Farley with Auto News: EV Plans and More

[Harley Lover]

28 minutes ago, jpd80 said:

The rub will start earlier than that, the arrival of Mexican built BEV Explorer and Aviator will definitely have an impact on CAP production and staffing. I can see the conversation between UAW leaders and Ford being very interesting. Not long after that, the same thing will happen with Louisville once Oakville comes on line, UAW leaders are going to be asking what replacement products are planed for those plants……

 

The new battery plant(s) in Kentucky are near Louisville. It would make tons more sense to refit Louisville to BEV than Chicago, for multiple reasons including build quality, quality of workforce, and of course proximity to the battery facility and the cost savings that will accrue from that proximity.

 

The really interesting question is which facilities do Ford plan to supply from Kentucky. OAC? Louisville? Others? Once that question is answered, questions about which legacy facilities will get BEV conversions will also be answered. And don't forget - more battery plants are coming.

[Harley Lover]

16 hours ago, Deanh said:

ANNOUNCEMENTS ARE GREAT...Just ask Elon....its when they actually become a PRODUCED reality that's important....don't tell that to everyone investing in Lucid and Rivian though....

 

You are kidding yourself if you don't think GM are well down the path with Brightdrop (or whatever it's called). The product is coming and represents a real threat to Ford (although I don't believe GM have the knowledge or relationships in this segment that Ford have). It will be interesting to see if Ford do with Transit EV what they are doing with F150 EV, which is to move to a true EV skateboard chassis as soon as they can. I don't know if Ford sees the current Transit EV as a transitional product (ala current F150 EV) - GM's approach is to go straight to the dedicated EV chassis, so if they're right, Ford will have to move quickly.

[Gurgeh]

5 hours ago, Footballfan said:

FRAP is not going anywhere and is supposed to get an EV in a few years from what I have been told.  Closing Chicago would cause a rub with the UAW unless a new plant is built nearby.  

Closing Chicago would do a lot to improve Ford's quality of product. That place is probably unfixable.

[silvrsvt]

Going back to what I said before-

 

The BlueOval City Plant makes sense for the F-150 because its Ford's most vital product and also helps open up production space for a BEV Navigator and Expedition while the other two plants transition from ICE to BEV down the road, but once things fully switch over to BEV (maybe in 2035 or so), I guess BOC could retool for something else since I don't see the need for 3 plants making the F-150 alone. 

 

As for other plants going BEV only-given the auto industry works slowly, I see no reason why say Louisville can't retool in 2028 or so for BEV products after the wind down of ICE Escape production and flipping the switch to BEV cars.

 

As for other plants like Oakville and Cuautitlan that are either building are almost building BEV products...how do BEV plants scale vs ICE plants? Can they build more product with BEVs vs ICE...say 200K ICE units are needed to break even at a plant....can they build 300K units at the same plant with the same amount of shifts with a BEV, if demand warrants it?  

 

Not sure how Cuautitlan would be able to handle say 350K units a year between an Explorer/Aviator and Mach E, so these cries of having Chicago close because of a BEV Explorer might be unfounded. I'm sure that some plants will be realigned or shut down depending on the situation though. 

I think Ford is taking a two tier approach for the rest of this decade and will rip the band aid off early next decade with going BEV only where it makes sense and ICE will be PHEV or HEV only in products that do heavy duty towing. I still think there is a lot of hesitantly with a lot of people with BEVs but also by the time we hit the end of the decade that much of that will be addressed. 

[akirby]

8 hours ago, Footballfan said:

FRAP is not going anywhere and is supposed to get an EV in a few years from what I have been told. 

It’s useless in the long term plan unless they tear it down and rebuild it.  Can’t have a plant that can only build cars going forward.

 

8 hours ago, Footballfan said:

 Closing Chicago would cause a rub with the UAW unless a new plant is built nearby.  

Really?  Do you not remember Atlanta (Hapeville)?

[Pina]

Lot's of exciting things happening and while I also can't imagine an entire switch to electric, never say never!

[Chrisgb]

35 minutes ago, akirby said:

It’s useless in the long term plan unless they tear it down and rebuild it.  Can’t have a plant that can only build cars going forward.

 

I'm not familiar with the details or constraints of FRAP other than it''s a big building, could it possibly be converted to an electric drive motor plant, or feeder plant: chips, stampings, etc?

[silvrsvt]

12 minutes ago, Chrisgb said:

I'm not familiar with the details or constraints of FRAP other than it''s a big building, could it possibly be converted to an electric drive motor plant, or feeder plant: chips, stampings, etc?

 

The issue is that its not tall enough to accommodate CUV type vehicles

[Footballfan]

1 hour ago, akirby said:

It’s useless in the long term plan unless they tear it down and rebuild it.  Can’t have a plant that can only build cars going forward.

 

Really?  Do you not remember Atlanta (Hapeville)?

FRAP twice had expansions and paint shops canceled by the idiots in charge.  FRAP was to have built the Mach E and other EVs. The body and final/trim lines can handle CUVs.  The issue is the paint shop.  

 

I remember well the plant closings, but they happened when Ford was nearing bankruptcy.  Big difference when Ford us making large profits (ask gm about this in 2019). 

[Footballfan]

1 hour ago, Chrisgb said:

I'm not familiar with the details or constraints of FRAP other than it''s a big building, could it possibly be converted to an electric drive motor plant, or feeder plant: chips, stampings, etc?

The paint shop is the Achilles heel.  Ovens and conveyors are too short to accommodate vehicles over a certain height. 

Edited December 10, 2021 by Footballfan

[akirby]

3 hours ago, Footballfan said:

FRAP twice had expansions and paint shops canceled by the idiots in charge.  FRAP was to have built the Mach E and other EVs. The body and final/trim lines can handle CUVs.  The issue is the paint shop.  

 

I remember well the plant closings, but they happened when Ford was nearing bankruptcy.  Big difference when Ford us making large profits (ask gm about this in 2019). 

Just saying it wouldnt be the first time and as long as Ford is adding jobs elsewhere and allows employees to move I don’t think the union will object.  Especially given how much of a shit show that plant appears to be.

[Footballfan]

25 minutes ago, akirby said:

Just saying it wouldnt be the first time and as long as Ford is adding jobs elsewhere and allows employees to move I don’t think the union will object.  Especially given how much of a shit show that plant appears to be.

Hey, if Ford can waste $750 million on a choo-choo train station in Detroit, they can invest the same amount in one of their plants. 

[rmc523]

19 hours ago, akirby said:

I don’t understand why existing plants can’t be converted to BEV.

 

I don't see any reason they can't.

 

7 hours ago, Harley Lover said:

 

You are kidding yourself if you don't think GM are well down the path with Brightdrop (or whatever it's called). The product is coming and represents a real threat to Ford (although I don't believe GM have the knowledge or relationships in this segment that Ford have). It will be interesting to see if Ford do with Transit EV what they are doing with F150 EV, which is to move to a true EV skateboard chassis as soon as they can. I don't know if Ford sees the current Transit EV as a transitional product (ala current F150 EV) - GM's approach is to go straight to the dedicated EV chassis, so if they're right, Ford will have to move quickly.

 

Yeah I'm sure longer term Ford will wind up with something similar.  GM is in a position with lesser Express sales that they're willing to jump way out there, while Ford has to maintain the existing Transit sales while also pushing forward.

[fuzzymoomoo]

8 hours ago, Harley Lover said:

I don't know if Ford sees the current Transit EV as a transitional product (ala current F150 EV)

If nothing else the transit has been on sale here for (I think) 8 years already without a complete overhaul so I would have to believe it is a transitional product. I can't see a scenario where it isn't. 

[fuzzymoomoo]

5 hours ago, silvrsvt said:

 

The issue is that its not tall enough to accommodate CUV type vehicles

Not to mention the machinery inside is very old compared to pretty much every other Ford plant. I have heard some rumors of some work being done, and relatively soon, to alleviate some of those space issues but at this point they’re exactly that, rumors. 

[fuzzymoomoo]

4 hours ago, Footballfan said:

The body and final/trim lines can handle CUVs.

Nope. Not all of them can. 

[fuzzymoomoo]

1 hour ago, akirby said:

Just saying it wouldnt be the first time and as long as Ford is adding jobs elsewhere and allows employees to move I don’t think the union will object.  Especially given how much of a shit show that plant appears to be.

That's always been a thing written into the union contracts as long as I've worked there. The tricky part becomes how many actually take the deal to follow their work vs. how many just take a retirement buyout vs. how many expect the worst and hope for the best and lets the situation play out as it will (I took option 3 when MAP shut down to retool for Ranger and it paid off for me in the long run). 

[jpd80]

8 hours ago, silvrsvt said:

Going back to what I said before-

 

The BlueOval City Plant makes sense for the F-150 because its Ford's most vital product and also helps open up production space for a BEV Navigator and Expedition while the other two plants transition from ICE to BEV down the road, but once things fully switch over to BEV (maybe in 2035 or so), I guess BOC could retool for something else since I don't see the need for 3 plants making the F-150 alone. 

 

As for other plants going BEV only-given the auto industry works slowly, I see no reason why say Louisville can't retool in 2028 or so for BEV products after the wind down of ICE Escape production and flipping the switch to BEV cars.

 

As for other plants like Oakville and Cuautitlan that are either building are almost building BEV products...how do BEV plants scale vs ICE plants? Can they build more product with BEVs vs ICE...say 200K ICE units are needed to break even at a plant....can they build 300K units at the same plant with the same amount of shifts with a BEV, if demand warrants it?  

 

Not sure how Cuautitlan would be able to handle say 350K units a year between an Explorer/Aviator and Mach E, so these cries of having Chicago close because of a BEV Explorer might be unfounded. I'm sure that some plants will be realigned or shut down depending on the situation though. 

I think Ford is taking a two tier approach for the rest of this decade and will rip the band aid off early next decade with going BEV only where it makes sense and ICE will be PHEV or HEV only in products that do heavy duty towing. I still think there is a lot of hesitantly with a lot of people with BEVs but also by the time we hit the end of the decade that much of that will be addressed. 

I think you have your answer with Ford delaying BEV Explorer/Aviator by 18 months,  it’s clear to me that the embrace of BEVs is happening much faster than Ford expected and production constraints may be forcing changes……

 

If it’s true that Ford is delaying BEV Explorer/Aviator by 18 months that’s massive, and hard to believe unless their EV plan was massively flawed…

 

It could also be a sign that Ford is deep in reviewing its plans for the next five years, you could be right with Ford being forced to consider reconfiguring one or two ICE plants it was hoping to shut down…….

Ford has to consider the UAW workers in this and bring across as many as possible to BEV production 

Edited December 10, 2021 by jpd80

[bzcat]

Michigan: Ranger, Bronco

Detroit: F-150, F-150 Lightning (in a separate line)

Flat Rock: Mustang

Ohio: E-series, Medium Duty, Stripped Chassis

Kansas City, F-150, Transit, Transit EV

Chicago, Explorer, Aviator

Kentucky: Super Duty, Expedition, Navigator

Louisville: Escape, Corsair

Tennessee: TE2 F-150 Lightning

Oakville: Edge (on death watch), Nautilus, MEB utilities (Escape EV, Corsair EV)

Hermosilo: Bronco Sport, Maverick, Transit Connect 

Cuatitlan: Mach E

 

We can speculate a lot but these are know facts that likely won't change:

• 2023 Mustang will stay in Flat Rock and remain there until 2028 or so when the future of Mustang is up in the air.
• MEB to Oakville is settled.
• TE2 F-150 to Tennessee is settled although in the long run, Ford will probably need another plant to build TE2. 
• Michigan seems set with T6 in the near term - Next gen Ranger will run from 2023 to about 2030. 
• Next gen Transit (2025?) will probably be EV only and have different platform so Ford will need a different plant to build it while Kansas City keep the existing one.
• Louisville will be freed up before 2030 for something else. 
• E-series and Medium Duty won't survive in current form until 2030 so either Ford gives up that business or they are already working on a medium duty EV. Either way, Ohio is going to be available for something before 2030.
• Hermosilo is good until the end of C2 around 2030.
• Cautitlan is locked in on GE1 Mach E until 2025 or so. Next gen Mach E stay there? Unclear

[rmc523]

24 minutes ago, bzcat said:

Michigan: Ranger, Bronco

Detroit: F-150, F-150 Lightning (in a separate line)

Flat Rock: Mustang

Ohio: E-series, Medium Duty, Stripped Chassis

Kansas City, F-150, Transit, Transit EV

Chicago, Explorer, Aviator

Kentucky: Super Duty, Expedition, Navigator

Louisville: Escape, Corsair

Tennessee: TE2 F-150 Lightning

Oakville: Edge (on death watch), Nautilus, MEB utilities (Escape EV, Corsair EV)

Hermosilo: Bronco Sport, Maverick, Transit Connect 

Cuatitlan: Mach E

 

We can speculate a lot but these are know facts that likely won't change:

• 2023 Mustang will stay in Flat Rock and remain there until 2028 or so when the future of Mustang is up in the air.
• MEB to Oakville is settled.
• TE2 F-150 to Tennessee is settled although in the long run, Ford will probably need another plant to build TE2. 
• Michigan seems set with T6 in the near term - Next gen Ranger will run from 2023 to about 2030. 
• Next gen Transit (2025?) will probably be EV only and have different platform so Ford will need a different plant to build it while Kansas City keep the existing one.
• Louisville will be freed up before 2030 for something else. 
• E-series and Medium Duty won't survive in current form until 2030 so either Ford gives up that business or they are already working on a medium duty EV. Either way, Ohio is going to be available for something before 2030.
• Hermosilo is good until the end of C2 around 2030.
• Cautitlan is locked in on GE1 Mach E until 2025 or so. Next gen Mach E stay there? Unclear

 

I don't see them transitioning to BEV ONLY Transit that quickly.  I see it being like F-Series, where both ICE and BEV will be sold simultaneously (though different platforms) to preserve the existing business while also "future proofing" it with an EV model.

 

Keep ICE Transit on the current platform and revise it slightly.

Also introduce a BEV-optimized platform "e-Transit".

[bzcat]

11 minutes ago, rmc523 said:

 

I don't see them transitioning to BEV ONLY Transit that quickly.  I see it being like F-Series, where both ICE and BEV will be sold simultaneously (though different platforms) to preserve the existing business while also "future proofing" it with an EV model.

 

Keep ICE Transit on the current platform and revise it slightly.

Also introduce a BEV-optimized platform "e-Transit".

 

I didn't say the ICE Transit was going away. I said the next gen Transit will likely be BEV only and Ford will keep the existing version going in Kansas City.

 

We are saying the exactly same thing. 

[rmc523]

3 hours ago, bzcat said:

 

I didn't say the ICE Transit was going away. I said the next gen Transit will likely be BEV only and Ford will keep the existing version going in Kansas City.

 

We are saying the exactly same thing. 

 

Whoops, missed the end of the line there.

[sullynd]

I wonder if Fords plans to use VWs MEB has changed. 

[AGR]

17 hours ago, Harley Lover said:

 

You are kidding yourself if you don't think GM are well down the path with Brightdrop (or whatever it's called). The product is coming and represents a real threat to Ford (although I don't believe GM have the knowledge or relationships in this segment that Ford have). It will be interesting to see if Ford do with Transit EV what they are doing with F150 EV, which is to move to a true EV skateboard chassis as soon as they can. I don't know if Ford sees the current Transit EV as a transitional product (ala current F150 EV) - GM's approach is to go straight to the dedicated EV chassis, so if they're right, Ford will have to move quickly.

 

I guess you haven't gotten the BON memo that GM is doomed to failure {sarcasm}.

[akirby]

43 minutes ago, AGR said:

 

I guess you haven't gotten the BON memo that GM is doomed to failure {sarcasm}.

 Volt/ELR or Fusion/MKZ/Cmax Energi?  
Bolt or Mach-E?  

Hummer or F150 Lightning/E Transit?