akirby

I think the base models will be 250-ish. No different than base model cars having a tiny engine and no options. Some buyers will get the cheapest version but most will upgrade to a few more options and longer range.

Well I just had a flat in the Porsche and found out I have summer tires. When I upgraded the wheels it wasn't clear that they came with summer tires - I would have swapped them out for all seasons. So I guess I won't be driving it below 45 degrees. I'll just have to do more mountain trips next summer and wear them out before next fall......

Say what? Remember when Maverick came out at $20K? The asians still sell a crapload of sub $25K cars. Corolla alone sold 230K last year. A cheap $25k teuck will sell great just like the original ranger. The difference here is they need to use all those ce1 cost saving ideas to make it reasonably profitable at those lower prices. I see 150k+ no problem compared to 50K Rangers.

I see 2 reasons. 1 - free up Map to make more Broncos and new variants including hybrids and possibly a pickup 2 - the lower cost gas truck will sell in much larger numbers just due to cost and has the potential to be far more profitable if they can apply at least some of the ce1 design, engineering and manufacturing principles. They could keep Maverick as a step up product and keep this truck on the cheaper side.

Thats the least ugly full sized GM truck I remember. Thats the best I can do. 😎

TL/DR - even with electricity rate hike and cheaper gas it's still cheaper to charge a lightning than to buy gas.

I still say it's a small unibody pickup. Bronco pickup would not be "affordable" but I do think they might do both.

We know it's not Shelby

Biden? Democrats? European Union? All contributed to the EV frenzy.

Exactly. The only thing I really blame him for is the Oakville debacle. Those were bad products period and it killed a really good product in Edge and Nautilus.

Sorry I got confused with the topic merging. I'm saying develop a new unibody pickup platform that combines c2 and ce1 for lower cost, then produce a new Maverick along with a single cab for a lower more affordable price point.

Details in the other topic I started.

They're still selling 50k gladiators every year which is the same or slightly higher than Ranger. Seems like a no brainer swap to me even if sales are a bit lower.

He does deserve huge kudos for the ce1 skunkworks team. We don't know how successful it will be but that took balls to set up a team like that and give them complete freedom from the usual corporate bullshit and to bring inso many outsiders. I suspect he also had a big hand in Bronco, Bronco Sport and Maverick.

Ok hear me out. Borg may not be wrong. Step 1 - Kill Ranger and add a Bronco pickup to MAP. The pickup will be lower volume but higher profit freeing up Bronco capacity as they add hybrids. Step 2 - combine Maverick with CE1 components and make a new unibody Ranger. Offer affordable single cab models and a crew cab Maverick replacement. All hybrids. Maybe even a SUV. This frees up Hermosillo to make next gen bronco sport and vans.

Bronco pickup was my first thought but no way that would be "affordable".

Well if it's truly affordable as in significantly cheaper than Maverick I think they could sell 150k easily. It wont be the only product there. I'm just trying to spitball a totally new model thats affordable.

IIRC our Dell 730 servers back in 2017 had 2 cpus, 48 cores, 6 NICs, 256 gb ram and 12 TB hard disk cost us around $15k. Big volume discount but still....

Well you have to consider the regulatory environment at the time they made those decisions - unrealistic CAFE targets and pending regulation that would have essentially banned new ICE vehicles. Now I think they tried to pivot too fast and with some wrong products but you can't blame them for going that direction. Also - CE1 wasn't viable yet. A slower and more calculated approach would have been far better but thats not Farley's style. He likes to swing for the fences. I disagree about battery storage. I think its a good business with far better returns than car batteries. Tesla has been doing it for a long time.

Because Maverick moved up in price and majority of buyers don't want EVs yet. Think original Ranger.

Which automaker is owned or controlled by the government?

Except its still a BEV......

Sounds to me like they're building a small truck based in part on CE1 making it smaller and cheaper than Maverick. They could also be moving next gen Maverick there as well freeing up Hermosillo for utilities.

I still think T3 is an important product longer term, but I understand wanting to focus on more affordable EVs. The new gas truck is a bit of a head scratcher. I'll start a new topic on that one.