Rick73

Yeah, a good idea to temper expectations. IIRC Farley mentioned skunkworks team was very successful in lowering R&D costs (30 cents on the dollar), but I don’t recall much detail suggesting the new vehicles would be that much cheaper than competition.

Having an all-new Mustang inspired by early models is not to say it must be retro per se.. Not to me anyway, though I can see some not differentiating. To me it’s more about capturing the original’s essence. To be honest, I don’t normally like cars that are retro-looking, so not looking for a 65 convertible knockoff.

Prefer cleaner lines of Top Gun: Maverick’s classic 1973 Porsche 911 S. If Ford did a complete redesign of Mustang, my vote would be to make it simpler and aesthetically less “cluttered”. Not sure what the right term or description is, but present Mustang looks too busy to me, in a similar manner that Porsches posted above by akirby look overdone compared to original 911 from movie. Functionality aside, Mustang inspiration should indeed come from 60s IMO.

You may be 100% correct, but just because two events occur sequentially doesn’t necessarily mean there is causality. Companies spin information every which way they think will benefit them best, so it’s hard to know for sure. Obviously Hyundai at some point in time must have thought there was demand or they wouldn’t have committed the necessary investment. On the other hand it’s likely that shifting production to US took some time, so even if sales suddenly dropped 50% for unrelated reasons, reversing direction may have not been an option. I hope you’re right and that sales bounce back in second half. My concern is that general EV ownership sentiments have been shifting.

Model Y will likely lose additional ground in 2025, given lower sales numbers for Tesla through first half of this year. Toyota no doubt deserves credit for various models doing great, but IMO Model Y losing top honor is largely on Musk. If nothing else, corporations should have learned by now that CEOs should be discouraged or prohibited from engaging in partisan politics, at least beyond their own company’s business. It’s also interesting IMO that top sellers are better known for value and substance than flashiness and exciting designs. Not saying vehicles should be boring and ugly, just that emphasizing excessive power, performance, great looks, etc. may not lead to additional sales as much as we often discuss and or expect, particularly if it adds significant costs.

Car and Driver considers Hyundai and Kia EV sales in 2025 under loser category, so probably nothing specific to worry about, other than just being competition. Like Ford their non-EV sales did much better. https://www.caranddriver.com/news/g65277687/auto-sales-q2-2025-winners-losers/ Regarding China threat, IMO much depends on government intervention. Without tariffs or other hurdles, Chinese could build a plant in US and sell entry-level affordable cars that may be successful. It will be interesting to follow how the BYD Dolphin Mini does in Brazil, and also who in their population ends up buying them. Will it be mostly low income, or young, or environmentalists-minded, or will it appeal to a broad segment of society for other reasons?

Required charge time from 10 to 80 percent battery SOC is one data point for comparison, but since they are talking about importance of fast charging during long trips, it’s probably more important to consider how far the vehicle will drive at highway speeds for that given amount of charge time. IMO expressing rate in kW, or percent battery capacity, is not as meaningful as MPH. An older base Tesla Model 3, as example, could gain +/- 500 MPH (miles of highway range per hour of charging), and the newer Model 3s much better than that. Just saying it’s not about how many kWh you get in a given time, but also how far they will take you in actual highway driving.

Probably another good idea that was a little ahead of its time, requiring too much complexity to make it work reliably and at reasonable cost. Back then motor-generators were not all that powerful for their size and weight, making it necessary to incorporate the planetary transmission part of the system. The concept itself of series-parallel hybrid though was not bad. The motor-generators were rated at only 110 HP each IIRC which isn’t enough power for a heavy pickup, particularly if loaded and or towing, to operate in series mode, other than in slow traffic. IMO a very similar concept is made to work in a far simpler manner, by Honda as one example, because the primary drive motor connected to the wheels is roughly twice as powerful in a vehicle about half the weight. The higher electric-motor power density allows the planetary transmission to be eliminated, simplifying and lowering costs of the entire system. There’s enough power to drive like an EV, and second M-G only requires a clutch or two. I give GM credit for thinking big and taking risks like with EV1, which helped improve electrification technologies, though it can also lead to financial disaster.

That is similar to my first thought; that most E-Transit sales are commercial and not to private buyers, unlike Lightning and especially Mach-E. One poor month for E-Transit I can accept as an anomaly, but an entire quarter and June in particular shows a downward trend that’s hard to explain other than that demand for this type of vehicle has essentially disappeared. Obviously much depends on price and I have no idea what Ford may be doing in that area. Maybe they stopped taking a loss on each unit. If I had to guess, and that’s all it is, business owners may have determined that BEV commercial vans do not offer all the advantages they expected. Just a guess though. We’ll see what happens over next few months.

What’s behind E-Transit decline? Seems the recent larger-battery upgrade did not help much. First thought maybe businesses stopped buying EVs but GM’s BrightDrop improved considerably, though sales numbers still low. Above statement explains some of the decline, but year-to-date data suggest there’s likely more than that affecting sales.

As of 2025 model year, Ford still offered hybrid with 3.3L V6 for law enforcement, according to Ford Authority. Will be interesting to see how much longer that option continues. It would seem 3.3L V6 has very low volume unless being exported or used for other applications I’m not aware of. https://fordauthority.com/2025/05/2025-ford-police-interceptor-features-its-own-8-inch-display/

In fairness to Ranger PHEV, 3 of the 5 guys in video said they preferred Ranger best, with other 2 voting for BYD Shark. The third vehicle got no votes. The main issue with reported lack of power was when climbing last steep grade in soft sand, but I’m not sure that was mostly due to the engine being detuned to a lower horsepower level. They mentioned possible issue with traction and or power cutoff, pointing fingers at software. Watching video I guess I’d agree, because the climb was too short to fully deplete battery, and they likely (or could have) let it charge enough at bottom of hill while waiting. A PHEV doesn’t work for my driving needs (other than as an integrated camper van for electric power source) because it wouldn’t save enough or any fuel compared to other vehicle choices, but Ranger PHEV specs suggest it should tow reasonably well provided owner understands towing fuel economy will be poor. The lower power is partly due to peak HP being at lower RPM. Since most drivers don’t tow at 5,000+ RPM anyway, I don’t think the Ranger PHEV will be that bad at towing (other than poor fuel economy). It’s possible software needs upgrading, but power levels suggest the engine should be able to keep battery charged while towing a normal-size trailer most of the time. Exceptions may be crossing Continental Divide or something that extreme where battery could run down completely, but how often does that come up for most owners? I look forward to seeing Ranger PHEV real-world towing data under different trailer and road conditions to see if limitations are more engine or software (and transmission) related.

Maybe the lower fuel economy rating played a part in decision. Difference is roughly 10%, not that many buyers probably care all that much at that price point.

Video is a bit long but makes some great points, and is also entertaining, particularly for those of us who like camping and have done off-road driving. Thanks for posting. As discussed previously on this forum from a technical point of view, PHEV technology may be great for buyers who mostly drive in city traffic, but if driving at highway speeds most of the time, it doesn’t make as much sense, especially from a financial perspective. HEV are probably a better compromise all around if driving at highway speeds on a regular basis, given that vehicle is not loaded down with excess PHEV weight that adds little value once cruising speed is reached. And in case of EREV, the same applies except even worse when driving at higher speeds or other high loads like when towing or driving on soft sand. Video exposed the weaknesses of new technologies when put to actual use under pressure. These technologies are best under light average loads, but when pushed hard continuously they become relatively much less efficient. What is an obvious advantage for EVs and some PHEV/EREV like BYD Shark is tremendous short-term power that helps accelerate quickly, or provide lots of HP for a few seconds to climb a steep sand dune. They no doubt have a lot of power but it’s not available for long duration. For the camper in me I really related to their experience with battery-supplied electric power, which Ford calls Pro Power Onboard. It’s interesting though that software has not been fully developed to use this feature as a “camp mode”. To be able to power a microwave, coffee maker, fridge, or induction cooktop seamlessly from your vehicle’s battery, and have it recharge in minutes once driving again, is priceless (figure of speech; must be priced within reason). I would pay a premium for a PHEV van if equipped with camp-mode software that not only powered PPO inverter but also vehicle air conditioner while parked. It would be easy enough to add this capability as a DIY project, but a factory system could be far superior in my opinion if done right. If not fully integrated then the price premium may not be worth it. As mentioned in video, owner can simply buy a portable power source for a lot less money that can charge from vehicle’s 12 VDC while driving. Thanks again for video. If nothing else got a good look at interesting parts of your country I will never see in person.

RAM might also have option to import a Euro passenger van, or build it in US, if meant for personal/family use where a ProMaster is likely too large. I can see a ProMaster passenger van for shuttle applications, but families would probably be better served by a smaller vehicle. Below are pictures of one option that can haul 8 passengers (maybe up to 9). It’s also low enough at under 2 meters to be garageable. An interesting seating arrangement with second row facing backwards has an option for a folding tray similar to some airplanes that could be handy when waiting in parked van.