DeluxeStang

Am I nuts, or did they find a way to make the SC even less attractive? I think it has something to do with the fact that the grille is a little more squared off, but the rest of the body was those softer, curvier lines compared to the body shape of something like a maverick. So you have this curve side surfacing with blockier front end graphics, it just doesn't flow well. It also looks like the plastic cladding for the arches is chunkier as well, which makes the rims look even more undersized. The mavericks design has aged quite well imo, the SC's design hasn't, and this makes it even worse.

Not to mention it's a direct response to one of the main criticism's EVs have. That they don't hold up well when exposed to a wide array of diverse conditions and terrains. This shows that EVs can handle anything a reasonable person is gonna throw at them. It's not exactly exciting news, but it's crucial to start to more actively push back against the misinformation on EVs if brands want to start selling more of them.

Those things were hot.

Sounds like it was pretty disappointing. I'm curious to see what Ford does for the 60th anniversary, they seem to be making a big deal out of it, so hopefully they have something special planned. Not just "Here's a slightly different badge".

Demand for EVs drops off because most people can't afford them. Ford lowers the price, demand improved. Also Ford, alright, let's immediately increase prices again.

The hybrids are a little loud during cold startup, but most cars are fairly loud during cold startups. I highly doubt it's the throttle bodies getting stuck open, they would have discovered something like that in testing, and in the 15 years or so that the 2.5 has been on the market.

Pretty much. A maverick is a modern take on the old school ranger formula, but better in every way aside from the bed length as you mentioned. We'll see how they hold up long term, but mavericks seem to be looking solid there as well. I'll be curious to see if mavericks have the same reputation in 10-15 years that 90s and 2000s rangers do now. My uncle owned a mid 90s ranger, the thing felt like a death trap, especially if you were riding in the rear jump seats. Not the worst truck in the world, reliable, simple, capable enough. But it was a far more compromised vehicle than the maverick is.

Yep. I've seen a lot of maverick owners complain about the blue interior, and that's with a relatively restrained and subtle color that goes with most things. I can only imagine what people are saying about this green which doesn't pair anywhere near as well as far as I'm concerned.

I believe we have some wires crossed. You're referring to a traveling exhibit that's moving from state to state starting next month. From the looks of it, none of those events will take place in New York. I'm referring to the comment made by Pffan1990 where he stated it that Ford's booth at the New York Auto show would heavily feature a mustang 60th anniversary display. With speculation that if the main focus of Ford's new York Auto show presentation is the mustang, then it's likely whatever this reveal is, it's gonna be based around the mustang. A theory further supported by the fact that we're nearing the 60th anniversary, and the original mustang was revealed in New York. We know Ford is a fan of bringing past events like that into modern reveals. Then again, it could be nothing, we'll know in a few days.

Someone mentioned how when you look at the event details, Ford's reveal schedule is tied to some sort of mustang 60th anniversary event. So whatever this is, if we see anything at all, is probably gonna be mustang based. So then the question becomes what exactly. I haven't seen anything on their social media accounts pertaining to the mustang, aside from a post about some 1960s mid-engine mustang concepts they posted earlier this month. That's probably a trip down memory lane rather than a wink and a nudge at what's to come, but we'll see. With Ford, there tends to be a pattern with reveal events, and not teasing anything in advance. They either reveal something so insignificant that it doesn't even warrant a social media post, like a new tinted headlight option. Or it's this mind blowing reveal, aka something like the ford atlas concept or the Ford gt reveal in Detroit.

Why would anyone do that? One of the only visual attributes of the CT that looks halfway decent is the stainless steel. I understand it's a pain to keep it clean, but I'd imagine you could wrap some sort of clear film onto it to help with that.

I agree with your closing statement completely. EV adoption is still happening, just at a slower pace than originally projected. The issue as I see it, is even great EVs are struggling to sell currently. By most accounts, this three row EV is a joke, it's apparently as ugly as it gets, and has done very poorly in research clinics, not that research clinics are always the end all, be all of consumer sentiments and purchasing behavior, but it's not a promising sign. If great EVs aren't selling, polarizing EVs almost certainly won't sell either. Personally, I say go with that Chinese edge design to start, it's far more conventional, and less divisive. Build that for a couple of years while you tweak and redesigned the appearance of the three row to make it more appealing, and then release the three row. If this plant was originally designed to have the production capacity to produce 5 separate models in the near future, I don't see why they couldn't produce this new edge, and the three row EV in the same plant, unless there's something stopping them from being able to produce EVs and ICE side by side. Hedge your bets, offer radical stying, and conservative styling, EVs and ICE side by side and let customers decide what they want.

I'm conflicted, on one hand, you don't want to confuse consumers by having a bunch of different explorer models. But at the same time, the Chinese edge doesn't look like a proper edge.

I know it's not what people want to hear, but my guess is as Ford scrambles, they'll most likely bring the tooling for the evos/Chinese edge body here, and throw a hybrid system under it. There's no time to develop a c2 edge from scratch, they can't keep the current edge going much longer, and it sounds like these new three row EVs are struggling, and lack any real appeal. Bring the Chinese edge here, rebrand it into an explorer sport because it's boxy styling really doesn't look like an edge, but would align with the explorer name. Shorten it if at all possible to bring it more in line with the edge's dimensions. Ditch the controversial c-pillar if you have to. You'd be left with a boxy, sharp looking crossover that strengthens Ford's iconic nameplates, and looks better than the existing bulbous edge to my eyes.

That's a bit of a stretch.

Not perfect, but it's a step in the right direction to my eyes.

Not since Amber Heard have I come across a story of someone shitting the bed this hard. I get turbos love to guzzle fuel when they prioritize a high power output, but damn.

I haven't. I know upper trim large Ford trucks have genuinely nice interiors, and lots of advanced features, but I'm curious what they feel like to drive and ride in. I've never been in an f-150 or super duty, the only truck I've driven and owned is a maverick. Is the ride quality and handling in a high end Ford truck about the same as the lower end Ford trucks? Or do the engineers go in and swap out some of the hardware to make the more luxurious trucks ride better? Hit the nail on the head. I'll say as I've matured, I've also started to realize one of the greatest luxuries in a vehicle is peace of mind, in that regard, a Ford truck is a much better luxury vehicle than almost anything you can buy in Europe. Your BMW's and Range Rovers are nice when they're brand new, and under warranty, but I wouldn't be able to live with one for 10-15 years. It would be a constant worry about what was going to break next. That's not really a concern with Ford trucks, you have that satisfaction of knowing as long as you take care of it, it's not going to fall apart on you immediately. Then there's the whole swiss army knife element as some have called it, something I didn't truly appreciate until we bought our maverick, how nice it is to have a vehicle that can basically do everything. It's a great commuter one minute, and a versatile ute the next.

Five rows of bench seating. I live in Utah, people here need all the seats they can get.

Flat plane crank, that 8,200 RPM is essentially in a van.

I like the way you think, but only if it's a manual, and it can't be a dime over $15,500. Cmon Ford, make it happen.

This isn't terribly surprising, once we heard that this affordable utility wasn't bronco sport based, a lot of us assumed it was a next gen electric escape, or something similar. Fingers crossed they're putting effort into making it appealing beyond just having a low price point and it doesn't just end up being some generic blob.

This is a smart play. While brands like Lincoln would benefit from transitioning to EV powertrains, the refinement they offer perfectly aligns with their quiet flight strategy, now isn't the time. We're seeing demand for premium EVs slam into a wall once first adopters get their cars, and generally speaking, the older your demographic is, the harder it is to sell them on newer tech. Like most luxury brands, the average age of Lincoln buyers tends to be on the higher side. While there are some exceptions of older people being receptive to the latest and greatest tech, more often than not, people tend to want to stick to what they know as they age. For the current Lincoln buyers, that means gas and hybrids. Selling them on evs in their current state would be more trouble than it was worth. Ford is being smart but pivoting to smaller, affordable EVs, going after the demographics that have actually shown interest in owning an EV, aka young people and value oriented consumers. Why dump 500 million into developing a navigator EV that you're gonna sell maybe a few thousand of at best when you could instead invest that same 500 million into developing an EV maverick or bronco sport and have a runaway success on your hands.

This is what I'm thinking as well. We did see that test mule with the center mounted exhaust, so it's not a GTD, testing months ago. So they could reveal whatever that is.

There are lots of ways they could make it work. Platform and parts sharing for example is a fantastic way to develop a product quickly, for much less money, without compromising on quality or other attributes. Using smaller battery packs also saves thousands of dollars per car. As a whole, EVs tend to have much less complexity than ICE vehicles. Meaning you aren't having to source as many parts from suppliers, and you aren't having to hire as many workers to build them, saving money there as well. The only real hold up on making EVs affordable is the battery pack, which brands like Ford are starting to get around now through a variety of creative means. Once you get past that hurdle, making inexpensive EVs sustainable is definitely possible.