Ford August 2023 Sales Results

[DeluxeStang]

48 minutes ago, tbone said:

I personally think they should be looking at more entry level BEVs that are not focused so much on performance, as they are on range and reasonable price. 3.4 seconds 0-60 is great, and I like it, but people will also think a 6.5 second 0-60 is fast as well.  They are already losing a shit load of money on BEVs, so perhaps lose a little less money, while providing a useful vehicle people can afford and perhaps drawing more non-Ford people to the brand.  

 

 

Agreed, I think what Ford will learn is just like how it's not all or nothing when it comes to EVs, the same applies to how they position their EV offerings in the market. It won't be a case of only chasing the premium, or affordable markets, but a mix of both, with unique strategies and executions for each product to deliver the best results.

 

Ford's strategy of making areo driven funky looking EVs with smaller, cheaper batteries is a solid idea. I'd love for that approach to be applied to a entry level EV or two. Radical designs that can feasibly be priced in the high 20s or low 30s due to their cheaper, simpler components.

 

Products that use futuristic and polarizing styling, and turn it into an asset rather than a liability. You could pitch them as a cool, fun and quirky EVs in a sea of boring economy vehicles, that would appeal to a large audience imo, especially young people. For added diversity, maybe you could have a sleek, areo driven sporty EV, and an affordable rugged offering. 

 

I included a few pics of what I'm thinking of, interesting and colorful products that go against the mold of blandness while being genuinely affordable. There's basically nothing on the EV

Edited September 11, 2023 by DeluxeStang

[silvrsvt]

The issue is that the performance from EVs is from the way it works (100% torque at 1 rpm,etc)…I don’t see a way to dial back performance without it having a impact on overall driving. 
 

As for funky styled vehicles-aero normally doesn’t work too well for styling-look at the Tesla X-a bloated tick sedan that is supposed to be a crossover or Ionqi 6 that looks funky from the rear. Smaller cars are harder to make aero because of their packaging-they are normally taller to maximize interior space, but that hurts your frontal area. 

[Flying68]

20 hours ago, tbone said:

Well stated.  There is 22 MME AWD extended range near me with 17000 miles that originally stickered for $65k that is listed for $45k.  That’s a substantial drop after one year, which would certainly give me pause on buying a new one from a depreciation perspective.  I personally think the BEV market is troubled right now, which is putting all manufacturers between a rock and a hard place, and I don’t see it improving in the near term. 

https://www.eddyslincoln.com/used/Ford/2021-Ford-Mustang+Mach-E-fcab69880a0e087f0db8dbb6a7b09b9f.htm

 

2021 Mach-E GT Performance Edition.  MSRP was $69,200.  It has 4,934 miles, one owner.  Current asking price is $47,107.  It has been on their lot for a long time, almost a year.  I keep contemplating asking them what the best price they would give me on it just to move it off their lot.  Problem is that I think the value is going to keep plummeting and I wouldn't have any trade value if we went to a Lincoln BEV in a few years.

[Trader 10]

10 minutes ago, Flying68 said:

https://www.eddyslincoln.com/used/Ford/2021-Ford-Mustang+Mach-E-fcab69880a0e087f0db8dbb6a7b09b9f.htm

 

2021 Mach-E GT Performance Edition.  MSRP was $69,200.  It has 4,934 miles, one owner.  Current asking price is $47,107.  It has been on their lot for a long time, almost a year.  I keep contemplating asking them what the best price they would give me on it just to move it off their lot.  Problem is that I think the value is going to keep plummeting and I wouldn't have any trade value if we went to a Lincoln BEV in a few years.

Those buying these first gen Mach-Es and Lightnings are going to get their heads handed to them when it comes to trade in time. 

[silvrsvt]

12 minutes ago, Trader 10 said:

Those buying these first gen Mach-Es and Lightnings are going to get their heads handed to them when it comes to trade in time. 

 

That is the issue with first gen products...your better off leasing them because tech is changing so much. I wouldn't buy an EV outright till the end of the decade because of that. 

[akirby]

6 hours ago, silvrsvt said:

The issue is that the performance from EVs is from the way it works (100% torque at 1 rpm,etc)…I don’t see a way to dial back performance without it having a impact on overall driving. 

It has to do with the power of the motor and how many you use.  Some performance models have 2 or 3 motors.  Ford’s hooligan version of the Mach-e had 7 motors.

Edited September 11, 2023 by akirby

[DeluxeStang]

5 hours ago, silvrsvt said:

The issue is that the performance from EVs is from the way it works (100% torque at 1 rpm,etc)…I don’t see a way to dial back performance without it having a impact on overall driving. 
 

As for funky styled vehicles-aero normally doesn’t work too well for styling-look at the Tesla X-a bloated tick sedan that is supposed to be a crossover or Ionqi 6 that looks funky from the rear. Smaller cars are harder to make aero because of their packaging-they are normally taller to maximize interior space, but that hurts your frontal area. 

Which is why I firmly believe we're gonna see some sort of resurgence of sedans/hatches/wagons in the EV space. It's pretty clear that's the direction technical targets are pushing us in, let me explain. 

 

Ford, and other brands are trying to make products with cheaper batteries to produce more affordable offerings while still maintaining profits. But to do that, you need great areo. That means lower frontal areas, very low ground clearance, low swooping rooflines, and smooth, clean lines, put all of that together and you end up with something that's clearly a hatchback or sedan. 

 

The mach-e and Hyundai Ionic 5 are both excellent examples of this, the Ionic 5 especially. They're marketed as crossovers,  but they're very clearly just hatchbacks. They have the lines and proportions of hatchbacks, they have the ground clearance and in most cases, the roof height of a hatchback. Brands just have to call them crossovers because that casts a spell on buyers. You're already seeing very slightly lifted sedans being marketed as lifestyle crossovers.

[silvrsvt]

1 hour ago, akirby said:

It has to do with the power of the motor and how many you use.  Some performance models have 2 or 3 motors.  Ford’s hooliganism version of the Mach-e had 7 motors.

 

I'll use the Mach E as an example-the Select, Premium and California Route 1 use all the same motors (266HP/428ft lb) and the California Route 1 with the bigger battery gets the best MPGs out of the three

 

The GT makes 480/600ftlbs with an larger motor and only gets about 10 MPG less then the select and Premium. Going from 99 city to 90 City isn't going to make a big difference. The MPGe Ratings are only 9 MPG less. 

I'm going to assume Ford is going to keep motor design to a minimum and just stack them if they need more performance. 

[Rick73]

1 hour ago, akirby said:

It has to do with the power of the motor and how many you use.  Some performance models have 2 or 3 motors.  Ford’s hooliganism version of the Mach-e had 7 motors.

Exactly, having oversized motors is not ideal for efficiency.  We can see that when manufacturers of cars with two motors that have more power than necessary for normal driving end up powering mostly one motor to improve its efficiency.  In cases where vehicle performance is not at top of list, using a single motor of lower power saves weight, cost, and improves efficiency which then extends driving range.

 

Another option to provide higher performance (using larger motor(s)) and higher range (by improving efficiency) is use of gear boxes.  Tesla abandoned 2-speed gearbox on original Roadster because they had issues with design but idea is apparently not dead with performance EV brands.  Simplest thing is to size motor for peak efficiency and range, and let performance suffer a little.  Most BEVs even with 100 kW motors are plenty fast to keep up with traffic and then some.

[akirby]

25 minutes ago, silvrsvt said:

 

I'll use the Mach E as an example-the Select, Premium and California Route 1 use all the same motors (266HP/428ft lb) and the California Route 1 with the bigger battery gets the best MPGs out of the three

 

The GT makes 480/600ftlbs with an larger motor and only gets about 10 MPG less then the select and Premium. Going from 99 city to 90 City isn't going to make a big difference. The MPGe Ratings are only 9 MPG less. 

I'm going to assume Ford is going to keep motor design to a minimum and just stack them if they need more performance. 

But could they get by with less powerful motors if price was a factor?

[Rick73]

On 9/9/2023 at 11:06 AM, rmc523 said:

Well, I also feel like the new Mercedes EVs look like melted bars of soap.

I noticed yesterday during a long 800+ mile drive that many new cars on the Interstate are adopting an aero look that could be described as “melted bars of soap”; and most where ICE, or perhaps Hybrid (I couldn’t tell for sure) since difference sometimes is not that noticeable during quick glance.

 

The aero look is becoming much more common in that there were sleek/smooth sedans from Hyundai, Toyota, Honda, VW, Mazda, BMW, and Mercedes.  I was surprised at how many smaller aero sedans there were on the road compared to what I recall on previous trips.  Don’t get me wrong, there were still plenty of large pickups and SUVs, but number of fuel-efficient cars seemed higher than previously.  I was also looking out for BEVs on the highway, and only noticed 3 Tesla and 1 Rivian pickup.  Also saw one Mach E but it was in a city where I was stopping for gas.  Vehicles I noticed randomly probably did not represent a sample of all cars on road, but I’d bet there were far more aero Elantra, Civic, Corolla, Camry, Accord, etc. than BEVs on the Interstate I was traveling.   Just saying that aero styling that leads to much higher highway MPG, particularly when combined with hybrid powertrain, seems to be much more common over last few years.

 

 

[silvrsvt]

7 hours ago, Rick73 said:

Exactly, having oversized motors is not ideal for efficiency.  We can see that when manufacturers of cars with two motors that have more power than necessary for normal driving end up powering mostly one motor to improve its efficiency.  In cases where vehicle performance is not at top of list, using a single motor of lower power saves weight, cost, and improves efficiency which then extends driving range.

 

Most dual motor setups I've paid attention to are for AWD vs RWD. As for power, what some people think is fine and what other people think it should have is often a bridge too far. 

 

7 hours ago, akirby said:

But could they get by with less powerful motors if price was a factor?

 

It might be possible, I'm not up on how exactly what makes an electric motor cheaper or less powerful. I'd assume windings but I think there a lot more at play here when it comes to efficiency vs how it was on ICE products when it comes to MPGs or range.  

[akirby]

Quote

R1T

Main article: Rivian R1T

Rivian R1T

The R1T features four electric motors, two located on each axle (front and rear). The front two motors produce 415 hp (309 kW) and 413 lb⋅ft (560 N⋅m) of torque while the rear two motors produce 420 hp (310 kW) and 495 lb⋅ft (671 N⋅m) of torque.^[61] The result is a Rivian-claimed 0–60 mph (0–97 km/h) time of 3.0 seconds.^[62]

 

[tbone]

23 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

Agreed, I think what Ford will learn is just like how it's not all or nothing when it comes to EVs, the same applies to how they position their EV offerings in the market. It won't be a case of only chasing the premium, or affordable markets, but a mix of both, with unique strategies and executions for each product to deliver the best results.

 

Ford's strategy of making areo driven funky looking EVs with smaller, cheaper batteries is a solid idea. I'd love for that approach to be applied to a entry level EV or two. Radical designs that can feasibly be priced in the high 20s or low 30s due to their cheaper, simpler components.

 

Products that use futuristic and polarizing styling, and turn it into an asset rather than a liability. You could pitch them as a cool, fun and quirky EVs in a sea of boring economy vehicles, that would appeal to a large audience imo, especially young people. For added diversity, maybe you could have a sleek, areo driven sporty EV, and an affordable rugged offering. 

 

I included a few pics of what I'm thinking of, interesting and colorful products that go against the mold of blandness while being genuinely affordable. There's basically nothing on the EV

My thought is young people would likely be more open to the aero designs that would be necessary to increase efficiency, as such the entry level category would be an opportunity for more focus.  

[tbone]

14 hours ago, Flying68 said:

https://www.eddyslincoln.com/used/Ford/2021-Ford-Mustang+Mach-E-fcab69880a0e087f0db8dbb6a7b09b9f.htm

 

2021 Mach-E GT Performance Edition.  MSRP was $69,200.  It has 4,934 miles, one owner.  Current asking price is $47,107.  It has been on their lot for a long time, almost a year.  I keep contemplating asking them what the best price they would give me on it just to move it off their lot.  Problem is that I think the value is going to keep plummeting and I wouldn't have any trade value if we went to a Lincoln BEV in a few years.

Yet another example of terrible depreciation. Although I mentioned the depreciation issue earlier, I am not meaning to imply that the MME is not a quality vehicle. I actually think it is nicely done, and if they had a gas variant, they would probably be selling a ton of them.

[Rick73]

4 hours ago, silvrsvt said:

Most dual motor setups I've paid attention to are for AWD vs RWD. 

In what context does this portion of your reply relates to my post?  I have no idea what you’re trying to say with this statement.  Yes, most AWD have two motors, and RWD one motor.  That’s common knowledge, so what are you saying about over-sizing motor power with this statement?

[tbone]

11 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

Which is why I firmly believe we're gonna see some sort of resurgence of sedans/hatches/wagons in the EV space. It's pretty clear that's the direction technical targets are pushing us in, let me explain. 

 

Ford, and other brands are trying to make products with cheaper batteries to produce more affordable offerings while still maintaining profits. But to do that, you need great areo. That means lower frontal areas, very low ground clearance, low swooping rooflines, and smooth, clean lines, put all of that together and you end up with something that's clearly a hatchback or sedan. 

 

The mach-e and Hyundai Ionic 5 are both excellent examples of this, the Ionic 5 especially. They're marketed as crossovers,  but they're very clearly just hatchbacks. They have the lines and proportions of hatchbacks, they have the ground clearance and in most cases, the roof height of a hatchback. Brands just have to call them crossovers because that casts a spell on buyers. You're already seeing very slightly lifted sedans being marketed as lifestyle crossovers.

It certainly seems the BEV buying public is amenable to sedans, as they sell a shit load them. 

[silvrsvt]

5 hours ago, Rick73 said:

In what context does this portion of your reply relates to my post?  I have no idea what you’re trying to say with this statement.  Yes, most AWD have two motors, and RWD one motor.  That’s common knowledge, so what are you saying about over-sizing motor power with this statement?

 

The thing is that I believe your looking at a larger electric motor being more inefficient like an ICE engine would be...when that clearly isn't the case. eMPG goes up as battery size does (see different models of the Mach E which use the same motor) and doesn't suffer that much when they are more powerful (Mach E GT roughly a 8-10% drop in eMPG). Electric motors are really efficient vs ICE, which wastes 40-60% of its potential power output due to different factors. 

 

I found this if you really want to dig into engineering aspects of it

 

https://x-engineer.org/ev-design-electric-motor/

 

 

[Rick73]

3 hours ago, silvrsvt said:

 

The thing is that I believe your looking at a larger electric motor being more inefficient like an ICE engine would be...when that clearly isn't the case. eMPG goes up as battery size does (see different models of the Mach E which use the same motor) and doesn't suffer that much when they are more powerful (Mach E GT roughly a 8-10% drop in eMPG). Electric motors are really efficient vs ICE, which wastes 40-60% of its potential power output due to different factors. 

 

I found this if you really want to dig into engineering aspects of it

 

https://x-engineer.org/ev-design-electric-motor/

 

 

EPA data shows Mach-E is not a very efficient BEV,  but given that it is what it is, I don’t see where you get the information above.  The most efficient version is 103 MPGe which is RWD and standard battery, which makes sense since it’s the lightest.  The worst listed is GT Performance at 82 MPGe.  That’s a lot of difference and shows the impact performance has on efficiency.  Whether a buyer feels it’s necessary is a different subject.

 

In general, across many brands, larger batteries add mass and normally reduce MPGe.  AWD, likewise, also adds mass and generally reduces MPGe (not only due to added mass but also added HP).  If buyers want the most efficient BEV of a certain model, it’s usually the RWD with standard battery.

 

https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/PowerSearch.do?action=noform&path=1&year1=2023&year2=2023&make=Ford&baseModel=Mustang Mach-E&srchtyp=ymm&pageno=1&rowLimit=50

[silvrsvt]

2 hours ago, Rick73 said:

EPA data shows Mach-E is not a very efficient BEV,  but given that it is what it is, I don’t see where you get the information above.  The most efficient version is 103 MPGe which is RWD and standard battery, which makes sense since it’s the lightest.  The worst listed is GT Performance at 82 MPGe.  That’s a lot of difference and shows the impact performance has on efficiency.  Whether a buyer feels it’s necessary is a different subject.

 

What is considered an efficient BEV? 

 

As for my argument-

 

The Mach E GT Performance edition is no different then the Mach GT outside of the larger 20in tires, which add more mass/resistance, thus affecting the range even more.

 

Comparing a Mach E AWD with the extended range battery and a Mach GT standard edition shows whopping difference of 8 eMPG between the two of them. which is a 9% difference between them. If you use the ICE Mustang to contrast this with, the difference between the Ecoboost and most fuel efficient V8 is 30% difference in combined MPGs

 

 

 

Edited September 12, 2023 by silvrsvt

[ice-capades]

Just my thoughts... A lot of the recent discussion is really off-topic which is supposed to be about the August 2023 sales. Discussions about BEV battery size, MPGe rating comparisons, vehicle aerodynamics, etc. are a whole different story and belong in a different topic.  

[rmc523]

 

54 minutes ago, ice-capades said:

Just my thoughts... A lot of the recent discussion is really off-topic which is supposed to be about the August 2023 sales. Discussions about BEV battery size, MPGe rating comparisons, vehicle aerodynamics, etc. are a whole different story and belong in a different topic.  

 

There's not a whole lot else to talk about regarding sales numbers specifically, so it's evolved.

[Rick73]

45 minutes ago, ice-capades said:

Just my thoughts... A lot of the recent discussion is really off-topic which is supposed to be about the August 2023 sales. Discussions about BEV battery size, MPGe rating comparisons, vehicle aerodynamics, etc. are a whole different story and belong in a different topic.  

You’re correct.  It just seems many are trying to find reasons for why Ford BEV sales are so low, especially since it’s a possible prelude to what’s coming as Ford converts to BEVs. 

[jpd80]

46 minutes ago, Rick73 said:

You’re correct.  It just seems many are trying to find reasons for why Ford BEV sales are so low, especially since it’s a possible prelude to what’s coming as Ford converts to BEVs. 

Ford is openly saying that early adopters have moved on from Ford’s BEVs - that’s why sales have sagged,

so I doubt that doing this or that with batteries, motors or efficiency would change any of that……

[DeluxeStang]

14 hours ago, tbone said:

My thought is young people would likely be more open to the aero designs that would be necessary to increase efficiency, as such the entry level category would be an opportunity for more focus.  

Exactly, funky styling is a riskier strategy for older buyers with a more conservative design taste. But for young buyers who want cars that are unique and expressive, it would be a way to set ford's EVs apart. 

 

Show a 25 yr old these two cars, tell them they're a similar price, and see which one they buy. 

Edited September 12, 2023 by DeluxeStang