did well for a few years against Ferrari, but look at the big picture, the whole last 60+ years Ferrari kicks Ford's butt all over the place. http://www.automobilemag.com/features/racing/0909_henry_ford_ii_vs_enzo_ferrari_great_rivalries/index.html

[Tazio]

Sure Ford did well for a few years against Ferrari, but look at the big picture, the whole last 60+ years Ferrari kicks Ford's butt all over the place. http://www.automobilemag.com/features/racing/0909_henry_ford_ii_vs_enzo_ferrari_great_rivalries/index.html

The link you provided doesn’t really back up your asertion :rolleyes:
You are just throwing fuel on the fire. You might want to go the Motorsport History Forum and learn a little about Ford’s contribution to racing, especially in the area of engines. This whole thing was started by a vindictive comment in a Ferrari press release. I am a big fan of Ferrari, but I recognize that Ferrari behaved badly in that matter. This is certainly not a thread for comparing the relative merits of the two in auto racing. There is no reason to escalate it any further. Who cares? Be a man. Let it go!! :vader:

[Tazio]

BTW all you are proving is that you can be more vindictive than the next guy! It's not worth it! :grenade:

[Tazio]

:s ailor: Trust me ;)

[Kevincal]

you are the one trying to stir **** with your long posts about nothing. ;) you get a life LOL. all I am arguing is I hate how our world has become sue happy. Ford is a pathetic company who makes crap cars. Ya so they've done some racing, and made some decent engines. They are nothing compared to Ferrari when it comes to racing.

[pino]

The name has been changed so there's no need to continue this :)