In terms of driving experience, most Ford cars I've driven (Contour, Focus, and Taurus, probably all from early 2000s; they are probably better now) handle like boats; turning radius comparable to an oil tanker, unresponsive brakes and gas, etc. So there are tradeoffs among all makes and models within those makes.
Weeelll... given that a modern car is a complex dynamic system I would presume it's not to trivial to state where exactly design constraints concerning build quality end and dynamics and handling start.
For the end user they both affect the 'feel' of the product - how it behaves on the detail level when in use. "I have a door I have a hard time closing" and "the dynamics feel a bit clumsy" deal with totally different things on the engineering level, but end users (generally) are not buying engineering but holistic products.
Namely, concerning this comment: Are there compromises made on the design of the handling to facilitate the build quality? And if there are, then those are not two different things, but systems which interact - hence, it's relevant to offer commentary on one while discussing the other.
> it's not to trivial to state where exactly design constraints concerning build quality end and dynamics and handling start
Maybe I'm being overly simplistic here but I'd say if the finished product doesn't match the design then it's a build quality issue, whereas if it does match the design and it's still crap then that's a design issue.
Arguably if they end product doesn't match the design because the design isn't feasible to manufacture then that would also be a design issue.
Unless the design is limited by build quality issues. The AK-47 is perhaps the most famous example, but most designs are a back and forth around the manufacturing process.
Ford doesn't compete with Land Rover, Mercedes and BMWs but deliver a good value-for-money nonetheless. Compare that to a Cadillac Escalade from GM: Worse quality than a Ford, priced at Mercedes level.
