Footballfan

You kind of made my point. The double nickel was jettisoned and V8s had the muscle again after voter and customer backlash.

I think everyone lives in the moment. The late 1970s and first few years of the 1980s really sucked. I remember there was talk of no more V-8 engines, all non-truck vehicles were going to be front wheel drive. In 2008 we were told that pickup sales have reached their peak and Ford and GM were converting their large car/truck plants to small cars. Less than 10 years later, those same small car plants were being converted back to trucks.

As we have seen in the past, mandates can be made and mandates can be broken. As we have also seen in the past, government nor companies can shove down the throats of customers things they do not want.

I was discussing pols being hammered all over the world as we are seeing now in Europe (Italy).

Management in the American auto industry has had a history of being myopic- laser focused on one way and only one way to meet the needs of the market and government regs. In many instances they were wrong and were forced to revise their plans at the cost of billions of dollars. Also there is the political angle. Many are seeing the costs of the New Green Deal- skyrocketing fuel prices, fuel shortages, inflation, etc. The public will definitely take it out on those who are forcing these mandates.

Ford will be asking for a lot of labor trouble if they start closing legacy plants and moving production to a new plant in a right-to-work state that is not guaranteed to recognize the UAW. As for EVs I'm still a skeptic. Will they get a solid 25-30 percent of the market within the next 10 years? Sure. But I don't think we will see 100 EV adoption for several decades if ever. I think BOC will end up something like the Saturn plant in nearby Spring Hill. A lot of expectations but the end result will be something less than promised.

Interesting article: https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2022/09/11/wsj-politicians-are-pushing-expensive-evs-on-consumers-for-virtually-no-climate-benefit/

Companies have relented suing CA at this time, because it is the politically correct thing to do. The people who do not want EVs at this time are not adverse to change. They just want reliability and value. I can get in one of my ICE vehicles right now and travel anywhere I want in the US and not have to worry about fueling my vehicle. I cannot do that at this time with an EV. I would consider buying an EV only under these conditions: 1) The EV cost no more than an ICE vehicle at the time of purchase 2) The EV will get just as much range per charge- if not more- than an ICE Vehicle fill up 3) Charging times will be no longer than it would take to fill up my gas tank Anything less that what I listed above does not work for me when I pay $50k plus for a new vehicle.

Bottom line, successful companies will offer what the customer wants whether it be ICE or electric despite of what the politicians try to shove down people's throats. The Asians and Stellantis are taking a more balanced approach instead of the "all or nothing" approach gm and now Ford is taking, Politicians can be "induced" to rewrite laws and modify rules as we have seen in the past. gm and Ford are getting a lot of financial help from this administration. However when a new admin comes in these companies will come up with a whole different strategy to match.

I guarantee you by 2030 California's waiver will be challenged in court and likely to be overturned or modified. Just as Biden reinstated the waiver, a Republican president will block it. Again, I see this issue eventually ending up in the Supreme Court.

I think the death of the ICE Mustang (as well as other ICE vehicles) are greatly exaggerated. I think that both will coexist in the new car showrooms for at least 20 more years. Regarding which will come first, the Corvette SUV will be coming out in 2025 while the Mustang electric is penciled in for 2030 at the earliest.

.

These engines were not conceived until 1985 or 1986. Prior to that, Ford was just going to ride with their traditional V-8s thinking that the market for them would eventually dry up (as other automakers did). When people started demanding more V-8 powered vehicles around 1982 and 1983, Ford developed the Modular engines. That is what I meant by "crash program."

Keep in mind that what is enacted can be unenacted. There is a good chance there will be a new administration in 2024, and that admin is likely to shift the political landscape hard right and a lot of these mandates will probably be reversed (as we are seeing in Virginia). Ford and GM will have to revise their "apple polishing" programs at that time for the new administration. Keep in mind that Ford and GM were against California setting their own emissions rules until Biden and his minions came into office.

Reminds me of the early 1980s when everyone thought the V-8 was dead. Then the market suddenly demanded them again, and it was a crash program to get new V-8s on the market with the 4.6. Keep in mind also, that if in-house engineering work stops, it does not mean a program is dead. A lot of times the design/development work is outsourced to third-party job shops. Nevertheless, it looks like the old habit of short-term thinking is again visiting Ford. Hope it does not bite them in the behind.