T-dubz
-
Posts
1,970 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
5
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Downloads
Store
Posts posted by T-dubz
-
-
12 minutes ago, sullynd said:
You must not spend much time on the multiple Maverick forums or Facebook groups. Lots of passionate fans of the Maverick. We’re very happy with my wife’s Mav.Being very happy and passionate are completely different things. I would equate being very happy with a vehicle to liking it, which is why I said lots of people like it. I too like the maverick for what it is, but it in no way invokes passion in me and I’m sure it doesn’t in you or your wife either. I go to mavericktruckclub several times a week and the amount of users and posts there is nothing compared to a true passion product forum like bronco6g.
-
35 minutes ago, akirby said:
Oh good grief you just don’t get it. Maverick buyers are passionate about their trucks. It’s not about price.
The maverick is a fine vehicle. It checks a lot of boxes, gets good gas mileage, it’s cheap and has a lot of utility. Lots of people like it, but I doubt anyone is passionate about it. The definition of passion is strong and barely controllable emotion. Do you honestly think anyone feels that way about the maverick? Passion products would be vehicles that you aspire to own or a vehicle that you would take over all others regardless of price. No one is picking a maverick in either of those situations.regardless, I think Farley would classify the maverick in the “work” vehicles and not a passion product anyways.
-
7 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:
To be fair, look at the maverick. It's not expensive, it's not some exotic vehicle offering. It is that reliable A to B transportation device than many buyers want. But it's not some generic commodity product either. It's a passion product that broke the mold, and captured everyone's attention by being radically different to what was being offered by other brands. Aside from the model 3, it's probably the only affordable entry level product in my lifetime that people have cared about, that people have been excited about.
So I don't see Farley's comments as saying Ford will only selling broncos and mustangs in a few years. I see his comments as Ford rethinking it's offerings in high volume segments to make something worthy of your money. Alter that transit van to make it a better tool for your business, or a better option for the van life folks. Making thinks like the explorer more visually daring, and forward thinking, same goes for the escape, instead of making a small crossover vanilla blob on wheels, offering a small crossover that actually has a reason to exist in the space.
Basically look at Ford's lineup, and reimagine most of those products as class leading, sexier, faster, more versatile takes on what Ford's already offering. That's how I envision this.
I’ll say he’s never been good at choosing his words because he often says things that can be interpreted multiple ways. It sounds to me like he wants to go more profitable niche markets instead of focusing on the masses, but maybe I’m wrong. I would be a big fan of some exciting vehicles, especially if the price was right. Most of ford’s vehicles have been boring lately, minus the broncos and raptors, which of course are very expensive.Bronco - exciting
Bronco sport - exciting
Ranger - boring, probably the most boring in its segment
Escape - most boring in its segment, dated
explorer - neither boring or exciting, but the most exciting out of the vehicles in its segment
maverick - boring, but good qualities that make it appealing
mach e - somewhat exciting but already looks dated
mustang - somewhat exciting, but looks dated for being brand new
edge - boring dated design
expedition - boring and bloated looking but better then it looked a few years ago
f150 - neither boring or exciting
lightning - boring
F250 - exciting
transit - boring
-
1
-
-
Maybe I’m getting old but all that bronze looks ugly. Those wheels would look awesome in black though.
-
I thought this quote was telling:
“There are a lot of car companies, but what is going to make Ford different? And for me it’s very simple: we don’t make commodity products,” Farley said. “We make products for people who work, and work with their hands, and we make passion products like Bronco and Mustang. And that’s what we do at Ford, and when we’ve gotten away from that formula, it hasn’t worked out. We want Ford to be a powerhouse when it comes to passion products and work products. No more boring products, and that’s what this night is all about.”
The reason ford vehicles don’t usually work out is because ford doesn’t update them, not because they were commodities. Most of these “commodity” vehicles were big sellers until ford left them high and dry. Also, look at all the top selling vehicles in each segment, most of them could be considered commodities. I’m sure the rav4 and crv are bringing in plenty of money for Toyota and Honda.
Most people don’t buy work vehicles or passion products. They need good, reliable transportation to get them where they need to go. It seems shortsighted to get rid of “boring” vehicles when that’s what most people buy.
Here’s my problem with all of this. “Passion” and “exciting” when used to describe a vehicle are usually also associated with the word “expensive”.
-
6
-
-
I don’t know much about off-roading or suspension, but I’d have to think that all the weight from the batteries would wear out the shocks pretty fast right? Jumping with that much weight also doesn’t seem like a good idea unless everything else has been beefed up to handle it.
-
1 hour ago, silvrsvt said:
The proportions of it are odd to my eye too..maybe it will look better in person
Yeah, I wonder if the angle of the pic is throwing the proportions off. That rear 3/4 pic looks too much like the current charger to me. I really like the concept though so hopefully it looks more like that in person.
-
Trax is doing really well at 44k for the quarter. Looks like it was only beat by the trucks and the equinox.
-
1
-
-
-
4 hours ago, rmc523 said:
I wouldn’t be surprised to see Bronco Sport follow the same pattern of losing most buttons since it and escape are so similar. Plus, with the bigger screen, they’re going to have to reorient the air vents in BS because they won’t fit vertically anymore with the larger screen.The air vents are already in the correct orientation on the maverick. I wonder if ford would do an interior refresh that is used on both the maverick and bronco sport? It would save money and I already like the maverick interior better than the BS.
-
https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a46228486/2025-ford-bronco-sport-interior-off-road-tires-spied/
Some more pics of the exterior including close ups of the wheels. These wheels look better than anything currently offered.
-
2
-
-
Nice! The bronco sport was lacking in the tech dept so it’s nice to see these upgrades. Hopefully they add a power liftgate too. I’m really liking the exterior too in that spy pic. Not sure if that is a new trim or a package, but it looks slightly lifted with more aggressive tires and some nice looking wheels.
-
I believe this new system also requires a cellular subscription. GM says they will pay for the first 8 yrs of it. Let’s see how long that lasts. I can only imagine how low the prices will be for used GM vehicles as they approach the 8 year mark. No one is going to want to buy them.
-
Tacoma build and price is up
-
I use mine mainly for nav. The maps in my built in nav are out of date now and I don’t feel like paying to upgrade it. Occasionally I’ll stream Apple Music or Amazon music.
-
I’m concerned about any truck design that has a shorter front and longer bed. The most popular configuration of truck has been crew cab short bed for years, which means people are used to and prefer these proportions. I don’t think the general truck buying public will go for a short front long bed. If you are trying to appeal to non truck buyers, would a longer bed be the way to go? These people are coming from cars and SUVs, they are going to prioritize interior space. I also see the home charging of full size ev trucks being a problem. Maybe it’s just me, but I’d prefer to have my vehicle inside the garage when charging. That’s hard to do with a full-size truck that doesn’t fit inside.
-
1
-
-
53 minutes ago, rperez817 said:
Blue Oval City is expected to open in 2025, and Ford stated that it expects to have 600,000 units/year run rate for BEV sometime in 2024 (previously, they expected to achieve that goal in 2023 but pushed it forward a year or so) and 2,000,000 units/year run rate by 2026. That's for all Ford BEV, not just F-150 Lightning. But it certainly suggests that F-150 Lightning sales alone can and should exceed 12,000-15,000 units/month. Twice or even 3 times that volume by 2025 for F-150 Lightning alone is quite possible.
Neither of those projections (600k in 2024 or 2M in 2026) are going to happen in the timeframes mentioned. I’m not even sure if 200k in 2024 is possible.
-
2
-
1
-
-
15 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:
It's what makes a Toyota a Toyota. I'll give them credit that many of their designs are unique looking, fresh, and energetic. But they don't age gracefully at all. The rav 4 looks pretty terrible, particularly the face of the thing, and the Camry looks older than the last gen fusion. The ft-1 was solid until they butchered the proportions with the production supra, that's according to the team that designed it. The new MR2 looks sweet, and seems like it'll come to production. But it probably won't come here knowing our luck.
I’m not disagreeing with you btw, but I had to laugh at the “don’t age gracefully” comment simply because Toyota has so many “new” vehicles that are quite old yet still selling more than much newer entries from the competition. I think the Tacoma was last redone in 2015. The RAV4 and camry were 2018, 4Runner was 2009.Toyotas new concepts all look really good imo. The crown sedan (not the one we are getting) is probably one of the better sedan designs I’ve seen in a while and I’d definitely consider the crown sport if it were offered in the US.
-
Prius, Colorado, EV9
-
25 minutes ago, DeluxeStang said:
Thanks, that's actually what I'm going for, something that doesn't look like a normal truck at first glance. The bed starts as the pillars start to go down. I tried a version of the design where the cab goes straight down like most trucks, but the proportions just looked off.
To put it into perspective, the model is about a foot and a half shorter than a maverick, but with a similarly sized bed, with ideas on how the bed could be extended even further for more space. I was worried about the angled pillars making it difficult to reach over, but the vehicle isn't very tall, it's about 1-2 inches lower than a maverick's roof, so reaching over the side pillar is easier than trying to reach over the side of something like an f-150 or ranger.
I'm also working on another truck, midsized for that one, that's far more traditional looking, it looks a bit like Rivian's truck from some angles.
What software are you using? That looks like it would be fun to mess around with.
-
9 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:
If it's sub 40k it'll be a game changer. If it's substantially more expensive than that, it doesn't stand a chance. It'll probably be 50-60k starting is my guess. That puts it right in the sights of Kias new three row EV, which they nailed the execution of. Ford keeps saying how their EVs will be cheaper with these new dedicated platforms. We'll see if it's by a noticable margin or not with time.
I’d say sub $40k is a pipe dream. There’s mavericks and escapes that cost more than that. $50-60k like you suggest seems more reasonable. Ford wants to make a profit on these evs. They are unprofitable now. Even a substantial savings from smaller/cheaper batteries, cheaper manufacturing process, and economies of scale might not be enough to allow ford to pass savings on to customers. It might just mean the vehicles will now be making a profit instead of losing money at the same price.
-
1 hour ago, silvrsvt said:
Is there a link or any other info for the expected sales or maybe they are talking about total plant capacity? At one point they where talking like 4-5 different EV products at Oakville, so I think at this point in time there is no good baseline rumor to even venture a guess at what they'll actually do.
I tracked down where I heard that number from and it was a comment in the UAW thread where OACjay mentioned the 200k figure for the Lincoln and ford. Not sure where he heard it from
-
19 minutes ago, Oacjay98 said:
Ford doesn’t think it’s gonna sell low volume, or are they gonna scale back their projections now that they’re slowing down their plans. I can’t wait to actually see what it looks like I wonder when the hell Ford will shed more light on this project. I already predict a slow start up so I won’t be surprised if I’m right. I can see and one shift start up with maybe both shifts coming in on and two week off and on schedule in the beginning. When we had our ratification online meeting they mentioned a possible third product in a few years.
I don’t remember exactly, but I thought ford’s original estimate was something like 150-200k a year for the ford and Lincoln combined. Lincoln’s sales will be minimal so that means ford is expecting most of those sales coming from the ford. Besides the f150 and explorer, ford doesn’t really have a vehicle that currently sells in the 150-170k/yr range. For reference, mach e is at 28k at the end of the 3rd quarter this year. Explorer is at 138k (probably finish around 170k) and it’s one of the best sellers in the segment. I’m not sure how ford thinks this will basically do the same volume as explorer.
I am also anxious to see it as well. Seems like it was forever ago that the first pic was shown. Maybe it’s better than we are thinking. Who knows.
14 minutes ago, akirby said:
The only way such a polarizing design sells well is if it ends up being super cheap due to smaller batteries. But it needs to be really cheap compared to ICE seven seater SUVs and minivans.Yeah, this is the only thing I can think of too. Maybe it catches on with the environmentalists like the Prius did?
-
15 minutes ago, Oacjay98 said:
We need good products, ours are long in tooth and heading out. Last thing we need is low volume here.
That’s what I’m saying. IMO this is an experiment and a bad one at that. It’s going to sell in low volume regardless of how good it is as a ev based on its possible polarizing looks. Even with the mustang name and a more traditional look, the mach e isn’t selling well. That doesn’t bode well for this crazy shaped vehicle. I think it’d be lucky to even meet the mach e’s sales figures, which is much lower then the ancient edge that OAC is currently making.
if aero design is what people wanted, why are all the manufacturers coming out with large ev trucks and SUVs that look like bricks? Those are what people want and will pay a lot of money for so that is what the manufacturers and building.
Maybe it’s some version of the L100
Farley Says Boring Vehicles Are Going Away
in Ford Motor Company Discussion Forum
Posted · Edited by T-dubz
That means absolutely nothing. The reason people pay msrp or above or wait a long time for it is solely due to price. Any comparable truck alternative is probably 40k so even if I pay 27k instead of the 25k msrp, I’m still saving 13k over going with the alternative. If the maverick started at 40k instead of 25k, there would be no waiting to buy it, no paying above msrp, and probably no loyal fan base. The reason the Ecosport failed was because it was ugly, and too small. Maverick is by no means a looker, but it’s bland enough to be inoffensive and it offers way more utility then the Ecosport ever could and can carry four adults somewhat comfortably.