Jump to content

silvrsvt

Moderator
  • Posts

    24,773
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    113

Posts posted by silvrsvt

  1. 15 minutes ago, rmc523 said:

    That said, it does seem odd that this move to get Oakville something "sooner" is still 2 years away.

     

    The unfortunate thing is that how things are done now. Apparently North America is going through a huge building boom with manufacturing plants due to the expectation that China is going to fall apart in the next decade and there are only so many resources in the area to do this stuff with.

     

    I see it first hand with trying to get equipment, we are trying to build a hydraulic tester and the lead time for one of the components won't have us getting it till 2027 and we started the project 18 or so months ago. 

  2. 16 minutes ago, Captainp4 said:

    I typed that part out too then deleted it, but I get that. I just don't understand the burn every other nameplate to the ground because we found some hot selling -possibly- niche products. I own a couple broncos, older ones, and I get the appeal of that, but what's the longevity on products like that going to look like and when they inevitably fall off where's the boring commodity products that hold the company together and let them make the high margin 'gottahaveit' product?

     

    Well here is the thing that I think is happening-Ford is pivoting towards products it does well-that means trucks and S/CUVs to a lesser extent.

     

    Their core product is the F-series. If that goes the company goes along with it.

     

    I also think Ford is looking at the world market holistically-given the amount of competition and changing demographics and other things, they are focused on making products that command higher profit margins with less market share. They rather make say 10% profit on everything vs having the best selling mid size CUV that might only make 2%. 

     

    Not mention the Bronco and Bronco Sport are both based off other platforms and only came back because of that. 

  3. 15 minutes ago, Captainp4 said:

    I understood the commodity thing with the sedans/hatchbacks and still think it was a fair decision. I do not understand the direction with Edge and Escape, there's no way they can't compete in those markets.

     

    They are competing in those segments with other products, just not sterotypical ones

     

    You have the Bronco, Mach E and Bronco Sport, which are in the same price/size range, but aren't just a two row mid or small sized vehicle. 

  4. 1 hour ago, Footballfan said:

    Three row could go to BOC?

     

    If anything, I'd expect an EV Ranger and Bronco to go there first, since it will be building an EV pickup already. 

     

    Given the timing with the Mach E with it approaching 7-8 years on the market by the time the three  rows come out, it might be just easier to replace that and move the Mach E to the new skunkworks small EV. 

  5. 53 minutes ago, akirby said:


    Do you have to go there incognito? 😂

     

    LOL actually I don't have to...bygones are bygones 

     

    My wife wants to get a new car in a couple months-either a Bronco Sport or Escape and we are going to go there...but she buys off the lot so shouldn't be a shitshow. 

  6. 42 minutes ago, akirby said:

    I presume this will free up space in Louisville for the new smaller EVs.

    Louisville (Escape/Corsair) and KTP (SD/Expedition and Navigator) are two different plants in Kentucky

     

     

     

    12 minutes ago, ExplorerDude said:

    This is phenomenal news!!! Congrats to the OAP team! Your workforce was too good to sit idle for 3.5 years. And adding Super Duty production is a great way to expand F-Series sales, getting it closer to that 1 million a year sales goal (one day).

     

    Yes, the 3 row EVs look to be going to the Cuatitlan plant. Which is where they were originally supposed be built before their major design / program changes.

     

    It does make me wonder why they didn’t just keep Super Duty production entirely at KTP and not move Expedition and Navigator to OAP. 

    Quite a change over the past couple years going from 5 EVs down two EVs that got delayed to building the Super Duty. I wonder what the expectations are-do they think they can sell another 100-200K SD a year?

     

    Reading in between the lines on this-I wonder if this means the Mach E goes away in Cuautitlan in a few years? Given that a small EV is being worked on that more or less is a replacement for the Escape, which the same platform is used on the Mach E, it would make sense to consulate it with whatever is coming to replace the Escape. The Mach E would be the performance EV and maybe get the Mustang coupe next decade? 

     

     

  7. 13 hours ago, T-dubz said:

    Was the puma refreshed? The article kept referencing “the new puma” but the exterior seems to look the same? Interior looks new and that’s an interesting looking interior for sure. 


    Seems odd to release this now when you just released two other EVs that are similar in size. I think I would have let the new EVs get some sales for a while, then brought out the puma ev whenever the next gen puma comes out (current gen has been around since 2019 so I’d imagine next gen isn’t too far off). 

     

    It hasn't been yet.

     

    The Capri and Explorer EV are roughly Bronco Sport size, so a short C CUV or 175 inches long

     

    The Puma is a B class product and is 165 inches long

     

    The Mach E is 186 inches, so you have roughly 10 inches of length to differentiate them all

  8. 4 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

    I take my car's in for oil changes at literally this exact Larry. H Miller dealership, well, after they moved their location to draper that is. It's about $30 per oil change, hardly a rip off, and they're technicians are hands down the best mechanics I've encountered. 

     

    I have to say this, even after the complete shit show I went through with my dealership with the ADM on my Bronco, the the service dept there is really good. My wife takes her Escape there also and they've been excellent with their work and don't upcharge by adding stupid shit to the bills when work is needed. It also helps that they pick our cars up too when they need service or work on them too. 

     

  9. 14 hours ago, morgan20 said:

    The last Ford sedans that were very competitive and better than all in the segment were 1986-1991 Taurus and 1992-1997 Crown Vic. I bought a 1994 Crown Vic a few years after I started my first job at Ford.

     

    You do realize your talking about a car that was built 30+ years ago that had its last platform change almost 50 years ago now? The full size car market was dead by 1996. 

     

    That is like talking about cars made in the 1960s having any bearing in 1990s market place. 

     

    The Panther platform was nothing more then a fleet car for the last 20 year or so of its existence. It might have been profitable, but the only reason for that was most of its sunk costs where already paid off.  

  10. 2 hours ago, rmc523 said:

     

    Ah, i thought you were waying they had 3-4k discounts vs. not much on the other products implying Malibu/Equinox weren't selling well.

     

    Well from a pricing perspective, the Malibu and Equinox are currently closer to the Trax and Trailblazer pricing with discounts, but its due to them being discontinued or newer models coming out. 

  11. 23 hours ago, rmc523 said:

     

    To be fair as well, Malibu is on the way out the door, as is the current Equinox (new model for '25), vs. a new Trax (Trailblazer is a few years old).

     

    Yeah I know that but if they weren't selling, they would have larger discounts on them. 

     

    The Trailblazer is pretty popular in my area and I actually find it be one of the best looking GM models with the two tone roof and body color-which I'm assuming are higher end models. 

     

    For a cheaper product, it doesn't look cheap. The Maverick (well interior wise) looks cheap sometimes. 

  12. 15 hours ago, ford5 said:

    tzach is correct in that government interference has no business in a free market system.  I now see how Ford bet on the BEV market and lost.  US infrastructure and the average US car buyer are not ready for BEV.  You all have helped me understand how and why the Edge is disappearing, which is too bad.  I believe it is a great vehicle.  An updated hybrid Edge would be in my garage if it were available.  

     

    EV adaption is still happening, just not at the rate it was 4-5 years ago. 

  13. 1 hour ago, Andrew L said:

     

    Complexity is a problem but think about this too.  When I had my Lincoln LS it was a V6, the V6 models typically were base trim and that's how most were built.  Mine however was a pretty loaded V6 but one thing they did was the V8 models got a computer on the instrument cluster to display Fuel Economy, Oil Life, Distance to Empty, as well as adjusting vehicle settings.  Why get punished because you didn't get the bigger engine?  Was it really necessary to have 2 different instrument clusters from V6 to V8 models and different trim on the dash one with and one without buttons to control it?  I think it would have made sense just for all of them to have the message center computer regardless of engine.  I mean now it's not so much a big deal but just something I noticed Ford used to do and around 08 or so not pushing you based on what engine you had was a good move.  Just IMO.

     

    See that is problem-I get what your saying, but Ford also wants to upcharge/make profit on a vehicle. 

     

    Not sure how different the trims are on say Toyotas or Hondas in relation to Ford's trim levels, but from what I understand, at least with Toyota, you get what you get without the ability to special order what you want in options.

     

    EVs going forward will experience this to a point-the biggest difference will be amount of motors (performance) and range (battery size) in a product, because something like heated seats will be needed to help with range impact in cold weather vs running the heat (which was "free" in an ICE) and other electronics will be standard that do things like auto braking etc. 

  14. 33 minutes ago, rmc523 said:

    1) I think it depends on the competition - you can't not offer things the competition does, just because

    2) Ford under Mulally really pushed adding options to all their products back in the day which I think helped the brand.....backtracking on that while increasing prices doesn't help the value quotient for customers.

    Right that is why I mentioned about the competition, plus some options become standard because they are just cheaper to do so then offering an alternative  

     

     

    21 minutes ago, Andrew L said:

     

    I agree with this last part, I remember when reading "American Icon" they pushed to add features to even I4 models of the Fusion/Milan and not force customers to get the V6 which helped sales.  Not everyone wanted a V6 but still wanted the nicer features.  I can attest to this somewhat I had a friend in college who picked up a Milan Premier I4 with a 5-speed manual.  It was extremely well equipped had leather, electronic climate control, 6 CD changer, wood trim, and a sunroof.  It was pretty cool to see an I4 Manual so well equipped.  Before that it was rare to see a combo like that.

     

     

    Part of the problem with this is that it adds more build complexity which can impact quality, which has been hurting Ford for years now.  

×
×
  • Create New...