T-dubz

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 The maps in my built in nav are out of date now and I don’t feel like paying to upgrade it.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.

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.

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

What software are you using? That looks like it would be fun to mess around with.

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.

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

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. Yeah, this is the only thing I can think of too. Maybe it catches on with the environmentalists like the Prius did?

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.

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.