Originally Posted by 123456Wannasail654321
Oh and just as there were cars that were complete dogs (say like the edsel )
Actually, FWIW there was nothing fundamentally wrong with the Edsel - it was the same quality, reliability etc. as the other comparable cars of that era. It had a huge, powerful engine, easily the equal of the Lincoln and Cadillac engines of the day.
It got its "ultimate loser" rep. from an unfortunate series of judgement errors that interfaced with an economic downturn.
The first problem was that both Ford and Mercury models filled the same market slot so, at best, it would have merely diluted their sales. (Brand loyalty was VERY big then). It simply wasn't different enough.
The second problem was that stupid, ugly nose - "A Mercury sucking a lemon" in the words of the day.
The third was the name - "Edsel" just wasn't in the same league as "Dynamic", "Impala", "Turnpike Cruiser", "Bonneville" that were then in vogue.
Last was the economy - there was a pretty bad slump in '58 and sales dropped off badly.
Other than that, it was a pretty good car.
By the way, you can thank Robert MacNamara for it - he was President of Ford then.
With a father like that, I guess it was doomed to fail.