akirby

"WHEN YOU HEAR A FORD COMING DOWN THE MULSANNE STRAIGHT AT THREE IN THE MORNING, YOU SHOULDN’T HAVE TO LOOK AT THE BADGE TO KNOW WHO IT IS." DAN SAYERS, FORD RACING HYPERCAR PROGRAMME MANAGER The Ford Hypercar will be powered by a naturally-aspirated 5.4-litre ‘Coyote’ V8 engine entirely developed inhouse and based on its Dark Horse R, GT4 and GT3 powerplants. Three drivers have already been named: Sebastian Priaulx, Mike Rockenfeller and Logan Sargeant. The first two are already members of the Ford family. In 2025 they drove the Mustang GT3 to victory in two rounds of the IMSA WeatherTech SportsCar Championship. Former 24 Hours of Le Mans winner (in 2010 with Audi) Mike Rockenfeller brings precious experience to the campaign. Two pf the drivers will compete this year in LMP2. Red Bull is helping with the electrification and they'll use an Oreca chassis.

I'm seeing more wraps than natural here lately....

I agree they do too much launch and abandon but the reason for that is their recent small and midsized platforms are not cost effective so margins are low. Improvements would help sales but nobody is paying a premium for better vehicles like those so it won't move the needle on margins. C2 is the first step in the right direction but it needs another generation of cost reduction which I think ce1 will provide especially the electrical. Not moving Edge and Nautilus to C2 with hybrids a decade ago was a big mistake. So when Ford abandons a vehicle it's usually because margins are low or negative and no prospect to improve that short of a whole new platform. So they've already decided the juice isn't worth the squeeze before they abandon it. Why throw good money after bad IF you have better options like Maverick and Bronco Sport that can be sold at higher margins on the existing platform? And you're right at some point you run out of those options which is why they're going back to affordable vehicles on new platforms. We'll see if they're able to achieve the expected cost savings and if they'll stick with affordable vehicles but that doesn't mean those vehicles need to be cars.

Oh wait I found a spy photo......

Maybe he just means some type of 4 door midgate design. Hard to come up with anything else.

Which is understandable but it gives you a completely biased view of Ford and their decisions. This is where your facts are wrong. In 2008 buyers did not move to smaller vehicles. They just stopped buying period. F150 sales dropped dramatically and small trucks like Ranger did not increase but also dropped and so did Corolla sales. The market went from 17M to 11M overnight. There is no evidence that says high fuel prices would hurt Ford more than others especially considering Ford's investment in EVs, hybrids and EREVs. Commercial vehicles are fairly immune to fuel price hikes anyway because there aren't alternatives. This just proves your ongoing bias and need for rationalization of smaller cars. In no scenario does Ford NEED small cars to be successful. Having more affordable and more fuel efficient trucks and suvs fills any voids in their lineup. Cars may come as incremental sales to fill out plants but they're not a priority. Not selling sedans has not hurt sales of trucks and suvs. It's like Wendys, McDonalds and Burger King not selling hot dogs. You can get a hot dog at any gas station for $2. They'd rather sell $6 burgers. If you really want a hot dog (car) go to the gas station (Asian brands).

It doesn't make sense to bash Ford about cars but fail to praise them for their truck, suv and commercial vehicle success either. You think they're lazy and incompetent and propped up by government regulations and tariffs that force buyers to buy expensive trucks and suvs. Fact is Americans prefer trucks and utilities especially mid size and larger and it has nothing to do with tariffs or regulations. Even with CAFE favoring larger vehicles there were and still are plenty of small car choices. Buyers still moved away from them to utilities and trucks. That's the market and Ford is simply playing to their strengths. We've been super critical of Ford's bad decisions. We even acknowledged that they were incapable of making cost effective cars and small utilities in the past. The very innovation you claim they don't have is exactly what is behind ce1 and that will bleed over to ICE products. It's the exact reset you say they need yet you give them no credit for even trying. What you consider a failure is just a different way to do business.

Dark Horse SC is just phoning it in at this point. I get the racing tie in but dark horse cobra or some other name would have been so much better.

Given how Ford likes to wordsmith, I see 3 possibilities. Something smaller than Maverick. Keeps the cost down but there isn't a big market there. A new less expensive Maverick with more options and trims. A midsize unibody slightly bigger than Maverick offering hybrids. This would compete overlap with Ranger which is why I suggested it replaces Ranger but now I don't think that's likely. I now think a lower cost Maverick replacement is most likely with a low cost street model si,ilar to Maverick but also higher end models based on Bronco Sport. Or something completely different. Who the hell knows at this point.

Absolutely but only after the other products are maxed out.

Because you bash Ford and give them no credit just because they don't do what you want them to do.

I disagree. It has to be cheaper than Ranger. I bet it's sub $30k.

It's really simple - they didn't want to pay Shelby regardless of what they said.

I owned a 93 explorer, 95 ranger and 97 explorer. They were almost identical. They made more changes to Explorer going forward but it was still the same basic platform. But in the end sport trac was still just an updated 4 door Ranger.

Because it had 4 doors and more weight and more amenities. Underneath ranger and explorer were almost identical.

How much is enough? 2.3L - 315/350 5.0 - 500 hp 5.2sc - 760 hp powerstroke - 1200 lb/ft

Exactly. Sport Trac was a 4 door Ranger.

Looks lifted to me. 4wd rally mustang?

I don't think this is market driven as much as it represents a truck that can be manufactured cheaper and sold cheaper and therefore return a much higher profit margin with decent volume.

Not impressed by patents. I own one myself and while it was a really good application design that I'm proud of the only reason it was patented was because the contractors we hired to write the code wanted to sell it to other clients. I also personally know folks who have 20-30+ patents each but none of them are particularly useful - they're just ideas that didn't already have a patent. It's like throwing a pot of spaghetti against the wall and hoping one piece sticks. I'm not saying Toyota or Hyundai aren't innovative. But Ford has done great things with F150, Bronco and Mustang. F series - Aluminum body, powerboost hybrid, ecoboost engines, high output diesel, future erev, godzilla v8. Mustang - Predator v8, GTD, gt3/gt4 race cars Raptor suspensions Ford GT - everything Bronco off road performance and accessories. Tons of innovation just not on small cars like some people prefer.

I'll wait to see the price before getting too excited.

That's true as far as American companies being more short term focused but you're dead wrong about innovation and engineering. Ford and GM are every bit as innovative as Toyota or Hyundai or VW - they just do it on trucks and commercial vehicles and sports cars and larger SUVs i stead of on vehicles YOU want them to make. What is universal is corporate finance. Unless a company borrows money or has a lot of extra cash lying around to expand then every dollar and every FTE spent on something new has to come from something existing. If you have a lot of factories and employees like GM and Toyota you can get away with repurposing. Ford runs a leaner operation so they don't have that option. All of the EV funding came from cuts to Ford Blue. That's how it works.

That was my first thought exactly but I was laughed out of the building. But I think that comment was about ce1.

Ford owns rights to Cobra for Mustangs. AC Cobra owns it for vintage Cobras. As far as I can tell Shelby doesn't own anything.

Same architecture