akirby

I think the writing is on the wall that Ranger is a dead man walking. 50k sales and no new models. Expansion of Bronco lineup. It's a very small niche now with Maverick on the lower end and most buyers in that space don't need the true 4wd or payload/towing capacity. Kill current Ranger. Expand Bronco with hybrids and a pickup. Replace Maverick with a cheaper to build midsized unibody pickup with more capability than Maverick. Offer cheap basic street versions like Maverick and lots of off road/upper trim levels for the Ranger crowd. This plus importing Bronco Sport frees up Hermosillo to make crossovers. Maybe Corsair and Nautilus and an Escape and/or Edge replacement.

I said it would replace Maverick and Ranger as Ford's midsized truck.

Corsair is being imported from China and lightning continues as an EREV. But a ce1 pickup buyer is not a Maverick buyer. They want an EV but there are no lower cost EV trucks. So Ford has that market all to themselves. As opposed to a plethora of EV crossovers and cars. Why do you think Maverick was able to raise prices from $20k to $30k? No competition below $30k.

Little for you maybe. Somebody bought 2.1M Ford branded vehicles last year. Maverick, Bronco Sport, Mustang, Ranger, Explorer, Bronco, Expedition, F150, Super Duty, Transit, Mach-E and Lightning. Plus 4 Lincolns. And at least 5 new ones in development including an Escape replacement of some kind.

Forget smaller reg cab. What if they replaced ranger and maverick with a cheaper unibody pickup? Lower price equals more sales and lower cost = more profit.

I was probably wrong about the single cab. I thought that's what they showed for ce1 and it would be the most affordable top hat. But why a cheap unibody truck? Same reason as cheap EVs. I think ce1 showed them how to lower costs on ICE so they can make decent margins on cheaper vehicles. Hyundai and Toyota are still selling sub $25k cars. A $25k maverick would sell like crazy and if I'm right about ce1 cost cutting it would be more profitable than a $35k maverick or bronco sport. Or a Ranger replacement that's 25% cheaper to build. It's a new growth opportunity that wasn't viable 3 years ago.

It's ok to say you like sedans and wish Ford would make more. It's not ok to rationalize a business case that doesn't exist.

I favor a lineup that returns the best profit margins for the least investment. It's already balanced from a price standpoint starting with Maverick and more affordable new products on the way. This isn't a case where they're vulnerable to a recession. Nobody is going to suddenly start buying sedans over trucks and utilities because of a recession or high gas prices. They'll just buy fewer new vehicles period and more hybrids.

You can't include f150 and super duty and leave out Continental. And Puma and C-Max were way more car than crossover. I don't think there is a lot of overlap in trucks as you say although I said above I think they could replace Ranger with a new unibody like Maverick but more aggressive with more capability closer to Ranger. I think it could be cheaper and more profitable leaving MAP to expand Bronco offerings.

So it was perfectly fine to have Puma, Fiesta, Focus, c-Max, Fusion, Taurus and Continental but having 5 or 6 trucks is bad? I think this new affordable ICE truck at TTP will end up being a cheaper to build and more versatile Maverick that might end up replacing Ranger as the midsized truck offering. I

The fate of afeela? (for the taylor swift fans)

Far better than ecosport but tiny cars just don't sell well in the US.

I guess that's the advantage of a relatively low volume (Initially at least) new product. You're not losing existing revenue like cd6 explorer and not losing out on billions of new revenue so it's a lot easier to justify a slow managed rollout. Also keeps costs down. We'll see if they stick with it but maybe the skunkworks team really opened Farley's eyes to a different way of doing business.

The ones I've seen you press on one side and it pops out then you pull it to open.

I stand corrected. I thought the images of the ce1 pickup were single cab but now I see it's more Maverick sized. I don't think it will be larger than Maverick though.

Flush is ok if they're still mechanical.

If you're going that far just do a full restomod with a new frame, modern suspension and coyote powertrain.

There you go. Lower prices (or perception-of lower prices) yields more volume. Raise prices and volume usually siffers.

I guess that debunks the theory that not having cheap cars will hurt sales of higher priced vehicles. Good vehicles like F series, Bronco Sport, Maverick, Bronco, Ranger and Explorer will sell regardless. The harping on affordability and lower trims just confirms my previous statements that price sells. And it can be profitable if you don't need big incentives. That's why I think one of the TTP new trucks will be a slightly smaller than Maverick reg cab similar to the ce1 pickup. True entry level allowing a new Maverick to move up a little.

I'd love to see incentives overlaid on sales. Was it 2nd qtr when they did employee pricing or was that last year?

To me an EREV only makes sense if you normally drive less than 100 miles per day empty but occasionally need to take a long trip or tow something. Otherwise it's essentially a powerboost hybrid.

BTW just because I explain why Ford does something doesn't necessarily mean I agree with it. But sometimes mistakes of the past force less than ideal decisions now. I think the biggest goof other than EVs was not doing an even cheaper version of c2 a decade earlier and using it for edge, escape, fusion, focus, maverick and bronco sport with hybrid powertrains and having 3 c2 plants.

Because cR-V is more important to Honda than Escape is to Ford and Honda is more conservative. Ford did the same thing with Lightning because f150 is important.

That I agree with. Farley likes to swing for the fences with new ideas with no backup plan.

That's what they tried with the 2013 Fusion. I bought a Titanium. It was a great vehicle. Still the best looking mid sized family sedan IMO. But buyers only wanted cheap SE models and they had to put $4k on the hood to compete. Better styling would have increased Escape sales for sure but not necessarily increased profits. They are working on a new utility to replace Escape - either a C2 to build in Hermosillo or some joint venture with Nissan. I've advocated for a longer Bronco Sport. The problem is it's taking way too long to get here.