Harley Lover

Well, for those who have expressed the opinion that Ford Europe is on its last legs, this news seems to indicate that Ford have different ideas: https://www.autonews.com/ford/an-ford-europe-infusion-0310/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Newsletter-ANDaily-20250310

That claim is apparently based on the Euro cycle, not EPA testing, so misleading at best:

The Lincoln LS and Jaguar X-Type would like a word.

Agree, I took the mention of the 'commercial' EV (in the context of skunk works products apparently destined for Louisville) to be something distinct from any Maverick-based product (which presumably would be built in Mexico).

Reread the quote posted by rmc523 - the BEV is not 'rumored', it appears to be stated in the part of the statement I quoted. I hadn't heard that before, which is why I highlighted it for discussion.

I highlighted 'commercial' - does this sound like a Ford Pro version of the EV chassis will be offered - perhaps in both pickup and maybe even small commercial van (ala Transit Connect) form?

There's the other thread titled 'Ford want to be the Porsche of Off Road'... if Ford literally follows the 'Porsche model' then they will unquestionably prove their chops in the world of (off road) Racing. As with Porsche, that could be something directly related to its road going models (F150, Bronco, Mustang) or it could be something more in the realm of prototype/purpose built racer. It all depends on how the decision makers view the purpose of the vehicle (win on Sunday/sell on Monday or demonstrate Ford's technical prowess if the off road realm but with a purpose built vehicle). There was a time where Ford valued the learning its engineers derived from the world of racing/competition, and believed that experience and exposure benefited the company in the development of its consumer vehicles. Perhaps there's a belief that working on chassis and suspension (and other areas) for off road competition will feed back into Ford's development processes in a beneficial manner - and support Ford's desire to be 'the Porsche of Off Road'.

Sounds like Mary Barra's recent definition of 'profitable'. <wink>

If it was that poster, they're the most 'insider' of anyone on this forum, that would be very credible.

@bzcat, can it also be inferred that, if we assume Ford's supply of hybrid-specific parts has some sort of volume limitation, that Ford have made the determination based on your comments that those hybrid-specific parts would be better utilized on higher profit products, specifically Maverick and Bronco Sport?

That's my point, but trying to make it succinctly.

Dean, based on your experience, would you say that Mustang and Mach E buyers are 2 distinct groups, versus a 'single' group deciding between the 2 vehicles? <That would be my expectation, but it's simply anecdotal as I have no way to confirm my opinion. If we were to stipulate that the 2 groups of buyers are distinct, then the relative sales incentives between the 2 become less important because those 2 groups aren't cross shopping those 2 cars. Perhaps the MME buyers cross shopped a Tesla or some other EV instead? And I'm not sure what the Mustang buyers would cross shop - to me, it's a stand alone product at this point. Maybe a Challenger?

bzcat, could you also comment on Ford's plans for its "Pro" business in Europe? The OP article paints a bleak picture for Ford in Europe, but I'm under the impression that Ford continue to have a thriving, profitable business in the business segment (but can't quote details).

Don't forget the battery plant under construction in Kentucky. Given that BOC will have its own on-premises battery production, the Kentucky batteries have to go somewhere else (presumably) and Louisville would make the most sense proximity-wise. Whether or not that leads to the conclusion that Louisville will get the skunkworks vehicle(s), I don't know.

Fair point, but Jaguar are not that big. I would posit that McGovern has his needle in the well.