Ford CEO: Vertical Integration Will Increase with Move to EVs

[DeluxeStang]

5 hours ago, ExplorerDude said:

Yes, the current Edge and Nautilus are more attractive. The new 7-seater Ford EV is not attractive in my opinion. Its shape is what turns me off. It’s extremely different and I honestly don’t know how they will sell 50,000-75,000 units a year projected for the US. I could be wrong but who knows. I still have no idea what name it will have. It’s honestly not fitting to call it an Explorer. I’ve heard “Edison” floated and no not because it’s Team Edison’s latest project.
 

On the other hand, the Lincoln version while different is not unattractive. It’s sleek and very fitting of a future Lincoln EV. I am fairly certain the 7-seater Lincoln EV will be called Aviator though.

 

I believe Farley wants to go after Tesla buyers with a 7-seater EV which Tesla doesn’t have. Oakville is projected to build / sell 200,000 a year. I assume Oakville is building these for global consumption as this will be the only place these are built.

That's unfortunate, based off the covered images, and the comments made a out the design, I'm imagining some sort of low, dart head pointed front end, maybe slightly Ford gt esque,with a roofline like the Tesla model x, but blockier, and some sort of recessed rear end. I've also heard it's very low, and has been off putting proportions. 

 

As for the Lincoln, I've heard it's essentially the Lincoln star concept, but slightly sportier looking, and more exotic. If the current aviator was like a range Rover, the next gen aviator is like a Aston Martin dbx or Lamborghini urus, that's how someone described it. 

[DeluxeStang]

3 hours ago, Oacjay98 said:

I think it’s actually sad news that the old stale yet solid Edge and Nautilus look better. How can Farley and the R and D people look at these vehicles and think they’re gonna sell based on what you’re saying. I hope it’s not another love it or hate it Ford Flex situation. The Flex never sold great and was just a top up at OAC along with that hideous MKT. He might have made them go back to the drawing board with the Mach E doesn’t mean it’s gonna work this time changing the original design. I hope Farley knows what he’s doing he seems quite intelligent.

Farley thinks he's Elon Musk. He sees how the futuristic and strange designs for Tesla have worked for them and assumes it will work for Ford as well. He seems to have gotten in his head that new EVs have to be overly futuristic, not a smart strategy imo. It's good to differentiate your ICE and EV models, but it seems like they're going to far with it. 

[akirby]

1 hour ago, rmc523 said:

 

There's a difference between "ugly unique" and "attractive (or decent) unique"

 

C-Max fell under the former category, IMO - ugly might be a strong word, but it certainly wasn't attractive....

Neither was Prius but it was hugely successful.   I’m not convinced it’s a good idea either.

[Willwll313wll]

56 minutes ago, DeluxeStang said:

Farley thinks he's Elon Musk. He sees how the futuristic and strange designs for Tesla have worked for them and assumes it will work for Ford as well. He seems to have gotten in his head that new EVs have to be overly futuristic, not a smart strategy imo. It's good to differentiate your ICE and EV models, but it seems like they're going to far with it. 

 

Some would say the Cybertruck goes too far. I think it went as far as it could and they would probably go farther if they reasonably could. I think that's a good thing, when done right of course, not going far just for the sake of going far. Shake up the market. Push design. Take real risk. Be innovative. Be unconventional.  I'm excited to see if Ford/Lincoln delivers with the 3rows and project T3.

[akirby]

12 minutes ago, Willwll313wll said:

 

Some would say the Cybertruck goes too far. I think it went as far as it could and they would probably go farther if they reasonably could. I think that's a good thing, when done right of course, not going far just for the sake of going far. Shake up the market. Push design. Take real risk. Be innovative. Be unconventional.  I'm excited to see if Ford/Lincoln delivers with the 3rows and project T3.

Cybertruck is a cartoon/hot wheels toy that can’t compete with F150 or Silverado EV trucks.  It’s the DeLorean of the EV world.

[akirby]

1 hour ago, DeluxeStang said:

Farley thinks he's Elon Musk. He sees how the futuristic and strange designs for Tesla have worked for them and assumes it will work for Ford as well. He seems to have gotten in his head that new EVs have to be overly futuristic, not a smart strategy imo. It's good to differentiate your ICE and EV models, but it seems like they're going to far with it. 

Im not sure it’s being done just for styling.   What’s been described doesn’t sound like a Tesla design.

[Willwll313wll]

7 minutes ago, akirby said:

Cybertruck is a cartoon/hot wheels toy that can’t compete with F150 or Silverado EV trucks.  It’s the DeLorean of the EV world.

 

Hahah that's funny. 

I am curious of how it will perform in real world! It has to be good. It can not just be something to look. Reviews should be happening in the next couple months. 

[Willwll313wll]

9 minutes ago, akirby said:

Im not sure it’s being done just for styling.   What’s been described doesn’t sound like a Tesla design.

 

It sound's like it's being done at Ford sounds like it is for efficiency, which I think it should be. Let the form follow the function. 

Edited November 13, 2023 by Willwll313wll

[DeluxeStang]

16 minutes ago, akirby said:

Im not sure it’s being done just for styling.   What’s been described doesn’t sound like a Tesla design.

Tesla design in the sense of prioritizing areo targets over aesthetic appeal. 

 

32 minutes ago, Willwll313wll said:

 

Some would say the Cybertruck goes too far. I think it went as far as it could and they would probably go farther if they reasonably could. I think that's a good thing, when done right of course, not going far just for the sake of going far. Shake up the market. Push design. Take real risk. Be innovative. Be unconventional.  I'm excited to see if Ford/Lincoln delivers with the 3rows and project T3.

I get that, zig where others zag is the guiding principle to my own approach to product design. My mentality is the world only looks at you if you give them a reason to, if you're a startup, and you just copy the f-150, then everyone is just going to buy an f-150. 

 

I'm working on a small sporty truck for my portfolio, early on, I decided to wanted to shorten the hood and lengthen the bed, while also lowering the nose. Trying to applying those ideas to something with the typical blocky truck styling cues just looked off. So I decided to try something radically different. I said to myself, in theory, this would be an EV, you can make an EV truck perform really well, but what if you also made it look the part? You're already giving this truck the cab forward proportions of a mid-engine car, so instead of pulling styling cues from a typical truck, make it look like a lifted mid engine sports car instead. It worked, version 1 and 2 of the design were a little rough, I'd say I'm on version 3.5 now, and it's showing some promise. 

 

It still needs some tweaks, but it's something very different. The overall profile looks vaguely like the lancia rally cars from the 80s, and there's an areo pass through in the hood like the EV charger concept. It's a small, practical truck that goes and looks like a sports car. It wouldn't appeal to everyone, but it would definitely appeal to people who want the practicality of a truck, in a more exciting package. So I definitely understand the appeal of doing things differently, but there's a good different, and a bad different. 

[Oac98]

1 hour ago, DeluxeStang said:

Farley thinks he's Elon Musk. He sees how the futuristic and strange designs for Tesla have worked for them and assumes it will work for Ford as well. He seems to have gotten in his head that new EVs have to be overly futuristic, not a smart strategy imo. It's good to differentiate your ICE and EV models, but it seems like they're going to far with it. 

I will brace myself for disappointment as we get the scraps of Fords designs lol. 

[Oac98]

51 minutes ago, Willwll313wll said:

 

Some would say the Cybertruck goes too far. I think it went as far as it could and they would probably go farther if they reasonably could. I think that's a good thing, when done right of course, not going far just for the sake of going far. Shake up the market. Push design. Take real risk. Be innovative. Be unconventional.  I'm excited to see if Ford/Lincoln delivers with the 3rows and project T3.

Well let’s hope they deliver some great products. 

[mackinaw]

37 minutes ago, Willwll313wll said:

It sound's like it's being done at Ford sounds like it is for efficiency, which I think it should be. Let the form follow the function. 

 

Farley said something several months back that one of the easiest ways to increase battery range is to have a very aerodynamic design.  

[T-dubz]

2 hours ago, Oacjay98 said:

Better for who??? Won’t be better for OAC if this Flops. 

If it’s as bad as we all think, it would be better for everyone long term. Yeah, it’s gonna suck short term for OAC, but would you rather get a good selling product in there sooner, or stick with this low volume ev for several years?

[Oac98]

20 minutes ago, T-dubz said:

If it’s as bad as we all think, it would be better for everyone long term. Yeah, it’s gonna suck short term for OAC, but would you rather get a good selling product in there sooner, or stick with this low volume ev for several years?

We need good products, ours are long in tooth and heading out. Last thing we need is low volume here. 

[ice-capades]

1 hour ago, akirby said:

Cybertruck is a cartoon/hot wheels toy that can’t compete with F150 or Silverado EV trucks.  It’s the DeLorean of the EV world.

 

Interesting assessment but I think it's applicable!

[T-dubz]

15 minutes ago, Oacjay98 said:

We need good products, ours are long in tooth and heading out. Last thing we need is low volume here. 

That’s what I’m saying. IMO this is an experiment and a bad one at that. It’s going to sell in low volume regardless of how good it is as a ev based on its possible polarizing looks. Even with the mustang name and a more traditional look, the mach e isn’t selling well. That doesn’t bode well for this crazy shaped vehicle. I think it’d be lucky to even meet the mach e’s sales figures, which is much lower then the ancient edge that OAC is currently making.

 

if aero design is what people wanted, why are all the manufacturers coming out with large ev trucks and SUVs that look like bricks? Those are what people want and will pay a lot of money for so that is what the manufacturers and building. 
 

 

[Deanh]

48 minutes ago, T-dubz said:

That’s what I’m saying. IMO this is an experiment and a bad one at that. It’s going to sell in low volume regardless of how good it is as a ev based on its possible polarizing looks. Even with the mustang name and a more traditional look, the mach e isn’t selling well. That doesn’t bode well for this crazy shaped vehicle. I think it’d be lucky to even meet the mach e’s sales figures, which is much lower then the ancient edge that OAC is currently making.

 

if aero design is what people wanted, why are all the manufacturers coming out with large ev trucks and SUVs that look like bricks? Those are what people want and will pay a lot of money for so that is what the manufacturers and building. 
 

 

everything will change volume wise when the special edition Mach E Rally is released....

[Oac98]

1 hour ago, T-dubz said:

That’s what I’m saying. IMO this is an experiment and a bad one at that. It’s going to sell in low volume regardless of how good it is as a ev based on its possible polarizing looks. Even with the mustang name and a more traditional look, the mach e isn’t selling well. That doesn’t bode well for this crazy shaped vehicle. I think it’d be lucky to even meet the mach e’s sales figures, which is much lower then the ancient edge that OAC is currently making.

 

if aero design is what people wanted, why are all the manufacturers coming out with large ev trucks and SUVs that look like bricks? Those are what people want and will pay a lot of money for so that is what the manufacturers and building. 
 

 

Ford doesn’t think it’s gonna sell low volume, or are they gonna scale back their projections now that they’re slowing down their plans. I can’t wait to actually see what it looks like I wonder when the hell Ford will shed more light on this project.  I already predict a slow start up so I won’t be surprised if I’m right. I can see and one shift start up with maybe both shifts coming in on and two week off and on schedule in the beginning.  When we had our ratification online meeting they mentioned a possible third product in a few years. 

[akirby]

2 hours ago, T-dubz said:

That’s what I’m saying. IMO this is an experiment and a bad one at that. It’s going to sell in low volume regardless of how good it is as a ev based on its possible polarizing looks. Even with the mustang name and a more traditional look, the mach e isn’t selling well. That doesn’t bode well for this crazy shaped vehicle. I think it’d be lucky to even meet the mach e’s sales figures, which is much lower then the ancient edge that OAC is currently making.

 

if aero design is what people wanted, why are all the manufacturers coming out with large ev trucks and SUVs that look like bricks? Those are what people want and will pay a lot of money for so that is what the manufacturers and building. 

The only way such a polarizing design sells well is if it ends up being super cheap due to smaller batteries.  But it needs to be really cheap compared to ICE seven seater SUVs and minivans.

[Deanh]

3 hours ago, akirby said:

Cybertruck is a cartoon/hot wheels toy that can’t compete with F150 or Silverado EV trucks.  It’s the DeLorean of the EV world.

IMO its much like the Delorean, and Hummer...its for the " HEY look at me " crowd....

[T-dubz]

19 minutes ago, Oacjay98 said:

Ford doesn’t think it’s gonna sell low volume, or are they gonna scale back their projections now that they’re slowing down their plans. I can’t wait to actually see what it looks like I wonder when the hell Ford will shed more light on this project.  I already predict a slow start up so I won’t be surprised if I’m right. I can see and one shift start up with maybe both shifts coming in on and two week off and on schedule in the beginning.  When we had our ratification online meeting they mentioned a possible third product in a few years. 

I don’t remember exactly, but I thought ford’s original estimate was something like 150-200k  a year for the ford and Lincoln combined. Lincoln’s sales will be minimal so that means ford is expecting most of those sales coming from the ford. Besides the f150 and explorer, ford doesn’t really have a vehicle that currently sells in the 150-170k/yr range. For reference, mach e is at 28k at the end of the 3rd quarter this year. Explorer is at 138k (probably finish around 170k) and it’s one of the best sellers in the segment. I’m not sure how ford thinks this will basically do the same volume as explorer.
 

I am also anxious to see it as well. Seems like it was forever ago that the first pic was shown. Maybe it’s better than we are thinking. Who knows.

 

14 minutes ago, akirby said:

The only way such a polarizing design sells well is if it ends up being super cheap due to smaller batteries.  But it needs to be really cheap compared to ICE seven seater SUVs and minivans.

Yeah, this is the only thing I can think of too. Maybe it catches on with the environmentalists like the Prius did? 

[Oac98]

2 hours ago, T-dubz said:

I don’t remember exactly, but I thought ford’s original estimate was something like 150-200k  a year for the ford and Lincoln combined. Lincoln’s sales will be minimal so that means ford is expecting most of those sales coming from the ford. Besides the f150 and explorer, ford doesn’t really have a vehicle that currently sells in the 150-170k/yr range. For reference, mach e is at 28k at the end of the 3rd quarter this year. Explorer is at 138k (probably finish around 170k) and it’s one of the best sellers in the segment. I’m not sure how ford thinks this will basically do the same volume as explorer.
 

I am also anxious to see it as well. Seems like it was forever ago that the first pic was shown. Maybe it’s better than we are thinking. Who knows.

 

Yeah, this is the only thing I can think of too. Maybe it catches on with the environmentalists like the Prius did? 

I can’t help but be skeptical those numbers will be achieved. I don’t know shit, I’m just saying how I feel. The brains of the ford operation must know something we don’t lol.

[Willwll313wll]

6 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

Tesla design in the sense of prioritizing areo targets over aesthetic appeal. 

 

I get that, zig where others zag is the guiding principle to my own approach to product design. My mentality is the world only looks at you if you give them a reason to, if you're a startup, and you just copy the f-150, then everyone is just going to buy an f-150. 

 

I'm working on a small sporty truck for my portfolio, early on, I decided to wanted to shorten the hood and lengthen the bed, while also lowering the nose. Trying to applying those ideas to something with the typical blocky truck styling cues just looked off. So I decided to try something radically different. I said to myself, in theory, this would be an EV, you can make an EV truck perform really well, but what if you also made it look the part? You're already giving this truck the cab forward proportions of a mid-engine car, so instead of pulling styling cues from a typical truck, make it look like a lifted mid engine sports car instead. It worked, version 1 and 2 of the design were a little rough, I'd say I'm on version 3.5 now, and it's showing some promise. 

 

It still needs some tweaks, but it's something very different. The overall profile looks vaguely like the lancia rally cars from the 80s, and there's an areo pass through in the hood like the EV charger concept. It's a small, practical truck that goes and looks like a sports car. It wouldn't appeal to everyone, but it would definitely appeal to people who want the practicality of a truck, in a more exciting package. So I definitely understand the appeal of doing things differently, but there's a good different, and a bad different. 

 

I'd love to see what youre working on!

[stromberg2]

Yeah....me too!

[Ares]

On 11/11/2023 at 8:37 PM, pffan1990 said:

 

If Ford does proceed with the plans to do the two EVs at OAC, they should give both all-new names. Resurrect the previously-cancelled boxy Explorer EV and build that and its Lincoln version (Aviator) at OAC as soon as they can. That would provide at least four EVs built at OAC by the end of the decade. But then again, it's Ford. They don't even know their own ever-changing plans the next few months. lol

Speaking of, is the aforementioned cancelled Aviator EV the same as the cancelled Rivian-based vehicle, or were they different projects? I think I recall someone stating the Rivian-Lincoln project was one of the most striking SUVs ever and I find it disappointing if a design like that was abandoned for a quirky futuristic one. However, if the current project is comparable to something like the DBX, that is promising.