bzcat

Absolutely. The average American household has 1.9 vehicles but most people only buy 1 vehicle at a time. But I personally know many 2 EV households as it's not that unusual in Los Angeles. The $25k buyers will most likely be the last ones to switch to EV. That's not a surprise. It takes down for technology to filter down to lower price points.

It does look better. Shows you how minor changes really make a difference and begs the question how the original design sailed through.

Profit margin on stripped chassis is probably much better than Transit Connect. And plant utilization at Ohio and Flat Rock are important considerations. And truth be told, Transit Connect would still be with us if Maverick and Bronco Sport were not such big success with long wait list and selling over MSRP. The business plan for Hermosilo C2 was baked in with all 3 products. Ford went as far as getting supplier bids for 2023 Transit Connect components so they were serious about renewing it - the engineering had already been done at that point. But clearly Ford now thinks it will make more money building the two than to utilize the plant capacity for the 3rd model.

Still not clear what Ford wants to do here. FCV won't be a feasible solution for retail customers (think the brodozer crowd and all the F-250 urban cowboys) so Ford will probably pursue PHEV strategy with next gen Superduty. As far as F650 and E-series, the question is if Ford still wants to compete in the stripped chassis market because that is the part of the business that makes money. F650 and E-series cab or cutaway are visible part of that business but I think what utility step van makers want will drive the replacement decision. I still maintain that BEV will win out over FCV for practical reasons... no small or medium size fleet operators can afford to install onsite hydrogen infrastructure but they can all afford a couple of Level 2 chargers.

I'm just going to leave these graphs here. To me the case is pretty open and shut. The CARB mandate reflects market reality from now until 2026 when the target is 35% - this is going to happen whether you like it or not. EV sales in California was 14% in Q1 2022 and 16% in Q2 2022. And it is increasing every quarter as new EV are added to the market and on track to surpass 20% in 2023. So the issue is not demand. We can put to bed that nonsensical notion that somehow Govt is forcing people to buy EV... this mandate is largely reactionary to what is already happening in the market - EV are hugely popular with buyers in general almost across all segments. Lots of available data out there to show majority of new car buyers is considering EV for the next vehicle. The portion that will only consider ICE is declining rapidly and will probably approach single digit soon. The other key thing to note is CARB's mandate allows up to 20% of sales in all years to be PHEV. CARB's definition of PHEV is 50 miles ZEV range. This means these PHEV will almost never use ICE during daily commute but is functional when needed. e.g. think about towing your boat with your PHEV pickup. Will there be supply to meet demand? Ok, that's somewhere debatable. All the major car companies are expanding battery production capacities so I think we will see the supply side solve itself soon. For sure in the case of Ford, based on the long waiting list, we know that Ford can probably double or triple the EV sales overnight if it had actual EVs for sale.

You can ignore the data but it says the EV market is more robust than car companies anticipated. CA is already on track to get to 20% EV in 2023. No one can make enough EVs to meet demand. Like I said, the proposed rule is actually behind the market. Which is why car companies are not making a fuss over this. If passed, it will kick in 2016 with 35% EV requirement. Assuming current adoption curve, EV will account for about 40% of the market in CA by 2026. In another word, the legislation is likely behind the market.

The proposed law seems pretty reactive to market reality rather than a lean forward legislation. California is on track to reach 20% EV market share sometime in 2023 so 35% by 2026 doesn't seem that challenging, and 100% by 2035 is perhaps only a year or two ahead of current adoption curve. That is if you assume adoption curve stays linear, which it probably won't... most likely it will accelerate. According to the chart below which is based on CARB data, CA was at roughly 16% EV as of Q1 2022, up from around 10% from a year earlier. So if you assume roughly 6% growth in market share per year (which seems very conservative because it assumes linear progression), it will about 14 years to reach 100% Let me break out the calculator for this one... 2022 + 14 = 2036. My gosh, what are these lawmakers thinking pushing the mandate up to 2035!

I would frame the sales decline in context. It's probably not for lack of demand but more of a supply issue. Nissan NV200 was never designed for duty cycle typically seen in North America. The skinny tires tells the whole story. Nissan kept the thing in the market for many years because Carlos Ghosn insisted Nissan be a player in commercial fleet sale and NV200 made sense as a companion model to the larger NV2500 vans. Their departure from US market was predictable as soon as Carlos Ghosn was gone... It was an uphill battle for Nissan to try to muscle in on the commercial fleet sales market in the US with poor product fit and lack of fleet solutions. Ford is simply too strong of a player. If Toyota knows not to challenge Ford, Nissan didn't really stand a chance. Transit Connect sales started falling once Ford knew it was going to lose the Chicken Tax case - volume dropped because Ford was holding back the imports. Likewise Stellantis which used the same tactics for Promaster City slowed down the import once it was clear Ford lost the case and Treasury will come after them next. The long supply chain and limited fleet customization option was always the challenge with TC. And Ford drastically reduced the volume once the Chicken Tax case went south. That's the project that got cancelled. V758 was supposed to be a van version of P758 (Maverick). It was going to be optimized for North America form factor (longer and wider) and which is why Ford Europe bailed out of the project and went with rebadged VW Caddy because it was shorter but with taller roof, more in line with market demand and preference there.

Introduced 2017 model year (2018 model year in some markets). So if you go by the industry standard of 5 or 6 model year, it is due for replacement in 2023 or 2024 model year. In another word, Tonale/Hornet is essentially the next gen from the development standpoint of the SCCS platform CUV. Sergio basically put the next-gen SCCS money into a 7 seat version of Compass (Jeep Commander) and Tonale. So that left no money for a new Compass or option for another unique body for Hornet. Also don't forget... Renegade and 500X are even older (2015 model year). They have been contributing to the CAFE but sales have also fallen because they are ancient. So in the CAFE context, Hornet is basically a necessity.

They'll keep Alfa in North America. Keeping Alfa around cost them almost nothing because they still have to maintain the Maserati dealer network in the US. Or put it in another way... shutting down Alfa in the US will probably mortally wound the Maserati business plan in the US, which will leave Stellantis with no premium brands in the US. Fiat is basically already gone. There is no plan to replace 500X, the last remaining vehicle for sale here. And as I already kind of explained, Hornet exists by necessity because the late Sergio cancelled the development for a new Jeep Compass in favor of Alfa Tonale. So now Stellantis has to sell a high volume version of this car to make up for the decline in volume from Compass because it is becoming ancient in a segment full of new product offerings.

It is only sold in Europe and North America. Europe will get rebadged VW Caddy and North America didn't have room for a new one. Where else would you build it? India? Ford just sold the factory to Tata.

Article is behind paywall so I can only read the headline. But I'm guessing the robust sales or Bronco Sport and Maverick spelled doom for NG Transit Connect. The different requirements for replacement in Europe and North America also played a role, limiting the choice of production sites and volume projection. At the end, this was kind of a fitting end to "One Ford". As you may recall, Transit Connect was the first non-US designed model that Mulally introduced to the US as a warm up act for Mk3 Focus and Mk6 Fiesta that also eventually saw unification of Kuga and Escape, Mondeo and Fusion, and fullsize Transit coming to the US.

The GT3 and GT4 Mustang will be very interesting to see.

Treasury has not issued the interpretation on how they will administer the law so no body knows. This law strikes me as be careful what you wish for because you may get it! ? The source of mineral is a problem but he big one is income phase out. It means the $60-$100k EV will face some headwind because they are typically purchased by individuals that will be income phased out but not actually wealthy. Ironically the $100+k EV will be fine and the $30-$50k EV will also be fine too. Think about it in the context of Ford - Most of its F150 Lightning buyers are probably in this group. Do they now focus on the $100+k market where tax credits don't matter or they make sure there are enough products in the sub $50k market so they are not losing market share which is important to maintain volume to achieve economy of scale on battery production. But it's clear that GM and Tesla will regain some form of the credit because their EVs and batteries are made in North America. Hyundai is the big loser because none of its EV or batteries are made in North America. Audi was going to build the Q6 in Europe with Porsche Macan but they will probably move that to Mexico where Q5 is currently built. This also means Audi's plan to keep the Q5 going next to Q6 will probably change.

I think Dodge will sell a lot of these. FCA decided to not update the Compass so think of this as the new Compass that we would have received by now. A version of the PHEV powertrain is available in Compass in Europe (as well as Tonale of course). The real question is how long will they continue to try to sell Fiat 500X, the other member of the quadruplets. Basically, 500X and Compass were "first gen" SCCS platform CUVs. Tonale and Hornet are the "second gen" SCCS CUV except Stellantis is keeping all of them in production.

Oh this looks very cool. They totally nailed the design. Hope the production car keeps the size and shape. The fake gears and engine noises are very stupid though. This is supposed to be 2024 model... same with S650 Mustang. I have to say that if Charger is full EV and Mustang is holdover ICE, it will make the Mustang totally irrelevant. The decision to postpone all-new EV Mustang to 2030 seems like a mistake if Stellantis can pull this off in 2024.

In Taycan's case, the range difference is mainly attributable to difference size wheels. Turbo and Turbo S has bigger standard wheel than 4 and 4S so the unsprang weight causes the range to go down. The relationship between power and range in ICE is a tradeoff. You increase one side and the other side decrease. It is not the case in EV. You want more range, you increase the battery size, which generates higher peak output.

Couple of nugget of data from the certification. First, the new Edge is significantly longer - at exactly 5 meters which puts it roughly the same length as Explorer. Wheelbase also increased by 100mm. Second, the standard seating is 7 passenger. Maybe Ford will bring back the 5 seat later. Third, the max output (183kw) implies it is 2.0 EB only. Looking at the stats, you can see why Ford US opted out of this project. It is just too big and will compete with Explorer. Ford US didn't need another 7 seat SUV and wanted a more sporty model based on CD6 which didn't have any appeal for Ford China (they have Evos for that segment covered). What's interesting now to see is what happened to Fusion Active... clearly this was not it based on the size. Looks like Farley quietly killed the Fusion Active.

If the fake leather is good enough on a $70k Mercedes (MBTex) it's going to be fine in the Maverick. Most car companies are actually moving towards using the fake leather because it has much lower carbon footprint - it helps with their ESG reporting. Cows emit a huge amount of methane and uses a crazy amount of water so leather interior is on the automotive endangered list with diesel engine and manual transmission. Pretty sure in 10~15 years time, only the boutique car companies with very low volumes will still offer real cow interior.

I would get Lariat Tremor. The upgrades are worth it.

This is the mystery SUV prototype we saw that was identified as possible Fusion/Mondeo Active. I mentioned in that thread it could also be the new Chinese Edge.

Agree... the cheapest model will just be "Escape". But keep in mind that is may not be "base" per se. Ford could offer it with mid package as well. I think "Escape" will just be no-theme appearance - like the current SE... anonymous looking blob. It's possible that both Active and ST-Line will be available in low, mid and high package so the difference is basically just appearance - one has more rugged looking black plastic trim, and the other has color matching everything. And Platinum will just have high and lux package with different grille like on the Explorer and F-150.

Only 2.3T transverse is really in danger here due to unique application in Corsair and Focus ST (EU only). Farley's comment is probably more aimed at Europe where Ford has far too many ICE options for the volume it is generating: 1.1 VCT 1.0 EB 1.0 EB 48V Mild Hybrid 1.0 PHEV 1.5 EB 1.5 EB 48V Mild Hybrid 1.5 EcoBlue 2.0 EB 2.0 EcoBlue 2.0 EcoBlue 48V Mild Hybrid 2.5 Hybrid 2.5 PHEV 2.3 EB And keep in mind most of these come with both manual and auto options and multiple output levels. For example, there are 3 different 1.0 EB output levels for different trim levels and 2 of them are available with 6MT or automatic. And 2 of the 1.0 EV are paired with 48V hybrid system so the combination multiplies. Don't forget the 1.0 EB PHEV. It's really crazy when you think about the freefalling volume at Ford Europe in this context.

Ford has 3 sub-trims on almost all existing trim level: SE Base, SE Mid, SE High; XLT Base, XLT Mid, XLT High; Outer Banks Mid, Outer Banks High, Outer Banks Lux etc. Seems like Ford is moving Escape towards the "theme" trim design like on Bronco and Bronco Sport. Active is probably going to be like Big Bend and think of ST-Line as just another theme that is road-focused instead of off-road focused like Bad Lands. Bronco Sport theme: Base, Big Bend, Outer Banks, Bad Lands Escape theme: Based, Active, ST Line, Platinum

Sedan doesn't sell that much in Japan. In fact, Honda doesn't even offer Civic in Japan. It's all tall minivans and CUV of various sizes. US and China are the largest market for sedans like Civic and Camry. Outside US and China, Civic and Accord sales sales are basically rounding error. Camry and Corolla see a bit of action in the Middle East but a fraction of US market.