Harley Lover

Detroit engineers weren't incompetent (at least in this case), it was a case of malfeasance by Ford Financial Management (and that is one thing that has never changed at Ford). The quote from Iacocca says it all.

What more investment - Manufacturing capacity. I don't think Ford can merely snap its fingers and have the capacity it needs. I've (perhaps wrongly) been under the impression that Ford are capacity constrained in terms of engines, batteries, trannys, and the associated support plumbing for hybrid vehicles. They also have to reengineer some of the C2 based vehicles that are not currently hybrid 'capable' to utilize the C2 hybrid chassis. Perhaps the lead time needed to reengineer the vehicles to their new chassis 'homes' buys the time Ford will need to source, manufacture, and install the added drivetrain capacity that will be needed?

From Ars Technica:

From Automotive News:

Don't forget all the unsecured creditors that were royally screwed over in the bankruptcy - except for the UAW. Total Claims: The primary unsecured creditor group, composed largely of mutual funds, pension funds, and retail investors who held GM's unsecured bonds, was owed close to $28 billion. Initial Recovery: In the initial bankruptcy plan, these unsecured creditors exchanged their debt for 10% of the stock in "new" GM and warrants to purchase additional equity. Percentage Recovery: The total value of their recovery (stock and warrants) was initially valued at approximately 22% of their claims based on GM's stock price after the initial distribution. This means they lost roughly 78% of their investment, or over $21 billion in total.

Big news with potentially purpose-altering implications for BOC: Now that BOC Tennessee will not have battery construction on site, does that create the possibility of that plant being designated for production of something other than EVs?

From Auto News, this quote implies the BS is too "off-road focused" and therefore the Euro model will be 'more refined': Not defending anything, just trying to parse what Ford are thinking here. It wouldn't be the first time a Ford model in one global market didn't pass muster for use in another Ford market.

Wouldn't it be great if it were Ford announcing these specifics? https://www.autonews.com/toyota/an-toyota-us-investments-hybrids-1118/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Newsletter-ANBreakingNewsAlert-20251118

As if the aluminum plant fire weren't enough, now the industry (including Ford) are staring down the gun barrel of this shortage: https://www.autonews.com/manufacturing/suppliers/an-nexperia-chips-us-production-outlook-1025/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Newsletter-ANBreakingNewsAlert-20251025

From Automotive News: Complete article: https://www.autonews.com/ford/an-ford-q3-earnings-1023/

The side profile/long front end reminds me a little of this Ford sculpture from 2020: https://ccdiscussion.com/t/2020-ford-design-sculpture-concept/66021

A paltry investment of $130 million sure makes it sound like it will be built on the existing platform.

In the article in Automotive News, Ford claim the price target is $40,000.

A fine illustration that the Ford Finance function remains alive and well, and very much willing to make utterly stupid decisions like this. The hell with them.

Could it also be availability of drivetrains? With Escape ending production, Ford now have access to hybrid batteries, trannys, and Atkinson cycle engines to be reassigned elsewhere in the Ford line up (same for the Ecoboost engines used in Escape). If one assumes that Ford is to some extent capacity constrained in the drivetrain arena (especially on the hybrid drivetrains), then a nice chunk of capacity will be coming available to be used elsewhere in the product line. More Maverick hybrids? Bronco Sport? Maverick van?