What Customers Really Want

[akirby]

1 hour ago, rperez817 said:

 

That's correct AM222. And it's no coincidence that those are also the segments where the products Ford offered were mediocre (or worse).

Nothing about Fusion was mediocre except fuel economy and profits.

[rmc523]

4 hours ago, AM222 said:

More profitable or not, Ford tends to leave segments they have a hard time competing in. 

Looking at US sales for Q2 2023, these are the popular sedan choices. Ford left the sedan segment in the US.
Toyota Camry is at 7th
Tesla Model 3 is at 12th
Honda Accord is at 14th
Toyota Corolla is at 15th

Q2 2023 sales of compact SUVs, Ford plans to kill the Escape in 2025
Toyota RAV4 is at 5th
Honda CR-V is at 6th
Nissan Rogue is at 9th
Hyundai Tucson is at 16th

Ford Escape is at 23rd, way behind many other compact SUVs and several sedans. The F-series is the only Ford in the top 20. The Explorer is in 21st place. I just wished there were more Fords in the top 20 in the US, the brand's home market.

I read that Mach e sales bounced back last month (August 2023), hope the momentum continues because there's no turning back for Ford, now that they've invested heavily on BEVs.

 

 

 

 

I think it's worth noting - Explorer production and sales are way off norms due to production and stop sale issues.

 

Also, I'm curious where Bronco Sport + Escape falls on the list, as Ford split the market there between two models.

[AM222]

47 minutes ago, rmc523 said:

 

I think it's worth noting - Explorer production and sales are way off norms due to production and stop sale issues.

 

Also, I'm curious where Bronco Sport + Escape falls on the list, as Ford split the market there between two models.

Q2 2023 US sales

Ford Bronco Sport: 33,272

Ford Escape: 43,690

Combined = 76,962

 

Toyota RAV4: 102,313

Honda CR-V: 96,456

 

About Explorer's production and stop sales issues. US built Fords seem to be affected by something more frequently than Fords from other plants around the world. 

Edited September 22, 2023 by AM222

[Gurgeh]

29 minutes ago, AM222 said:

...About Explorer's production and stop sales issues. US built Fords seem to be affected by something more frequently than Fords from other plants around the world. 

As for the Explorer's (and Aviator's) problems, about what you would expect given the well-documented problems that have long plagued the Chicago facility where they are built.

[DeluxeStang]

37 minutes ago, Gurgeh said:

As for the Explorer's (and Aviator's) problems, about what you would expect given the well-documented problems that have long plagued the Chicago facility where they are built.

The strange thing is the 2011-19 explorers were very reliable and well built cars for the most part. Then the 2020s came out, and had nothing but issues. I will say, our 2017 explorer has the driver's door hanging a out 1/10th of an inch or so lower that the other three doors, which has always been strange considering I've never seen that in any other explorer. But beyond that quality quirk, it's been a great car. 

 

I wonder if the issue with CD6 explorers pertains to some glaring engineering flaws with the CD6 platform itself, rather than the assembly plant building it. It's quite telling the CD6 is one of the Ford's only modern architectures that they gave up on after making just two products on it. Whereas platforms like c2 seemed to be getting used for everything. 

 

I know that has to do with the fact that some CD6 products were coupes and sedans, and those were killed because the market shifted to crossovers. But I can't help but wonder if internally, Ford was looking at the cd6 issues going yikes, maybe we just throw this platform out after awhile. Whereas most c2 products seem to be more well engineered/reliable.

[tbone]

3 hours ago, akirby said:

Nothing about Fusion was mediocre except fuel economy and profits.

I second that.  My Fusion work car and my sons Sport were very nice cars. 

[tbone]

29 minutes ago, DeluxeStang said:

The strange thing is the 2011-19 explorers were very reliable and well built cars for the most part. Then the 2020s came out, and had nothing but issues. I will say, our 2017 explorer has the driver's door hanging a out 1/10th of an inch or so lower that the other three doors, which has always been strange considering I've never seen that in any other explorer. But beyond that quality quirk, it's been a great car. 

 

I wonder if the issue with CD6 explorers pertains to some glaring engineering flaws with the CD6 platform itself, rather than the assembly plant building it. It's quite telling the CD6 is one of the Ford's only modern architectures that they gave up on after making just two products on it. Whereas platforms like c2 seemed to be getting used for everything. 

 

I know that has to do with the fact that some CD6 products were coupes and sedans, and those were killed because the market shifted to crossovers. But I can't help but wonder if internally, Ford was looking at the cd6 issues going yikes, maybe we just throw this platform out after awhile. Whereas most c2 products seem to be more well engineered/reliable.

We had a 2020 ST and currently have a 2022.  I have not had any body or paint issues between the two.  There were some minor electrical gremlins such as memory seat not holding settings and the camera issue on the 2020, and a rattle from the front suspension where they replaced a strut, but otherwise no mechanical issues for 42000 miles.  The 2022 has been good accept an oil leak on the head gasket which took a very long time to get the replacement part, but otherwise no mechanical or electrical issues for 30000 miles, not even the camera issue, knock on wood. I personally don’t think there is anything inherently wrong with the CD6 platform. 

[jpd80]

8 hours ago, rperez817 said:

 

That's correct AM222. And it's no coincidence that those are also the segments where the products Ford offered were mediocre (or worse).

A better question would be why Ford allowed those products to become mediocre; why each of those products in the segments mentioned became “commodity product”  which is code for low profit volume selling products. The same attitude applied to cars is now being applied to utilities offered as alternatives. What’s not being said by Ford is the reason behind those vehicles becoming commodity products is because upper trim buyers are no longer interested because Ford gave them no reason to say and buy almost  the same vehicle they did five years ago.

 

That is all on Ford’s previous attitude to stretch out and economise refreshes and worse, start silently decanting features out of later versions. Ford is and always will be cheap, penny-pinchers that basically don’t understand or care about buyer want and needs beyond the types of vehicles they want to build. I get that but instead of supporting struggling vehicles, they actually engineer the demise of vehicles they no longer want.

 

So rounding back to what customers really want, you are correct in that Ford has a set of buyers (not everyone) it wants to attract. How they execute to capture enough of those buyers is way more important. Also interesting to note that Ford now works with more recent research data on what buyers want, so some of the changes are going to look both logical and perplexing at the same time.

 

Ford needs to be careful here, they are deliberately shedding customers and hoping to attract new ones in segments /vehicles that are more profitable. There is an inevitable reduction in volume as the “commodity vehicle” goes away, savings in doing less has been a Ford credo since Mulally, making more money by making and selling less.

Edited September 22, 2023 by jpd80

[Deanh]

On 9/20/2023 at 11:06 AM, rmc523 said:

 

Sure, there will need to be a switch in thinking from primarily "my car is out of gas, let me swing by a gas station real quick" to "let me charge daily (or every few days) from home and I'll be full daily".

 

That said, to act like just "educating" people and saying "BEV IS FANTASTICCCCC, you'll see!!!" is all it'll take is just not reality.

 

Educating folks isn't going to help those that have limited access to chargers - whether at home (apartments) or charging network for trips.

Educating folks isn't going to help those that have range anxiety for those folks.

Educating folks isn't going to help the high prices of EVs relative to ICE - and despite what value you're going to argue they have over ICE, many people literally can't afford to see past the high sticker price.

you forgot absolutely shitty resale....issues aside, they drive great, but right now they have a multitude of hurdles... and all the fanfare is basically from BEV cultists that are unaffected by BEVS limitations.

[jpd80]

12 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

The strange thing is the 2011-19 explorers were very reliable and well built cars for the most part. Then the 2020s came out, and had nothing but issues. I will say, our 2017 explorer has the driver's door hanging a out 1/10th of an inch or so lower that the other three doors, which has always been strange considering I've never seen that in any other explorer. But beyond that quality quirk, it's been a great car. 
 

The Explorer was developed from an already mature D3 platform, so the chances of inherent flaw carry over was far less likely.

 

Quote

 

I wonder if the issue with CD6 explorers pertains to some glaring engineering flaws with the CD6 platform itself, rather than the assembly plant building it. It's quite telling the CD6 is one of the Ford's only modern architectures that they gave up on after making just two products on it. Whereas platforms like c2 seemed to be getting used for everything. 

 

A lot of the issues with CD6 a to do with supplier quality or inability to supply.

 

Quote

I know that has to do with the fact that some CD6 products were coupes and sedans, and those were killed because the market shifted to crossovers. But I can't help but wonder if internally, Ford was looking at the cd6 issues going yikes, maybe we just throw this platform out after awhile. Whereas most c2 products seem to be more well engineered/reliable.

The delays in moving forward with CD6 types were basically due to Fields waiting for Mulally to retire before becoming CEO and approving  development. That delay meant the run against cars had already begun plus late rejection of CD6 Edge replacement meant big ramifications with the FWD Edge’s future. The whole US RWD shit show was delayed too long and by the time the ego button was pushed, the whole reason had evaporated because competition vehicles had already captured most of the SUV market anyway.

 

For all the piss around with CD6 Explorer, Ford may have well made it a shorter version of alloy body Expedition and saved everyone a lot of grief. Imagine that, Explorer, Expedition and Expedition XL all being built together at CAP, freeing up KTP for more Super Duty trucks…

Edited September 23, 2023 by jpd80
Annoying Autotext typos

[silvrsvt]

42 minutes ago, Deanh said:

you forgot absolutely shitty resale....

 

That is part of the problem, the tech hasn't settled down to a point that you might regret buying one, your better off leasing IMO for the next 5 years. 

[DeluxeStang]

4 hours ago, tbone said:

We had a 2020 ST and currently have a 2022.  I have not had any body or paint issues between the two.  There were some minor electrical gremlins such as memory seat not holding settings and the camera issue on the 2020, and a rattle from the front suspension where they replaced a strut, but otherwise no mechanical issues for 42000 miles.  The 2022 has been good accept an oil leak on the head gasket which took a very long time to get the replacement part, but otherwise no mechanical or electrical issues for 30000 miles, not even the camera issue, knock on wood. I personally don’t think there is anything inherently wrong with the CD6 platform. 

I'm glad to hear yours are holding up reasonably well. Over 40k relatively trouble free miles isn't bad, but 5th Gen explorers are known for regularly lasting 150-200k miles with little to no issues. Hopefully the 6th gens hold up over time, but the shear volume of recalls they've received concerns me. I believe the explorer/aviator had 11 recalls in the first year alone. It seems to have calmed down a little bit since then thankfully. 

[CoolScoop]

2 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

I'm glad to hear yours are holding up reasonably well. Over 40k relatively trouble free miles isn't bad, but 5th Gen explorers are known for regularly lasting 150-200k miles with little to no issues. Hopefully the 6th gens hold up over time, but the shear volume of recalls they've received concerns me. I believe the explorer/aviator had 11 recalls in the first year alone. It seems to have calmed down a little bit since then thankfully. 

We had 5 recalls on our 2020 Aviator GT, with some of them being repeats of the camera issue.  All of them were just software updates.

[jpd80]

2 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

I'm glad to hear yours are holding up reasonably well. Over 40k relatively trouble free miles isn't bad, but 5th Gen explorers are known for regularly lasting 150-200k miles with little to no issues. Hopefully the 6th gens hold up over time, but the shear volume of recalls they've received concerns me. I believe the explorer/aviator had 11 recalls in the first year alone. It seems to have calmed down a little bit since then thankfully. 

Remember all the furore about exhaust leaks coming in through rear tailgate on 5the Gen Explorers, seems to have died down now…..

[tbone]

7 hours ago, jpd80 said:

A better question would be why Ford allowed those products to become mediocre; why each of those products in the segments mentioned became “commodity product”  which is code for low profit volume selling products. The same attitude applied to cars is now being applied to utilities offered as alternatives. What’s not being said by Ford is the reason behind those vehicles becoming commodity products is because upper trim buyers are no longer interested because Ford gave them no reason to say and buy almost  the same vehicle they did five years ago.

 

That is all on Ford’s previous attitude to stretch out and economise refreshes and worse, start silently decanting features out of later versions. Ford is and always will be cheap, penny-pinchers that basically don’t understand or care about buyer want and needs beyond the types of vehicles they want to build. I get that but instead of supporting struggling vehicles, they actually engineer the demise of vehicles they no longer want.

 

I couldn’t have said it better myself.  Ford has a lot of self inflicted pain and self fulfilling prophecy.  

Edited September 23, 2023 by tbone

[DeluxeStang]

3 hours ago, jpd80 said:

Remember all the furore about exhaust leaks coming in through rear tailgate on 5the Gen Explorers, seems to have died down now…..

That seems to have been an issue exclusive to the cop car variants. Ford conducted their own investigation and found some third party outfitters were making half assed modifications. Specifically, when they drilled through the tailgate weather stripping to run wiring harness's for exterior lights, some shops weren't sealing the hole properly. 

[jpd80]

46 minutes ago, DeluxeStang said:

That seems to have been an issue exclusive to the cop car variants. Ford conducted their own investigation and found some third party outfitters were making half assed modifications. Specifically, when they drilled through the tailgate weather stripping to run wiring harness's for exterior lights, some shops weren't sealing the hole properly. 

Absolutely, the fact that the majority of leaks were found to be on LEVs pointed to outfitter problems but some of the flap valves were found to be a little bit leaky, not enough to cause the main leaks. Trying to blame Ford and threatening legal action, amazing how all that seems to have settled….

 

IIRC, was when AC was on recirc under power, when switched to fresh, the AC created positive pressure in the cab stopping exhaust being sucked in.

Edited September 23, 2023 by jpd80

[Rick73]

Tentative commitment from Ford to union to increase 7.3L capacity with production starting in 2028 is interesting.  It suggest to me Ford is not anticipating (or planning on) a BEV Super Duty, at least in significant volume, and also that some diesel demand may transition to gasoline.  Apparently investment in ICE continues, though possibly at lower level? 

[silvrsvt]

5 hours ago, Rick73 said:

Tentative commitment from Ford to union to increase 7.3L capacity with production starting in 2028 is interesting.  It suggest to me Ford is not anticipating (or planning on) a BEV Super Duty, at least in significant volume, and also that some diesel demand may transition to gasoline.  Apparently investment in ICE continues, though possibly at lower level? 

Making more of existing engines isn't really an investment-its just meeting market demand for product. Heavy Duty trucks will be one of the last products to transition to EV or something else. They'll be around till 2035, if not longer.

 

Its everything else that more or less can do it much easier. 

[jpd80]

7 hours ago, Rick73 said:

Tentative commitment from Ford to union to increase 7.3L capacity with production starting in 2028 is interesting.  It suggest to me Ford is not anticipating (or planning on) a BEV Super Duty, at least in significant volume, and also that some diesel demand may transition to gasoline.  Apparently investment in ICE continues, though possibly at lower level? 

The thing to remember is Super Duty sales are absolute cash cows and increasing 7.3 production shows that Ford wants to go hard on selling as many of these as it can.

 

Increasing 7.3/6.8 production could also mean a reduction is diesel sales coming or possibly chasing more hybrid sales over full BEV - maybe a toe into the water with fleets to see if they consider switching on vehicles where maximum towing hauling is not required.

Edited September 23, 2023 by jpd80
Autotext typos

[fordmantpw]

7 hours ago, Rick73 said:

Tentative commitment from Ford to union to increase 7.3L capacity with production starting in 2028 is interesting.  It suggest to me Ford is not anticipating (or planning on) a BEV Super Duty, at least in significant volume, and also that some diesel demand may transition to gasoline.  Apparently investment in ICE continues, though possibly at lower level? 

 

51 minutes ago, jpd80 said:

The thing to remember is Super Duty sales are absolute cash cows and increasing 7.3 production shows that Ford wants to go hard on selling as many of these as it can.

 

Increasing 7.3/6.8 production could also mean a reduction is diesel sales coming or possibly chasing more hybrid sales over full BEV - maybe a toe into the water with fleets to see if they consider switching on vehicles where maximum towing hauling is not required.

 

I'm thinking a HEV Super Duty may be on the way.  Hopefully PHEV.

[jpd80]

31 minutes ago, fordmantpw said:

 

I'm thinking a HEV Super Duty may be on the way.  Hopefully PHEV.

Hopefully so but the proposed production increase for 7.3 plan is still roughly five years away.

[7Mary3]

14 hours ago, Rick73 said:

Tentative commitment from Ford to union to increase 7.3L capacity with production starting in 2028 is interesting.  It suggest to me Ford is not anticipating (or planning on) a BEV Super Duty, at least in significant volume, and also that some diesel demand may transition to gasoline.  Apparently investment in ICE continues, though possibly at lower level? 

 

EPA and CARB are going to make it increasingly difficult and expensive to get diesels certified (particularly to meet NOX standards) starting in 2025.

Edited September 24, 2023 by 7Mary3

[Captainp4]

12 hours ago, 7Mary3 said:

 

EPA and CARB are going to make it increasingly difficult and expensive to get diesels certified (particularly to meet NOX standards) starting in 2025.

What else can they do to meet standards? They already have dpf and def. More aggressive approaches to that or more extra stuff??

[jpd80]

1 hour ago, Captainp4 said:

What else can they do to meet standards? They already have dpf and def. More aggressive approaches to that or more extra stuff??

Tighter control of the exhaust gas temperature is a big part of it.

Bosch released an exhaust gas emission control process a few years back that would have made European passenger diesels compliant with future emission levels but manufacturers had already committed to electrification.
 

The Bosch system uses existing emission hardware and a new electronic control module but the rub is that it can’t be retrofitted to existing vehicles. The tighter and higher temperatures required means changes to engine cylinder heads.  Maybe this system would be worth investment for heavier vehicles to really knock down emissions…

Edited September 24, 2023 by jpd80