What Customers Really Want

[silvrsvt]

2 hours ago, jpd80 said:

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…

 

But what point does diesel really offer any alternative over a gas powered vehicle? The newer diesels in heavy duty vehicle applications like pickups never really offered anything over say an ecoboost engine, esp when it came to gas mileage. 

 

The big selling point was better MPGs and better durability, which both seem have to taken a dump with all the additional emissions controls and complexly they have now. 

[jpd80]

5 hours ago, silvrsvt said:

 

But what point does diesel really offer any alternative over a gas powered vehicle? The newer diesels in heavy duty vehicle applications like pickups never really offered anything over say an ecoboost engine, esp when it came to gas mileage.

The 6.7 offers significantly higher tow rating with better fuel efficiency 

 

 

5 hours ago, silvrsvt said:

 

The big selling point was better MPGs and better durability, which both seem have to taken a dump with all the additional emissions controls and complexly they have now. 

No added complexity with new system, just better temperature management 

[AM222]

On 9/23/2023 at 5:32 AM, jpd80 said:

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.

Interestingly, during the time of Alan Mulally, Ford had a very complete lineup globally. 
Toyota for example can attract young customers and keep them in the Toyota-Lexus family because they have a full lineup its customers can step up to. 

A 2024 Maverick starts at $23K, but not everyone wants to drive something as long as an Explorer. 
Next up is the $29K Escape which Ford plans to eventually discontinue, this will leave the Bronco Sport which starts at $31K (or whatever its price will be in 2025).

Ford needs a Maverick SUV. Lol Sort of like a low-cost Bronco Sport with a FWD base trim. 

In some left-hand drive IMG markets, Ford's traditional B and C-segment models vanished and the C-segment Territory crossover SUV is the only model in small/small-smallish vehicle segment waving the blue oval flag. Territory is closer to the Corolla Cross in price but similar to a Rav4/Escape in size. Partial solution for IMG markets, still no EcoSport replacecment but it's better than nothing.
 

Edited September 25, 2023 by AM222

[jpd80]

2 hours ago, AM222 said:

Interestingly, during the time of Alan Mulally, Ford had a very complete lineup globally. 
Toyota for example can attract young customers and keep them in the Toyota-Lexus family because they have a full lineup its customers can step up to. 

A 2024 Maverick starts at $23K, but not everyone wants to drive something as long as an Explorer. 
Next up is the $29K Escape which Ford plans to eventually discontinue, this will leave the Bronco Sport which starts at $31K (or whatever its price will be in 2025).

Ford needs a Maverick SUV. Lol Sort of like a low-cost Bronco Sport with a FWD base trim. 

In some left-hand drive IMG markets, Ford's traditional B and C-segment models vanished and the C-segment Territory crossover SUV is the only model in small/small-smallish vehicle segment waving the blue oval flag. Territory is closer to the Corolla Cross in price but similar to a Rav4/Escape in size. Partial solution for IMG markets, still no EcoSport replacecment but it's better than nothing.
 

The sad part is that in global markets like Asia Pacific Ford has withdrawn for compact vehicles,

RHD markets like Australia, New Zealand and South Africa could do with supply of Puma and Escape

but honestly, it might as well be unobtainium, FOA  inquired about Bronco Sport and Maverick in RHD

but told RHD was never part of the plan so not happening….Ford would rather sell $90,000 Mach Es…

 

Apart from Ranger and Everest, everything else is pretty hard to get, even the T6 twins are a good 9 months wait.

Edited September 25, 2023 by jpd80

[akirby]

6 hours ago, AM222 said:

Interestingly, during the time of Alan Mulally, Ford had a very complete lineup globally. 
Toyota for example can attract young customers and keep them in the Toyota-Lexus family because they have a full lineup its customers can step up to. 

A 2024 Maverick starts at $23K, but not everyone wants to drive something as long as an Explorer. 
Next up is the $29K Escape which Ford plans to eventually discontinue, this will leave the Bronco Sport which starts at $31K (or whatever its price will be in 2025).

Ford needs a Maverick SUV. Lol Sort of like a low-cost Bronco Sport with a FWD base trim. 

In some left-hand drive IMG markets, Ford's traditional B and C-segment models vanished and the C-segment Territory crossover SUV is the only model in small/small-smallish vehicle segment waving the blue oval flag. Territory is closer to the Corolla Cross in price but similar to a Rav4/Escape in size. Partial solution for IMG markets, still no EcoSport replacecment but it's better than nothing.
 

Most mfrs have short and long C class utilities.  Bronco Sport is short, a Maverick suv would fit the long slot if they do cancel Escape.

[akirby]

6 hours ago, AM222 said:

Interestingly, during the time of Alan Mulally, Ford had a very complete lineup globally. 
Toyota for example can attract young customers and keep them in the Toyota-Lexus family because they have a full lineup its customers can step up to. 

That’s a popular theory and used to be very true but I don’t think that’s nearly as important nowadays.  Look at all the Civic owners that defected to Maverick.  That wouldn’t have happened 20 years ago.

[AM222]

1 hour ago, akirby said:

Most mfrs have short and long C class utilities.  Bronco Sport is short, a Maverick suv would fit the long slot if they do cancel Escape.

The difference is Ford's short C segment SUV is more expensive than the long C-segment SUV because its AWD-only and part of the "Bronco" family.

[AM222]

5 hours ago, jpd80 said:

The sad part is that in global markets like Asia Pacific Ford has withdrawn for compact vehicles,

RHD markets like Australia, New Zealand and South Africa could do with supply of Puma and Escape

but honestly, it might as well be unobtainium, FOA  inquired about Bronco Sport and Maverick in RHD

but told RHD was never part of the plan so not happening….Ford would rather sell $90,000 Mach Es…

 

Apart from Ranger and Everest, everything else is pretty hard to get, even the T6 twins are a good 9 months wait.

If Ford only manufactured the Puma in Asia, they could have a proper subcompact priced competitively in the region. 

The only C-segment Ford built in Asia that's exported is the Territory which is sadly left-hand drive only.



 

Edited September 25, 2023 by AM222

[GearheadGrrrl]

Ford needs a freakin' plan, like VW Group, Toyota, and all the other world class automakers. 

 

Every year or so Ford wheels out the latest "plan" in hopes of impressing the investment community, but Ford's real de facto plan is an over reliance on pickups and panel vans protected by the 25% "Chicken Tax" Tariff that should have gone away the better part of a century ago. On a world scale that's a single digit niche market, and even in the vast big BOF pickup sanctuary that is the U.S. most new housing doesn't come with F series sized garages, if they have garages at all. 

 

Ford needs to make a plan and implement it while they still have capital available and before the vultures of bankruptcy circle...

[akirby]

54 minutes ago, AM222 said:

The difference is Ford's short C segment SUV is more expensive than the long C-segment SUV because its AWD-only and part of the "Bronco" family.

That’s a great thing as long as they’re selling.  The only reason to go after lower price points is if they need the volume to keep the plant near capacity and they’re profitable at lower prices.

[akirby]

22 minutes ago, GearheadGrrrl said:

Ford needs a freakin' plan, like VW Group, Toyota, and all the other world class automakers. 

 

Every year or so Ford wheels out the latest "plan" in hopes of impressing the investment community, but Ford's real de facto plan is an over reliance on pickups and panel vans protected by the 25% "Chicken Tax" Tariff that should have gone away the better part of a century ago. On a world scale that's a single digit niche market, and even in the vast big BOF pickup sanctuary that is the U.S. most new housing doesn't come with F series sized garages, if they have garages at all. 

 

Ford needs to make a plan and implement it while they still have capital available and before the vultures of bankruptcy circle...

They have a plan.  Several in fact.  They just keep changing it.   Pick something and stick to it.

 

As for the truck market it’s not going away any time soon and that’s always where Ford got its big profits.   And NA sales of F series dwarfs the global competition when it comes to revenue and profits.  Without Covid F series sales would be closer to 1M units.

 

Global sales volume 2022

 

 

 

[DeluxeStang]

10 hours ago, AM222 said:

Interestingly, during the time of Alan Mulally, Ford had a very complete lineup globally. 
Toyota for example can attract young customers and keep them in the Toyota-Lexus family because they have a full lineup its customers can step up to. 

A 2024 Maverick starts at $23K, but not everyone wants to drive something as long as an Explorer. 
Next up is the $29K Escape which Ford plans to eventually discontinue, this will leave the Bronco Sport which starts at $31K (or whatever its price will be in 2025).

Ford needs a Maverick SUV. Lol Sort of like a low-cost Bronco Sport with a FWD base trim. 

In some left-hand drive IMG markets, Ford's traditional B and C-segment models vanished and the C-segment Territory crossover SUV is the only model in small/small-smallish vehicle segment waving the blue oval flag. Territory is closer to the Corolla Cross in price but similar to a Rav4/Escape in size. Partial solution for IMG markets, still no EcoSport replacecment but it's better than nothing.
 

It's not a stretch to assume the EV that will replace escape will be around the same price as the current escape, especially considering how much money Ford is apparently saving with these next gen platforms. 

 

Not to mention these EV platforms can accommodate virtually any form factor. So Ford could very easily be planning more affordable sleek CUVs or even electric hatchbacks to appeal to today's youth without having to spend a ton of money to develop them. 

[ice-capades]

8 minutes ago, DeluxeStang said:

It's not a stretch to assume the EV that will replace escape will be around the same price as the current escape, especially considering how much money Ford is apparently saving with these next gen platforms. 

 

Not to mention these EV platforms can accommodate virtually any form factor. So Ford could very easily be planning more affordable sleek CUVs or even electric hatchbacks to appeal to today's youth without having to spend a ton of money to develop them. 

 

Regarding future EV pricing being more affordable, I'll believe it when I see it, especially after whatever the terms are with a new UAW contract. 

[ice-capades]

1 hour ago, akirby said:

They have a plan.  Several in fact.  They just keep changing it.   Pick something and stick to it.

 

As for the truck market it’s not going away any time soon and that’s always where Ford got its big profits.   And NA sales of F series dwarfs the global competition when it comes to revenue and profits.  Without Covid F series sales would be closer to 1M units.

 

For some reason, I thought that perhaps pre-pandemic F-Series global sales actually hit the 1M mark. 

[rperez817]

2 hours ago, GearheadGrrrl said:

Ford needs to make a plan and implement it while they still have capital available and before the vultures of bankruptcy circle...

 

Good point GearheadGrrrl. Ford did make a plan, called Ford+. The most important component of that plan for the next few years is the company's BEV strategy with Model e and Pro divisions. The Ford Electric Vehicle Strategy: What You Need to Know | Ford Media Center

 

The electric era is here, and Ford is in the midst of implementing an ambitious, comprehensive plan to make the transition to an electric lifestyle – or commercial fleet, for that matter – easy.

Ford is investing $22 billion in electrification through 2025 as part of its plan to lead electrification in areas of strength. The company is electrifying its most iconic products – the Mustang, F-150 and Transit – with many more to come in the years ahead. In addition to offering zero-emissions versions of its most popular vehicles, Ford is harnessing electrification to deliver more of what customers love about them: Performance, capability and productivity.

 

And as mentioned in that press release Ford is indeed implementing it. The big thing is that Ford further accelerate its efforts "electrifying its most iconic products – the Mustang, F-150 and Transit – with many more to come in the years ahead".

 

Also, Ford needs to implement an exit strategy for Ford Blue soon, whether that involves selling off assets to private equity firms, joining a consortium of other legacy automakers, etc., so that it gets out of the "old world" of the automotive industry as soon as possible.

[ice-capades]

13 minutes ago, rperez817 said:

And as mentioned in that press release Ford is indeed implementing it. The big thing is that Ford further accelerate its efforts "electrifying its most iconic products – the Mustang, F-150 and Transit – with many more to come in the years ahead".

 

Also, Ford needs to implement an exit strategy for Ford Blue soon, whether that involves selling off assets to private equity firms, joining a consortium of other legacy automakers, etc., so that it gets out of the "old world" of the automotive industry as soon as possible.

 

Are you really serious? It's just my opinion, but I have trouble believing you're serious about a lot that you post. Ford's invested billions of dollars in the transition to BEV vehicle and battery production with the Blue Oval City facility under construction, etc. and you want an even faster effort. Sorry, but the current BEV sales rate doesn't support such an acceleration, even with the current BEV incentives. 

 

And how exactly do you suppose Ford will finance the BEV transition without the profits generated by Ford's sales of the ICE F-Series and other ICE vehicles? 

 

There are still obstacles to overcome regarding overall BEV adoption including charging infrastructure, range and pricing before widespread acceptance accelerates. And it will probably be several years before we see benefits from any potential next generation technologies such as Solid-State Batteries.    

[rmc523]

On 9/22/2023 at 5:32 PM, 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.

 

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.

 

Yeah, Ford has a bad habit of extending out refreshes well past their prime (and past 3-year leases), de-contenting on those extended refreshes, and then wondering where customers went.  Duh buyers aren't going to buy the same vehicle with less content for more money than before.....

 

 

24 minutes ago, ice-capades said:

 

Are you really serious? It's just my opinion, but I have trouble believing you're serious about a lot that you post. Ford's invested billions of dollars in the transition to BEV vehicle and battery production with the Blue Oval City facility under construction, etc. and you want an even faster effort. Sorry, but the current BEV sales rate doesn't support such an acceleration, even with the current BEV incentives. 

 

And how exactly do you suppose Ford will finance the BEV transition without the profits generated by Ford's sales of the ICE F-Series and other ICE vehicles? 

 

There are still obstacles to overcome regarding overall BEV adoption including charging infrastructure, range and pricing before widespread acceptance accelerates. And it will probably be several years before we see benefits from any potential next generation technologies such as Solid-State Batteries.    

 

He won't be happy until ICE = 0% and BEV = 100%, because BEV = unicorn farts and rainbows for everyone!!!!!

[akirby]

1 hour ago, ice-capades said:

 

For some reason, I thought that perhaps pre-pandemic F-Series global sales actually hit the 1M mark. 

Not in the US but it came close.  Total production exceeded 1M a few times including Canadian (2nd column) and Mexico sales (3rd column).

 

[akirby]

1 hour ago, rperez817 said:

 

Also, Ford needs to implement an exit strategy for Ford Blue soon, whether that involves selling off assets to private equity firms, joining a consortium of other legacy automakers, etc., so that it gets out of the "old world" of the automotive industry as soon as possible.

That is officially the stupidest thing you’ve ever said here.  Even worse than your autonomous car bullshit.

[akirby]

32 minutes ago, rmc523 said:

He won't be happy until ICE = 0% and BEV = 100%, because BEV = unicorn farts and rainbows for everyone!!!!!

You forgot autonomous vehicles…..

[jpd80]

9 hours ago, AM222 said:

If Ford only manufactured the Puma in Asia, they could have a proper subcompact priced competitively in the region. 

The only C-segment Ford built in Asia that's exported is the Territory which is sadly left-hand drive only.

 

Unfortunately, Ford has no interest in building Puma in a second plant, it’s maddening that China is on our back door and we can’t get any RHD builds from there either 

Edited September 25, 2023 by jpd80

[jpd80]

5 hours ago, akirby said:

That is officially the stupidest thing you’ve ever said here.  Even worse than your autonomous car bullshit.

Absolutely

We all know what prematurely killing Ford Blue would do to Ford’s profits needed to fund Model E development and support during all the low or no profit years…….

[AGR]

6 hours ago, akirby said:

That is officially the stupidest thing you’ve ever said here.  Even worse than your autonomous car bullshit.

Yeah, but only slightly dumber than another poster taking what's likely a bargaining tactic as a sign of the death of EVs. 

[rperez817]

7 hours ago, rmc523 said:

ICE = 0% and BEV = 100%

 

That's exactly where the global automotive industry's future lies, and where Ford has an opportunity to lead.

[jpd80]

38 minutes ago, rperez817 said:

 

That's exactly where the global automotive industry's future lies, and where Ford has an opportunity to lead.

and Ford Will only lead sales if enough people actually want to buy their BEVs…..

A 600k/year BEV run rate only works if there 600,000 sales in a year

The other way is if 600k/year is EVs that includes a lot of hybrids and PHEVs 
If that’s the case, you watch Ford cling to that electric vehicle claim like a drowning man

 

Ill be curious to see what September sales are like, hoping Mach E and Lightning have a good month but not surprised if that doesn’t happen 

 

Edited September 26, 2023 by jpd80