morgan20

While it is not the case that the only way to deliver new products is to cancel existing products, making decisions on what new products to introduce and what if any existing products to cancel is basic economics. It's not exclusive to Ford. Remember the definition of economics? Economics is the study of the use of scarce resources which have alternative uses. So while Ford has been particularly aggressive in cancelling existing products (most of which were anonymous unibody garbage), every automaker has to contend with scarce resources and alternative uses - economics in other words. The automotive industry isn't like the Garden of Eden where everything was available in unlimited abundance.

Haha, it's obvious to us and anyone else with common sense that GM's execution of its EV plans ain't perfect, not even close. But the GM big shots who came up with the plans, and then failed to follow through on them, probably still think they're infallible. 🙄

Are the big shots at GM and Ford responsible for screw ups like this going to be hit with demotions or terminations?

Yea, exactly. For the U.S. Jeep product lineup, it's now either regular hybrid (Cherokee) or pure battery electric (Recon & Wagoneer S):

A lot of the Ford lifers and other "average" employees are profoundly unproductive given the skunkworks newbies produce 20 times more per capita! ...a team of roughly 500 employees, most of whom work out of a secretive office in Long Beach, California, geographically and organizationally removed from Ford’s Michigan operations. Field stressed the importance of identifying and attracting 20x contributors—individuals who produce 20 times more than an average employee—with many engineers hired from California tech companies such as Tesla, Rivian, and Apple, among others.

Nah, I don't think so. Ford is hiring for its BlueOval Battery Park Michigan plant, which will produce low (or lower) cost LFP batteries.

Amen my friend! As I mentioned a couple months ago, wouldn't it be somethin' if in a few years the brand that's best known for bringing EV to the masses is Ford? Not Tesla, not GM, not BYD? And by the same token, wouldn't it be incredibly destructive to Ford's future (and incredibly sad) if this so called "Model T moment" fails? At this point, the big shots at Ford that manage CE1 products and all of the components and production processes for Universal Electric Platform and Universal Electric Production System must embrace the philosophy of NASA Mission Control from the Apollo 13 era, which Gene Kranz made famous:

Yea, no surprise the big shots at Stellantis have called it a day for PHEV. Beyond all the reliability issues that Texasota and Dequidre mentioned, the whole concept of a Plug In Hybrid that's ICE dominant (which is what the Pacifica Hybrid and the Jeep 4xe models are) ain't makin' much sense to customers or to manufacturers. For ICE dominant vehicles, pure ICE and regular hybrid are best. For Electric motor dominant vehicles, BEV is best, EREV is an OK alternative in some cases, FCEV ain't practical for U.S. consumers

Nobody has a Level 5 self driving system ready for mass produced cars as of now. Eyes-Off Self-Driving available now, like Waymo robotaxis, are Level 4. Why are the Ford big shots pursuing Level 3 at all? Swapping control of the vehicle between the human driver and the Level 3 system renders Level 3 the most dangerous of the SAE International autonomy levels. As a species, humans can be irresponsible and sometimes lazy. Level 3 demands drivers remain alert and mentally prepared to retake control at a moment’s notice. Every second counts in emergency situations; therefore, the time it takes for the driver to respond to an alert to retake control could prove fatal. There have been several reported accidents caused by humans mismanaging a Level 2 system because they placed too much confidence in its capabilities. Level 3 will initiate even more unfounded confidence in humans always on the hunt to make things easier.

No automaker will ever produce 100% trouble free vehicles 100% of the time. Acknowledging that, for long term dependability among compact unibody blobs, CR-V and RAV4 are the best choices.

Yea, exactly. Toyota and Hyundai gave up on tiny Eurotrash style unibody blob crossovers in the U.S. market (Toyota dumped the C-HR, Hyundai cancelled the Venue). So if even Toyota and Hyundai can't pull it off, there's no chance that Puma or any other global Ford product in this category would be successful in the U.S., and the big shots at Ford know it.

Actual dependability, not perceived. CR-V and RAV4 are the most dependable and longest lasting models among compact anonymous unibody blob SUV/crossover

Puma offers a 48V belt alternator starter mild hybrid version in addition to the battery electric Gen-E version

Of the several Ford F-150s I've owned over the years, my current 2022 F-150 Lightning is by far the nicest feeling, most reliable, lowest maintenance, affordable vehicle with the fewest compromises. That's why Ford needs to ensure that next generation F-150 Lightning family includes a pure battery electric version in addition to the EREV they already announced. EREV is, by definition, a compromise.

Yea, that's why I'm cautiously optimistic that Ford will succeed with CE1 products, Universal Electric Vehicle Platform, and Universal Electric Vehicle Production System. And at least some of the Ford big shots understand that if it doesn't succeed, competing with Toyota and Hyundai will be the least of Ford's concerns.