slemke

Picturing the scene from the movie “Fargo” where the couple is at the car dealership buying a car.

I wouldn’t be worried if it was up to the free market. But government meddling is a different story. With California and the emission lemming states going all in on electric in the 2030s, I wonder what the market will look like. Carve off too much volume and we won’t see much advancement in internal combustion engines or the vehicles they power. Gas stations could be on their way to extinction due to lower volume and tougher environmental regulations. Your V8 won’t be outlawed, but will be inconvenient and not worth the hassle to own. No crystal ball, the pendulum could easily swing back and let the market decide the optimal solution. Maybe resurrect the discussions on electric cars in 10, 15, and 20 years to see how the predictions pan out.

I call it China inc. It’s like one big conglomerate with competing entities. Not an efficient use of capital, but turns enough profit to wreak havoc for everyone else. My fear is China becoming a global monopoly. Use government ownership of everything to capture foreign investment and IP, undercut on price elsewhere in the world to eliminate the competition and then use that control to monopolize. Hopefully it can be controlled before it is too late.

Well said. Another justification used for closing the twin cities assembly plant (and Atlanta) was the supplier network and shipping parts that far from the main operations.

Well, they do need to be competitively priced compared to rivals. But having 50% of your profits taken by another entity makes the business case that much tougher. It isn’t the Chinese government taking the profit, it is the local Chinese company whose affiliation with the government is sometimes hard to distinguish. Sure would be nice for international companies to be independent when operating in China.

Being from the upper Midwest I have the same concerns. Current battery technology just doesn’t like cold temps. I’d like some real hard data on how much energy is needed to keep the battery from being damaged in -25 to -40 temps...that still doesn’t touch the low temps seen in parts of MN, Canada, and Alaska. I would be concerned about leaving an electric car at the airport for a 1-2week vacation in January. Combine that with the amount of energy to keep the vehicle warm and any efficiency gains over gas could quickly be lost. I recall needing to needing to drive slower on the interstate when it was below 0 just to keep the car warm inside. The airflow over the car just sucked the heat right out such that I could feel it getting colder around the windows. As for the charging station in your garage, trenching a line around the outside of the house might be a viable option. Either one won’t be cheap and adds to the cost of owning an electric car. Many of these scenarios are glossed over by the electric cars for everyone crowd. But, they need to be taken seriously. p.s. Anyone have any experience with the new battery powered snow blowers in cold temps? How do the batteries hold up? My Royobi leaf blower struggled in the “cold” (45 degrees).

A lot has changed in 10 years. 10 years ago we were in/early recovery from a significant recession that devastated the auto industry. Gas prices had been over $4 per gallon and the government issued a cash for clunkers program to put more efficient vehicles on the market. People loved their suburbans and trucks, but traded them in for next to nothing to get a small gas sipping vehicle. The Obama administration was entertaining ideas of drastically increasing fuel economy standards for all vehicles. What resulted had enough compromises to allow manufacturers to still build profitable trucks and suvs. When gas prices fell back to the $2.50/gallon range combined with the more efficient government mandated cafe, consumers renewed their love affair with trucks and suvs. This wasn’t something generally seen as happening. So Ford concentrated on trying to make a profitable Focus and derivative from it. Now they are making derivatives of a few truck platforms. Not all that much different other than which platform is used (c1/c2 vs T6/fxx). I fully expect the strategy to change again as market conditions change. If it doesn’t, any manufacturer that doesn’t change with it will be left behind.

Just because you install them for a living doesn’t mean it will be reasonable for the average owner to do. Are all Fords like that? Maybe I could take the doors off my Taurus and pretend it’s a bronco.

Or more. Non-HO 3.5eb added 25hp. It is reasonable to expect the high output version to see similar or greater gains (500hp as you stated). Now if Ford creates a HO powerboost, we could see something closer to 600hp (475-500hp + 100hp electric motor from Aviator). Then there is the speculation on what the 6.8L will bring to the table. There aren’t any charging stations in the middle of the desert, so not likely to be fully electric unless the Baja 1000 creates a new class.

Maybe. There are other ways to keep up morale and take care of employees. Bronco wouldn’t be the first vehicle Ford didn’t offer employees special pricing on if indeed they don’t offer it. If they don’t, it will be because getting more Broncos out to non-plan customers at full price was deemed more profitable. The first year looks like it will be a struggle to meet demand, and I think non plan buyers would be much more likely to cross shop potentially costing a sale. Therefore it would be better to not offer plan pricing the first year. When supply starts to exceed demand, then add the plan pricing back in. Sure some employees will be upset, some always are. The question becomes how upset will they be? Never buy another Ford upset, or wait for the (hopefully) larger profit sharing check and buy a second year model? I get Dean’s point on changing the terms in the middle of the process. Terrible spot to put dealers in. —shareholder not ready to buy another vehicle this year.

Why would any company offer discounts on a product that is sold out and likely fetch a premium? They can add incentives, lower pricing, employee discounts, increased marketing etc. after initial demand is met. Companies are generally set up and run to optimize profits. Non-profits, regulated monopolies, etc. being the exceptions. As long as there is a customer willing to pay the price Ford is requesting for the Bronco, there is no need to add special incentives for employees. They either pay the same price as everyone else or wait for the price to be lowered. Shareholders have a different idea of dumb.

Rear window length looks shorter in the render.....could the render actually be Maverick? Or is there a 4 door sub-crew cab in the works?

And I’m predicting the same thing will happen with the escape hybrid vs Corsair and f150 powerboost. The later will get the battery cells to meet demand and escape gets what is left.

The 30 way adjustable seats already do this for the bolster controls and massage. Hit the button on the door and the control screen comes up.

No need to add lots of buttons. Just identify which key fob is present and adjust the seat to the preset assigned to the fob. Lincoln already does this on the aviator and I think the SHO supports it also. Size of the fob was likely determined by some studies on what felt comfortable to hold fit in a pocket and not too small to get lost. The Ford fobs have a built in key. That may dictate size also. any seat controls could also be built into the center touch screen or phone as a key.

$50-65/barrel isn’t bad. It needs to be around that price point to be profitable to pump in North America. A good portion of the gas price is highway tax. 18.5 cents federal and NC adds another 50 cents or so. I don’t see gas prices rising above 2.50 per gallon in NC anytime soon unless there is some disastrous event. The price tfl paid for there couple kWh of charge, didn’t impress me. Only real savings seems to be if you charge at home. Eventually that will change too. Government will find a way to charge electric car owners for road use. Right now, it is just another subsidy to electric car ownership. it could easily be an issue with the electrify America charging stations or any other. Someone interpreted the spec differently. With over the air updates, Ford can roll out patches to fix compatibility issues. Hard to believe using public charging stations wasn’t part of development testing to find these issues. Thus, it could be outdated software at the charging stations. I have not paid attention to know how many iterations the standard went through. tesla needed to build out a charging infrastructure in order to sell cars that people could use for more than commuting. Without an appreciable number of electric cars on the road there wouldn’t be demand for charging stations and without charging stations there wasn’t demand for a car with a long range you could take on trips. Now with some infrastructure and more companies building electric vehicles, I don’t see the need for Ford or any other automaker to build their own proprietary system or even one to an existing standard. It will get sorted out soon as more non-Tesla electric cars hit the road.

This is the VW network they were forced to build as retribution for dieselgate? If so, they promised to build it, not make sure it worked. The price didn’t seem like that much of a bargain when gas is $1.80/gal at Costco.

Center console would work. At least add the functionality to the key fob. It is one of those expected features on upper trims that convince buyers to splurge on the fancier model. Sort of like cable packages....a few channels you really want spread amongst various packages to entice you to go all in.

that’s after GM and Ram did extensive weight reductions. Keep in mind Ford started out several hundred pounds heavier back in 2014. Ford needed big gains to leap ahead and aluminum provided the answer at the time. Options can make a substantial difference in curb weight. Without knowing what was compared, it is hard to tell how Ford stands from your examples. Certainly seems closer than it was in 2015.

Before that it was the non-super duty F250. Then it became the 7700GVW f150 and now the heavy duty payload package. The payload numbers went up across the board when the aluminum ‘15 was introduced. Ford was 300-400 lbs heavier than the competition and went to several hundred pounds lighter. It paid off in better payload, fuel economy, and performance. Combined with the ecoboost engines, Ford has been able to beat the cafe requirements even with high volumes of 4x4s including raptors. Aluminum and ecoboost changed the game for Ford. No more convincing customers to take 4x2 n/a 6 cyl or 4.6l v8 to ward off buying credits from Tesla.

Agreed. Entire roads would be large infrastructure improvement not worth the cost. Maybe on limited high traffic routes....but upgrading a rail line to use electric might be a more cost effective option. One of the reasons I think government should step back and let business compete for the best solutions. I recall Qualcomm having some sort of wireless car charging pad. Efficiency wasn’t great, but it sure would be convenient to pull into a spot, have the car charging while running an errand, and automatically billed to your account. Infrastructure like that would make smaller/cheaper battery packs more desirable for commuting and local errands.

As someone who grew up in MN, I like the AL F-series for its rust resistance and light weight. I question whether the new steels are actually any cheaper than aluminum when you consider the recycling programs Ford put in place to optimize the price for scrap. At any rate, if they do make the switch, I’ll likely get in line for the last of the aluminum bodies.

Nailed it. I was referring to the individual battery cells needed to make the battery pack when I said batteries. I have no idea how many Ford plans on making as I have not seen any information in the business news or press releases. I think the F150 could have used a larger battery pack, particularly for the on board generator. But, I suspect the pack was limited in size and capability to extend the limited availability of cells. Lower cost was just icing on the cake. Maybe we’ll see a plug-in version in a year or two along with the electric only version.

I concur, the Awd bronco sport and escape, particularly the hybrid, target different customers. In their current forms, I would go with the Bronco Sport. Make a few tweaks to the Escape (the sport appearance package is a good start) to give it a more aggressive sporty appearance (think Porsche) and my choice would change. With a few tweaks, I think Ford could have two great choices in the pair. As for a bronco sport hybrid, look at the city Mpg. They are within 10% for an Awd BS and Fwd Escape. A hybrid BS could achieve upper 30s city mpg and be a great commuter vehicle for those that prefer the boxy styling and Awd for winter conditions. I think Ford needs to work on greater availability of escape hybrids first. It will be interesting to see if Ford can produce enough F150 powerboosts to meet demand. Considering the price difference between it and the escape, the F150 will get batteries first to meet demand.

Depends. How much electricity does it take at -30F just to keep the battery warm to be functional? Say you have a 10 hour overnight shift with no place to plug in. Will there still be enough charge left to warm the car and get you home after a long night? I remember in MN on the coldest days people going out to their cars to start them on breaks to charge the battery and keep the engine warm enough to turn over at the end of the day. Some of that may have ended as synthetic oil became more prevalent. 10W30 would come out of the bottle in chunks when it was below 0. There was no way that was making it to the oil pan on its own. Electric cars serve a purpose. But they aren’t ready for prime-time. Cost needs to come down on the batteries, charging infrastructure improved dramatically, and cold weather issues worked out.