Harley Lover

Another Hackett mistake... but who's counting at this point?

Not likely. Bronco stands alone style-wise.

Ignoring Toyota for a moment, my question is (specifically about VW ? what is the nature of their (inferred) failure with their EV effort? I've read about gigapresses and I suppose that there is money to be saved by rethinking/simplifying the chassis into fewer pieces with these presses, but where else have they come up short? How much of the cost disparity is attributable to labor costs in Germany (which shouldn't be a factor in the U.S. plant)? What other factors are in play?

That's the basis of my speculation that the OG Lightning might become a Ford Pro exclusive...

I think this could be an important indicator of how Ford might be planning to utilize the Lightning plant(s) in Michigan once BOC is up and running. Could it be possible that the BOF OG Lightning could live on after BOC, perhaps in support of Ford PRO? The lithium iron phosphate batteries are lower cost, might be tailor made for such an application. The article mentions that Virginia is also under consideration as a site, but perhaps that is a bargaining ruse, as the location isn't really central to Ford's operations. https://www.autonews.com/automakers-suppliers/ford-chinas-catl-mull-us-battery-plant?utm_source=daily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=20221215&utm_content=hero-headline

As part of this push in Europe, Bronco will be positioned as a 'halo' vehicle: Ford will position the Bronco as a halo model to promote the automaker’s U.S. heritage in building SUV-type vehicles. In a new marketing slogan for Europe called Adventurous Spirit, Ford is promoting American values. The Bronco is expected to start at 60,000 euros ($63,2700) in Germany, motoring press reports said. The midsize SUV will compete with the Jeep Wrangler and some versions of the Land Rover Defender in Europe. It will also go up against the new Ineos Grenadier, which is similarly built with body-on-frame chassis and offers retro looks inspired by the original, rugged Land Rover Defender. I like this monochromatic paint job, will it be available stateside?

These figures would be more meaningful if they were interpreted as DOS.

The reality is their next opportunity to join won't be until 2025: https://www.autonews.com/world-congress/ford-says-1920-us-dealers-agree-new-ev-rules?utm_source=breaking-news&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=20221205&utm_content=hero-headline

An update on the Ford program requiring dealers to invest if they want to sell EV's: Two thirds of the dealers. Interesting... https://www.autonews.com/world-congress/ford-says-1920-us-dealers-agree-new-ev-rules?utm_source=breaking-news&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=20221205&utm_content=hero-headline

The point is your misquote makes the title argumentative, whereas the actual title is explanatory.

If you're going to link the article, at least quote the title correctly: "Why it's so hard for Ford to catch up with F-150 Lightning orders"

Chinese market vehicle. From the op link:

Antaus, it's already being discussed here: Maybe the mods can find a way to put these 2 together?

LOL. To read all of this speculation, one might think that big bad Ford foisted this on the poor wittle dealers with no input or dialogue with the dealers. Again, from the article quoted by jpd80: "Dozens of meetings with dealers". "The evolution of where we finished versus where we started was a direct result of dealer input". LOL Trying to get all dealers to agree to anything is the equivalent of herding cats.

Does that F series figure include the unfinished units? If not, that's got to be close to a 60 day supply, which seems inflated in the current circumstances?

My point in quoting those 2 passages was to point out that it's not just the charging station issue the dealers are fighting, (some) dealers also are fighting Ford's ability to set margin on EVs. Granted that Ford are using the charging station issue to link to the margin change, but in the abstract, I can't see a situation where Ford would not be allowed to set whatever margin it desires, as long as all dealers are treated equally - perhaps that's the rub.

From jpd80's linked article: And, interestingly, this: As has been noted in other contexts, the dealers have their state franchise laws to fall back on and try to protect their income.

Those reviews were incorrect. My 2013 C-Max Energi (PHEV) has selectable modes (EV/Gas only/Hybrid), so obviously Ford has offered this capability for almost a decade on its PHEV models. What you read *might* apply to a 'regular' Escape hybrid, so perhaps there was a misunderstanding of which model was being described.

Enough already.

So - this makes even more concrete the reason for selecting the Kentucky location for the twin battery plant (Louisville always had a future). Does this also mean that OAC will definitely be getting GE2?

How new is the info on CE1? You've done a great job uncovering info that was not widely known prior to your post!

Not sure I agree with the (non)crash worthy premise. Look at the VW ID. Buzz. From my armchair arguing position, I would say that the passenger compartment is closer to the front end than the Tesla, yet it meets crash standards:

Another Jim Hackett mistake.

None of which addresses whether or not their processes and manufacturing are leading edge - as VW have now seemingly realized about their situation.. Is GM using their version of Tesla's gigapress? I doubt it. Having a bespoke EV chassis does not ensure world class cost structure, again as VW have apparently realized. GM 'engineering by press release' notwithstanding.

Just read this, looks like Ford are locked in on MEB (at least for for now): https://europe.autonews.com/automakers/ford-drop-fiesta-bring-forward-ev-launch?utm_source=daily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=20221026&utm_content=hero-headline