Ford introducing new 7 seat EV CUV in 2025 with 350 miles of range

[ice-capades]

1 hour ago, akirby said:

Not sure I agree about 2 door Bronco.  I think Bronco Sport is in the mix for sure even though it’s smaller.

 

It still leaves a huge void in the lineup for folks who do t want a Bronco or BEV.  Edge and Nautilus are in the sweet spot - not too small and not too big.  Unfortunately that’s also what makes the segment crowded and super competitive.  I thought the ST model would give Ford an edge (pun intended) over the others but while it is a popular model it never really moved the needle much.

 

At least from my experience, the Edge had a very loyal owner body and those owners loved the size, the 2-row configuration, the price point, etc. It would be interesting to know what the utilization rate is for those buying 3-row SUV's. 

[Gurgeh]

2 hours ago, ice-capades said:

 

At least from my experience, the Edge had a very loyal owner body and those owners loved the size, the 2-row configuration, the price point, etc. It would be interesting to know what the utilization rate is for those buying 3-row SUV's. 

Though I'm a Lincoln guy, I can answer to an extent. If you want a 2-row mid-sized crossover, you generally aren't going to be tempted to go with a 3-row. It is just longer than you want and has a row you won't use. If Lincoln weren't importing the new Nautilus from one of their Chinese factories, I would have gone with a Genesis GV80, Mercedes GLE 450 or Range Rover Sport. They are all designed around two rows and are shorter than the Aviator (though not cheaper), but frankly are still a little bigger than what I want. So I overcame my wish that this wasn't a Chinese import and am going with the 2024 Nautilus. My guess is that if you were an Edge customer you wouldn't be looking at the Explorer. Definitely the Bronco if you like the rugged styling and greater off-road capabilities (whether you ended up using them or not), but otherwise you'd be looking a GM, Hyundai/Kia or maybe Subaru product, but honestly I don't really know the mass-market 2-row mid-sized crossover segment well.

 

If I had the ability to do overnight charging I might have considered the Mach-E, but I don't (yet). Plus, my periodic road trip vacations down to Chincoteague, Virginia on the southern tip of the Delmarva peninsula would have been a bit of a challenge. I expect within a few years that will get fixed.

[akirby]

We test drove an Aviator when the Nautilus we had reserved got sold out from under us “accidentally”.  It was just too big and the added cost wasn’t worth it to is since we almost never need more than 4 seats.

[Harley Lover]

19 hours ago, Rick73 said:

40k seems a stretch for such a large vehicle if with acceptable driving range, but I do agree that unless aerodynamics are excellent, there is no chance whatsoever.

 

As a point of reference, the most efficient EV according to Car and Driver list is now Hyundai Ionic 6.  It comes with a standard 53 kWh battery which keeps price lower, just above $40k, but with limited range.  The extended-range 77.4 kWh larger battery gives it 361 miles of combined range while still keeping starting price under $50k.

 

When C&D tested the long-range RWD Ionic 6 in their steady 75 MPH highway loop, the range was reduced to 260 miles.  And that’s with a car that has a coefficient of drag of just 0.22 according to Hyundai.  It confirms that when driving at normal Interstate speeds, BEVs have to be very aerodynamic or else will be a huge disappointment.

 

Ford Lightning with extended range 131 kWh battery, when using C&D 75 MPH test data, and Ford charging data, on a very long road trip would need to charge every 150 miles (2 hours of driving) requiring at least 44 minutes to charge from 15 to 80 percent, so stop would likely take an hour or longer by time driver gets off highway, plugs in, and gets back on road.  I could never spend 1/3 of my time associated with charging.

 

For drivers who want a BEV suitable for long road trips, I don’t see a way around sleek aerodynamic shapes until battery capacity and charging rates improve significantly.  Yeah, the Ionic 6 doesn’t look great to me, but at least it functions better on paper than most BEVs.

 

Excellent post that reiterates what Farley and others have been stating: to get longer range, 'bullet train' styling becomes a necessary part of the mix (along with a host of other factors: battery design, bespoke EV chassis, etc.). None of this means there won't be building block style EV SUVs for those who want them (Bronco, Bronco Sport), but the design brief for this product dictates the aero pursuit. That also doesn't mean the vehicle has to be ugly as hell, so hopefully this one will hit the mark style wise. 

[Hugh]

On 6/9/2023 at 8:54 AM, ice-capades said:

 

At least from my experience, the Edge had a very loyal owner body and those owners loved the size, the 2-row configuration, the price point, etc. It would be interesting to know what the utilization rate is for those buying 3-row SUV's. 

Just me talking, I have no requirement for 3 rows and bigger is not always better. 

[Bellanca]

Still patiently waiting to hear anything about Lincoln’s first electric—would love one to replace my Aviator around 2025 but all we ever hear about is Ford; doesn’t give me a lot of hope. 

[Rick73]

52 minutes ago, Hugh said:

Just me talking, I have no requirement for 3 rows and bigger is not always better. 

Same here, though my wife drives a 3-row minivan.  I would guess over 90% of time it is just her in it, and of the other 10%, the vast majority of that is the two of us.  Very rarely do we have two others with us, for a total of 4.  I can only recall one time traveling with 6 people, and that was probably around 10 years ago.  

 

I like the utility and efficiency of a minivan design, and don’t mind the 3rd row seat since it folds flat into floor in seconds.  However, ours is much larger than we ever need.  For us, the size of the original Honda Odyssey in 6-passenger (2+2+2) configuration would have been better all around.  The first generation Odyssey was about 5 inches narrower, 4 inches lower, and over a foot shorter.  I think they were referred to as compact MPV, not that name matters.

 

A new 3-row BEV of similar size makes a lot of sense to me, particularly if limited in width.  I doubt 6 versus 7 passengers makes that much difference to most buyers.  Comfort and access to 3rd row is probably much more important.

[Hugh]

36 minutes ago, Rick73 said:

Same here, though my wife drives a 3-row minivan.  I would guess over 90% of time it is just her in it, and of the other 10%, the vast majority of that is the two of us.  Very rarely do we have two others with us, for a total of 4.  I can only recall one time traveling with 6 people, and that was probably around 10 years ago.  

 

I like the utility and efficiency of a minivan design, and don’t mind the 3rd row seat since it folds flat into floor in seconds.  However, ours is much larger than we ever need.  For us, the size of the original Honda Odyssey in 6-passenger (2+2+2) configuration would have been better all around.  The first generation Odyssey was about 5 inches narrower, 4 inches lower, and over a foot shorter.  I think they were referred to as compact MPV, not that name matters.

 

A new 3-row BEV of similar size makes a lot of sense to me, particularly if limited in width.  I doubt 6 versus 7 passengers makes that much difference to most buyers.  Comfort and access to 3rd row is probably much more important.

I also feel silly considering I load up the Edge in full twice a year for camping. It hits the sweet spot for performance after I traded my Fusion Sport in. I love to drive fast and the Edge is acceptable in corners. Great compromise for a small family.

Edited June 12, 2023 by Hugh

[rperez817]

4 hours ago, Bellanca said:

Still patiently waiting to hear anything about Lincoln’s first electric—would love one to replace my Aviator around 2025 but all we ever hear about is Ford; doesn’t give me a lot of hope. 

 

Maybe there's a pleasant surprise in store for Lincoln, something along the lines of a 100% electric vehicle lineup by 2030 or sooner. Lincoln, with its premium positioning, low sales volume, and "Quiet Flight" theme, is the ideal legacy auto brand to go all electric ASAP.

[akirby]

5 hours ago, Bellanca said:

Still patiently waiting to hear anything about Lincoln’s first electric—would love one to replace my Aviator around 2025 but all we ever hear about is Ford; doesn’t give me a lot of hope. 

You’re not going to hear anything until it’s close to production.

[DeluxeStang]

5 hours ago, Bellanca said:

Still patiently waiting to hear anything about Lincoln’s first electric—would love one to replace my Aviator around 2025 but all we ever hear about is Ford; doesn’t give me a lot of hope. 

All I've heard about the electric Lincoln's is that they make a bold statement, and wouldn't be mistaken for any of Ford's current designs. That's according to BORG. 

[Bellanca]

36 minutes ago, akirby said:

You’re not going to hear anything until it’s close to production.

Well with three supposed electrics by 2025 and being halfway through 2023 it just seems odd to not even see an article about test mules or anything of the like. But we shall see. 

[DeluxeStang]

3 hours ago, Bellanca said:

Well with three supposed electrics by 2025 and being halfway through 2023 it just seems odd to not even see an article about test mules or anything of the like. But we shall see. 

Yeah, it's pretty common to see at least some rough prototypes running around a year or two before production. I'll be stunned if we don't see some electric Lincoln's, as well as t3 running around in the near future. 

[akirby]

They’re being a lot more careful these days - only taking them out at night in some cases,

[fuzzymoomoo]

On 6/9/2023 at 10:44 AM, akirby said:

Unfortunately that’s also what makes the segment crowded and super competitive.

Not to mention pricing is pretty damn close to Explorer

[akirby]

1 hour ago, fuzzymoomoo said:

Not to mention pricing is pretty damn close to Explorer

Probably explains the big incentives edge usually had at least on the lower trims.

[silvrsvt]

9 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

Yeah, it's pretty common to see at least some rough prototypes running around a year or two before production. I'll be stunned if we don't see some electric Lincoln's, as well as t3 running around in the near future. 

 

This is the mule for the upcoming BEV mentioned here...this was from a year or two ago. 

[Rick73]

33 minutes ago, silvrsvt said:

 

This is the mule for the upcoming BEV mentioned here...this was from a year or two ago. 

 

It appears much larger and heavier than I expected for a vehicle meant to drive on smaller battery in order to keep cost down.

[silvrsvt]

9 minutes ago, Rick73 said:

It appears much larger and heavier than I expected for a vehicle meant to drive on smaller battery in order to keep cost down.

 

Its just a MME body over whatever platform this 7 seater is going to be on...your reading WAY TO MUCH into this.

 

 

became this 

[Rick73]

1 hour ago, silvrsvt said:

Its just a MME body over whatever platform this 7 seater is going to be on...your reading WAY TO MUCH into this.

As I said, larger and heavier than “I expected”, which may be different than your expectations.

 

The platform appears to have longer wheelbase, wider track front and rear, and lifted a significant distance.  It all suggest to me a much larger vehicle by comparison.

 

Also, the mule has 6-lug wheels which suggest it may be much heavier than Mach-E.  “I expected” a vehicle not much larger than Tesla Model Y with a third row seat, so not necessarily much larger overall.  A vehicle as large as what I see above would require greater battery capacity than could likely be sold for around $40k as previously discussed. 

[silvrsvt]

39 minutes ago, Rick73 said:

As I said, larger and heavier than “I expected”, which may be different than your expectations.

 

The platform appears to have longer wheelbase, wider track front and rear, and lifted a significant distance.  It all suggest to me a much larger vehicle by comparison.

 

Also, the mule has 6-lug wheels which suggest it may be much heavier than Mach-E.  “I expected” a vehicle not much larger than Tesla Model Y with a third row seat, so not necessarily much larger overall.  A vehicle as large as what I see above would require greater battery capacity than could likely be sold for around $40k as previously discussed. 

 

The Mach E is roughly the same size as a Model Y...are you thinking the X? Having a 3rd row in a C sized car isn't going to do anyone favors. 

 

Apparently the new GE2 has alot of cost savings design wise that will help keep the costs down. I see the entry level product starting around 40K with 250 miles of range, but the longer range model will be a bit more. 

 

 

[rmc523]

1 hour ago, Rick73 said:

As I said, larger and heavier than “I expected”, which may be different than your expectations.

 

The platform appears to have longer wheelbase, wider track front and rear, and lifted a significant distance.  It all suggest to me a much larger vehicle by comparison.

 

Also, the mule has 6-lug wheels which suggest it may be much heavier than Mach-E.  “I expected” a vehicle not much larger than Tesla Model Y with a third row seat, so not necessarily much larger overall.  A vehicle as large as what I see above would require greater battery capacity than could likely be sold for around $40k as previously discussed. 

 

So they've been talking about a 7 seat Explorer-sized model, and also mention Expedition, yet you were expecting something the size of Model Y?

 

---

 

I see this model starting at at least $50k.

[Rick73]

51 minutes ago, rmc523 said:

 

So they've been talking about a 7 seat Explorer-sized model, and also mention Expedition, yet you were expecting something the size of Model Y?

 

---

 

I see this model starting at at least $50k.

Yes, I was expecting a vehicle closer to a Model Y, except perhaps a little longer to provide greater 3rd-row legroom and headroom.  My expectation was based on sketch showing what appears to be a very aerodynamic 3-row 6-person vehicle (suppose it could also be 7).

 

The original article mentioned Ford wanting 300-mile range at 75 MPH for road trips, and if battery is to be considerably less than 100 kWh in capacity, then vehicle would need at least Tesla-like 4 miles of range per kWh of efficiency.  If that part is correct, the new vehicle needs to be fairly light and with relatively small frontal area in addition to being very aerodynamic.  Granted, it’s also possible 300 miles range at 75 MPH is for a more-expensive larger-battery option.

 

[DeluxeStang]

15 hours ago, akirby said:

They’re being a lot more careful these days - only taking them out at night in some cases,

Interesting, I'm guessing they're probably keeping them on closed courses only as well. 

[DeluxeStang]

3 hours ago, Rick73 said:

As I said, larger and heavier than “I expected”, which may be different than your expectations.

 

The platform appears to have longer wheelbase, wider track front and rear, and lifted a significant distance.  It all suggest to me a much larger vehicle by comparison.

 

Also, the mule has 6-lug wheels which suggest it may be much heavier than Mach-E.  “I expected” a vehicle not much larger than Tesla Model Y with a third row seat, so not necessarily much larger overall.  A vehicle as large as what I see above would require greater battery capacity than could likely be sold for around $40k as previously discussed. 

Yeah, I don't think that mach-e prototype is the explorer, not the revised more futuristic version at least. As you mentioned, it looked like it's lifted, but BORG said the explorer would have a lower ground clearance than the mach-e.