akirby

No. I’m saying they have better things to spend time and money on. At any given time they probably have a dozen or more projects with a positive ROI that could be done but they’re all below the line which means resources were given to higher priority projects.

Every vehicle/project has a cost and an expected ROI (return on investment) based on volume and pricing and production costs and that has to be compared with other projects competing for the same resources. It’s never just a sales question.

Some even before they were built.

The battery plant would supply hybrid batteries. Whether that technically violates the agreement or not I don’t know. That’s one of the big issues they have to work out if they’re considering that option.

No it doesn’t address my scenario at all. Those studies only look at WLTP predictions vs measured overall fuel economy. It does not take into account how many miles are being driven on a daily basis (nor can it because that data is unavailable). They’re only measuring total miles driven vs fuel used. I just gave you 2 examples of hugely different mpg for 2 different vehicles that both get fully charged every night. Without knowing the background the study would conclude the vehicle only getting 42 mpg was not being plugged in. But that is 100% false. You cannot use observed mpg to determine if a vehicle is being plugged in without knowing how many miles are driven each day. Period. It’s simple math.

This. Stampings are easy to replace.

I think they’ll keep Lightning in some capacity for Ford Pro customers.

And let’s reiterate the flaw in simply measuring PHEV fuel consumption to conclude that they aren’t being plugged in. Let’s say my escape PHEV can go 30 miles on battery and gets 35 mpg afterwards and let’s say I charge fully every night. If I only drive 40 miles per day I use about 1/3 of a gallon. Thats 120 mpg. If I drive 210 miles per day I use about 5 gallons or 42 mpg. Just looking at fuel economy one might conclude that one is being plugged in and the other isn’t and that’s completely untrue. Another example of lies, damn lies and statistics.

We know exactly what it means and that was already stated. It means the WLTP estimated fuel economy is not an accurate prediction of real world fuel consumption based on samples. And the PHEV estimates are wildly optimistic.

I don’t see a problem on the 24V charger side - you’d be feeding it 24V DC. But I don’t know if that would work while they’re still connected to the vehicle as individual 12V devices.

Working in corporate America for almost 38 years you learn to read between the lines and understand how things work. IF they’re working on a plan to bring Edge and Nautilus back it’s not far enough along to announce yet. And they may truly have not yet decided what to do. Announcing this delay essentially buys them time to figure out what they want to do. I’m sure a lot of the remodeling is needed regardless of what they decide to do so that will continue to some point.

But not everybody cares about removable tops or doors and they just like the styling. I once cross shopped a Lincoln LS sedan, Mustang GT convertible and a Mercury Cougar coupe. I just wanted something fun to drive. Ended up with the LS V8.

Is it just me or does that shot remind anyone else of escape?

There was at one time but they’ve deleted some of those controls recently. Check the menus.

So Fisker Karma was a really appropriate name?

I believe I even said at the time they really should have built that new plant in Mexico or put the new EVs at Cuautitlan with Mach-E instead of converting Oakville. Or completed the remodel at Flat Rock. Especially considering how much of an unknown EV volume was back then. But remember the original plan was 5 EVs and that’s when they decided to drop Edge and Nautilus. Then it changed to just the two larger ones and now they’re stuck between a rock and a hard place with nothing in Oakville. They gambled and lost. This happens a lot with business decisions. You make a decision that makes sense at the time and then things change along the way but by the time you realize it’s no longer viable you have no backup plan. Ford gets too enamored with new shiny stuff and too often ignores the existing stuff. Sometimes it works out great - Maverick and Bronco Sport e.g. Even Mach-E, E Transit and Lightning have been moderately successful for what they are. But the new EVs starting with the Rivian and VW deals and now with Oakville have been unmitigated disasters. We’ll see what happens. I think delaying the EVs is just buying time to get a new plan together for Edge and Nautilus hybrids.

What really changed in the last 5 years? Batteries, range, charging times are essentially the same you just have a lot more mfrs entering the market so a lot more products. Charging infrastructure is somewhat improved. Costs have gone up not down. I think we’re 2-3 years from the next wave with new batteries and cheaper vehicles and more charging improvements.

Since when does the govt do anything logical?

They may have good volume but profit margins are probably lower than they want. Some of that is due to the competition, some due to higher costs. But they’re not just killing vehicles - they’re diverting those resources to new vehicles that either promise higher margins or are strategically more important to the company. E.g. if they had kept Focus they would have had to build a new factory and hire dozens if not hundreds more people and there is no way Focus would generate enough profit to cover that added cost. So they replaced it with Bronco and Ranger.

And you just keep ignoring the 25% reduction in co2 even when it’s not being plugged in.

It is possible they decide to bring back Nautilus and design a new C2 edge for Oakville. They could even move Corsair and Escape if they need space in Louisville for the new cheap EVs. They can still use the Canadian batteries for hybrids. I just don’t see the 3 row EVs fitting into Ford’s future plans at this point.

I think that’s the point that Ford reports it as a delivery and no longer carries it in their tracking system. Apparently Stellantis doesn’t do that.

Here we go again. BEVs are not viable for the majority of buyers and won’t be for many years and probably decades. So the choice TODAY for most buyers is ICE or HEV. HEVs provide tangible benefits with almost no drawbacks or compromises until EVs are ready.

Going from 5.6 to 4.3 is a 23% reduction. On the Escape going from 4.3 to 3.4 metric tons is a 24% reduction. If you’re trying to say those reductions aren’t significant then there is no point continuing the discussion.

I didn’t word that correctly. I thought that after a certain amount of time after a vehicle was discontinued if it was still in dealer inventory Ford would do something so that they didn’t have to continue reporting it in the sales data. You don’t see Ford reporting sales of vehicles that were discontinued 3 years ago. Or do they just do a better job of getting rid of them.