DeluxeStang

Probably as EVs start to become more mainstream. I highly doubt we'll ever see some 1,000 hp EV being sold in the 30s. But I can see a day where you can buy a super high performance EV for about as much as a mustang GT or something.

Perhaps, but isn't GE2 dead in the water to a degree? At least for the mustang, it seems like the logical choice is to develop an all new scalable architecture that can underpin everything from pure ICE, to hybrid and EVs, something the current platform can't do according to insiders.

Which in turn means they've had years of experience with these products on the market. Meaning they've collected a lot of feedback and data from owners and reviewers that will serve to make the next generation of EVs even better. What frustrates me is some insiders have hinted that there might not be a mach-e second generation, which would be a mistake imo. Despite the mach-e's shortcomings, it's sold fairly well for an initial EV effort. It stands to reason an even less compromised second gen mach-e would do quite well. The smartest aspect of Ford's strategy was to focus on this idea of making their EVs aspirational. That's a theme that they should strive to carry into their CE1 EVs.

The idea wasn't, but the execution of them was. The decision to engineer them in a similar fashion to how Ford engineers everything else rather than rethinking the development process led to a lot of waste.

https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a61692733/2025-chevrolet-corvette-zr1-revealed/ Highlights include a 1,064 Hp 5.5L V8 Does the quarter mile in less than 10 seconds 1,200 lbs of downforce 215 mph top speed in low drag configurations Absolutely batshit insane. Will be curious to see this go head to head with the GTD.

Look at it this way, Ford thought they were doing the right thing by developing full sized truck and suv EVs. Because that's what's worked really well for them in the world of combustion vehicles, so they assumed it would work with EVs as well. They made a mistake, but they learned from it which a lot of brands seem incapable of doing.

I should clarify, get those old school Toyota engineers 😆.

Imagine if Ford brought in quality engineers from brands like Toyota. That would be epic. It just feels like a lot of the quality assurance people working for Ford at the ground floor couldn't care less. They know even if they keep messing up, they'll still have their job.

I like to say Nissan is the kinda company where the loans last longer than the cars 😆.

It's hard to admit when you're wrong, but it's better to swallow your pride and change direction, rather than stick with a flawed product plan. While t3 definitely sounds like it has some potential, Ford's making the smart choice pivoting to smaller, more affordable EVs. If well executed, and if they can beat Tesla to market, I can genuinely see this being where Ford closes the gap to Tesla significantly.

Didn't Hackett boast about getting rid of a lot of engineers, and about cutting engineering costs? I remember being concerned about how that would impact product quality.

It's not too bad. The 5th gen was clearly more attractive imo. I always hated the 6th gen front end. The way the headlights protruded awkwardly into the grille looked like shit. This has a large grille, but at least it's cleaned with better line flow. The rear end looks way more upscale imo. From best looking to worst 2016-19 2025 - 2011-15 2020-24

My explorer was recalled to replace the clips on the roof rack covers. Meanwhile, Honda is in the corner whistling while civic engine blocks crack in half, and transmissions give out.

Apparently it's limited by the doors. I believe someone was saying the doors are carry over, along with the roof, but the rest of the panels are all new. The issue is if you can't change the doors, and that character line running along them, then you basically have to keep that character line running along the fender and quarter panel, even if they're new. It makes it look like the old design, but it would look even worse if you have a character line running along the doors that terminated abruptly once it reached the fenders. Unfortunate, but no way around it really.

So, how do engineers not catch these sort of things in testing? How do engineers miss things like maverick CV axle issues? Or coolant intrusion? Or transmission issues? They boast about how they do insane amounts of testing, and development, and miss the most obvious things. Either they're lying, or something is fundamentally flawed with their testing procedures.