T-dubz

If it’s as bad as we all think, it would be better for everyone long term. Yeah, it’s gonna suck short term for OAC, but would you rather get a good selling product in there sooner, or stick with this low volume ev for several years?

It’s probably better that no one likes it and it’s a huge failure. Sometimes you have to learn the hard way. Wonder why they didn’t try to do a concept of this new design to gauge public reaction?

I’ve never liked using another models name on a vehicle. If you are making a good quality product that people want, the name doesn’t matter. Look at teslas or bmws, their names are just letters and numbers. When you use another models name, that tells me that you don’t believe your product will sell on its own and it needs help. If you don’t believe in your own product, why should I believe in it as a customer?

If it were just the blue nostrils and badging, I think it would be ok, especially with black wheels. But the strips and the blue wheels really make this look tacky. Also, did ford buy bulk navy leather at a discount or something? They are throwing that color on everything these days even if it doesn’t match. I remember when ford used to color coordinate their interiors.

Imo it doesn’t look much like the explorer ev at all. They tried to go for a cuv coupe look, but the back slant is way too much. Its getting close to being a lifted sedan here. I don’t have high hopes for this one. Maybe the camo is doing a great job, but this thing is terrible.

Always liked the prelude. This looks good, but I wish it had some more design cues from the previous generations.

This looks pretty good. Could we see some interior changes too? I’m guessing 360 camera could also lead to a larger touch screen? Hopefully ford prices it right, but if I had to guess, I’d say msrp of $49,999.

Good point, it’s probably cost prohibitive to make updates regularly on a low volume product too. I think in the case of Tesla, they didn’t have to refresh because there wasn’t much competition. But going forward I would expect that to change, especially with skateboard platforms. It seems like it would be easier than ever to make updates to the tophat.

Just saw that the 2024 mach e will be dropping the California route 1 trim. I wonder if the reason was low sales, or maybe they didn’t have enough of the extended range batteries? This is its fourth model year now, and no mid cycle refresh yet. Don’t they usually happen around the 3 year mark? Is ford planning on having a second gen mach e or is it getting axed in favor of the other second gen evs? If the latter, it would make sense ford isn’t spending more money on it.

I think that’s true in some cases, but then you have cars like the model 3 which has a more traditional silhouette, looks decent (subjective), is affordable, and maintains a high level of aero. I think that’s part of the reason why it’s a best seller. It’s like the automakers think they either have to go full aero or full brick (in the case of trucks or SUVs), and there’s no in between. It’s that in between area they need to explore more.

If they think demand is going down now, just wait until that $7500 from the government disappears. Someone mentioned smaller, more affordable evs not selling well too. I think a big part of that is the design. Some of the early entries just weren’t very good looking, like the leaf and bolt. If they had actually tried to make these vehicles look good instead of focusing on aero, they probably would have sold a bit better. I think ford is going to repeat this mistake again with their 3 row wedge shaped EV.

Has it been mentioned what will happen to ford’s future battery plants? Did they give in like GM?

Ford did this to themselves. They took a good plan and executed it terribly. Escape design missed the mark. It looks like it’s from the same era as my old 2013 fusion. Bronco sport has the right exterior design, but didn’t get all the tech goodies it should have. Just because someone wants to have some off-road ability doesn’t mean they want a bare bones vehicle. Both have subpar interiors and high prices. Limiting the top engine to only one trim on a sporty off-road vehicle also made zero sense. The bronco sport needs the 12” screen from the ranger and the 12” IP from the escape. Big screens go a long way in making a cheap interior seem more luxurious. Power liftgate was also a feature that was omitted for some reason. Also, get rid of the light colored headliners that don’t match anything in the rest of the interior. I get it, it’s supposed to make the cabin feel larger. The bronco sport has almost unlimited headroom, it doesn’t need to feel larger. Just give me an interior that looks good.

That red one looks like it could be a winner here.

I’ve always liked the lifted sedan concept ever since Lincoln came out with the navicross concept. If Volvo made the S60 cross country still, I’d definitely consider buying one.

I kinda think it’s the opposite. Car fans in general are probably the only ones who even pay attention to where a car is built. Your average car buyer has no idea. If it weren’t for this site, I’d have no idea where the explorer, or bronco or ranger were built. Think of other brands too. I couldn’t tell you where the Silverado, tacoma, crv, Santa Fe, Prius, etc are built.

If there weren’t any supply issues, I don’t think you’d be seeing ADMs on mavericks or used mavericks selling for more than new ones either. With that said, I don’t think the fusion would demand ADMs even if it had supply issues. Nautilus is coming from China and I don’t think anyone cares.

Exactly. Think of how much money would be available to give the good workers raises if ford wasn’t forced to continually give more money to the bad workers. Top performers would be making a ton by now but that’s not possible when everyone gets a piece of the pie. In a non-union job, the bad workers don’t get raises. They would need to either work harder, move on to a different job, or accept their lower wage and be fine with it. All of these are better for both sides than having the union involved. If they work harder, they will see a raise and ford will see increased output. If they quit, ford has got rid of a bad employee, and that employee can find a job that better suits their work ethic. If the worker accepts their low wage, ford gets a role player at a lower cost and the employee gets to work at the level they want to.

I know what you mean. It seems like every day I see a new facelift for a Hyundai. The Santa Fe has probably gone through three iterations during the same timeframe.

This sounds ridiculous. First, why would you hire someone back that you fired, and second, why would you pay them back pay if you did hire them back? The more I hear about the UAW and the manufacturers, the more I feel like I’m in La La Land.

There’s no way 200k happens, especially if one of those models is a Lincoln. Lincoln doesn’t even sell 100k as a company, so that would mean the ford version would probably need sales around 160-180k to meet the 200k goal. With the controversial styling, that doesn’t seem likely. Besides f150, the explorer is the only vehicle ford sells that pulls those numbers. Also consider that the more budget friendly escape and bronco sport only sell slightly more than 200k a year combined.

I’d like to know more about these vehicles too. It’s been a few months now since that photo came out. I’m surprised we haven’t seen more spy shots yet. Boxy off road designs are the “in” thing right now. I’m a big fan of the new Lexus GX. I wish ford would come out with something similar.

As prices go up, “Buy American” goes out the window, and the younger generations probably don’t care about buying American anyways. I myself have no problem buying an imported vehicle if the quality is there and the price is right.

Let’s not forget the cost saving measures are pretty easy to spot on the maverick too. Black plastic body panels, exposed metal behind the seats, not getting the “real” version of sync, just to name a few. It’s easier to get away with this on a truck.

Sounds like the GM gave in on the battery plants. I’m not sure how that is even allowed to be part of the negotiating process. It doesn’t seem to be a valid reason for a strike since it’s not related to unfair labor practices or economics.