Leaderboard

Ugh. You can’t dictate quality. Quality is the result of processes in all areas of design and engineering and manufacturing being quality focused and which are constantly tweaked based on root cause analysis and implementing irreversible corrective actions. And tying compensation to meeting those goals.

I’m ok with this. The federal government has already spent waaaay too much on charging infrastructure with nothing to show for it. Leave it to the states and/or the private sector. Tesla has already proven they’re way more effective at it than the government.

Most of what he says is posturing or negotiating and doesn’t mean it will happen. He’ll use those threats to get something else, I agree with dumping the tax credit, it’s no longer needed.

Well, we pulled trigger over the weekend. I've been drooling over the Bronco since it came out, and this weekend, we were finally able to pull the trigger on one. I wanted to order one, but missed the boat for a V6 2-door (I don't want a Stroppe edition), so I've been looking pretty regularly the past couple months and had my eye on one at the dealer an hour away. Well, the rebates were good($3500...went up $1k on Thursday, the day I called about it), and the deal was decent, so we went to look. We brought it home for the night and my wife drove it home because she doesn't like driving my truck (I wasn't about to leave it at the dealership). Well, that was a mistake, because now, instead of buying me a Bronco, apparently I've bought her a Bronco that I get to drive sometimes. LOL. Now we've got two horses in the stable, and my Super Duty has been pushed to the basement garage to be relegated to trailer-towing duty. First mod will be mud flaps (ordered before we even signed the papers lol). We've got a 1/4 mile gravel driveway, and this thing throws rocks like crazy! It's already got rock chips with just over 200 miles on it. So, we just drive through the field instead of down the driveway until the mud flaps arrive.

Farley made it clear that Mustang is competing as a global sports car not just an American pony car. Sales don’t matter too much because it’s a Ford icon. V6s used to fill in the big performance gap between 4 and 8 cylinder engines. The 2.3eb IS the 6 cylinder of old. In fact it has more power than the old 4.6l v8 cobra mustang engine. A naturally aspirated I6 wouldn’t move the needle and a turbo I6 would be redundant with the coyote. It’s the answer to a question nobody is asking.

It is great to see Lincoln doing so well. Hopefully this prods Ford to allocate some additional investment in the brand, including a few new models.

The major distinction is for SDV is that all of the functions are on the same operating system instead of 20+ separate software systems that operate independently in non-SDV. The easiest way to visualize this is SDV is top-down driven logic while conventional vehicles are bottoms up driven logic. In a top-down logic, all the functions follows the code from central electronic control unit (ECU). In bottoms up logic, the native codes are written at the function level and you have silos. Another way to think about this is to understand who actually makes all the components of the car. A traditional car will have seats made by an external supplier who will program its ECU using its own software code. And the HVAC system is supplied by a different company who programs its ECU in a different way. And a 3rd company supplies the mirror and guess what, it also has embedded ECU that is also different than the seats and HVAC system. So the car company then spend all its time integrating it so the two subsystems talk to each other. Now when you press the heated seat button on the HVAC panel, the HVAC system knows how to turn on your heated seat; and when you press the memory button, it know how to adjust the seats AND the mirrors. One drawback of this approach is anytime you want to make a change to the HVAC system, you also need the supplier for the seats and mirrors to be onboard, even though you are not changing those things. You have to coordinate a lot of different moving parts and this all takes a lot of time and cost money. In a SDV, seat controls, HVAC, and door mirrors will be controlled by the same set of ECU that controls that zone so there is no integration required. If you want to change how the HVAC works, it won't impact its integration with seats or mirrors. It can be done in a simple over the air update. This article shed some light on how Rivian has advanced the art of SDV and why VW paid $5 billion to try to get it https://www.popsci.com/technology/rivian-zonal-electrical-architecture/ The bottom line: SDV requires car companies to take control of the design decision on all the component rather than relying on Tier 1 suppliers to make the decision for them. This is why legacy car companies are struggling with SDV - it is fundamentally incompatible with how they've built cars in the last 30 years since the advent of computers in cars. A lot of the major car technology breakthrough in the last 20 or 30 years have been developed by Tier 1 suppliers like Bosch, Denso, or ZF. They have a vested interest to keep the silos so the car companies have to keep coming back to them for integration and licensing.

The credit was created to make early EVs more affordable and help automakers recoup their initial investment. It was also designed to encourage new EV mfrs to enter the market by giving them the credit while the credit for established mfrs expired once they met a volume threshold. Now it’s just being used to increase sales and further EV adoption which isn’t necessary. The market is established and mfrs are on board. Competition and technology improvements will take care of the rest without government assistance or interference.

Absolutely! Ford's quality problems have existed for decades, yet Ford even used quality as an advertising slogan (Quality is Job #1) for many years. It was easy to use back then when Ford had 6 out of the 10 top selling models and no one was paying attention to the quality issues because it was a relatively small issue compared to the volume vehicle sales. The quality issues in recent years have become more apparent because they're having a substantial impact on financial results and becoming a much more visible concern affecting the stock price and ratings. Appointing a new executive in charge of vehicle quality issues is just another "Smoke & Mirrors" attempt on Ford's part to make it look like they're finally taking a serious step towards addressing the quality issues. Until there's accountability related to executive compensation for vehicle quality, the problem will continue to exist. It's been a decades long issue at Ford and has to include Ford's supplier relations related to supplier contracts. Ford can only squeeze supplier costs to a point before quality becomes an issue, which is a lesson that Ford still hasn't learned. Sqeezing supplier contracts for the absolutely lowest cost can result in short term savings but long term substantially increased warranty costs. Ford still hasn't learned how important it is to have good relations with its suppliers and allow them to have reasonable profits. In the long run, both parties' profit, vehicle quality improves, and warranty costs go down.

Speaking of direct replacements.....I'll have to get used to the updated username lol

We’re not suffering we’re perfectly happy. And really good sports cars are not cheaper.

I don’t think they’re cross shopped at all and the sales statistics are just an interesting anecdote that means very little.

Based on your description of the survey, maybe those plans became the Mach E Ralle? Who'd have thought they'd put Porsche branding on a Porsche? Having a brand design language isn't the same as naming everything "911 _____" I like that concept - never seen it before (I'm guessing it's just a rendering). Funny, I've drawn something very similar to it in the past...

Glad to have 1 unit of the F-Series total for 2024.

Truck and EV Truck/Van comparisons:

True but don’t forget there were very real threats of legislation effectively killing all ICE sales starting with Europe plus Tesla’s domination here. What can and should be held against Ford is the failed Rivian and VW deals, the failed 3 row EVs and Oakville cluster F***, failure to add more hybrids and overcommitting to BOC. Also killing the flat rock upgrade and the 3rd Mexico plant.

That’s not how they make business decisions. Any car at this point will be either high volume low profit or low volume higher profit with the likelihood of sales continuing to drop. Each product requires dedicated design, engineering and testing resources in addition to manufacturing. It also takes 2-4 years to start production. When you compare that with all the other projects in the pipeline or proposed - especially EVs - it isn’t worth the effort. With the pull back on EVs that might change but they’re still going to be low on the priority list. The big miss here is not upgrading FR to build anything tall. Adding Nautilus and a new c2 hybrid Edge is a no brainer and that might also support a 4 door Mustang.

This is what I would do. Declare that known defects or potential problems must be reported up the chain as soon as they are known. Hiding or failing to report an issue is grounds for dismissal and that goes for executives as well. If your boss tries to ignore or hide something you’re required to escalate it. Make 20% of management pay discretionary with a range of 0-150% based on these KPIs: warranty costs as a percentage of revenue - 60% profit margin percentage - 20% (vary by division) customer satisfaction- 20% I would phase in the targets based on where they are at today with significant improvement expected each year until final targets are reached. This works if you’re willing to hold people accountable and get rid of the ones who act in their own best interest first. I’ve seen it. I’ve escalated known problems and was rewarded for it while who waited to report it got dinged. But that has to come from Farley and the entire executive team.

Yea, when I worked at Ford, I attended training on quality management topics like APQP, FMEA, etc. But Ford sure as heck didn't consistently apply those processes in all areas of design and engineering

Correct, he’s not yet inaugurated and he has countries reacting to threats of Tariffs. Once we get over the rhetoric, the true question will start, what is it that you really want us to do, what moves the needle for you without resorting to tariffs? I smiled when Canada and Mexico threatened to impose tariffs of their own, so they want to charge their own people 25% more for buying American products? I don’t think so, that would be political suicide for those leaders and parties. Agree with dumping tax credits, it’s obscene to throw up to $12,000 at large high $$$ BEVs those are being bought by people who can use a tax credit to reduce their Income tax. Someone on $40k per year can neither afford these vehicles nor fully use the tax credit but that’s a whole other thread…..

Exterior is a massive improvement. That was my biggest problem with it and the Model 3, they looked like drunk frogs from the front

Detroit Auto Show is starting. They just announced the winners of the North America car/truck/utility of the year. The Ranger won truck of the year (beat out Ram and Toyota). https://www.detroitnews.com/story/business/autos/detroit-auto-show/2025/01/10/winners-2025-north-american-car-truck-utility-of-the-year/77589572007/

Hogwash. Interest rates were low before the pandemic. Prices were raised because shipping and manufacturing slowdowns limited production which naturally raised prices due to high demand and low supply. Rising fuel prices thanks to Biden drove inflation even higher for everything. Interest rates were raised to stave off inflation.

Proof that they raised prices to pay for electrification on or is just conjecture? I think they raised process because they could when cars were scarce post covid. Then inflation reared its ugly head and that raised them again. Now the trick is getting the the genie price back in the bottle and still make money. I think the 10% margin wish may just be that for awhile, a wish.

Bias doesn’t necessarily mean unfair. Turbos do fail and can be slightly expensive to fix, but it’s no worse than the water pump failures on the transverse cyclone V6s. Ford offered the 3.3Lv6 on F150 and nobody bought them outside fleets. Most opted for ecoboosts over the coyote v8. When Ford still offered the 3.5 v6 and 2.0eb in the Edge the ecoboost was 3-4 mpg better with the same performance and better low end torque. Same difference for the Mustang with the 3.7 vs 2.3eb. Those are objective benefits. Don’t confuse people who just want the cheapest option with people who want simplicity. Most of those buyers would buy an ecoboost if it was cheaper.

Maybe bring Zephyr over with Nautilus on the same ship.

I posted on this topic extensively before. Ford has 3 challenges in Europe: 1. US GAAP requiring pension costs to be reported as expense at the time the pension is earned. IFRS allows companies to report pension costs as expense at the time they are paid. This is why GM couldn't turn a profit with Opel but PSA can turn a profit in year 1. Has nothing to do with the product or strategy. It is literally just how the costs are reported. 2. Ford doesn't have a premium brand in Europe so it struggles with margin. VW can justify making small margin on a Skoda Octavia because it makes 3 times that on an Audi A3 which is basically identical car. So it has to focus on market segments that are less sensitive to price - in the old days, it focused on "company car" market which were white collar employee perks in all the major European markets. These cars were purchased by the company and given to the employees to use. Employees do not pay income tax on use of car and employer write off the car in full as deductible business expenses. Large companies were often not very price sensitive because they needed the expenses to offset taxable income. Ford dominated the "company car" market in UK as well as a lot of the European countries without native brands - e.g. Belgium, Greece, Denmark etc. Together, it made Ford a major volume brand. The "company car" market has largely disappeared with tax reforms at EU level that gradually make "company car" less attractive employment perk (in most EU country now employee has to pay income taxes on use of company car). For companies that still offer this benefit, it just make more sense to give employee the cash and let them buy their own cars. When that happened, people started buying things like Audi A3 and Mercedes A-Class instead of Ford Mondeo. Ford never really adopted well to the post-"company car" reality in Europe. 3. UK and EU CO2 target. Unlike CAFE in the US, this is a hard target that cannot be cheated by making cars wider/longer. The only way to meet the target is to make cars that is lower CO2 emission - i.e. EV and hybrids. In Farley's calculus, it makes more sense to sell Mustang/Ranger and some EVs then a lot of Fiesta and some EVs. Mustang/Ranger have higher margins than Fiesta - it's related to the previous point but the regulatory framework forces that decision.

And that’s where a proper root cause analysis would highlight that. The problem is once you identify that you need to pay suppliers more for better quality, it becomes a fight between short term cost hikes vs long term improvements. That’s where Farley has to put his foot down and say do it anyway. What we used to do with our problematic IT suppliers is ask them what they need price wise to ensure top quality. Then we’d agree to pay that BUT we put in big penalties if they didn’t meet the contract standards. And in some cases we even agreed to give back some money if they exceeded the standards significantly. Do the same with the decision makers on your side and the problem will get solved.

I’ve said repeatedly that cd4 was a mistake and not giving edge and nautilus a hybrid was a huge mistake. Typical Ford poor product planning.

More than you might think these days. Incentivizing CSI, willingness to approve warranty claims and 'good will' repairs, etc.. It is still hard for the manufacturers to terminate really bad dealers. Take a look at what's going on with Stellantis dealers these days. Their CSI is down in the weeds due in no small part to Stellantis dragging their feet on warranty and not making parts available. Manufacturers may be limited on what they can do to promote good service, but they sure can mess it up.

Well in the grand scheme of things they are far better off then say GM when it comes to hybrids or Dodge/Ram/Jeep. The biggest issue is just getting them into more products that don't have a P/HEV setup in them. Ford overall is in decent shape with powertrains till the end of the decade between EV and ICE powertrains.

Isn’t it amazing how Ford and other manufacturers were given a way to work the market with reduced production and high prices. Then greed took over and everyone went back to over producing vehicles and just assumed that all those customers would pay high prices… What does that say about the key people at the top of these corporations, are they listening to underlings who just don’t know how markets work? Where does the deluded ideas come from?

I think they already fixed it for the 2025 models. And they should provide them for free.

Yea, yesterday Ford announced Mustang EcoBoost RTR, tuned by Vaugh Gittin Jr's company. Ford didn't mention pricing or specs yet, but if this package is between $5k and $10k, it could be the ultimate value buy for Mustang

Nice, Ford won the truck award in 2024 (Super Duty), 2023 (F-150 Lightning), 2022 (Maverick), and 2021 (F-150) too

Rav4 and CR-V are the new accord and Camry so no surprise there,

I think it might be a better fit if they ever came out with a Mustang Sedan-hopefully it would make having AWD easier, since the motors would be in the front wheels. I don't think a hybrid Mustang would appeal to people who are looking as it as a performance option-Ford will add it when they are forced to.

Actual buyers don’t have a problem with small turbo engines - almost every mfr including Mercedes and other luxury brands have a 2.0L turbo engine. Your obsession with value and efficiency is a minority view and you just make stuff up that suits your views. You also give far too much credit to the average car buyer who usually doesn’t even know what type or size engine they have.

You guys are assuming Ford wants to sell more Mustang... I'm not sure that they do. It's not CAFE friendly and despite S650 still based on S550's aging bones, it's probably not that profitable once you factor in Flat Rock's under-utilization. Sure, Ford can lower the price by 20% and sell a ton more but it seems clear to me that they are also constraining supplies so it doesn't create a bigger CAFE hole. What Ford really needs to do is find something else to build at Flat Rock. The single model production line in a modern car plant thing doesn't really work.

Thank you for your tireless work this year, compiling data in those charts takes a lot of work and I'm sure that everyone here appreciates you efforts. Well done. Interesting that BrightDrop hasn’t had the impact that GM was counting on.. I also think there’s a message in the low sales of Silverado EV that is supposed to be way superior to the Lightning, I still think GM has a big problem convincing it’s mostly V8 oriented truck buyers to even consider an EV. Ford having a better pathway with its EB V6s and of course Powerboost Hybrid option is winning quite a few over. While I’m often critical of Ford, there’s a lot to be thankful for with sales this year, Ford USA cracked the 2 million sales mark and F Series really took it to GM and Ram. Sure, There’s more work to do with getting trim mixes more in line with what buyers want in tougher times but rest assured that every vehicle already made will be eventually sold. So now it up to dealers and Ford to work together and get the backlog sold down.

Good summation of past issues. What do you think was the root cause of so many bad choices? Ford clearly wanted to copy GM by moving more products to Mexico but I suspect that it didn’t realise the wider global export opportunities for the right products. Europe is struggling making enough product for its own market let alone supply ROW markets, could be a good opportunity for Mexico as export Center… Not trying to make excuses for Ford here but it seems like it is prone to a lot of bad choices, is there something I’m not seeing in their decision making process? Hackett seemed to be looking for easy solutions to BEVs but never understood the importance of securing adequate battery supply (neither did Fields or Mulally or Bill Ford before him) I know I’ve said that BOC looks like a white elephant today but maybe I’m completely wrong, maybe Ford is actually too many years in front of what’s needed to day but perfectly positioned for a future when everyone else is trying to scramble because they’re too late? With regards to Europe, I’m sure that CE1 will replace the VW based MEBs that now look like place holders, it would be in Ford’s best interest to make this happen in the next five years or earlier if possible.

Ford Europe is the passenger car business and it is indeed bleak. Ford Pro is the just marketing... the van business in Europe is under Ford Otosan. Farley already placed its eggs in the Otosan basket with Puma (the best selling vehicle under Ford Europe) now made by Ford Otosan. Ford Pro in Europe is just a natural evolution of the point #2 I made in my post... van buyers are not as price sensitive as retail B-segment hatchback buyers. And there are fewer competitors (e.g. Toyota and Hyundai are bit players in European van market) so Ford's pivot to Pro business is just a survival instinct... go where the margins are high and competition less fierce. There are only 4 credible van sellers in Europe: Ford, Mercedes, VW, and Stellantis. Renault is now struggling because it lost Opel to Stellantis so I think they will eventually exit the business. Compare this to the passenger car business with a dozen credible player plus the emerging threat from Chinese OEM... it's obvious why Ford doesn't want to sell Fiesta but is all-in on Transit. The van business also less capital intensive because model cycles are long... 10-15 years between major update is pretty standard. In passenger car business, 5-6 year model cycle with 3 year midcycle update is standard. You can see why Farley loves the van business in Europe. If I'm Farley, I would approach Renault and buy its van business. Combine that business with Ford Otosan will be transformative for Ford in Europe.

They had rperez817 syndrome back then.

Or perhaps take their customers more seriously. Ford and many of their fellow manufacturers chose to go full throttle on products the customers didn’t ask for. They thought they were going to get the government to help them out and the public effectively told all of them to go pound sand. This is why Ford doesn’t have many Interesting ICE vehicles right now, because they blew their wad on EV‘s. Frankly, what is there to be excited about on the ICE side. The Mustang and Ranger received nice updates, and then we got basically the warmed over Explorer and Expedition, which don’t move the needle for me. Now there’s no Edge replacement, and the only other vehicle my wife would be interested in is made in China. I’m personally currently five deep on a list for a vehicle I would like to buy now but it is limited production and I refuse to pay above retail, so that isn’t happening anytime soon. Thankfully Ford still cares about the F150 for the most part, which should yield a full redesign fairly soon. I’ll end my rant now.

I say consolidate all new BEV products (CE1 and T3) at BOC and make it Ford's BEV factory until additional demand is warranted for either BOC expansion and/or other plant conversion. Throw a new/better top hat on C2 ICE Escape and Corsair (nothing wrong with the platform, just keep them updated and not whither on the vine like they do with most other products.) at LAP, and consider C2 Nautilus (and an Edge?) to help LAP volume. Give Flat Rock a Mustang sedan and companion Lincoln product so they have a sedan back in each lineup, while better utilizing FRAP. As for Cuatitlan - who knows.....Mach E seems orphaned now, leaving it underutilized, but they're not going to switch it back to ICE.... I think one of the recent rumors was it had been paused to prioritize CE1 development (since it was going to be on GE2), but who knows....

I’d say the biggest gaffes have been the ecoboost 1.0, 1.5/1.6, 2.0 engines and the dual clutch transmission issues. Those are the most glaring because they were engineering defects that got glossed over and pushed out into production. Manufacturing and supplier issues can be solved easier. Ford doubled down on stupid with final refresh of the Focus and kept the dual clutch when they had a more reliable suitable 6 speed.

As an employee of this corporation I just want this all to workout well. The industry is volatile and even moreso due to the Chinese and your commander in chief.

Somebody forgot to tell the 1.5M or so people that bought one this year.

$405/space or $2,405/space? Not sure why writer leaves $2,000 contribution by others out a couple of times in article as if it isn’t an actual cost. Somebody is paying indirectly, even if not the building’s owner. Bias is also significant when they state “California’s new building codes will require EV chargers in most new overnight parking spots starting in 2026, going a big way towards solving the only actual problem with EVs.” EVs are good and have much to offer, but that’s not “THE ONLY ACTUAL PROBLEM WITH EVs”. Making such statements is a good way to lose credibility IMO.

Why is it so important to dealer trade? Head to Baltimore and drive one home. HRG