jpd80

406

Yes, worth $2.76 billion last year

At the moment, there’s over 1,200 platinum 3.0 V6s available at Ford dealers nationwide, so looks like maybe Ford is dropping the 3.0 V6 in Platinum because of low take rate?

The big issue with diesel pickups and lots of short trips where the diesel particle filter block up because they don’t get hot enough to burn particles off or do regen cycle. This is becoming costly maintenance for those owners and the gasoline hybrid may offer them a neat way to avoid this as well as take advantage of Australia’s cheaper petrol prices vs diesel. Something you might find interesting but be warned, these reviewers tend to be Toyota biased… something weird happened on the first leg with the two Chinese pickups using a lot of fuel while Ranger’s normal fuel usage was down played. I think there was a big issue

As Ford rep Jim Baumbick briefly mentioned, their goal was diesel or better performance. For emissions purposes, it’s a clever relocating of power and torque into the electric side and even though a PHEV with relatively small battery and range, it still functions effectively as a hybrid on launches, delivering most of the perceived lost performance. so yeah 207 Kw (278 hp) 697 nm (516 lb ft) But here’s the thing, Ford also cleverly clipped the power so that the PHEV couldn’t get close to Ranger Raptor performance. I think that was unfortunate because it would have offered a pathway to the future and an alternative to brute force ICE power while keeping the likes of BYD Shark 6 and Great Wall Cannon Alpha PHEV pickups at bay - both of those perform better. Maybe Ford isn’t ready to give up all those AU$94,000 Ranger Raptor sales just yet…. Ford South Africa also makes the Amorok in V6 diesel but also a 2.3 EB versions, I guess people could buy that if they wanted but it’s also limited to a high series trim so the cost is more than the Ranger PHEV XLT

Absolutely and mostly because of final parts orders from suppliers. In the final 12 months, the build profile is locked in so all required parts can be ordered, the 2026 year model could be an extension on that for what is available at this later stage.

And you can see that the only reason that Stellantis kept North America manufacturing was to harvest money for its European brands, they could care less about Ram, Jeep and Dodge and thats sad……

A big part of future CE1 model roll out and timing is now about what Ford does with its ICE PHEVs that people now seem more open to buying. Its an interesting time for Ford and hoping they don’t lock into either/or choice but press forward with both types of vehicles and let buyers decide what they want.

The efforts were concentrated around ease of manufacturing and reduction in body shop steps (gigacastings) Having a high series and lower series operating system wouldn’t be a big ask, more like CE1+ for Lincoln? Yeah, I could see that. My gut feeling is that they are replicating the build tech in Tesla Models 3 and Y albeit with different top hats. I can see how that would work well for Ford especially with lower cost and safer LFP batteries. PR talking about up to eight different top hats is a bit wishful, especially when they still haven’t shown the pickup that’s due in 2027. My concern is that it’s been so long since Ford has shown the market anything new that Ford now resort to product envelope potential rather that what it will actually deliver in the coming years..

As Ford demonstrated with last month’s increased sales, pricing plays a big part in turning stock it into revenue. Always has and always will.

Had the CX7 in for gearbox repair the other week (broke reverse hub, common fault when they get old) Anyways, I got onto the subject of later autos and stop/start, the transmission specialist advice was to deactivate as much as possible. Says it’s hard on auto, they are supposed to keep internal pressure up in the box but many don’t and when the power comes back on it shocks the transmission.

While that may be true as an brownfield project, the only dimension shared was bore spacing, mainly because it allows casting suppliers to keep down costs. It’s a clever way around the accountants without justifying an all new engine

Considering that GM is committed to an all electric future, I’m surprised it’s taken them this long to surpass Ford..

More likely, Ford took all their ICE project funding and put it into electric vehicles because that’s the way European Legislation is forcing manufacturers go. What we are seeing today is basically the fruit of decisions made four or five years ago.

Just my opinion, If the overall fuel economy targets were based on assumed BEV sales numbers that are not happening then, yes those target numbers should be revised lower.