Ford Discusses New Affordable EV Platform

[jpd80]

2 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

Musk is an asshole who often gets credit for the work others in his organization are putting in, he's very similar to Steve Jobs in that regard. He has some good ideas, but I hate how people worship him as this perfect figure who's mastered the auto industry. 

While I agree with sum of what you’re saying, we need to separate Musk the manager

from Musk who gets on late at night texting or who gets hurt because people criticise  him.

 

To the first point, Ford would kill to have someone who could make decisions and bet the farm on calculated guesses. That's what really speeds up decision making and keeps costs down by limiting the amount of cooks wanting to add their five cents worth….a big issue with a corporate like Ford where normal decisions get bogged down for weeks and months because the Ford bible says you can’t do that.

 

To the second point, Musk’s character flaws are well known but the biggest one is his ego,

surrounded by people who always agree and tell you that you’re right never ends well.

Equally, working at Ford and having every decision questioned and  micromanaged is also a soul killer,

so many talented people just give up and do what the boss wants so as not to be yelled at for having ideas.

 

On topic regarding an affordable compact BEV,

Ford keeps circling the airport on this one and unless I miss my guess, different people within Ford want different things. Ford Europe clearly has a desire to evolve its C2 platform into affordable BEVs (E-Max). Ford brass and North America would have none of it and signed up VW MEB architecture deal, Hackett called it job done but then after he took his golden parachute Ford realised that it was paying a big price for something it should be able to engineer internally. Now we’re back to a skunkworks doing an add on development of GE2 but for smaller vehicles….Ford groundhogs day.

 

Edited February 12 by jpd80

[Captainp4]

16 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

5 years ago, Tesla was 10 years ahead of everyone else. Ford is behind, but catching up a lot faster than Tesla fans are willing to admit. I'm willing to bet t3 matches or exceeds CT in every category, better towing, better payload, better range, better styling, better reliability. 

 

Tesla has some benefits, but let's be real, they're also a brand that doesn't respond well to criticism. I mean, how long have people been telling Tesla to get their shit together when it comes build quality and product launches, and they never listened. 

 

Now Ford and Toyota, companies who actually know how to build a proper car, are gunning for Tesla. Will Tesla be able to hold them off for a few more years? Yeah. Will Tesla still be the standard in the electric car industry 20 years from now? Probably not. 

For sure Ford is catching up and depending how fast the new products come I'd even say they're in a solid second place and/or best of the "legacy" brands, just seems like some around here have a hard time admitting when someone is doing it better than Ford right now and might have some better ideas. Tesla could take some pointers from Ford on trucks/commercial applications too, not out here being a blind fanboi of either, though I do like a lot of what both do. And I hope so on t3, was hoping CT would be the EV truck that fit my needs, but the more I look at it I don't think it's quite there for my use. Access to the super charging network should help too for Ford.

Come on now, you're on a Ford forum talking about another company not getting their shit together on build quality and product launches.... lol

20 years is a long time away and a lot can happen. Tesla has a huge lead on everyone else right now, but yeah I doubt they hold it indefinitely..

[Flying68]

20 hours ago, Captainp4 said:

Tesla is a bad word around here, even if you quote Farley saying they're going to follow Tesla's lead because they're more efficient in every aspect, from design to manufacturing to the end product.

I've seen some people claiming Mercedes did it first, but pretty sure most people are confusing mild hybrids that still step down to 12v for all the inside functions.

 

Mercedes did pioneer the 48v system, and did take advantage of it to provide mild hybrid functionality.  They powered all the accessories that are normally belt driven using the 48v system and had an integrated starter/alternator that could provide low end torque at the launch (mild hybrid) as well as an electric supercharger.  But yes, the interior electronics were all 12v because that is the standard that all suppliers use.

[akirby]

1 hour ago, Captainp4 said:

just seems like some around here have a hard time admitting when someone is doing it better than Ford right now and might have some better ideas.

Going to a 48V system is not necessarily “better” and it’s not new.  It’s always been better from a wiring standpoint - smaller cheaper wires.  But that also means new expensive 48V components that aren’t readily available yet or a lot of distributed converters, both of which negate at least some if not all of the cost advantage of the wiring.   I assume Musk has committed to building a lot of the 48v components in house or working with suppliers and Ford is tagging along and I suspect other mfrs will follow based on expected higher volumes on EVs which are much easier to convert.
 

 

[ice-capades]

This whole back and forth about the 48V vs. 12V is getting very tired. As such, I skim through or skip those posts as I feel that I have nothing of substance to add. 

[Deanh]

On 2/8/2024 at 11:44 AM, akirby said:

It just means they weren’t hampered by current processes and organizational beurocracy.  Clean sheet especially when it comes to manufacturing.  Nothing legacy to support or worry about.

usually translates to free reign creativity...Fords skunkwork programs have led to some absolutely incredible product, albeit $$$...lets see how it translates to affordability...

[DeluxeStang]

13 hours ago, jpd80 said:

 

 

To the first point, Ford would kill to have someone who could make decisions and bet the farm on calculated guesses. That's what really speeds up decision making and keeps costs down by limiting the amount of cooks wanting to add their five cents worth….a big issue with a corporate like Ford where normal decisions get bogged down for weeks and months because the Ford bible says you can’t do that.

 

To the second point, Musk’s character flaws are well known but the biggest one is his ego,

surrounded by people who always agree and tell you that you’re right never ends well.

Equally, working at Ford and having every decision questioned and  micromanaged is also a soul killer,

so many talented people just give up and do what the boss wants so as not to be yelled at for having ideas.

 

On topic regarding an affordable compact BEV,

Ford keeps circling the airport on this one and unless I miss my guess, different people within Ford want different things. Ford Europe clearly has a desire to evolve its C2 platform into affordable BEVs (E-Max). Ford brass and North America would have none of it and signed up VW MEB architecture deal, Hackett called it job done but then after he took his golden parachute Ford realised that it was paying a big price for something it should be able to engineer internally. Now we’re back to a skunkworks doing an add on development of GE2 but for smaller vehicles….Ford groundhogs day.

 

That's where I see a lot of potential with Ford, it seems like this team Edison group isn't bogged down with the layers of bureaucracy that the larger divisions in ford have. As far as the ego of leaders goes, it sounds like Farley is genuinely a decent person, like he wants to hear that different idea, or he wants people to come to him with problems rather than trying to hide it. 

 

Ford's weakness is they can't stick with a plan for more than two seconds. If they can actually commit to new products and get them out the door rather than canceling or rebooting programs constantly, I can see them doing quite well in the EV space in a few years time. They just need to get out of their own way in that regard. 

 

Interesting comments on GE2, how that platform and CE1 are both pivoting to smaller EVs. I'm curious to know where that cut off lies. The mach-e is quite compact for a crossover, so one would think developing a second gen mach-e would count as one of those smaller EVs Ford is working on. Yet Farley is also saying he wants to get away from two row crossovers, which would include things like the mach-e, as well as the bronco sport, and escape. Their strategy seems quite confusing at this point in time if I'm being honest.

 

 

[DeluxeStang]

12 minutes ago, Deanh said:

usually translates to free reign creativity...Fords skunkwork programs have led to some absolutely incredible product, albeit $$$...lets see how it translates to affordability...

If Ford can get these small EVs into the low 30s, or even high 20s for a starting price, that's gonna be a game changer. 

[akirby]

17 minutes ago, DeluxeStang said:

Ford's weakness is they can't stick with a plan for more than two seconds.

[Rick73]

12 minutes ago, DeluxeStang said:

If Ford can get these small EVs into the low 30s, or even high 20s for a starting price, that's gonna be a game changer. 

Nissan and GM have already offered compact electric vehicles in that price range, though we have no idea how much they subsidized to sell at those prices.  Making a $30k “profitable” vehicle will be the real challenge.  Leaf and Bolt sold in OK numbers, but were not widely accepted by the masses even in the $30k range.  Buyers want and expect more than it just being electric.

[Rick73]

16 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

Musk is an asshole who often gets credit for the work others in his organization are putting in, he's very similar to Steve Jobs in that regard. He has some good ideas, but I hate how people worship him as this perfect figure who's mastered the auto industry. 

Probably so, but at that level effective leaders manage “big-picture” ideas, and must surround themselves with people who can accomplish the required work.  Obviously they probably have a big ego otherwise no one would take them seriously.  If Musk did not come across as overly confident, he wouldn’t have gotten investors to risk billions to launch Tesla in the first place.  I’m not defending the guy, just trying to be objective about what it takes to get to that level, particularly when they are trying to change the way people do things.

 

Musk seems obsessed with relentless pursuit of efficiency, both cost and energy (believing they are closely related), which is very different than how some marketing-driven competitors first approached transition to BEVs.  Pursuing efficiency to an extreme has lead to some polarizing designs that work but may not go over well with everyone.

 

Two days ago I was out driving around in a Tesla 3 and can say I really appreciate the compact size and aerodynamics that leads to excellent real-world energy efficiency and therefore range (for the price).  On the other hand I don’t care for all controls being in center of car on touch screen, automation of driving functions I can do myself, steer by wire (future cars), etc.  I enjoy driving, find it fun and relaxing, and don’t want a computer doing it for me.  I give Musk and Tesla credit for what they have accomplished in some areas, not so much in others.  That’s normal though.

[DeluxeStang]

55 minutes ago, Rick73 said:

Nissan and GM have already offered compact electric vehicles in that price range, though we have no idea how much they subsidized to sell at those prices.  Making a $30k “profitable” vehicle will be the real challenge.  Leaf and Bolt sold in OK numbers, but were not widely accepted by the masses even in the $30k range.  Buyers want and expect more than it just being electric.

Which is why you need something with that extra bit of flair. An electric bronco sport would do the trick. An electric bronco, maverick, and escort sedan would be the holy trinity as far as I'm concerned. What we need is a lot of variety in as few products as possible. Instead of giving buyers 12 small SUVs where they're all the same basic thing, give us a few well thought out products that all have their own reason to exist. 

[akirby]

1 hour ago, Rick73 said:

Musk seems obsessed with relentless pursuit of efficiency,

Sounds like your kind of guy……

[akirby]

36 minutes ago, DeluxeStang said:

Which is why you need something with that extra bit of flair. An electric bronco sport would do the trick. An electric bronco, maverick, and escort sedan would be the holy trinity as far as I'm concerned. What we need is a lot of variety in as few products as possible. Instead of giving buyers 12 small SUVs where they're all the same basic thing, give us a few well thought out products that all have their own reason to exist. 

I agree on the first two.  I think once you get past the Teslaphiles, the type of designs that work for ICE also work for EVs like Maverick and Bronco Sport and I don’t think a small penalty in range or battery cost is a problem in the near term.

 

I think a small sedan could also work but only if people want it for what it is and not just because it’s the cheapest model.  Can’t make any money competing just on price.

[rmc523]

16 hours ago, jpd80 said:

While I agree with sum of what you’re saying, we need to separate Musk the manager

from Musk who gets on late at night texting or who gets hurt because people criticise  him.

 

To the first point, Ford would kill to have someone who could make decisions and bet the farm on calculated guesses. That's what really speeds up decision making and keeps costs down by limiting the amount of cooks wanting to add their five cents worth….a big issue with a corporate like Ford where normal decisions get bogged down for weeks and months because the Ford bible says you can’t do that.

 

To the second point, Musk’s character flaws are well known but the biggest one is his ego,

surrounded by people who always agree and tell you that you’re right never ends well.

Equally, working at Ford and having every decision questioned and  micromanaged is also a soul killer,

so many talented people just give up and do what the boss wants so as not to be yelled at for having ideas.

 

On topic regarding an affordable compact BEV,

Ford keeps circling the airport on this one and unless I miss my guess, different people within Ford want different things. Ford Europe clearly has a desire to evolve its C2 platform into affordable BEVs (E-Max). Ford brass and North America would have none of it and signed up VW MEB architecture deal, Hackett called it job done but then after he took his golden parachute Ford realised that it was paying a big price for something it should be able to engineer internally. Now we’re back to a skunkworks doing an add on development of GE2 but for smaller vehicles….Ford groundhogs day.

 

 

Yeah, to me, the Hackett move always seemed like a knee-jerk stopgap move to "catch up" temporarily while Ford worked on its own in-house stuff.

[silvrsvt]

2 hours ago, Rick73 said:

Nissan and GM have already offered compact electric vehicles in that price range, though we have no idea how much they subsidized to sell at those prices.  Making a $30k “profitable” vehicle will be the real challenge.  Leaf and Bolt sold in OK numbers, but were not widely accepted by the masses even in the $30k range.  Buyers want and expect more than it just being electric.

 

Who is going to pay $30K+ on a subcompact car like the Bolt and Leaf? Subcompacts are DOA in the NA marketplace with C being the smallest reasonable size for the general market. 

[jpd80]

28 minutes ago, rmc523 said:

 

Yeah, to me, the Hackett move always seemed like a knee-jerk stopgap move to "catch up" temporarily while Ford worked on its own in-house stuff.

Correct, Hackett inherited a mess from Mark Fields and the VW deal answered a lot of instant problems

like having a ready to go architecture, supply chain and most importantly, battery supply.

It answered all of Ford’s problems by providing affordable BEVs with 90% of the work done.

Problem was that Ford then realised how much money VW stood to make supplying everything.

[jpd80]

2 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

That's where I see a lot of potential with Ford, it seems like this team Edison group isn't bogged down with the layers of bureaucracy that the larger divisions in ford have. As far as the ego of leaders goes, it sounds like Farley is genuinely a decent person, like he wants to hear that different idea, or he wants people to come to him with problems rather than trying to hide it. 

The issue with the Edison team is not bureaucracy but what is it they are actually designing.

The problem is that Ford keeps shuttling between developing BEVs  to replace ICE vehicles

and wanting to be Tesla…the coming OAC vehicle is example of that and leads to your next point….

 

Quote

 

Ford's weakness is they can't stick with a plan for more than two seconds. If they can actually commit to new products and get them out the door rather than canceling or rebooting programs constantly, I can see them doing quite well in the EV space in a few years time. They just need to get out of their own way in that regard. 

I think that the real issue is that Ford doesn’t really know who it’s BEV buyers are and what they actually want.

So they build two vehicles, Mach E and Lightning, early adopters go wild and reservations skyrocket…

Through a series of unfortunate delays, any chance of sales momentum is lost and enthusiasm evaporates.

 

Quote

 

Interesting comments on GE2, how that platform and CE1 are both pivoting to smaller EVs. I'm curious to know where that cut off lies. The mach-e is quite compact for a crossover, so one would think developing a second gen mach-e would count as one of those smaller EVs Ford is working on. Yet Farley is also saying he wants to get away from two row crossovers, which would include things like the mach-e, as well as the bronco sport, and escape. Their strategy seems quite confusing at this point in time if I'm being honest.

Let me be clear here, Mach E is on the original GE architecture and is basically midsized, Edge sized but longer wheelbase. GE2 is a heavy evolution of GE with a lot of new and different motors, controllers and batteries but importantly wider to make larger BEVs. Conversely, CE1 is to cover compact vehicles like Escape/Bronco Sport sized vehicles that are narrower than Mach E. (None of them are subcompacts)

 

Remember that developments are also being tailored around incentive requirements including size,

price and whether  a particular price/size also requires two row or three row. So that’s why some

decisions look a bit odd until we dig deeper

Edited February 12 by jpd80

[silvrsvt]

12 minutes ago, jpd80 said:

Let me be clear here, Mach E is on the original GE architecture and is basically midsized, Edge sized but longer wheelbase. GE2 is a heavy evolution of GE with a lot of new and different motors, controllers and batteries but importantly wider to make larger BEVs. Conversely, CE1 is to cover compact vehicles like Escape/Bronco Sport sized vehicles that are narrower than Mach E.

 

Mach E-GE1 186″ L x 74″ W x 64″ H

Escape-C1 181″ L x 74″ W x 66″ H

Edge-CD6 189″ L x 76″ W x 68″ H

Edge L-CD2 196.9" L x77.2" W x 69.8" H

 

Mach E is actually closer to an Escape then an Edge outside of OL. But otherwise your correct. 

[jpd80]

26 minutes ago, silvrsvt said:

 

Mach E-GE1 186″ L x 74″ W x 64″ H

Escape-C1 181″ L x 74″ W x 66″ H

Edge-CD6 189″ L x 76″ W x 68″ H

Edge L-CD2 196.9" L x77.2" W x 69.8" H

 

Mach E is actually closer to an Escape then an Edge outside of OL. But otherwise your correct. 

And that’s where there’s a bit of difference between Mach E and Tesla Y not much I’ll grant you

but the Mach E feels bigger than Escape and more like the Edge, hip and shoulder room are close/same.

 

Correction, the Y is also smaller than I thought, hip and shoulder room is compact size too

well ther ya go…..these modern compacts feel bigger to me than they actually are.

Edited February 12 by jpd80

[Deanh]

2 hours ago, akirby said:

I think quite a bit of that is probably due to the "Bean counters "...those buggers arent exactly the life of the party...

[Deanh]

56 minutes ago, silvrsvt said:

 

Who is going to pay $30K+ on a subcompact car like the Bolt and Leaf? Subcompacts are DOA in the NA marketplace with C being the smallest reasonable size for the general market. 

now...shoehorn the drivetrain in the Maverick....or something similar in concept...

Edited February 12 by Deanh

[jpd80]

11 minutes ago, Deanh said:

I think quite a bit of that is probably due to the "Bean counters "...those buggers arent exactly the life of the party...

Correct, service industries are always being told by accountants to do “less” in certain areas.

It s kind of an opportunity cost thing where they say stop wasting your time on this and 

concentrate on that instead. So I can see exactly the same thing playing out on car options.

[akirby]

22 minutes ago, Deanh said:

I think quite a bit of that is probably due to the "Bean counters "...those buggers arent exactly the life of the party...

More like executives hopping from one home run opportunity to another while ignoring the solid defense and singles and doubles hitters.

[DeluxeStang]

2 hours ago, akirby said:

I agree on the first two.  I think once you get past the Teslaphiles, the type of designs that work for ICE also work for EVs like Maverick and Bronco Sport and I don’t think a small penalty in range or battery cost is a problem in the near term.

 

I think a small sedan could also work but only if people want it for what it is and not just because it’s the cheapest model.  Can’t make any money competing just on price.

Exactly, there isn't a huge market for sedans these days, and what sedans you can still buy are often marketed due to their low cost, that's not sustainable for most brands. To be frank, I had given up on the idea of Ford bringing back sedans for quite some time, I realized I wanted sedans to make a comeback due to my personal preferences, and that looking beyond that, it would be difficult to make a compelling business case for bringing them back. 

 

I was listening to this new strategy of making EVs smaller, cheaper, and more areo efficient, and thought, a sedan sounds perfect for that approach. I agree, if it happens, it can't just be a cheap lump that sells on price. It has to be something that excites people, and stands out.