Auto Execs Are Coming Clean, EVs Are Just Not Working...

[jpd80]

4 hours ago, GearheadGrrrl said:

Transit Connect aerodynamics are impressive, coast down takes a half mile of so and the rear is well shaped for towing trailers- Pulled a motorcycle on a trailer this weekend and the MPG barely dropped at all.

Yes, I love the way Ford shaped the frontal area to round off the sides and slope the short hood, windshield and van top to reduce drag. Do all of that and still have something tat doesn’t look awful is a major achievement. Especially the bus version.

[DeluxeStang]

1 hour ago, jpd80 said:

The irony is that they had something similar to the current Explorer shape but obviously were concerned with conquesting existing ICE sales but also concerned that their battery range was a little wanting so went Aero and made it look like a 1980s Rover SD1 - they made it look like a car because they want a CD of around 0.26 by raking the frontal area  over like a dart. I don’t like it and no does the clinical trials.

So if you've seen it, does it look kinda like the Kia ev6 (shown below) to a degree?  It's very odd to me how a design is only shown to test groups after it's been locked in more or less. Most products have a variety of design proposals created for them early on in the process, it seems like it would be more logical getting consumer feedback at that stage, when you actually had time to incorporate said feedback. It sounds like the designers at Ford are just hearing how much they screwed up, but they can't really do anything about it. 

[jpd80]

1 hour ago, DeluxeStang said:

So if you've seen it, does it look kinda like the Kia ev6 (shown below) to a degree?  

Neeeah, kinda sorta the overall shape is similar but the proportions of the vehicle make it look a bit off, small changes are everything in styling, the back face is actually slightly recessed…

 

 

1 hour ago, DeluxeStang said:

It's very odd to me how a design is only shown to test groups after it's been locked in more or less. Most products have a variety of design proposals created for them early on in the process, it seems like it would be more logical getting consumer feedback at that stage, when you actually had time to incorporate said feedback. It sounds like the designers at Ford are just hearing how much they screwed up, but they can't really do anything about it. 

 

Farley made a decision to pull the wheels off the design and do the same thing he did with Mach E. The original designs looked a lot like Explorer/Aviator….maybe a little too close but anyways, the captain got it into his head that the buyers would love something more Aero, there was even talk of calling the Ford version Thunderbird (my heart sank when I heard that).

 

And you’re right, this was a captains call, a top down decision again to get better battery range with a slippery design, I think he lost the original buyer audience but was hoping to pick up a new group of buyer all while  not conquesting Explorer. Ford always does this, they slip from a great idea to transition loads of buyers to then go off making those BEVs into expensive lower volume niche models, I mean WTF guys?

Brought to you by the make less, charge more team….

 

 

Edited November 6, 2023 by jpd80

[blwnsmoke]

On 11/5/2023 at 7:42 AM, akirby said:

It doesn’t change your returns.  Think of it as a payday loan.  If you can’t take the full credit when you file you have to pay it back.

I was under the impression it worked like when I had solar put on.  Received the 30%  fed rebate but it took 3 years to get it back in full due to my tax liability each year.

 

So with cars, if you can't collect it in the first tax return, you lose what you didn't get?

[rmc523]

20 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

See, if this boxy Kia thing is already quite areo efficient, why didn't Ford adopt this styling direction for their BEV three row? It seems like they went for the science project design direction, with little benefit over conventional form factors. That's assuming, of course, that a largish 7 seater isn't gonna be able to get the drag coefficient much lower than 0.28 figure the Kia offers. Just seems like they played themselves. 

 

The thing is, Ford got it, until they didn't. EVs work when your development strategy is keep things fresh, which they haven't with the mach-e and lighting. They'll occasionally show off some new trim level, but they usually come across as half assed. Whereas brands like Kia are crushing it when it comes to their new EV offerings. Ford is making the same mistake they always seem to make, coming out with an excellent series of products, and then letting them go stale, watching sales crater, and wondering what went wrong. 

 

I think they're in the mindset of "EV buyers want 'futurrrrreeeee' looking products"

[BarneyFord]

On 11/5/2023 at 6:42 AM, akirby said:

It doesn’t change your returns.  Think of it as a payday loan.  If you can’t take the full credit when you file you have to pay it back.

This has been updated, your tax bill no longer matters. 
 

https://www.fool.com/the-ascent/taxes/articles/electric-vehicle-tax-credits-are-about-to-become-easier-to-get-in-2024/#:~:text=The U.S. Treasury Department has,to the purchase price of

Edited November 6, 2023 by BarneyFord

[HotRunrGuy]

39 minutes ago, BarneyFord said:

This has been updated, your tax bill no longer matters. 
 

https://www.fool.com/the-ascent/taxes/articles/electric-vehicle-tax-credits-are-about-to-become-easier-to-get-in-2024/#:~:text=The U.S. Treasury Department has,to the purchase price of

 

Wonderful. Now there will be more people that don't have a down payment using the tax credit as a way to purchase an EV they can't afford.

 

HRG

[akirby]

5 hours ago, BarneyFord said:

This has been updated, your tax bill no longer matters. 
 

https://www.fool.com/the-ascent/taxes/articles/electric-vehicle-tax-credits-are-about-to-become-easier-to-get-in-2024/#:~:text=The U.S. Treasury Department has,to the purchase price of

That’s completely wrong and misleading.  You can get the up front credit but you still have to qualify for the full rebate at tax time or you have to pay it back.

 

e.g. You take the full $7500 credit at purchase time but the following April you only have a $4000 tax liability.  Your tax liability for that year goes to 0 but you must repay $3500.  And you can’t carry over the $3500 to the following year.

Edited November 7, 2023 by akirby

[akirby]

7 hours ago, blwnsmoke said:

 

So with cars, if you can't collect it in the first tax return, you lose what you didn't get?

Absolutely.   See the example above.

 

Directly from the IRS:

 

The credit is nonrefundable, so you can't get back more on the credit than you owe in taxes. You can't apply any excess credit to future tax years.

Edited November 7, 2023 by akirby

[fordmantpw]

Be careful with the word "owe."  You may not actually "owe" the money at tax time, but you had a tax responsibility.  So, if you "owe" $50, but had a responsibility of $8000, you will still get the credit of $7500.  However, if your responsibility is only $4000, you will only get $4000.

[akirby]

47 minutes ago, fordmantpw said:

Be careful with the word "owe."  You may not actually "owe" the money at tax time, but you had a tax responsibility.  So, if you "owe" $50, but had a responsibility of $8000, you will still get the credit of $7500.  However, if your responsibility is only $4000, you will only get $4000.

Good point I updated it.  I forget some people don’t understand taxes vs withholding and refunds.

Edited November 7, 2023 by akirby

[blwnsmoke]

16 hours ago, akirby said:

Absolutely.   See the example above.

 

Directly from the IRS:

 

The credit is nonrefundable, so you can't get back more on the credit than you owe in taxes. You can't apply any excess credit to future tax years.

 

So then it will absolutely benefit those who miss out by only getting a partial credit as they will get the full $7,500 immediately off the vehicle.

[ice-capades]

I have to wonder how many BEV customers are really aware of the details with the $7,500 tax credit and how it actually works. It really benefits those customers that most likely need the tax credit the least and can afford the vehicles regardless. If the $7,500 tax credit was instead a rebate, the market impact could be much different. Just have to love the government bureaucracy in action. Create a program that is complex enough that many won't be aware of the details, require Ford and dealership reporting along with the IRS compliance, etc. What could possibly go wrong! 

Edited November 7, 2023 by ice-capades

[silvrsvt]

34 minutes ago, ice-capades said:

I have to wonder how many BEV customers are really aware of the details with the $7,500 tax credit and how it actually works. It really benefits those customers that most likely need the tax credit the least and can afford the vehicles regardless. If the $7,500 tax credit was instead a rebate, the market impact could be much different. Just have to love the government bureaucracy in action. Create a program that is complex enough that many won't be aware of the details, require Ford and dealership reporting along with the IRS compliance, etc. What could possibly go wrong! 

 

Well you do have this happening too...

 

Almost Half Of Americans Haven't Heard About Biden's EV Tax Credits

[DeluxeStang]

On 11/6/2023 at 12:30 AM, jpd80 said:

Neeeah, kinda sorta the overall shape is similar but the proportions of the vehicle make it look a bit off, small changes are everything in styling, the back face is actually slightly recessed…

 

 

 

Farley made a decision to pull the wheels off the design and do the same thing he did with Mach E. The original designs looked a lot like Explorer/Aviator….maybe a little too close but anyways, the captain got it into his head that the buyers would love something more Aero, there was even talk of calling the Ford version Thunderbird (my heart sank when I heard that).

 

And you’re right, this was a captains call, a top down decision again to get better battery range with a slippery design, I think he lost the original buyer audience but was hoping to pick up a new group of buyer all while  not conquesting Explorer. Ford always does this, they slip from a great idea to transition loads of buyers to then go off making those BEVs into expensive lower volume niche models, I mean WTF guys?

Brought to you by the make less, charge more team….

 

 

Man, I really hope they don't screw up t3 by taking the same approach. I assume that's the three row under the tarp on the left. I've heard people say t3 and this three row will both be shocking, both in terms of design, and tech. I think they need to reel it back in again. 

 

EVs are at their best when they're essential just a slightly improved gas powered car. They handle like a gas powered car, but slightly better, they look like a normal car, just with slight improvements like shorter overhangs and a lower hood. Lower ownership costs, you get the idea. Where EVs really struggle is when they set out to be weird. The team working on ford's upcoming EVs seem to have gotten into their heads that EVs need to be weird and "futuristic" in order to sell. I thought Farley understood that wouldn't work, and that's why he created the mach-e in the first place. Now, it just seems like he's lost. 

[jpd80]

26 minutes ago, DeluxeStang said:

Man, I really hope they don't screw up t3 by taking the same approach. I assume that's the three row under the tarp on the left. I've heard people say t3 and this three row will both be shocking, both in terms of design, and tech. I think they need to reel it back in again. 

It’s a shit show because Farley keeps getting involved and changing things away from what regular customers want.

 

Quote

EVs are at their best when they're essential just a slightly improved gas powered car. They handle like a gas powered car, but slightly better, they look like a normal car, just with slight improvements like shorter overhangs and a lower hood. Lower ownership costs, you get the idea. Where EVs really struggle is when they set out to be weird. The team working on ford's upcoming EVs seem to have gotten into their heads that EVs need to be weird and "futuristic" in order to sell. I thought Farley understood that wouldn't work, and that's why he created the mach-e in the first place. Now, it just seems like he's lost. 

From your lips to God’s ears, ICE top hat on BEV skateboard - that’s all Ford need to do for next Gen Lightning, Expedition & Explorer. How is it possible for people to get this wrong, are they looking at Cybertruck and thinking more has to be done to counter it?

 

I think Farley and Ford went in boots ‘n all on styling changes to BEVs thinking that buyers would accept it all, never thinking why existing vehicles are liked so much. The reporting from clinics has reached Farley he has the results and it’s now up to him to decide if he presses forward or not….that’s why the pause in spending happened, they’re building this big ass plant for mass BEV rollout when the current Lightning is selling 6% of total F150 sales. 

 

Edited November 7, 2023 by jpd80

[rmc523]

27 minutes ago, DeluxeStang said:

Man, I really hope they don't screw up t3 by taking the same approach. I assume that's the three row under the tarp on the left. I've heard people say t3 and this three row will both be shocking, both in terms of design, and tech. I think they need to reel it back in again. 

 

EVs are at their best when they're essential just a slightly improved gas powered car. They handle like a gas powered car, but slightly better, they look like a normal car, just with slight improvements like shorter overhangs and a lower hood. Lower ownership costs, you get the idea. Where EVs really struggle is when they set out to be weird. The team working on ford's upcoming EVs seem to have gotten into their heads that EVs need to be weird and "futuristic" in order to sell. I thought Farley understood that wouldn't work, and that's why he created the mach-e in the first place. Now, it just seems like he's lost. 

 

I still think we're going to see the current Lightning continue on as a more "traditional truck" alternative to the more BEV lifestyle T3.

[GearheadGrrrl]

There is also a substantial market of "virtue signalers", and something that looks like an ordinary F150 won't appeal to them. These are the people that ignored Honda and other's perfectly good hybrids and bought Priu because they had a distinctive look.

[silvrsvt]

27 minutes ago, jpd80 said:

I think Farley and Ford went in boots ‘n all on styling changes to BEVs thinking that buyers would accept it all, never thinking why existing vehicles are liked so much. The reporting from clinics has reached Farley he has the results and it’s now up to him to decide if he presses forward or not….that’s why the pause in spending happened, they’re building this big ass plant for mass BEV rollout when the current Lightning is selling 6% of total F150 sales. 

If you really think that BOC will only be building the T3 there, I think your very mistaken. long term It looks like the EV Ranger and Bronco will be built at the same plant before the decade is over. 
 

I also think the pause in spending is being way blown out of proportion by the press like everything else EV related. 
 

People seem to forget that we should have had the EV three row vehicles out already, but they’ve been pushed back two years also. 

[Oac98]

5 hours ago, jpd80 said:

It’s a shit show because Farley keeps getting involved and changing things away from what regular customers want.

 

From your lips to God’s ears, ICE top hat on BEV skateboard - that’s all Ford need to do for next Gen Lightning, Expedition & Explorer. How is it possible for people to get this wrong, are they looking at Cybertruck and thinking more has to be done to counter it?

 

I think Farley and Ford went in boots ‘n all on styling changes to BEVs thinking that buyers would accept it all, never thinking why existing vehicles are liked so much. The reporting from clinics has reached Farley he has the results and it’s now up to him to decide if he presses forward or not….that’s why the pause in spending happened, they’re building this big ass plant for mass BEV rollout when the current Lightning is selling 6% of total F150 sales. 

 

Let’s just hope Ford doesn’t screw these new vehicles up. We the workers will be affected if what they design is not accepted by the public. I don’t even trust their sales projections anymore when it comes to these upcoming EVs. So far they’ve fallen short! 

Edited November 8, 2023 by Oacjay98

[2005Explorer]

3 hours ago, jpd80 said:

It’s a shit show because Farley keeps getting involved and changing things away from what regular customers want.

 

From your lips to God’s ears, ICE top hat on BEV skateboard - that’s all Ford need to do for next Gen Lightning, Expedition & Explorer. How is it possible for people to get this wrong, are they looking at Cybertruck and thinking more has to be done to counter it?

 

I think Farley and Ford went in boots ‘n all on styling changes to BEVs thinking that buyers would accept it all, never thinking why existing vehicles are liked so much. The reporting from clinics has reached Farley he has the results and it’s now up to him to decide if he presses forward or not….that’s why the pause in spending happened, they’re building this big ass plant for mass BEV rollout when the current Lightning is selling 6% of total F150 sales. 

 

Granted the Maverick is more affordable, but compare Maverick sales to Santa Cruz sales. The Maverick looks like a little pickup truck which people really like. The Santa Cruz looks like a weird lifestyle vehicle with a bed. The Maverick way outsells the Santa Cruz. I have not seen any surveys indicating that styling is a big factor, but I would not be surprised if it didn't top the list right behind value for the money.

[akirby]

6 hours ago, blwnsmoke said:

 

So then it will absolutely benefit those who miss out by only getting a partial credit as they will get the full $7,500 immediately off the vehicle.

Yes but it’s only a temporary discount.  

[DeluxeStang]

5 hours ago, jpd80 said:

It’s a shit show because Farley keeps getting involved and changing things away from what regular customers want.

 

Farley definitely has some good things about him for sure, he's probably the biggest car fanatic running a car company right now, that passion definitely helps with some Ford products. The broncos and raptors, the mustangs, including the GTD, the Ford gt seems dead right now, but I wouldn't be surprised if he's pushing to get a new generation made behind the scenes. So some of the stuff he's putting out is good. 

 

He's also smart when it comes to understanding Ford's strengths, and how to leverage those to differentiate Ford from their rivals. But that's about it. Everytime he talks about EVs, software, and driverless tech, I get the impression that his teenage son gave him a five minute informative lesson just before he goes to speak to the press on these topics. He's a very old world car enthusiast. He's trying, but he really doesn't seem to understand why emerging trends in the industry are appealing, or how to capitalize on them. 

[DeluxeStang]

5 hours ago, GearheadGrrrl said:

There is also a substantial market of "virtue signalers", and something that looks like an ordinary F150 won't appeal to them. These are the people that ignored Honda and other's perfectly good hybrids and bought Priu because they had a distinctive look.

I've never met a single Prius owner who bought the Prius for how it looks, aside from the latest generation which genuinely looks somewhat decent. 

Edited November 8, 2023 by DeluxeStang

[DeluxeStang]

5 hours ago, rmc523 said:

 

I still think we're going to see the current Lightning continue on as a more "traditional truck" alternative to the more BEV lifestyle T3.

I've proposed this very thing. There are definitely a group of buyers who want the radical, and futuristic stuff, the truck of the future that changes everything so to speak. But there are also a ton of people who like the idea of an electric vehicle, but don't want anything overly weird. 

 

2 hours ago, 2005Explorer said:

Granted the Maverick is more affordable, but compare Maverick sales to Santa Cruz sales. The Maverick looks like a little pickup truck which people really like. The Santa Cruz looks like a weird lifestyle vehicle with a bed. The Maverick way outsells the Santa Cruz. I have not seen any surveys indicating that styling is a big factor, but I would not be surprised if it didn't top the list right behind value for the money.

As someone who owns a maverick hybrid, we looked into a sante Cruz, very briefly. I didn't hate the styling, the issue is the sante Cruz feels like it combined the worst attributes of the maverick and Ridgeline into one vehicle. It's overpriced, it has the smaller size of the maverick, but the crappy fuel economy of a Ridgeline. I just looked at it and thought why does this thing exist? The maverick has a very clear mission, the sante Cruz feels like this little freak show creature that has no appeal aside from being weird.