Jump to content

jpd80

Member
  • Posts

    31,219
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    172

Everything posted by jpd80

  1. Yeah about that, nobody has actually started recycling those massive car batteries yet and I remain unconvinced that any manufacturer is really engaged in anything more than just basic good will propaganda…
  2. Absolutely but the only way out of shifting so many 2023 Mach E is to subvent the whole issue by shoving them into 1) internal fleets, 2) dealer courtesy vehicles and 3) killer leases for retail buyers. I smile at the irony of this situation and the absolute hubris of Ford a year or so ago when it was planning to cut out dealers for the online ordering process, sure they might want to be like Tesla but the truth is that Ford cannot and will not deal directly with customers and their ordering issues.
  3. The crazy part is that’s the way most vehicles should be developed for scales of efficiency but so much bullshit goes on inside Ford because of the inherent culture and bureaucracy. Fast forward to now and you’re right, where did all that fast thinking go? Ford doesn’t learn anything, they’re still searching around for basic vehicle combinations to bring to market, omce they look at vehicles other than trucks, they seem to be all at sea making any kind of good decisions.
  4. As I see it, the big design and styling issue was that the E-Max was based on the C-Max “minivan” instead of using the Escape. The reason that misstep was due entirely because it was using out of date data. When Hackett and Farley rose to power after Field’s removal, the C-Max is cancelled because the market had already shifted to utilities like Escape, so more $$$$ were spent doubling down on the project tinkering with proportions that fortunately resulted in a more attractive vehicle but as it turns out few buyers want the Mach E these days….. A lot of Ford’s missteps can be traced back to its long product cycles and equally long product development times, evolution of the electric Focus was tortured by using C-Max instead choosing a Focus & Escape combo like Ford is developing at Cologne albeit with VW MEB toolkit. It all gets back to a totally disfunctional Ford and it inability to quickly design and deliver important products, the one exception is the Maverick, an example of what can be achieved by a smaller more efficient team. I shudder to think of what the total development costs were by the time Ford launched the Mach E
  5. This could be just me but I think that the last thing BEV buyers would want is to be stuck with long finance deals, the rate that technology improvements coming will mean many BEV buyers will be looking for vehicles with better batteries and greater overall efficiency. Ford needs to be offering killer two year and three year leases with those low rates and guaranteed buy back price. That would be the best method for moving on all the 2023s that Ford is now stuck with, gotta entice people….
  6. The difference I see with the 2.0 EB hybrid is the combined 310 hp is more in line with the previous 2.7 EB and in that respect, much better fuel economy 30/31mpg vs 19/25 mpg while keeping most of the horsepower. I imagine that an extra 55 horsepower over the Toyota hybrid thingy is a bit impressive… We’ll see if Lincoln buyers actually want this or if it becomes forgotten like Aviator hybrid because base power levels are sufficient…. On the 2.5 Atkinson, It’s not about marketing, Chinese Nautilus was developed with only a couple of ECU calibrations, a 2.0 EB Auto and a 2.0 EB hybrid so a 2.5 hybrid was never really considered and to do one now would add a lot of cost in design, development and field reliability testing that’s probably unrecoverable.
  7. I would argue that the added weight of big batteries acts more against range than aerodynamics which come into play at highway speeds but probably a blend of the two acts against most BEVs.
  8. Internally, there’s a strong competition going on between traditional project development of BEVs versus a more start up oriented Tesla style clean sheet approach. Love it or hate it, I think the smaller more efficient development teams are going to win out over Ford’s internal desire to keep reusing already developed modules and systems. What Ford needs is a watershed moment where it throws out 75% of the crap it thinks is needed to develop vehicles and just goes with a more minimalist approach that isnt clogged up by Ford’s big book of rules aka the book says you can’t do it that way… The biggest thing holding back Ford is its slavish devotion to multi-level bureaucracy.
  9. Wow, high inventory levels are forcing Ford to encourage sales any way it can but resale values are gonna take a big hit, maybe leasing is safer for those who really want one…
  10. Ford in its own statement about the skunkworks platform said that it is developing multiple vehicles. If the release date is 2027 then it no wonder why For would be unwilling to discuss which vehicles are in development apart from vague descriptions. Cannot signal too much to competitors.
  11. Has Borg mixed up which 3-Rows are delayed, could that be the T3 SUVs delayed until 2027? There’s a lot of misinformation out there, maybe Ford is trying to find leaks? If Borg is correct, this will be the second time the Oakville 3-Rows have been delayed. Originally, these supposed to arrive in 2023, right when buyers walked away from BEVs.
  12. From what I’ve read on some forums, the Mavericks with failed CVs get a distinctive hop or shudder in the front end under power. If you’re not experiencing those issues, you’re probably still OK. Maverick powertrain warranty is 5 years/60,000 miles, if you have any concern talk to your service department, they may have a TSB on this issue as it may never become a recall.
  13. All I know is that the two vehicles for LAP are internally coded as a Ford branded off-road utility and pickup. Sorry if I mislead anyone here as it appears that Ford has parallel projects and it’s getting confusing when some of my source material is “deliberately vague” in order to hold back important details I now know that CE1 is a small platform with a battery chassis (skateboard). It's the platform being developed by the skunkworks for the past two years and completely unrelated to any other Ford platform. The program is being headed up by an ex Tesla engineer out in Irvine. BEVs to use the Marshall plant LFP batteries. I’m not sure what exactly the BEV Maverick and Bronco projects are that the OP article mentions but Ford clearly had intentions of having multiple BEVs arriving in that 2026-2028 timeline. Now it seems these are being spread out….
  14. I’m waiting for the other shoe to drop, BEV Maverick and Bronco Sport to Cuautitlan, maybe a little too soon for that….
  15. By the sound of it, there was an undisclosed issue that caused the quality checks to take longer than expected. I’m guessing that this turned out to be a non-issue but the time taken made people think there was something more sinister to it. Strange that Lightning began shipments in January but then had the same stop-sale order. But yes, absolutely nothing to do with incomplete vehicle builds.
  16. But there’s the thing, the reason that Ford is/was going gangbusters with developing BOC and the associated battery plants is exactly because it badly misjudged the projected ramp up after getting excited over those 200k reservation that eventually evaporated into thin air.. Farley made a concerted decision to set up Model E s a separate business unit not only to insulate it from Ford bureaucracy but also to track all costs and infrastructure asset development. If you think about that $4 billion loss (financed), is it more a paper loss to claim tax deductions? We all know that it will be decades before Ford’s BEVs are able to self fund and pay for all that infrastructure, the financial heavy lifting must be carried by the other two profitable divisions making ICE retail, commercial and fleet vehicles. When you’re a CEO, “let’s just wait and see” does not play well in front of the board but I don’t see Farley having any other choice but to slow the pace of BEV manufacturing plants and battery plant capacity - maybe limit to an expandable stage 1 while Ford revisits profitable vehicles in the now. It’s easy to be dismissive of the two Hyundai battery cases but it highlights an underlying strategy, a level of added cost that has not been factored into insurance of electric vehicles and how the wider community of insured vehicles will see their premiums go up to cover this nonsense. Suppliers have worked out that it’s not in their best interest to have too many of these parts lying around. As with other parts, more profit can be had by squeezing vehicle owners nuts a bit harder…..
  17. Not directly attacking your point as there’s a lot of truth in that but, Farley redirected $11 billion in ICE programs to help fund Electric Vehicle development, that amount of funding is way more than just cancelling a few sedans and hatchbacks. I tend to think that he cut too deep on programs like hybrid/PHEV development and more comprehensive refreshes to products that are now needed to “carry the load”. Prhaps the current pause probably give Farley reason to revisit and dust off some of those better possibilities and strategies that were ash canned a few years ago..
  18. Correct, the two plants already in Kentucky are unionised, Louisville and Kentucky Truck Plant. Pretty sure that Blue Oval Center is heading that way too. Mexico offers significant cost advantage and let’s not Forget that Cuautitlan used to be a Super Duty plant before converted to making Fiestas and now Mach E…..not suggesting that Ford immediately move some SD production back to Mexico but it would be a possible option to hedge against any future UAW action
  19. And that’s probably also why it’s getting pushed back, scales of economy aren’t there and costs just keep going up. Better to watch and learn how Tesla executes the 2, it may have just as much trouble…
  20. F150 production was paused temporarily in February due to parts shortages……
  21. So back on the topic of this thread, It is my belief that Ford is delaying the BEV Maverick and Bronco Sport because it still hasn’t found a way to make them affordable and also, maybe the hybrid and PHEV versions are what buyers want now. It will be much quicker to bring hybrid/PHEV versions of Maverick and Bronco Sport to market in the next year or so, see if they work in a product cycle before committing to the BEVs later this decade. Ford is definitely open to doing a lot more with hybrids, maybe push harder with all available C2s?
  22. After the revolution we will have only gas guzzling V8s…….for those with no sense of humour, that’s was a joke.
  23. Storing F150s that are missing parts to complete is not a new thing, it’s been going on for at least the last two years. Maybe more likely a reporter has just discovered that the test track is being used for this purpose.
×
×
  • Create New...