Ford Model E in 2019

[sullynd]

A lot of the "demand" for EVs is simply demand for a cheap vehicle. Take away the gov't rebates and they won't sell nearly as well.

They said the same thing about hybrids. I think the fire sale deals on the Leaf and Volt have mostly dried up. I bet we'll see prices come down as the rebates go away. I actually think it may help sales, as right now it's hard to tell what the actual price is. I think longer range EVs will help too (such as the Bolt). The trend to lease them v purchase may hold them back. (Who wants to be on the hook for a battery replacement)

 

When we replace our Flex in a few years an EV/PHEV will get first looks.

[mackinaw]

 

I think it is way premature to call EVs a "failure".

 

 

Right now they are a failure. Over 17,000,000 vehicles were sold in the U.S. in 2015 and only 116,000 were electric or plug-in hybrids. That comes out to 0.66% of the U.S. market. Or, to put it another way, 99.34% are powered by an ICE. Pretty hard evidence that the market is not asking for electric vehicles. In 20 years, who knows? But right now, they're not.

[akirby]

I never said they were a failure, just that if you're looking at it from the standpoint of people embracing and wanting EVs then you have to temper that with the knowledge that a lot of folks are buying these EVs simply because they're a cheap lease thanks to the tax rebates and not because they're EVs. When the rebates end these folks will go back to some other cheaper option.

[BORG]

I've always had the impression that Ford has had a very hard time fully utilizing FRAP and there is certainly far more capacity there than a Mustang and Continental can support alone. I'm a little surprised Continental is being built there so I wonder if they originally intended to build Taurus there as well, and maybe there are more distant plans now in place for the plant. Continental could have been built at Oakville, replacing Flex and MKT production. In the end, with so much capacity moving to Mexico and Ford likely to see softening sales over the next few years, I'm sure they'd like to get rid of FRAP, especially with how fickle Mustang sales can be and the modest sales potential of Continental (at least in the US).

[fuzzymoomoo]

Yes, the Taurus (the weird looking one that became the China-only model) was supposed to be built at FRAP alongside the Continental. Those 2 cars were one of the incentives for producing the Fusion overflow there in the first place. Once the new US Taurus was cancelled, there was nowhere else to build the Continental with the capacity needed, so FRAP was the obvious choice regardless.

 

Regarding your obsurd notion that Ford wants to get rid of FRAP: that's absolutely ludicrous. Where else would they build the Mustang? Mexico? Do that and watch sales die the minute that's announced. The Mustang will always be built in America, Ford has said that for a long, long time.

[BORG]

Yes, the Taurus (the weird looking one that became the China-only model) was supposed to be built at FRAP alongside the Continental. Those 2 cars were one of the incentives for producing the Fusion overflow there in the first place. Once the new US Taurus was cancelled, there was nowhere else to build the Continental with the capacity needed, so FRAP was the obvious choice regardless.

 

Regarding your obsurd notion that Ford wants to get rid of FRAP: that's absolutely ludicrous. Where else would they build the Mustang? Mexico? Do that and watch sales die the minute that's announced. The Mustang will always be built in America, Ford has said that for a long, long time.

 

They clearly aren't moving Mustang production because it's unrelated to other Ford products, but instead of utilizing FRAP's overcapacity they are expanding capacity in Mexico. Ford has allot of capacity constraints but FRAP never becomes the obvious answer which I find interesting. I'm sure their plans for FRAP are in flux since Taurus was scrapped and Mustang plans have been accelerated by 2 years. The idea that it may become a Lincoln plant seems a little far-fetched considering how expensive it will be to update the plant to make that possible for a brand that is still on shaky ground. I'm sure it'll be around for the remainder of this decade but I doubt Ford likes having an underutilized plant assembling 1 or 2 lower volume cars with seasonal sales swings.

Edited March 20, 2016 by BORG

[RichardJensen]

 

instead of utilizing FRAP's overcapacity they are expanding capacity in Mexico

 

That's probably because they're going to be building global small cars at those plants, which wouldn't be very profitable at FRAP.

 

FRAP is almost certainly profitable on two full shifts--as, I expect, all NA Ford plants are--and Mustang + Conti should be dang near two full shifts.

[akirby]

There are also more models coming for Lincoln, and as Richard points out cheaper models need to be in Mexico. MAP supposedly gets bronco, ranger and something else. This isn't shifting capacity to Mexico - it's adding capacity in North America.

[fuzzymoomoo]

 

That's probably because they're going to be building global small cars at those plants, which wouldn't be very profitable at FRAP.

 

FRAP is almost certainly profitable on two full shifts--as, I expect, all NA Ford plants are--and Mustang + Conti should be dang near two full shifts.

Mustang alone is 2 shifts right now

 

I don't want to say too much but I have a theory. I'll PM you if you're interested

[mustang_sallad]

 

Reality check: The Model X has sold a whopping 400 units in January 2016 and 500 units in February 2016. Using your cherry picked examples, MKT/Navi sold 1205 units and 1161 units for the same months. In no known universe would those figures indicate that the Model X is "on track to outsell" the Lincolns.

 

If you compare the Model X to its true Lincoln alternative, the MKX, the comparison is laughable: MKX sold 2052 units and 2375 units for the same months.

 

C'mon.

 

 

Is that an invitation to check in on these sales numbers again in 6 months? Production on the Model X is just ramping up, and they've got something like 35,000 reservations without any form of traditional advertisement.

 

And on what planet is a $45k, mid-size, 5 seater SUV with 335hp the direct competitor to a full-size 7-seater with 500+ hp that starts at $75k?

[mustang_sallad]

I never said they were a failure, just that if you're looking at it from the standpoint of people embracing and wanting EVs then you have to temper that with the knowledge that a lot of folks are buying these EVs simply because they're a cheap lease thanks to the tax rebates and not because they're EVs. When the rebates end these folks will go back to some other cheaper option.

 

If you've ever met anyone who's owned an EV, you would know their next most definitely will run on electrons. The customer satisfaction numbers for Volt, Leaf and Model S are all through the roof. Most PHEV drivers I've met also say their next car will be a pure EV, they're a gateway drug.

[silvrsvt]

 

If you've ever met anyone who's owned an EV, you would know their next most definitely will run on electrons. The customer satisfaction numbers for Volt, Leaf and Model S are all through the roof. Most PHEV drivers I've met also say their next car will be a pure EV, they're a gateway drug.

 

having a small rabid fan base is one thing, but its another to actually grow it.

 

Not sure if there is a "law" or psychological condition for this, but I often find that people who go from one thing to another, go "whole hog" to justify what they did, instead of just fessing up that they wanted to do something different. There is a guy on Youtube that is a Ford tech who got a Ecodiesel Ram instead of a F-150 and offered some criticisms of the F-150 (which some were legit, others a real stretch), but ultimately it boils down he wanted a diesel 1/4 ton pickup, which Dodge only offers.

 

Same thing when people go from a bad owners experience with one car brand to another. I've had one bad experience with Ford out of four new cars I've bought. I've also seen two of same MY Escapes in my family have two completely different ownership experiences with going to the dealership with problems. My sisters Limited had alot more go wrong with it then my Wife's XLT and my wife's Escape has almost 150K on it now. These where mechanical issues shared between them. not trim differences.

[akirby]

90% of the leafs around my neighborhood (and there are tons of them - I see at least 4-5 every time I go anywhere) are driven by young people from a culture known for their extreme frugality (of which I have firsthand retail experience). I could be wrong but I don't think they're in it primarily for the tech or environmental benefits.

[atomcat68]

 

having a small rabid fan base is one thing, but its another to actually grow it.

 

Not sure if there is a "law" or psychological condition for this, but I often find that people who go from one thing to another, go "whole hog" to justify what they did, instead of just fessing up that they wanted to do something different. There is a guy on Youtube that is a Ford tech who got a Ecodiesel Ram instead of a F-150 and offered some criticisms of the F-150 (which some were legit, others a real stretch), but ultimately it boils down he wanted a diesel 1/4 ton pickup, which Dodge only offers.

 

Same thing when people go from a bad owners experience with one car brand to another. I've had one bad experience with Ford out of four new cars I've bought. I've also seen two of same MY Escapes in my family have two completely different ownership experiences with going to the dealership with problems. My sisters Limited had alot more go wrong with it then my Wife's XLT and my wife's Escape has almost 150K on it now. These where mechanical issues shared between them. not trim differences.

 

I think if everyone tried a Tesla, most would come away impressed! I always laughed EV cars off, but I think Tesla has most of what may be the right formula.

[akirby]

There is nothing wrong with the vehicles. It's the cost and/or range that make them less than desirable to the average buyer right now.

[silvrsvt]

 

I think if everyone tried a Tesla, most would come away impressed! I always laughed EV cars off, but I think Tesla has most of what may be the right formula.

 

They should, but the car costs $100K or so...in all seriousness, I can't think of anyone off the top of my head that normally complains about a purchase like that.

[bzcat]

 

having a small rabid fan base is one thing, but its another to actually grow it.

 

Not sure if there is a "law" or psychological condition for this, but I often find that people who go from one thing to another, go "whole hog" to justify what they did, instead of just fessing up that they wanted to do something different. There is a guy on Youtube that is a Ford tech who got a Ecodiesel Ram instead of a F-150 and offered some criticisms of the F-150 (which some were legit, others a real stretch), but ultimately it boils down he wanted a diesel 1/4 ton pickup, which Dodge only offers.

 

Same thing when people go from a bad owners experience with one car brand to another. I've had one bad experience with Ford out of four new cars I've bought. I've also seen two of same MY Escapes in my family have two completely different ownership experiences with going to the dealership with problems. My sisters Limited had alot more go wrong with it then my Wife's XLT and my wife's Escape has almost 150K on it now. These where mechanical issues shared between them. not trim differences.

 

Doesn't matter.

 

CAFE will require most of the mainstream fleet to have a plug. It's not a matter of whether you personally like it or not. It will be difficult to buy a new car after 2025 or so that doesn't have some kind of batteries under the seats.

 

This discussion about EV (or to be more precise... electrification) reminds me of the late 70s and early 80s when catalytic converters was coming out. At first, it was an option (a rather expensive one) so only people that really wanted it would get it. But then regulatory environment changed and all the new cars came with it when they got replaced/updated. Soon 100% of the car had it and western civilization didn't end.

 

How about ABS? Remember when that was optional? Try finding a new car without ABS now.

 

Or fuel injection? I remember when that was a several hundred dollar option that only environmental nerds would get to get clean burning engine or a few performance nuts that see the upside. Try find a car without fuel injection now. Regulatory framework is the most important factor in how car techs move forward.

 

The point is that looking at EV adoption rate now and proclaiming it to be a failure or irrelevant is really myopic. We know what the regulatory path looks like. Everyone on this message board will be driving a hybrid, PHEV, or EV of some sort by 2030 unless you decide to only drive "classic" cars and not buy a new car again after 2025.

Edited March 21, 2016 by bzcat

[akirby]

This is why we have so many endless circular arguments. Questioning the viability of Tesla as a business or the degree of their "breakthrough" technology doesn't have anything to do with the future of EVs. Saying that current demand is partially influenced by cheap lease deals doesn't mean the EV market won't continue to grow.

 

Tesla proves the technology exists to build exciting EVs. Tesla has not proven that a business can do so profitably (yet).

 

Imagine what the Ford engineers could do if they were turned loose with a few hundred million to play with and told to design a vehicle that doesn't have to produce a profit.

[silvrsvt]

CAFE will require most of the mainstream fleet to have a plug. It's not a matter of whether you personally like it or not. It will be difficult to buy a new car after 2025 or so that doesn't have some kind of batteries under the seats.

 

The point is that looking at EV adoption rate now and proclaiming it to be a failure or irrelevant is really myopic. We know what the regulatory path looks like. Everyone on this message board will be driving a hybrid, PHEV, or EV of some sort by 2030 unless you decide to only drive "classic" cars and not buy a new car again after 2025.

 

Like you said, it doesn't matter...because your going to be "forced fed" into getting one via CAFE. I'm not arguing that point....the point I'm making is having an EV vehicle for most people is a hinderance because or lack of range or the lack of funding (Tesla) in the next 5 years....maybe in in 2025, things will be different...I'd hope so...if not I see the world moving to car sharing because the costs of owning a car will be too high for all but the very rich...and that will cause problems for everyone.

[bzcat]

 

Like you said, it doesn't matter...because your going to be "forced fed" into getting one via CAFE. I'm not arguing that point....the point I'm making is having an EV vehicle for most people is a hinderance because or lack of range or the lack of funding (Tesla) in the next 5 years....maybe in in 2025, things will be different...I'd hope so...if not I see the world moving to car sharing because the costs of owning a car will be too high for all but the very rich...and that will cause problems for everyone.

 

Not many people will have EV in 2025 either.

 

But it will have a plug.

[tzach]

This discussion about EV (or to be more precise... electrification) reminds me of the late 70s and early 80s when catalytic converters was coming out. At first, it was an option (a rather expensive one) so only people that really wanted it would get it. But then regulatory environment changed and all the new cars came with it when they got replaced/updated. Soon 100% of the car had it and western civilization didn't end.

 

Cats were first on a production car in 1973 and were mandatory for 1975 on all cars sold in the U.S.

[silvrsvt]

This discussion about EV (or to be more precise... electrification) reminds me of the late 70s and early 80s when catalytic converters was coming out. At first, it was an option (a rather expensive one) so only people that really wanted it would get it. But then regulatory environment changed and all the new cars came with it when they got replaced/updated. Soon 100% of the car had it and western civilization didn't end.

 

Cats were first on a production car in 1973 and were mandatory for 1975 on all cars sold in the U.S.

 

But adding cats to a car is completely different from electrification of cars. A cat is an add-on item, whereas electrification is a much more invasive thing to do to a car.

 

Anyways, aren't we vearing off topic here completely? I agree that plug in hybrids are going to be more common in cars, but at the same time, EVs (purely battery powered) aren't going to make that big of a impact in the market place for at least another decade or so.

[SoonerLS]

...western civilization didn't end.

That's highly debatable. Have you seen what's on TV these days?

Edited March 21, 2016 by SoonerLS

[fuzzymoomoo]

That's highly debatable. Have you seen what's on TV these days?

It was 30 years before that really happened though

[mustang_sallad]

This discussion wouldn't have feared off topic if Ford was planning to have a competitive EV by 2017 or even 2018. Hopefully they at least offer some more interesting PHEVs in the meantime.

 

Also - the name is a little cheesy. i just assumed Ford wanted to stop Tesla from grabbing the whole alphabet, I didn't think Ford would actually use it themselves.