Ford Marshall Plant to Resume, But Be Scaled Back

[rperez817]

1 hour ago, Rick73 said:

Is a 20% margin on electric trucks a reality?

 

With BEV optimized vertical integration in all aspects of design, engineering, manufacturing, and marketing combined with economies of scale, there's no reason 20%+ gross margin can't be achieved on those products.

[rperez817]

1 hour ago, Rick73 said:

Who says Ford can’t make as much or more profit on electric Fiesta-size cars than on Lightning-size trucks?

 

Most automotive industry analysts would probably say that Ford can't. The key thing is what akirby mentioned earlier, "having passionate buyers". In the BEV world as in the ICE age, full-size pickup trucks are more likely to attract passionate, high-end, status seeking customers than B-segment passenger cars.

[ice-capades]

20 minutes ago, rperez817 said:

 

With BEV optimized vertical integration in all aspects of design, engineering, manufacturing, and marketing combined with economies of scale, there's no reason 20%+ gross margin can't be achieved on those products.

 

Here you go again! Without sufficient demand to support increased production there will be no economies of scale. Increasing production to achieve economies of scale will only increase losses until there is sufficient demand at prices that will be profitable. 

[Rangers09]

5 hours ago, Rick73 said:

Electrek article claims Silverado EV has much lower Cd than Lightning.  That will help significantly in normal driving, but when towing a large boxy trailer like most typical campers, the aerodynamics of the trailer will overshadow the trucks Cd, making improvement (difference) essentially unimportant.

 

When Rivian first came out with EV pickup, there was huge interest in “real world” towing capability.  First test I read was towing heavy sports-car/flat-bed-trailer combination which was relatively aero, and results were disappointing to many but not horrible.  However, when subsequent tests towing lighter but larger campers started to come out, range was reduced to as little as 1/3 of normal EPA city rating.  That was unexpected shock to many though I don’t know what they expected.

 

In most tests towing a boxy trailer will reduce range to less than 1 mile per kWh of battery capacity.  One tester reported as low as 0.65 miles per kWh driving into strong headwind, though he didn’t quantify wind speed.
 

https://electrek.co/2023/09/25/chevy-silverado-ev-impresses-towing-vs-gas-ford-f-150-video/

 

“As such, the Silverado has much better aerodynamics, with a .331 drag coefficient compared to over .5 for the electric Hummer. The Silverado EV is more in line with the Rivian R1T at around .3 and Ford’s F-150 Lightning at about .40 to .45.“

 

Another factor to consider when reviewing range is the ambient temperature, and use of cabin heater. heated seats and heated steering wheel.

 

We are experiencing another week of bitterly cold temperatures of 31-33 F and our Escape's range has been cut in half. So put a camper on the back of a Lightning and drive it in freezing temperatures and the range will be further reduced.

[akirby]

1 hour ago, Rick73 said:

If all three are capable of making smaller electric vehicles profitably, why are they not?  I understand what akirby and others say about Ford making more profit on trucks, but isn’t that based on making more profit on ICE trucks?  Electric trucks are not profitable as far as I know, so why focus on them versus sedans solely based on profitability of ICE vehicles?  The same profitability model may not apply between ICE and BEV when comparing sedans and trucks.

 

Who says Ford can’t make as much or more profit on electric Fiesta-size cars than on Lightning-size trucks?  If they are losing money on Lightning, it’s hardly the example to follow.  I guess I’m saying I don’t follow logic of extrapolating truck success from ICE to BEV.  Is a 20% margin on electric trucks a reality?

Is it really that hard to understand or is it just your disdain for inefficiency showing up again.  It’s easier to absorb the cost of $20K batteries on a $60K vehicle than a $20k vehicle.  Nobody is paying $40k for a Fiesta.  Why do you think Tesla started with the S?  You won’t see smaller cheaper BEVs until next Gen batteries or until costs come down dramatically on current ones.  And if you are supply constrained why waste resources on lower profit margins?

[Rangers09]

3 hours ago, rperez817 said:

 

Among the 3 automakers you mentioned by name, none are incapable of profitably making vehicles that aren't pickup trucks (particularly the big ones). But Ford is the most dependent of those 3 on that vehicle type. That's why it's imperative that Ford "dramatically expand F-150 Lightning production and also bring BEV/Lightning versions of Maverick, Ranger, and Super Duty to market ASAP" as I mentioned earlier in this thread, implement totally different strategies and approaches for design, engineering, manufacturing, and marketing of BEV overall (both pickup trucks and other vehicle types), and pick up the pace for both. 

 

Even Ford has admitted that BEV Super Dutys are not possible with current technology and are not anticipated in the short/medium term. How many times do you have to be told that a BEV Super Duty is not currently possible. My F-450, nor previous F-350's, are not daily drivers, they are for long trips towing a 16,500 lbs trailer. Minimum range requirement is 500 miles, so it would require towing an additional F-450 loaded with batteries.

 

If Ford could build PHEV Mavericks and Rangers they will sell well, but based on current customer demand, BEV models will probably sit like anchors on dealer lots, along with the thousands of Mach-E's & Lightnings. 

[mackinaw]

21 minutes ago, Rangers09 said:

We are experiencing another week of bitterly cold temperatures of 31-33 F and our Escape's range has been cut in half. So put a camper on the back of a Lightning and drive it in freezing temperatures and the range will be further reduced.

 

But 31-33F isn't really cold.  Below zero temperatures are bitter cold.  

[rperez817]

18 minutes ago, ice-capades said:

Without sufficient demand to support increased production there will be no economies of scale. Increasing production to achieve economies of scale will only increase losses until there is sufficient demand at prices that will be profitable. 

 

Demand is more than sufficient. In 2020, just 3 years ago, BEV sales in the U.S. exceeded 250,000 for the first time. This year, the U.S. BEV market is on track to jump past 1 million units sold. 

 

The biggest change since 2020 is that competition in the BEV market has intensified greatly as other automakers introduce a bevy of new models. For Ford, that means marketing initiatives that direct demand away from competitors' BEV and toward Ford BEV, integrated with corresponding efforts involving new product introductions, design, engineering, and manufacturing/production. That will lead to a virtuous circle that will bring not only the necessary economies of scale, but ultimately fulfill what Ford stated on page 24 of its 2023 Annual Report, "Ford has an ambitious plan to lead the electric vehicle revolution".

[Rangers09]

12 minutes ago, mackinaw said:

 

But 31-33F isn't really cold.  Below zero temperatures are bitter cold.  

 

Haha, all depends where you live. We are on the North West Coast and normally only get a few days a year below freezing, so for us that is bitterly cold. I can't imagine how much further the range reduces back East.

[tbone]

11 minutes ago, Rangers09 said:

 

Haha, all depends where you live. We are on the North West Coast and normally only get a few days a year below freezing, so for us that is bitterly cold. I can't imagine how much further the range reduces back East.

Im running a MachE in 22 degree weather this week for the first time, with heavy wind so it will be interesting to see what the range loss is. 
 

And I’m not turning down the heat to gain range…

[jpd80]

5 hours ago, rperez817 said:

 

Ford Motor Company executives who made the decision to scale back BlueOval Battery Park Michigan and those who continue to dilly dally on BEV/Lightning versions of Ford's entire pickup truck lineup (2028 at the earliest per jpd80's note?!!) are indeed "Clueless". 

You’re not getting it, the plants will still be built with maximum capacity preserved but the initial production volume

 has been set lower so Ford doesn’t overproduce too early.

 

Since reservations have all but disappeared , there’s no need to ramp up the current  Lightning  from its present volume,

to do so would simply swell inventory  and drive down premium prices. The problem for Ford and GM is that the early

excitement for electric vehicles has waned significantly. I agree, it’s now up to both of them to promote an encourage 

potential buyers to try electric vehicles - they can’t just sit back and expect masses of buyers to magically buy them.

[Rick73]

1 hour ago, akirby said:

Is it really that hard to understand or is it just your disdain for inefficiency showing up again.  It’s easier to absorb the cost of $20K batteries on a $60K vehicle than a $20k vehicle.  Nobody is paying $40k for a Fiesta.  Why do you think Tesla started with the S?  You won’t see smaller cheaper BEVs until next Gen batteries or until costs come down dramatically on current ones.  And if you are supply constrained why waste resources on lower profit margins?

Back to that accusation again?  Seriously?  If you want to be rude, are you technically challenged?  Why do you compare battery size versus cost in that manner?  That makes no sense whatsoever.  I know you love your F-150, but let’s try to be objective.

 

For a pickup to be practical and appeal to enough buyers, GM and Stellantis have concluded they need battery capacity in the 220+ kWh range.  That’s roughly 4 times as large as some of the most popular compact BEVs in Europe that are in production and selling well, and much over 3X the base Tesla Model 3.  Whether manufacturers are making money who knows, but the point is that if you are going to compare battery costs as a huge negative (and it is), then it’s a hell of a lot harder on a vehicle that sells for 2~3 times higher when it needs 4 times as large a battery.  Is it really that hard to understand or is it just your obsession with offending people who have different views than you?

 

The Silverado EV has a battery almost 4 times larger than base Tesla Model 3, but starting cost is only twice as high.  Doesn’t that make absorbing battery cost that much harder?  This is my business opinion, and has little to do with my opinion on efficiency.

[akirby]

17 minutes ago, Rick73 said:

Back to that accusation again?  Seriously?  

It’s literally all you talk about.  Big trucks are heavy and inefficient.  Small cars are very efficient.  If it’s not that important then stop repeating it over and over and over.

[akirby]

21 minutes ago, Rick73 said:

 

For a pickup to be practical and appeal to enough buyers, GM and Stellantis have concluded they need battery capacity in the 220+ kWh range.  That’s roughly 4 times as large as some of the most popular compact BEVs in Europe that are in production and selling well, and much over 3X the base Tesla Model 3.  Whether manufacturers are making money who knows, but the point is that if you are going to compare battery costs as a huge negative (and it is), then it’s a hell of a lot harder on a vehicle that sells for 2~3 times higher when it needs 4 times as large a battery.  Is it really that hard to understand or is it just your obsession with offending people who have different views than you?

 

The Silverado EV has a battery almost 4 times larger than base Tesla Model 3, but starting cost is only twice as high.  Doesn’t that make absorbing battery cost that much harder?  This is my business opinion, and has little to do with my opinion on efficiency.

What you don’t seem to understand is that more people are willing to pay a premium for a full sized truck than a smaller car.  Allmost 2.5M people buy $40k-$100k full size trucks every year.  And once you’re paying that kind of price the extra battery cost isn’t a big factor.   They don’t care that their ICE truck only gets 18 mpg or their BEV has extra batteries or slightly reduced range.   All these engineering comparisons just don’t matter to actual sales.

[DeluxeStang]

2 hours ago, rperez817 said:

 

Demand is more than sufficient. In 2020, just 3 years ago, BEV sales in the U.S. exceeded 250,000 for the first time. This year, the U.S. BEV market is on track to jump past 1 million units sold. 

 

The biggest change since 2020 is that competition in the BEV market has intensified greatly as other automakers introduce a bevy of new models. For Ford, that means marketing initiatives that direct demand away from competitors' BEV and toward Ford BEV, integrated with corresponding efforts involving new product introductions, design, engineering, and manufacturing/production. That will lead to a virtuous circle that will bring not only the necessary economies of scale, but ultimately fulfill what Ford stated on page 24 of its 2023 Annual Report, "Ford has an ambitious plan to lead the electric vehicle revolution".

A million sales isn't bad, there's promise there. But that's still less than 10% of new car sales in the U.S. There's demand for EVs, on this, we can all agree, it's not like every single buyer is shunning them. It's just Ford's initial projections were too optimistic. They're still spending billions of dollars on developing EVs, in fact, it sounds like their next generation of EVs will be far more competitive. The lightning, transit, and mach-e all have merit, but they're all a little lack luster relative to newer, and more futuristic rivals, and that's hurting their ability to complete. 

 

It might be frustrating right now, it might look like Ford is giving up. But in reality, they're just reevaluating their approach, and making sure they're giving people what they want.  I don't blame you man, you're an electric vehicle enthusiast, and that's cool in its own way. But I think your own passion is blinding you to the reality of the current EV landscape. You love EVs, and want to keep buying them, so naturally, you assume you're in the majority, and you will be, with enough time. But that's not the case today. There's still a ton of hurdles EVs have to overcome before they appeal to the majority of buyers. 

 

I'm guilty of the same thing to an extent, except it's enthusiast cars. I'm a massive car enthusiast, I have been since I was literally 2, so I sometimes look at things from the perspective of a car enthusiast. It's something I've been called out for by people like akirby, and they're right, I need to look at things not from my own point of view, but from that as a casual consumer. Having a broader perspective that goes beyond our own desires and bias is essential to better understand consumers. 

[rmc523]

One of these days, I'll sketch up my T3 prediction and post it and see where it lands vs. the real thing.

[Rick73]

1 hour ago, akirby said:

It’s literally all you talk about.  Big trucks are heavy and inefficient.  Small cars are very efficient.  If it’s not that important then stop repeating it over and over and over.

BS.  My post wasn’t about efficiency, it was about what actually sells.  Other manufacturers are selling way more electric vehicles than Ford, and so far there is no evidence that electric trucks will be more profitable than electric sedans, compact SUVs, or anything else.  They may be some day, but as of now it’s a guessing game.  And that Farley said an electric Super Duty was off the table is telling, or that GM delayed Silverado EV.  Or that RAM is adding a range-extending design (hybrid) after having announced BEV variant.  The evidence is overwhelming that at present BEV pickups are no better at being profitable than any other electric vehicle.

[Rick73]

1 hour ago, akirby said:

What you don’t seem to understand is that more people are willing to pay a premium for a full sized truck than a smaller car.  Allmost 2.5M people buy $40k-$100k full size trucks every year.  And once you’re paying that kind of price the extra battery cost isn’t a big factor.   They don’t care that their ICE truck only gets 18 mpg or their BEV has extra batteries or slightly reduced range.   All these engineering comparisons just don’t matter to actual sales.

By the way, I hope you are right, even though I disagree because I don’t believe ICE data correlates to BEVs as much as assumed.  We will see in a few days if Lightning sales take off.  I expect November numbers won’t be that different, remaining a small percentage of ICE F-150.  

[akirby]

25 minutes ago, Rick73 said:

By the way, I hope you are right, even though I disagree because I don’t believe ICE data correlates to BEVs as much as assumed.  We will see in a few days if Lightning sales take off.  I expect November numbers won’t be that different, remaining a small percentage of ICE F-150.  

I never said expensive BEV trucks would outsell cheaper vehicles.  They won’t just because of price.  And Lightning is t the end goal - that’s T3 and it won’t require 4x battery capacity.

Edited November 27, 2023 by akirby

[mackinaw]

5 hours ago, tbone said:

Im running a MachE in 22 degree weather this week for the first time, with heavy wind so it will be interesting to see what the range loss is. 
 

And I’m not turning down the heat to gain range…

 

I'll be following this.  22F degrees is more like the winter I normally see, but even that is warm to the minus 25F  I'll probably experience in January.

[Rangers09]

6 hours ago, tbone said:

Im running a MachE in 22 degree weather this week for the first time, with heavy wind so it will be interesting to see what the range loss is. 
 

And I’m not turning down the heat to gain range…

 

Same here, we immediately turn on the heated seats and steering wheel, with the heater set to a comfortable temperature. Might as well be comfortable, as once the battery is dead we have the engine to get us home.

 

Will be interesting to note your results.

[Gurgeh]

8 hours ago, ice-capades said:

 

Here you go again! Without sufficient demand to support increased production there will be no economies of scale. Increasing production to achieve economies of scale will only increase losses until there is sufficient demand at prices that will be profitable. 

There's also that inconvenient thing about economics that just because you can make a product for less doesn't mean that you can sell it for more. Where there is more competition margins typically shrink. We are already seeing Tesla aggressively compete by lowering prices, which steals margin away from their competitors.

Edited November 28, 2023 by Gurgeh

[Rick73]

1 hour ago, Gurgeh said:

There's also that inconvenient thing about economics that just because you can make a product for less doesn't mean that you can sell it for more. Where there is more competition margins typically shrink. We are already seeing Tesla aggressively compete by lowering prices, which steals margin away from their competitors.

Tesla’s share of total US Market is lower than a year ago, so competition has likely decreased their margins as well.  Tesla also have more competition in Europe from vehicles below the Model 3; which is why they are working on a smaller and cheaper Model 2.  Previously when I mentioned European vehicles with batteries roughly 1/4 the size of the Silverado EV, I was referring to options like the Corsa-e which was listed with a 50 kWh battery (46.3 kWh useable).  The BEV Corsa-e seems to be popular in UK.  Picture below of previous Corsa. 
 

 

[silvrsvt]

Oh boy the same tired arugments again.