Jump to content

Maverick Tremor Embargo Lifted Today


Recommended Posts

On 1/1/2023 at 1:08 PM, akirby said:

Still the best looking Ford truck front end.

 

 

534389EF-F45C-4005-B9F6-189BAB0488DF.jpeg

 

My grandpa had a '77 with that same two-tone paint scheme. It was an F-350 Super Cab Camper Special with a 460. He bought it and a 20-something ft camper and took a month-long vacation to Alaska.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/30/2022 at 6:08 PM, jpd80 said:

Makes me wonder if Ford could have pulled off the Maverick utility as well, we’re they unduly pessimistic?

 

Maverick utility would have ran into inhouse competition with Kuga-plus, the 7 seat Escape that was later cancelled.

 

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/4/2023 at 4:14 AM, bzcat said:

 

Maverick utility would have ran into inhouse competition with Kuga-plus, the 7 seat Escape that was later cancelled.

You could argue that the compact Maverick pickup does that anyway, in spades (>80,000 orders)

I do and don’t agree because Ford often shuts down variety of product but multiple utilities would

be an  incremental increase, especially as exports to other regions, Ford Europe is hopeless as a

supplier for other ROW regions, most times they simply can’t supply products…..

 

In retrospect, Ford terribly underestimated its Mexican C2 production capacity requirements but

thats a whole other conversation. Ford could have used the cancelled SLP plant but Fields…..ghaaa

Edited by jpd80
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, jpd80 said:

 

In retrospect, Ford terribly underestimated its Mexican C2 production capacity requirements but

thats a whole other conversation. Ford could have used the cancelled SLP plant but Fields…..ghaaa


Huh?  Combined US sales from Mexican plants was only 215k plus some exports.  Hermosillo alone can do 350k.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, akirby said:


Huh?  Combined US sales from Mexican plants was only 215k plus some exports.  Hermosillo alone can do 350k.

Yes, the current problem wasn’t capacity limitation but once the brakes come off, Hermosillo won’t have enough capacity for Bronco Sport and Maverick, they’ve already cancelled new Transit Connect production because  of that….

 

And then, what about exports to other regions?

Edited by jpd80
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, jpd80 said:

Yes, the current problem wasn’t capacity limitation but once the brakes come off, Hermosillo won’t have enough capacity

for Bronco Sport and Maverick, they’ve already cancelled new Transit Connect production because  of that….


Apparently it has been forgotten that at one point HMO couldn’t keep up with Fusion demand and Flat Rock had to build overflow. The same thing could happen with Louisville but it would likely be Bronco Sport going there rather than the Maverick. 
 

That is, unless they can squeeze Maverick into Flat Rock. I don’t know if there would be enough margin in it to justify the expense though. 

Edited by fuzzymoomoo
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, fuzzymoomoo said:


Apparently it has been forgotten that at one point HMO couldn’t keep up with Fusion demand and Flat Rock had to build overflow. The same thing could happen with Louisville but it would likely be Bronco Sport going there rather than the Maverick. 

Bill Ford is on record for opposing any future plan where the same product is built as overflow in a second plant, F Series being the exception. Gearing up FRAP for fusion production only to shut it down a few years later left a bad taste…

 

 

33 minutes ago, fuzzymoomoo said:

That is, unless they can squeeze Maverick into Flat Rock. I don’t know if there would be enough margin in it to justify the expense though. 

It may make more sense to expand Hermosillo to 430k production like was done to Louisville when MKC was added and export to China was done in the 20 teens before Chinese production took over. Parts supply issues are killing Ford, I know they could be making and selling a ton more products with more vertical integration. Amazing how outsourcing is biting them in the ass…

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, jpd80 said:

Parts supply issues are killing Ford, I know they could be making and selling a ton more products with more vertical integration. Amazing how outsourcing is biting them in the ass…


That’s their own goddamn fault. I have zero sympathy. They had the model example of how to do it in The Rouge Complex and they decided to go in the complete opposite direction. 
 

You reap what you sow. 

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, jpd80 said:

Bill Ford is on record for opposing any future plan where the same product is built as overflow in a second plant, F Series being the exception. Gearing up FRAP for fusion production only to shut it down a few years later left a bad taste…


Yeah, well, Bill sometimes you need to do what’s best for business regardless of your personal opinion. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, fuzzymoomoo said:


That’s their own goddamn fault. I have zero sympathy. They had the model example of how to do it in The Rouge Complex and they decided to go in the complete opposite direction. 
 

You reap what you sow. 

 

Remains to be seen how well integrated Blue Oval City will be, unless those details have already been released.  Even on-site production will likely largely be by suppliers (e.g. BlueOvalSK).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, j2sys said:

 

Remains to be seen how well integrated Blue Oval City will be, unless those details have already been released.  Even on-site production will likely largely be by suppliers (e.g. BlueOvalSK).


On-site by a vendor is still better than halfway around the world. Or in some very specific cases I can’t and won’t elaborate on, a 4 hour drive. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, fuzzymoomoo said:


That’s their own goddamn fault. I have zero sympathy. They had the model example of how to do it in The Rouge Complex and they decided to go in the complete opposite direction. 
 

You reap what you sow. 

Absolutely, the last 30-40 years has seen Ford trying to cut costs and virtually removing all the the supply stability it once had. We could have a whole thread on that alone 
 

1 hour ago, fuzzymoomoo said:


Yeah, well, Bill sometimes you need to do what’s best for business regardless of your personal opinion. 

Bill Ford is no genius, the last time he ran the company was an absolute disaster, so I take his edicts

as something that’s come pre-vetted from the bureaucracy/ accountants (he has been “fed” to say and believe)
Remember that he originally predicted 25% hybrid by 2006 back in 2001 but no one could get near him with the truth.

1 hour ago, fuzzymoomoo said:


On-site by a vendor is still better than halfway around the world. Or in some very specific cases I can’t and won’t elaborate on, a 4 hour drive. 

Agree, whoever did the threat analysis regarding supply of critical parts at distance was obviously clueless.

 

The maddening thing for me is that Ford is risk averse to taking a chance with product that’s a calculated risk

but gladly sinks itself in red ink with poor quality parts and lack of supply, do they not see how much self harm

is created for years? The brass clearly have their priorities wrong, good quality ICE is needed to pay for BEV…..

Now is not the time to undermine all the potential profit earners, need as many customers as possible and “

retain as many compact sized buyers as possible with hybrids so they don’t go elsewhere….that’s the job of C2.

Edited by jpd80
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, jpd80 said:

 

The maddening thing for me is that Ford is risk averse to taking a chance with product that’s a calculated risk

but gladly sinks itself in red ink with poor quality parts and lack of supply, do they not see how much self harm

is created for years?


New products require capital be spent and diverted from other programs today.  Sacrificing quality or taking a big risk with suppliers has short term benefits but the downside is years away (and if you get lucky nothing bad happens).  But by the time the bad happens the people responsible are long gone or couldn’t care less.  It’s a common problem in large corporations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, akirby said:


New products require capital be spent and diverted from other programs today.  Sacrificing quality or taking a big risk with suppliers has short term benefits but the downside is years away (and if you get lucky nothing bad happens).  But by the time the bad happens the people responsible are long gone or couldn’t care less.  It’s a common problem in large corporations.

With respect, if Ford can sink $50 billion on its electric future, it can make sure that it’s ICE products are maintained to pay for that, adding something like the Maverick utility or increasing Hermosillo capacity are things with a relatively quick ROI, turning a profit on the $50B for BEV will take decades…

 

Please don’t fall for the propaganda that Ford is going to magically start producing 600k/yr BEVs in the next three years, the truth will start to come out in the next 12-18 months…your original skepticism on depth of BEV sales was I think, sage advice, very correct IMO….especially if the plug gets pulled on IRA.

I’ll leave it at that.

Edited by jpd80
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, jpd80 said:

With respect, if Ford can sink $50 billion on its electric future, it can make sure that it’s ICE products are maintained to pay for that, adding something like the Maverick utility or increasing Hermosillo capacity are things with a relatively quick ROI, turning a profit on the $50B for BEV will take decades…

 

Please don’t fall for the propaganda that Ford is going to magically start producing 600k/yr BEVs in the next three years, the truth will start to come out in the next 12-18 months…your original skepticism on depth of BEV sales was I think, sage advice, very correct IMO….especially if the plug gets pulled on IRA.

I’ll leave it at that.


I was just trying to explain why they make bad decisions.

 

It’s the same thing that happens at home.  You have $5k in cash.  The HVAC system really needs to be replaced but you decide it will probably last another year so you take the kids to Disney World instead.  6 months later it dies and you’re without heat for 2 weeks in the middle of winter. 
 

Or worse, you know it will fail but you’ll be leaving before that happens so you don’t care.

 

It takes extreme discipline to prioritize long term quality over short term profits and new shiny things.  And that has to come from Farley and the other executives.

 

They did make an attempt a few years ago saying the product teams would be held accountable for the lifecycle of the vehicle including future warranty costs but I suspect they didn’t change the other processes to make that effective.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, jpd80 said:

Absolutely, the last 30-40 years has seen Ford trying to cut costs and virtually removing all the the supply stability it once had. We could have a whole thread on that alone 
 

Bill Ford is no genius, the last time he ran the company was an absolute disaster, so I take his edicts

as something that’s come pre-vetted from the bureaucracy/ accountants (he has been “fed” to say and believe)
Remember that he originally predicted 25% hybrid by 2006 back in 2001 but no one could get near him with the truth.

Agree, whoever did the threat analysis regarding supply of critical parts at distance was obviously clueless.

 

The maddening thing for me is that Ford is risk averse to taking a chance with product that’s a calculated risk

but gladly sinks itself in red ink with poor quality parts and lack of supply, do they not see how much self harm

is created for years? The brass clearly have their priorities wrong, good quality ICE is needed to pay for BEV…..

Now is not the time to undermine all the potential profit earners, need as many customers as possible and “

retain as many compact sized buyers as possible with hybrids so they don’t go elsewhere….that’s the job of C2.

I still don't know why Bill agreed to let Jac the Knife sell off the newly redesigned L-series in 1996/1997.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Joe771476 said:

I still don't know why Bill agreed to let Jac the Knife sell off the newly redesigned L-series in 1996/1997.

Simple, he convinced Ford that the market had changed and that profit from L Series was drying up,

that it needed to be sold before becoming worthless. The amount of data that Ford has, the case can

becspun either way to stick it out or eject and invest in something else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...