Electric Vehicle Discussion Thread - Ford Related

[akirby]

6 hours ago, jasonj80 said:

For Ford branded vehicles, if Ford created a new direct to consumer brand that sold different versions of the vehicles there is nothing Ford Dealers could do other than cry that they killed their golden goose. A lot of this case law was settled of what was and wasn't allowed during the GM bankruptcy.

Yes that would be the workaround but then you lose brand equity especially with pickups.

[jasonj80]

40 minutes ago, akirby said:

Yes that would be the workaround but then you lose brand equity especially with pickups.

That is the big issue, you're building a brand from scratch. 

[fuzzymoomoo]

5 hours ago, jasonj80 said:

That is the big issue, you're building a brand from scratch. 

Last time Ford tried that it didn't exactly go well… 

[justins]

If Ford cannot get rid of the dealers, they'll simply either not renew the agreements, or buy them out and convert dealerships to agencies like Mercedes and Honda have here in Oz, which I really think is a test case for the rest of the world.

 

The manufacturer owns the dealer license, and the dealership owns no stock. They're simply a Point of Sale and pickup. There's no haggling, as the prices are fixed. There's also no markups. 

[jasonj80]

13 hours ago, fuzzymoomoo said:

Last time Ford tried that it didn't exactly go well… 

What do you mean?

[akirby]

12 hours ago, justins said:

If Ford cannot get rid of the dealers, they'll simply either not renew the agreements, or buy them out and convert dealerships to agencies like Mercedes and Honda have here in Oz, which I really think is a test case for the rest of the world.

 

The manufacturer owns the dealer license, and the dealership owns no stock. They're simply a Point of Sale and pickup. There's no haggling, as the prices are fixed. There's also no markups. 

I don’t thinK U.S. Franchises and state franchise laws work that way.

[Havelock]

20 hours ago, jasonj80 said:

That is the big issue, you're building a brand from scratch. 

What if they called it Mercury?  Is that still covered by dealership agreements?

[fuzzymoomoo]

2 hours ago, jasonj80 said:

What do you mean?

Because that was a rousing success ?

[jpd80]

14 hours ago, justins said:

If Ford cannot get rid of the dealers, they'll simply either not renew the agreements, or buy them out and convert dealerships to agencies like Mercedes and Honda have here in Oz, which I really think is a test case for the rest of the world.

 

The manufacturer owns the dealer license, and the dealership owns no stock. They're simply a Point of Sale and pickup. There's no haggling, as the prices are fixed. There's also no markups. 

At some point, dealers will realise that they’re not required for BEVs, there’s less money at point of sales (online direct with Ford?) and way less service required, no more regular engine oil & filter changes, updates can be done over the air so far less work for dealers to do and charge. I can see dealerships wasting away as work dries up, Ford doesn’t have to do anything..and that’s probably the best way to circumvent. any state franchise laws….

they’ll go the way of the tv repair tech or VCR service tech….

Edited November 9, 2022 by jpd80

[Gurgeh]

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/ford-gm-talks-posco-investing-040517529.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAIgi-2WuifxPomhDyI7VNZAPGL6FEXbLowjvB3KDtrVujglp3Wr6Bb-hf33AvVC8dL8_qymefbnOtyWuf2Vg1kgN1vzjhvRSXrgRUga_JBqT4C7Wm9g-13bJkwgJnoGzqfn_bAMnmzgXbJb2PQBj2tXupbE6G2Zc1rBIj34zzX99

 

Ford, GM in Talks With Posco Chemical on Battery Metal Hubs

 

(Bloomberg) -- Ford Motor Co., General Motors Co., and Stellantis NV are in talks with South Korea’s Posco Chemical Co. about potentially investing in plants producing electric-vehicle battery materials in North America, according to people familiar with the matter.

 

The factories would make cathode-active or anode materials -- key ingredients for determining the energy density of lithium-ion batteries used in cars -- said the people, asking not to be identified because the discussions are private. The talks are preliminary and may not necessarily lead to a deal, according to the people. Posco Chemical is also talking to other automakers about similar investments, they added...

 

GM is investing $35 billion to make its lineup fully electric by 2035, while Ford is plowing $50 billion into its pivot to EVs, with plans to build 2 million a year by 2026. Stellantis, the maker of Ram pickups and Jeep off-roaders, is targeting 75 fully-electric models by 2030 with annual sales of 5 million vehicles.

 

This rapid shift to EVs is making sourcing batteries -- and the metals used in them -- a key competitive battleground for automakers. In recent months the likes of Honda Motor Co., Ford and Stellantis have teamed with Korean battery makers LG Energy Solution Ltd., SK Innovation Co. and Samsung SDI Co. to invest billions in North American battery plants.

 

The race has only intensified as the US government pressures automakers to slash their reliance on Chinese batteries and materials -- a major constraint given that China is home to the world’s two biggest EV battery makers and is a key source of battery metals such as lithium, cobalt and graphite...

[tarheels23]

some battery info:

https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/ev-battery-makers-race-develop-cheaper-cell-materials-skirting-china-2022-11-15/

 

"Over time, more (battery) chemistries will come out," said Linda Zhang, chief engineer on Ford's (F.N) F150 Lightning electric pickup truck. "It would be silly not to take advantage of those chemistries."

 

Aside from a cost advantage, Chen says Amandarry's batteries can charge really fast — 80% in 15 minutes.

 

 

Faradion's Quinn said the company's batteries are also already competitive with LFP cells and it has formed a joint venture for energy storage with agribusiness giant ICM Australia.

 

Quinn said at relatively low scale Faradion's batteries should be a third less expensive than iron-based LFP batteries.

 

He said Faradion has had discussions with "most every major automotive company."

"Within the next three to five years, you'll see (our batteries) on the road."

 

Edited November 15, 2022 by tarheels23

[Gurgeh]

He's said this before, but he is implying here that much of the 40% loss of labor could be made up by vertical integration, bringing in house much of what is currently bought from suppliers (who then presumably would face major job cuts). But he is not saying that the new labor needed for bringing the work in house will necessarily be provided by those who will face redundancy in their current jobs. Farley's comments are from a conference he attended on Tuesday.

 

There's a paywall, but you should be able to get past it by answering a single survey question. I tried to include pull quotes, but was successful in cutting and pasting only the headers.

https://www.ft.com/content/8df00b42-4e3f-4a45-b665-2726720105e0

 

 

Ford chief warns electric vehicles require 40% less labour

‘Storm clouds’ face workers as US carmaker pursues aggressive sales goals

 

 

[tarheels23]

https://fordauthority.com/2022/11/u-s-ev-battery-supply-chain-will-be-self-sufficient-by-2030-report/

 

not much on specifics but some new projections

 

In order to achieve this goal of reaching a self-sufficient European and U.S. EV battery supply chain that would end the current dependence on China, the forecast notes that both would need to invest more than $160 billion – with $78.2 billion going toward batteries, $60.4 billion on various components, $13.5 billion on the mining of lithium, nickel, and cobalt, and $12.1 billion on the refining of those materials.

[jpd80]

On 11/17/2022 at 11:00 PM, Gurgeh said:

He's said this before, but he is implying here that much of the 40% loss of labor could be made up by vertical integration, bringing in house much of what is currently bought from suppliers (who then presumably would face major job cuts). But he is not saying that the new labor needed for bringing the work in house will necessarily be provided by those who will face redundancy in their current jobs. Farley's comments are from a conference he attended on Tuesday.

 

There's a paywall, but you should be able to get past it by answering a single survey question. I tried to include pull quotes, but was successful in cutting and pasting only the headers.

https://www.ft.com/content/8df00b42-4e3f-4a45-b665-2726720105e0

 

 

Ford chief warns electric vehicles require 40% less labour

‘Storm clouds’ face workers as US carmaker pursues aggressive sales goals

 

 

As we know, a lot of labor in ICE build goes into engine and transmission assembly, so imagine that 90% of that labor is scrapped and replaced by mostly automated electric motor and single speed transmission manufacturing. I can see massive upheaval in the supplier chains that results in more lost jobs for ICE parts but replaced by new jobs in battery manufacture and assembly.
 

Maybe this is what Ford is not building BOC in Michigan, they need to cut the cord with a lot of suppliers, internal and external. 

Edited November 24, 2022 by jpd80

[jpd80]

17 hours ago, tarheels23 said:

https://fordauthority.com/2022/11/u-s-ev-battery-supply-chain-will-be-self-sufficient-by-2030-report/

 

not much on specifics but some new projections

 

In order to achieve this goal of reaching a self-sufficient European and U.S. EV battery supply chain that would end the current dependence on China, the forecast notes that both would need to invest more than $160 billion – with $78.2 billion going toward batteries, $60.4 billion on various components, $13.5 billion on the mining of lithium, nickel, and cobalt, and $12.1 billion on the refining of those materials.

Developments in South America have shown that extracting Lithium from brine wells results in 95% pure Lithium carbonate, ready for use in battery manufacture. Man if this gets going, all the hard rock lithium mining will end in the next few years as brine well extraction of refined lithium will be a massive cost saving and leave Chinese lithium refineries  at a big disadvantage…

[AGR]

On 11/24/2022 at 12:31 PM, jpd80 said:

Developments in South America have shown that extracting Lithium from brine wells results in 95% pure Lithium carbonate, ready for use in battery manufacture. Man if this gets going, all the hard rock lithium mining will end in the next few years as brine well extraction of refined lithium will be a massive cost saving and leave Chinese lithium refineries  at a big disadvantage…

 

General Motors will be doing the same in California near the Salton Sea.

[jpd80]

5 hours ago, AGR said:

 

General Motors will be doing the same in California near the Salton Sea.

The three companies pioneering the process are  Berkshire Hathaway Energy, Controlled Thermal and EnergySource Minerals. I think GM and Ford will be happy to purchase near pure Lithium from them or  actually, any other North American battery manufacturers. This is why China is getting worried by North America looking away from Chinese battery suppliers…..

Edited November 26, 2022 by jpd80

[jpd80]

American industry is a big flywheel, it takes a while for all the suppliers to ramp up but I can see all the green shoots beginning to pop out on the electric vehicle industry as well as the Tesla Power which is supplying power utilities loads of LFP battery banks that will make a shift to 100% renewables possible. Don’t take this as just green rhetoric, industry is shifting much quicker than most observers  thought.

 

Not meaning that some gasoline and diesel sales won’t continue but maybe there’s a higher expectation of superior fuel economy by way of hybrid or PHEV with both. Where Europe fails with hybrid bans, America succeeds in transition of most road users in a generation.

Edited November 28, 2022 by jpd80

[rperez817]

Ford public service announcement for cold weather operation of F-150 Lightning. Tips to help maximize the range of your F-150 Lightning in cold weather during its first winter | Ford Media Center

The Ford F-150® Lightning™ pickup has been tested in extreme cold conditions. It endured months of real-world winter driving in Alaska and Michigan’s Upper Peninsula. Its battery has been subjected to temperatures as high as 140°F to as low as minus 40°F in Ford’s atmospheric test chambers. However, all-electric vehicles experience energy decreases in cold temperatures due to battery cell chemistry. Temperatures below 40°F cause the electrolyte fluid to become sluggish, limiting how much power is available to discharge and how quickly the vehicle’s battery can charge. As F-150 Lightning customers across the United States and Canada begin their first winter with their new electric pickup, Ford wants to help make them aware that in low temperatures they could see a significant reduction in range, which is normal.

To help maximize your F-150 Lightning range in winter, here are some tips below:

1. Park your F-150 Lightning in a garage whenever possible.

2. Keep your F-150 Lightning plugged in when parked.

3. If planning a longer commute, precondition your vehicle using departure times to warm the battery while plugged-in by using the FordPass app or your trucks center screen.

4. If equipped, use the heated seats and steering wheel as primary heat to reduce energy consumed by HVAC.

5. When charging, turn off the heater if possible, or lower the temperature enough to remain comfortable. (Especially when using DCFC)

6. If your F-150 Lightning is covered with snow, brush all the snow off before driving to eliminate extra weight and drag.

7. Keep driving speeds moderate in cold temperature as high speeds use more energy.

8. Ensure your tires are at the proper pressure.

 

[Rick73]

4 hours ago, rperez817 said:

As F-150 Lightning customers across the United States and Canada begin their first winter with their new electric pickup, Ford wants to help make them aware that in low temperatures they could see a significant reduction in range, which is normal. 

 

Tips seem targeted at F-150 Lightning customers, yet content is appropriate for any electric vehicle.  Timing is also interesting because customers should have already been aware of winter’s affect, or been told prior to purchase, not reminded afterwards.  It almost seems like negative marketing, as if Ford is intentionally trying to reduce demand.

[akirby]

1 hour ago, Rick73 said:

 

Tips seem targeted at F-150 Lightning customers, yet content is appropriate for any electric vehicle.  Timing is also interesting because customers should have already been aware of winter’s affect, or been told prior to purchase, not reminded afterwards.  It almost seems like negative marketing, as if Ford is intentionally trying to reduce demand.

Its just a reminder.

[jpd80]

On 11/9/2022 at 3:12 PM, justins said:

If Ford cannot get rid of the dealers, they'll simply either not renew the agreements, or buy them out and convert dealerships to agencies like Mercedes and Honda have here in Oz, which I really think is a test case for the rest of the world.

 

The manufacturer owns the dealer license, and the dealership owns no stock. They're simply a Point of Sale and pickup. There's no haggling, as the prices are fixed. There's also no markups. 

None of the dealers are actually part of Ford Blue, the new part of Ford. So if they don’t pay the 1.2 million and do the required upgrades, they will be locked out of selling more than a handful of electric vehicles a year. I have a feeling that even if dealer sign up and do all the things that Ford  says, they’ll struggle with BEVs because a lot of the servicing goes away, mostly their reason for existing…

Edited November 30, 2022 by jpd80

[Sherminator98]

One thing that I’ve been thinking about is how are auto makers and well Ford are going to differentiate their EV products within existing nameplates. 
 

Using the Escape as an example-you have a small gas engine, a larger one for higher end models and two different hybrids. 
 

With that said, electric motors offer a lot of performance due to their nature, so the larger/performance ICE becomes redundant. The P/HEV models just go way since they aren’t needed. 

I’m guessing the entry level models would get smaller battery packs, but I’d also assume that most customers would want at least 300 mile range, which is roughly what a gas powered engine would get per tank. The higher end models would get more kWh storage for more range. Then add in single or dual motor (which doesn’t seem to impact range that much) if you want AWD. 
 

 

[akirby]

1 hour ago, silvrsvt said:

One thing that I’ve been thinking about is how are auto makers and well Ford are going to differentiate their EV products within existing nameplates. 
 

Using the Escape as an example-you have a small gas engine, a larger one for higher end models and two different hybrids. 
 

With that said, electric motors offer a lot of performance due to their nature, so the larger/performance ICE becomes redundant. The P/HEV models just go way since they aren’t needed. 

I’m guessing the entry level models would get smaller battery packs, but I’d also assume that most customers would want at least 300 mile range, which is roughly what a gas powered engine would get per tank. The higher end models would get more kWh storage for more range. Then add in single or dual motor (which doesn’t seem to impact range that much) if you want AWD. 

But you can get different performance based on the number of motors and motor output.  With Mach-E you have 70 kWh single motor, 70 kWh dual motor (e AWD), 91 kWh dual motor and a performance dual motor.   So it’s a combination of range and power but even the entry level model will have great performance out of the box.

[Sherminator98]

3 hours ago, akirby said:

So it’s a combination of range and power but even the entry level model will have great performance out of the box.

That is the issue-most people won’t need or want a car that has a 3-4 second or less 0-60s

 

its the point of diminishing returns.