Harley Lover

From the linked article: Presuming that Ford were planning to use the VW as-is, does that imply that VW's design might be deficient from Ford's perspective? If so, what does that imply for the I.D.4?

Not contesting your comment, but do you have more info or attribution for this?

Nope, not Explorer/Aviator sized: https://arstechnica.com/cars/2023/08/cadillac-reveals-the-2025-escalade-iq-one-excessive-ev/

That suggests that the larger part of the budget this cycle was spent on the interior - next cycle the exterior gets the majority of the budget.

New prices announced today (7/31/2023) starting at $56,715 (no more entry level 1LT): At these prices, I think GM will soon be joining Ford with a demand problem. Of course, the way they are slow walking their start ups, maybe not. https://www.detroitnews.com/story/business/autos/general-motors/2023/07/31/gm-starts-shipping-blazers-evs-drops-entry-level-1lt-trim/70498429007/

That revised front end styling would be a welcome improvement over the current model, plus bring it closer in appearance to the F150.

I'm not certain that Ford are doing what you think; from the linked article: That doesn't sound like adding 'traditional' hybrids or PHEVs, does it?

Dear god, that Free Wheelin abomination looks like the designer is someone who awoke from a coma that began in the 70's. Maybe they should do some promotion photos with these great 70's tape and pinstripe hits which it recalls:

Read the 16 page (and counting) reaction to Darren Palmer's comments - these are from people who actually own the car, not random commenters: https://www.macheforum.com/site/threads/darren-palmer-5-second-limit-on-full-power-acceleration-will-be-changed.29382/page-2

Why does a Mustang GT need 400+ hp? Why does an F150 Raptor need its suspension? Do I really need to answer the question? Why is it so hard to admit Ford dropped the ball here?

No. Being limited to 5 seconds at full throttle, among other issues. Ford effed up on that.

Porsche Taycan chassis image:

How do you know? What's the competition?

I'm not convinced that Ford will price under the competition - it's much more likely Ford will try to price with the competition, and pocket the savings you describe. That's much more the Ford way ( as well as most companies for that matter).

It could be argued that one of the primary differentiators is styling. The Bronco hit it out of the park. The Escape is improved for 2023, but apparently regarded at 'not good enough' since it's been characterized as a follower, not a leader in its segment. I'm not sure how the Edge is seen by Ford. Years ago, there was a great quote from someone in the auto biz along the lines of "It doesn't cost any more to design(style) a great looking vehicle than to design a mediocre looking vehicle". If Ford believes it can deliver 'gotta have' vehicles, then it needs more Broncos and no more 2020 Escapes. I'm not convinced Ford has the moxy to deliver; how did the Escape get past management into production? Will the upcoming 3 row EV mentioned previously in the thread be as abysmal as some fear? Why is Ford already making excuses for its appearance? If Ford wants to sell aspirational products in each segment, where's the proof that they can consistently deliver that type of product? For every Bronco, there's an Escape. That won't be satisfactory going forward. Remember when Mullally said each Ford should be the best product in its segment? Does anyone here believe that is still the case?

These promotional vehicles are great as far as they go, but thus far Ford have not given any indication that any engineering is going on to improve the MME GT's Achilles heel - its 5 second limit on full throttle acceleration. Ford Engineering missed the boat completely with the lack of performance development evident in the GT and GTPE.

Congrats!

Not true: I'm not saying I believe the claims or their timeline, only pointing out that they did address cost. https://www.thedetroitbureau.com/2023/06/toyota-reveals-ev-plans-ahead-of-shareholders-meeting/ https://www.autonews.com/mobility-report/toyota-future-ev-plans-include-batteries-900-mile-range?utm_source=breaking-news&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=20230612&utm_content=hero-headline

Excellent post that reiterates what Farley and others have been stating: to get longer range, 'bullet train' styling becomes a necessary part of the mix (along with a host of other factors: battery design, bespoke EV chassis, etc.). None of this means there won't be building block style EV SUVs for those who want them (Bronco, Bronco Sport), but the design brief for this product dictates the aero pursuit. That also doesn't mean the vehicle has to be ugly as hell, so hopefully this one will hit the mark style wise.

What was shown here: Is said to be the same vehicle as this: It was posted by Borg over on GMI that he has confirmed that the spy photo above is the new Ford 3 row EV, "Targeting 350 miles of range with 100kwh battery, efficiency is paramount in design. The back-end is going to be very controversial, it’s recessed with a razor edge wrapping around the body. Very futuristic looking vehicle with the same sort of wraparound HUD dashboard first seen in the new Nautilus. Ford may not be branding this Explorer afterall. Thunderbird is now being considered. The design is weird, not loved by many who see it." Would love to get some feedback from ExplorerDude as to whether or not this has any accuracy or not.

Exactly what Ford seemingly said about the Fusion mid cycle refresh in the teens. How did that turn out?

"Good case" according to whom? All those organizations are lobbying organizations that are doing their job representing the interests of the organizations that are paying them to shill, nothing more and nothing less.

It's a stupid question. Is a cassette tape part of the Emergency Alert System? Perhaps if his beard contained a few brain cells his reading comprehension might improve.

GM are having the same birthing pains with initialization of production of their EVs as everyone else has. Read about Cadillac Lyric production for details.

You should really read the article before you post: