jpd80

While it costs a lot of money to switch over completely to 48 volt system, there are big savings to be had from reducing wire size, the problem is replacing a well developed and mature industry wide 12 volt equipment supply chain make it so hard unless lots of manufacturers embrace it and make it the new standard. They (insert legacy brand) all want to but no one wants to be first.

Just briefly, it was from a forum where people who owned Ford 48 volt hybrid were having issues with the 12 volt battery going flat. What people forget is that regular ICE 12 volt batteries can go flat if they are used only for short trips where the alternator doesn’t get a chance to charge up the battery. this happened to me because I live less than ten minutes from work and don’t get much past 30 mph.

This is why it’s being discontinued, the park assist never had the wow effect on drivers that Ford had hoped for but I know that a lot of women and people unsure in todays parking lots with those tall trucks and SUVs probably could/should use it rather than grazing up against other vehicles.

I did some checking up on this and you suspected, the Puma has the 48 volt battery for the mild hybrid work only while the 12 volt battery still runs everything else, even when stopped in traffic or at lights. This is raising concerns on some Puma chat boards as the 12 volt battery can run flat in about 6 months of heavy city use, needs some open running to fully charge the battery up. From that, it looks like the charging system prioritises the 48 volt hybrid side.

The important part of that is the 48 volt electrical system, that reduces a lot of wiring size in the vehicle which is a huge cost saving while providing a more stable operating voltage supply for electronics. Ford Europe is also showing that evolving designs form existing ICE vehicles is still a viable option especially with smaller cost sensitive vehicles. Tesla of course going the different route with dedicated 2 will show us super creative ways to build small cars by substituting more body shop operations with larger gigacastings……Ford and other manufacturers could also do that if they wanted.

I waited until Oacjay98 responded because the answer was better coming from him. The last thing Ford would want to do is go to war with the UAW, crippling annual profit. I can see why Ford steered away from hurting CD6 sales but to me this is Ford continuing hedging on BEVs being range topping premium products vs replacements for existing ICE vehicles. The original three row BEVs to be built at Cuautitlan were a lot more conventional SUV shape. So I wonder if the two year delay actually gave Ford too much time to rethink the vehicles and copy Tesla X. I’m trying to keep an open mind on this, if Ford is planning to sell what is basically a “three row Tesla X”, Ford needs to get this right, if it looks shit to our eyes then maybe it’s appealing to a different buyer group. So let’s hope that Ford has picked right….. Random thought, had the Mach E been sold as sedan/hatchback/coupe combo, it would have capture more of the Mustang’s spirit and really given Tesla a run for its money. Better aero and battery efficiency.

I’ll give you a possible example, Copilot 360+ option on a 2022 F150 cost $995 but, it required a package including heated steering wheel, remote start, LED fog lamps, power seats and keyless entry which totals around $4,535 (March 2023). I can see the opportunity in there for Ford to selectively remove some options without dropping the price….. https://www.capitalone.com/cars/learn/finding-the-right-car/what-is-ford-copilot360/2186 To be fair here, I’m not so impassioned about this, it just strikes me as more marketing, compelling buyers to purchase more than they need to improve profits and then take some of that feature package away in the future….its bound to happen. Equally, people used to think that Ford was falling on its sword offering $8,000 cash incentives for end of model year run out. So what if say, $2,000 cash is already built into the MSRP of every vehicle in that vehicle’s year model, no doubt that Ford has some sort of contingency like that but, if it then reduces builds to inventory, it saves on fewer resources making vehicles that return less profit…I get that.

The issue with Fusion was that Ford dragged out refreshes to the point where it’s high value customers abandoned it and so Ford was left selling at volume but the low profit models, this happened in the late 20 teens. So somewhere along the line, Fusion was targeted as a vehicle with a lot of production and resources costs but low ROI, ford chasing at least 10% profit on revenue. They are defiantly wanting to build less than the maximum possible and just trade on the more profitable trims….. it’s the lazy ass view of making cars but makes sense in not wasting resources building excessive vehicles. Today, Ford has a Taurus sized C2 Mondeo available in China that would probably do well in North America but I’m betting we’ll never see it outside of China where it will slowly fade away…

polarising is the term you’re looking for…. https://www.carscoops.com/2023/02/mystery-ford-or-lincoln-sporty-model-spotted-at-dearborn-premises/ If Ford had really been all in on BEVs, it would be doing a BEV Explorer ass a 3-row boxy Utility, the fact that it designed away from competing with an existing ICE Explorer tells us a lot. Well apart form the fact that it was behind on battery range, it kinda says we want to compete with Tesla but on a larger vehicle like X but, in saying that offer maybe a bit more then Tesla. If people were interested in the now Discounted X ($79k?) then this Ford might be worth a go. Everytime Ford rips up plans and does something different , it’s a minimum two years delay, the only reason for doing so is to avoid imminent disaster, so I’m not convinced that “changing” helps. Until it has a much better plan, maybe keep going and see what happens, can’t engineer for a lack of buyers.

Im hearing next decade for all of the above, hope that’s not correct btw.. (but could be MY30)

Imagine Jim Farley explaining to Bill Ford that at full BEV capacity, the Rouge Electric Vehicle Center can deliver all the Truck BEV capacity required for the remainder of this decade…

Well Ford just announced the ‘skunkworks compact BEV” working behind the scenes, we heard about this last year as the CE1 architecture planned for Louisville after Escape ends in 2027 as BEV Bronco Sport. Everything looks bleak at the moment but all of that could change by the end of the year, we just don’t know. If I’ve learned anything, most of the experts are terrible at predicting the future or even next six months..

Exactly, Ford Is probably obliged to continue with the transformation of the plant unless it wants to spend a ton tearing up all of its plans. That’s the thing, changes cost a bomb and take time, maybe time developing other vehicles that Ford doesn’t have…. and yes, importing the C2 Nautilus that China paid for but no Edge developed there, I mean, it wouldn’t be all that hard to import the Evos as a new Edge… To be fair to Ford, this was an evolving situation that really turned bad during last year and I doubt that Ford could then uproot plans and send the three row utilities back to Cuautitlan without being ridiculed…. Seriously, if there a way to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, Ford will find it.

That’s a tricky one and probably why Farley is not saying more than generalisations at the moment. I honestly don’t know because if Ford is going to do more than delay programs, then changing things costs a lot of money as well as explaining to Bill Ford and the board why everything is turning to crap and how to fix it.

Remembering the whole reason why the three rows were transferred away from Cuautitlan was exactly because of the anticipated production capacity required by Mach E……So, there’s that…. I just think Ford did not renew OAC Edge / Nautilus as a way of eliminating internal competition with Mach E, they gave it every chance but in th east twelve months, Mach E sales have nose dived globally. In China, Mache sells in the hundreds, has done so for over a year because Ford disappointed Chinese buyers with delivery delays (important because of China’s registration deadline windows) The whole reason why Ford went so aero on the three row utility was because it has fallen behind on battery range targets, that’s not good because it covers a mistake with an even bigger one….Ford buyers prefer big boxy utilities and Ford knows that.

Only available as a hybrid or BEV, the straight ICE version is gone. Ford is hedging its bets here as to which one will win out…. Puma is best selling car in UK (RHD) but the latest version has been axed for Australia. So I’m wondering what game Ford will play with the BEV Puma launch later this year, I suspect that the hybrid will start becoming harder to get in the UK to encourage folks into the BEV version…A bit of supposition but Ford Europe are that transparent.

It’s more about opportunity cost, is this the best use of Ford’s resources versus doing something else. When a decision like that is made, there’s a certain amount of inevitability, it’s protecting Explorer. Ford is basically trying to sell what amounts to a Tesla X competitor whilst continuing with CD6 Explorer. The moment Ford chose to do that, it set the vehicles on a certain course no matter what we think.

What you’ve missed is that the ICE puma is being cancelled as the plant switches over to dedicated BEV Puma shared with the BEV Tourneo Connect in Romania. The important thing to note is that Tourneo Connect is a share with VW Caddy, and the BEV Puma also share those battery and electrics…Ford is very evasive about this fact and claims it’s all their own work….

About five years ago, Ford was looking at compulsory packages that drove up prices and profits, then realised how much cost and complexity was involved, now we find out what we already suspected, that buyers didn’t want most of the crap anyway and weren’t ordering it. And remember how Ford was pushing the idea of subscriptions for equipment built int every car, I think that’s quietly hitting the trash can because as BMW found out, don’t disappoint your buyers. Ford seems to have these shitty senior managers that aren’t even hiding the potential for greed and they wonder why buyers are really turned off by the hubris in their charging policies… Silently decontenting vehicles but not really dropping the price (they won’t miss it).

You know, I was just about to post that same thought, it seems like the natural thing to do. Just a thought on contingency plans, To save time and money, Ford could just rebrand the Evos as the new Edge, it and Nautilus could be imported from China until OAC reconfigure is completed.

Yes, I was wondering about cash incentives but offering 0% finance probably hooks buyers better, if a walk in buyer is offered 0% finance, that’s when sales staff can get to work and close the deal. As much as Ford dismisses Edge as yesterday’s vehicle, I think it’s a better proposition than Escape, that extra room changes the whole feel of the vehicle and plenty of examples on the used market. Edge production ends soon but I hope that Ford keeps an open mind to a larger C2 for North America, Mach E May recover some sales but I think the public is trying to tell Ford they prefer the Edge……

Back on January sales, now that inventory levels are growing, I’m hopeful that two things will start happening 1. Dealers now have more stock to sell to walk in buyers 2. To make the above happen, Ford needs to start offering some cash incentives I don’t think Ford is there mentally just yet but maybe that flip comes in March or April. To me, the big one is lower F Series sales in January, Ford will be trying hard to increase that number back to either high 50k or low/mid 60k area. It’s Ford main profit earner.

When you say hydrogen, it throws out hope without the complication of BEV which people are becoming educated about. Hydrogen still seems to capture people’s imagination without really understanding the huge logistics associated with the supply and distribution required…..it’s the same uphill battle in front of it as providing a comprehensive charging network.

You would think so but IMO, the reason that Farley didn’t face dealers is exactly because he’s not ready to 1) face the music or 2) have that second discussion on where to now….(I think they’re both linked) Its so strange, Ford is just about to axe Edge, a vehicle that can be made for half the price of a Mach E and yet still sells at roughly four times the amount…..Ford literally can’t give the Mach E away at the moment.

This. What Ford has been keeping under its hat has already been leaked last year as the new CE1 architecture, pits basically a downsized version of the GE2 Next generation platform - the vehicles going int Oakville. So we already know that one of the vehicles planned is BEV Bronco Sport when Escape ends. A lot of the body structure/tophat architecture is an extension of C2 manufacturing processes to keep down costs, every time they try this it’s to better E-Max/Mach E and now MEB Explorer/Capri. Ford needs to keep trying to get this right or risk being left out in the cold in places like Europe where BEV compact cars and crossovers are going to be major sellers.