Workflow
车顶是“纸”做的?福特辟谣来了
Ford MotorFord Motor(US:F) 3 6 Ke·2025-05-19 00:45

Core Viewpoint - The incident involving Ford's Bronco has sparked significant public concern due to a viral video showing the vehicle's roof material breaking, leading to questions about safety and material integrity [1][4][18]. Group 1: Incident Overview - A video showing the roof of the Ford Bronco breaking went viral, leading to public scrutiny and safety concerns regarding the material used [1][4]. - Ford explained that the material in question is a "polyurethane fiberglass reinforced paper honeycomb composite," which meets national standards and is designed for high strength and lightweight applications [4][6]. Group 2: Material Characteristics - The roof employs a sandwich structure with a honeycomb core that provides high strength and lightweight properties, capable of withstanding significant pressure [6][8]. - Similar materials are used in other vehicles, including models from Jeep, Land Rover, and Mercedes, indicating that the technology is not new and has been adopted by various manufacturers [8][10]. Group 3: Communication Issues - The misunderstanding stems from Ford's unclear communication regarding the new material, which led consumers to associate it with traditional paper products, causing safety concerns [11][15]. - Ford's marketing did not adequately explain the material's properties or its performance in extreme conditions, contributing to public skepticism [15][17]. Group 4: Trust Crisis - The incident highlights a broader trust crisis for Ford in the Chinese market, exacerbated by previous complaints about the Bronco's roof, including issues like cracking and delamination in cold weather [18][20]. - Consumers' declining trust in Ford's product quality has led to immediate skepticism whenever issues arise, reflecting a need for the company to address these concerns more effectively [20][22]. Group 5: Sales Performance - Ford Bronco's sales figures for the first four months of the year were relatively low, totaling 2,571 units, indicating poor performance in the off-road vehicle segment [21][22].