Electric Vehicle Discussion Thread - Ford Related

[BarneyFord]

10 hours ago, Rick73 said:

 

I’m not sure what the intent of that MPGe conversion the government came up with was meant to represent to average Americans.  It’s not real energy efficiency comparison, or real CO2 efficiency comparison, so likely meant as a political tool.  I don’t like it, and find it intentionally misleading.

The things a company that owned that van would care about are total cost of operation and does the van do the job (fit the purpose). 

[silvrsvt]

6 hours ago, 7Mary3 said:

 

Keep in mind that Mustang sales have dropped from over 160,000 in 2006 to less than 50,000 in 2022.  It's clearly a segment in decline, and 50,000 units isn't really enough to justify a unique platform.  If the trend keeps up Ford will of course abandon the segment as well, which is why I think it was a good move to introduce a BEV 'Mustang' to keep the name alive.

 

Its also not fair to compare what was one of the best selling years for the Mustang (In a very long time) to a year that was severely impacted by supply chain issues and everything else going on. 

[Rick73]

1 hour ago, BarneyFord said:

The things a company that owned that van would care about are total cost of operation and does the van do the job (fit the purpose). 

Agree businesses care most about costs, and if vehicle falls short of needs, it will impact bottom line in other ways.  During that “real-world” driving  test they found it required 43 minutes to charge from 10 to 80 percent, which would add roughly 60 miles of range.  For a work van that remains very close to home and charges only at night, that’s not bad.  However, if driving longer distances daily, economics could change quickly if spending nearly as much time charging as driving.

 

The van doesn’t appear to lend itself to longer trips, plus remote charging costs are high at over 30 cents per kWh.  And if van is only driven very short distances, then fuel savings over ICE Transit are not going to add up to much savings anyway.

[twintornados]

On 7/29/2023 at 2:13 AM, 7Mary3 said:

 

Keep in mind that Mustang sales have dropped from over 160,000 in 2006 to less than 50,000 in 2022.  It's clearly a segment in decline, and 50,000 units isn't really enough to justify a unique platform.  If the trend keeps up Ford will of course abandon the segment as well, which is why I think it was a good move to introduce a BEV 'Mustang' to keep the name alive.

 

1974-78 sales totaled 1.1 million cars

[silvrsvt]

10 hours ago, twintornados said:

 

1974-78 sales totaled 1.1 million cars

 

Completely different market too. Cars didn't last as long nor where they owned as long. Just look at used car prices over the past 20 years or so. I remember when I first started driving a decent used car was about $1500 or so in the early 1990s for something a few years old. My nephew got a 2018 Mazda 3, a decent entry level car for $17K a couple months ago (and promptly totalled it two weeks after he got it. Thankfully he was ok)

[rperez817]

On 5/25/2023 at 6:18 PM, Captainp4 said:

https://twitter.com/i/spaces/1eaJbrAPnBVJX?s=20&fbclid=IwAR0S12zJO2oZs0I5_R6IY4fMa3_OhLcBRDoFn3hvdUwf8AkmSkUKA3TFqKU

 

On 5/25/2023 at 6:25 PM, rperez817 said:

Thanks Captainp4, this is great news! Here is the official Ford press release regarding the company's agreement with Tesla. Ford EV Customers To Gain Access to 12,000 Tesla Superchargers; Company to Add North American Charging Standard Port in Future EVs | Ford Media Center

 

Bill Visnic of SAE (the organization responsible for developing the J1772 CCS connector standard for DC Fast Charging) wrote the following editorial in the August 2023 issue of the journal Automotive Engineering.

 

It was impossible to miss in late May what surely will be one of the year’s highest-profile electrification stories. Ford, quickly followed by GM and many others, announced they will adopt the Tesla-developed “North American Charging Standard” (NACS) EV charging connector. The shift ostensibly displaces the SAE International-developed Standard J1772 “Combined Charging System” (CCS) connector that has been the predominant connector standard for just about every EV that isn’t a Tesla.

This was the Holy Grail for Ford, GM and others anxious to reassure current and future EV purchase “intenders,” because the Supercharger network is a model of ubiquity and reliability, while the charging “experience” from all the other public-charging providers pretty much stinks. 

The NACS connector isn’t what makes Superchargers great. It’s that Tesla sweated the details and laid down scads of hard cash for proper site selection and to dig trenches, lay cables, spec transformers and the myriad hidden engineering aspects that are table stakes for a genuinely robust charging network.

[rperez817]

Ford is partnering with EcoProBM and SK to build a new plant in Quebec that will make NCM based cathode active materials for BEV batteries. EcoProBM, SK On, Ford Investing in Québec; Building Cathode Plant to Solidify EV supply chain in North America | Ford Media Center

 

Highlights.

• EcoProBM, SK On and Ford are planning to invest C$1.2 billion to build a cathode manufacturing facility in Bécancour, Québec
• EcoPro CAM Canada LP will create approximately 345 new jobs; production is targeted to begin in the first half of 2026

[Rick73]

19 hours ago, rperez817 said:

Ford is partnering with EcoProBM and SK to build a new plant in Quebec that will make NCM based cathode active materials for BEV batteries. 

The NCM chemistry is a bit of a surprise to me since I thought manufacturers were leaning towards lithium iron phosphate.  I suppose greater range remains an NCM advantage, particularly for more expensive vehicles that can better absorb the price premium.  I had to look up “core shell gradient (CSG) technology” to see what it is, but can’t find much on degree it may improve performance (like energy density). 

 

https://www.greencarcongress.com/2023/08/20230818-ford.html

[silvrsvt]

Saw this earlier and found it to be interesting-goes over how Lithium Ion batteries are recycled 

 

 

[akirby]

I just watched them make Lithium batteries on how it’s made,  one day they may even power an electric car!  (2001)

[Rick73]

On subject of battery technology as it affects cost and performance, it appears Ford’s competition is also pushing ahead. The following report states the new Highlander Tesla 3 base RWD model will have 10% greater battery capacity (66 kWh), increasing range to about 300 miles.  Present Model 3 has ~60 kWh and +/- 272 miles of range using LFP battery.

 

The new M3P cells are reported well below NMC in price and have lower internal resistance compared to previous LFP cells, allowing for faster charging and acceleration from base RWD model.  Apologies if this has been discussed already since dated a while back.

 

https://www.autoevolution.com/news/the-refreshed-tesla-model-3-rwd-will-feature-catl-s-m3p-battery-cells-in-a-66-kwh-pack-217280.html

[ice-capades]

Las Vegas Review-Journal

EDITORIAL: Electric Vehicles Run on Natural Gas

https://www.reviewjournal.com/opinion/editorials/editorial-electric-vehicles-run-on-natural-gas-2891110/?utm_campaign=widget&utm_medium=latest&utm_source=opinion&utm_term=EDITORIAL%3A Electric vehicles run on natural gas

 

 

California’s electric vehicle push has increased the demand for natural gas. The global warming alarmists never mentioned that.

 

Most consumers still don’t want an electric vehicle. Despite heavy subsidies and mandates, just 6 percent of new vehicles sold last year were electric. Sales are increasing but remain behind many government and automaker goals.

 

Rather than let the market operate, the green movement wants the government to force people out of gasoline-powered vehicles. They argue this will reduce emissions and lower global temperatures.

 

Green activists promote electric vehicles, but they don’t mention that creating a lithium-ion battery for a “zero-emissions” car produces more initial emissions than a gasoline-powered vehicle. They don’t mention that fossil fuel plants provide the electricity used to mine the minerals that make those batteries. They don’t mention how often U.S. environmental groups block projects that would produce the minerals necessary to wean the nation off fossil fuels.

 

And in many cases, electric vehicle crusaders have succeeded only in substituting one form of fossil fuel use for another.

 

Las Vegas Review-Journal_2023-08-21_Opinion_Electric Vehicles Powered By Natural Gas.pdf

Edited August 21, 2023 by ice-capades
Additional Content

[rperez817]

9 hours ago, Rick73 said:

On subject of battery technology as it affects cost and performance, it appears Ford’s competition is also pushing ahead. The following report states the new Highlander Tesla 3 base RWD model will have 10% greater battery capacity (66 kWh), increasing range to about 300 miles.  Present Model 3 has ~60 kWh and +/- 272 miles of range using LFP battery.

 

The new M3P cells are reported well below NMC in price and have lower internal resistance compared to previous LFP cells, allowing for faster charging and acceleration from base RWD model.  Apologies if this has been discussed already since dated a while back.

 

https://www.autoevolution.com/news/the-refreshed-tesla-model-3-rwd-will-feature-catl-s-m3p-battery-cells-in-a-66-kwh-pack-217280.html

 

Thank you Rick73. The 2023 Tesla Model 3 I purchased recently uses 60 kWh prismatic LFP battery with cells sourced from CATL. Both the current setup and the upgrade for Model 3 Highland are perfect examples of what Jim Farley described. "Tesla maximizes use of electrons in the vehicle. No one does it better than they do. Their customers pay less for a better battery."

 

Ford has also partnered with CATL for LFP batteries and is building a manufacturing facility in south central Michigan near Battle Creek. SOP is expected in 2026. https://media.ford.com/content/fordmedia/fna/us/en/news/2023/02/13/ford-taps-michigan-for-new-lfp-battery-plant--new-battery-chemis.html

Edited August 21, 2023 by rperez817

[Rick73]

1 hour ago, rperez817 said:

Ford has also partnered with CATL for LFP batteries and is building a manufacturing facility in south central Michigan near Battle Creek.

It’s getting tough for me to keep up with changes.  I didn’t see in Ford announcement mention of chemistry other than the more common LFP, though I suppose they may not want to share more information than necessary for competitive purposes.  Hard to say.

 

LMFP chemistry appears a step up from basic lithium iron phosphate but M3P using magnesium, zinc, and aluminum “improves energy density and lifecycle”.  While the previous article mentions new Model 3 will have 10% greater battery capacity, there’s no way of knowing how much of that is due to battery chemistry.  The new Model 3 structure may be lighter, allowing greater battery mass, or maybe the entire car is heavier.  Either way if Tesla can offer greater range at lower price as rumored, it will make it harder on competitors.

 

 

https://www.autoevolution.com/news/tesla-model-3-project-highland-to-start-deliveries-in-october-will-be-more-affordable-219173.html

 

 

“The new report also confirms that the refreshed Model 3 RWD will roll off the production line with a new battery supplied by CATL. Although this was rumored to use the lithium-manganese-iron-phosphate (LMFP) chemistry, further details show that CATL will provide its latest M3P battery cells to Tesla. In the M3P cells, the iron is enriched with a mix of materials that include magnesium, zinc, and aluminum. This gives the new cells a higher energy density than LMFP cells and a longer lifecycle.”

[jpd80]

As I understand it Terniary metal batteries give longer range but are more sensitive to charging that LFP that can take near full charging over and over. It’s all about intended use and charging habits. There’s actually a bit for owners to know to get best use out of battery types.

 

Then again, all of this could be blown away by lower cost sodium batteries or future solid state batteries…..

Edited August 26, 2023 by jpd80

[rperez817]

Ford Pro announced new and expanded offerings for Level 2 AC and DC Fast Charging Stations today. Ford Pro Expands Charging Solutions Revealing New Lineup of Chargers for Commercial Customers | Ford Media Center

 

Highlights.

• Ford Pro™ adds to its charging solutions roster, reveals new Series 2 AC Charging Station 80 amp and expands DC Fast Charger options.
• The new Series 2 charger is easier to use, service, and control with detachable cable and connector, RFID reader, increased connectivity, and primed for future standards and over the air updates such as new vehicle to charger communications.
• Ford Pro is laser focused on delivering reliable charging and scaling the adoption of EVs.

[rperez817]

Earlier this week, Ford announced that it is joining forces with Honda and BMW to form a company called ChargeScape. ChargeScape will take advantage of the fact that mass adoption of BEV (as is currently the case) can improve the resliency of the electric grid. The company "will create a single, cost-effective platform connecting electric utilities, automakers and interested electric vehicle customers". BMW, Ford and Honda Agree to Create ChargeScape, a New Company Focused on Optimizing Electric Vehicle Grid Services | Ford Media Center

 

Highlights.

• ChargeScape will aim to unlock the full potential of electric vehicle (EV) technology through conveniently managed energy services never before possible with gasoline-powered vehicles – benefiting EV customers, electric utilities and automakers.
• BMW Group, Ford and Honda will leverage years of cross-industry research around the Open Vehicle-Grid Integration Platform (OVGIP) to create a single platform that will seamlessly connect electric utilities, automakers and their interested EV customers to manage energy usage for a broad pool of EVs.
• ChargeScape will aim to provide EV customers financial benefits through EV-enabled grid services, as well as reduce EV customers’ personal carbon footprints while supporting grid resiliency.

 

[Rangers09]

Last evening I experienced the negative impact of ambient temperature and use of the heater on the effective range of an electric vehicle (PHEV).

 

When in the garage at home, I have programmed the car to charge to a maximum of 85%, which gives us an average range of about 37 - 40 miles, based on current conditions and driving habits. We have made the trip we did last night multiple times, a distance of about 17.5 miles each way. Departing the garage at 85%, we normally have 15 - 20% charge remaining in the battery upon return. Previous ambient temperatures were in the 80's (F), whereas last night it was low 50's. During the summer, we obviously didn't use the heater and only used the A/C once, as the range dropped drastically.

 

Last evening, on reaching our destination, after 17.5 mls I was surprised the battery was down to 18% from departing the garage at 85%. On checking, I noted DW, when driving her car the previous day had set driver/pax cabin temperature to 70 F. On the return home last evening, I reduced the cabin temp to low and managed to get to within about 3 miles of the house before the engine kicked in. Therefore with similar driving on the same route, with the heater on it used 67% of the battery charge for 17.5 mls and with the heater off it went about 14 miles on 18% charge.

 

Not a scientific experiment, but for me a real eye opener and another significant detriment when operating an electric vehicle. Sure glad we have a PHEV and were not stuck at the side of the road with no power left. I expect the lower ambient temperature had a minimal impact on also reducing the range, but I expect more once we get into winter and temps drop to the 30's.

 

 

[rperez817]

On 6/27/2023 at 1:52 PM, rperez817 said:

Looks like Tesla got its first deal with a foreign automaker to use NACS. Volvo Cars announced today that it's going that route. Volvo joins Tesla’s NACS, will adopt the connector on future EVs | Electrek

 

Hyundai/Kia joined the NACS club yesterday for its U.S. market BEV. Hyundai, Kia to adopt Tesla EV-charging standard from 2024 in US | Reuters

[jpd80]

25 minutes ago, rperez817 said:

 

Hyundai/Kia joined the NACS club yesterday for its U.S. market BEV. Hyundai, Kia to adopt Tesla EV-charging standard from 2024 in US | Reuters

Now that multiple brands are signing up, it justifies Tesla doing a massive surge expanding its charger network, far beyond what its Tesla owners require. This is money in the bank for Tesla and financing a big expansion should be a no brainer.

[rmc523]

18 minutes ago, jpd80 said:

Now that multiple brands are signing up, it justifies Tesla doing a massive surge expanding its charger network, far beyond what its Tesla owners require. This is money in the bank for Tesla and financing a big expansion should be a no brainer.

 

18 minutes ago, jpd80 said:

Now that multiple brands are signing up, it justifies Tesla doing a massive surge expanding its charger network, far beyond what its Tesla owners require. This is money in the bank for Tesla and financing a big expansion should be a no brainer.

 

18 minutes ago, jpd80 said:

Now that multiple brands are signing up, it justifies Tesla doing a massive surge expanding its charger network, far beyond what its Tesla owners require. This is money in the bank for Tesla and financing a big expansion should be a no brainer.

echo echo echo.   Lol

[jpd80]

4 hours ago, rmc523 said:

 

 

echo echo echo.   Lol

LOL, that’s me taking in circles…..

[silvrsvt]

 

[jpd80]

The below  article is a year old but it discusses how Mach E costs $25,000 more to build that a comparable Edge. While I’m confident that the Mach E remains profitable, it’s return is modest - the big killer for Model E sector is the huge development costs, Ford can’t progressively invest $50 billion into BEV infrastructure and not expect some red ink.

 

Quote

https://www.carscoops.com/2022/06/rising-material-costs-mean-the-ford-mustang-mach-e-is-no-longer-profitable/
 

While recently speaking at the Deutsche Bank Global Automotive Conference, Ford chief financial officer John Lawler said that soaring material costs will impact future electric vehicles from the company.
 

“We actually had a positive bottom-line profit when we launched the Mach-E, commodity costs have wiped that out,” Lawler said. “You’re going to see pressure on the bottom line when we launch our EVs, they’re not going to be positive.”
 

The impact of soaring prices has had such a significant effect on Ford that a Mustang Mach-E now costs $25,000 more to produce than an equivalent combustion-powered Edge. To help mitigate costs, Lawler said that Ford is re-engineering the Mustang Mach-E on the fly to improve its margins. 

Ford is spending $50 billion to expand its introduction of EVs and plans to build 2 million annually by 2026. Lawler said that popular combustion models like the Bronco are underwriting its forthcoming EVs but added that Ford’s goal is to make money on its new EVs “as we’re scaling and we’re launching these vehicles,” Yahoo reports.

 

Prices of the Mustang Mach-E have increased this year to help somewhat offset rising material costs. For example, prices of the entry-level Standard Range RWD Select variant rose by $1,000 for the 2022 model year while prices for the Extended Range RWD California Route 1 and Premium jumped by $2,375 and $2,500 respectively. Ford had also planned to introduce an additional round of price hikes in April but opted not to, Ford Authority reports.

 

The 2023 Mustang Mach-E is just around the corner and orders are expected to open in mid-August. Limited updates are expected but we do know the tweaked EV will receive the same charging-locator system as the F-150 Lightning.

 

Edited October 16, 2023 by jpd80

[jpd80]

And now this admission from Elon Musk,

 

 

Quote

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-10-18/tesla-s-profits-take-a-hit-after-deliveries-slow-down?srnd=premium&leadSource=uverify wall
 

“We dug our own grave with Cybertruck,” Musk told analysts, referring to the level of complexity of the vehicle. “Special products that come along only once in a long while are just incredibly difficult to bring to market, to reach volume, to be prosperous.”