Ford Discusses New Affordable EV Platform

[GearheadGrrrl]

If a $25K sedan isn't profitable, how is a $25K boxy sedan without a trunk lid like the Maverick profitable... Do trunk lids cost that much to make?

[silvrsvt]

2 hours ago, GearheadGrrrl said:

If a $25K sedan isn't profitable, how is a $25K boxy sedan without a trunk lid like the Maverick profitable... Do trunk lids cost that much to make?

 

That 25K sedan has anywhere from $3-5 in incentives on it, that is why.

 

Plus the Maverick can reach up to $40K with the Tremor package on it. 

 

Lets make this easier-the Focus had the ST and RS models that where "expensive" but they didn't sell and got blown out when the Focus went away. The normal Focus models always had some sort of discount on them. The Maverick has no incentives and sells well without them. 

 

Then add in the fact that Maverick is amortized by the Bronco Sport and Escape for its equipment, and its not very hard to figure out. The Focus did share some things with the Escape, but not as much as the Escape shares with the BS and Maverick.  

[silvrsvt]

6 hours ago, mackinaw said:

 

You have to give Sergio credit for that.  Fiat Chrysler stopped selling compact and mid-size sedans back in 2016.  Ford followed suit in 2019.

 

But they gutted Chryslers and Dodge's lineups too. Chrysler sells a minivan and Dodge has only couple products....trucks/vans where split off into RAM and SUVs where mostly done by Jeep. 

 

Seems like a stupid marketing exercise to keep all of them around. 

[Rick73]

Many here are assuming BEV sales will follow similar patterns or trends as ICE vehicles, and perhaps ultimately they will as electrification technologies improve, but thus far I see little evidence to support such assumptions.

 

Comparing BEV and ICE sales as of 2023 highlights very different vehicle types.  As just one example, full size pickups dominate ICE sales, but in BEV list account for a very small percentage of total.  Similarly, BEV list is dominated by cars and pseudo SUV.  I consider Tesla Y a bloated tall hatchback more than traditional SUV, but that’s just personal opinion, not that it really matters in that there is no ICE equivalent I’m aware of.  

 

My point is that inherent BEV versus ICE functional capabilities and limitations have and will continue to influence which designs actually work best in marketplace.  Sedans may have fallen out of grace somewhat as ICE vehicles, but their inherent advantage as a BEV may be harder to ignore.

 

 

 

P.S. — Honda Accord and Civic sold about 200,000 each in 2023, and Toyota Camry and Corolla even more.  On average each of these 4 sell as many vehicles as Tesla Model 3.  Sales may be down but still a significant volume.

[silvrsvt]

37 minutes ago, Rick73 said:

P.S. — Honda Accord and Civic sold about 200,000 each in 2023, and Toyota Camry and Corolla even more.  On average each of these 4 sell as many vehicles as Tesla Model 3.  Sales may be down but still a significant volume.

 

World wide sales, the Model Y is the best selling car

 

https://www.best-selling-cars.com/brands/2023-full-year-global-best-selling-car-models-worldwide/

 

[Rick73]

Car and Driver did an excellent comparison of 2023 Tesla Model 3 versus Y.  Side-by-side pictures show just how similar they look, other than slight height difference.  Still, given much greater success of Model Y, I expect smaller next-generation Model 2 will not deviate too much from Model Y, except smaller.  Eliminating 3rd row should allow significant downsizing while retaining much of its functionality at a much lower cost.

 

https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a44398809/2023-tesla-model-3-vs-model-y-how-they-compare/
 

 

[Rick73]

P.S. — Mentioned differences above as it may relate to Model 2 design since Farley has said new affordable Ford BEV will target Tesla’s next generation vehicle.

[Trader 10]

21 hours ago, silvrsvt said:

 

That 25K sedan has anywhere from $3-5 in incentives on it, that is why.

 

Plus the Maverick can reach up to $40K with the Tremor package on it. 

 

Lets make this easier-the Focus had the ST and RS models that where "expensive" but they didn't sell and got blown out when the Focus went away. The normal Focus models always had some sort of discount on them. The Maverick has no incentives and sells well without them. 

 

Then add in the fact that Maverick is amortized by the Bronco Sport and Escape for its equipment, and its not very hard to figure out. The Focus did share some things with the Escape, but not as much as the Escape shares with the BS and Maverick.  

Please list the 2024 25k sedans that have $3 to $5k in incentives. The Fusion was seeking with those kind of incentives at the end of its life but you’re making an apple/oranges comparison between a vehicle at the end of its life cycle and a brand new vehicle. I believe a C2 Fusion would garner ATPs that at least match Maverick’s.Hybrid only, XLT as the base model. Look at Honda Accord for example. A local dealer has 9 in stock listing from $33k to $40k and no rebates. A new Fusion would likely share a lot of commonality with the Maverick and Escape including the drivetrain. Ford certainly has the excess capacity to build 75 to 100,000 but has chosen to invest its money elsewhere (EVs) which obviously hasn’t worked out as hoped. 

[akirby]

6 minutes ago, Trader 10 said:

Ford certainly has the excess capacity to build 75 to 100,000 but has chosen to invest its money elsewhere (EVs) which obviously hasn’t worked out as hoped. 

They didn’t replace Fusion with EVs.  They replaced it with Bronco Sport and Maverick.  

[silvrsvt]

7 minutes ago, Trader 10 said:

Please list the 2024 25k sedans that have $3 to $5k in incentives. The Fusion was seeking with those kind of incentives at the end of its life but you’re making an apple/oranges comparison between a vehicle at the end of its life cycle and a brand new vehicle. I believe a C2 Fusion would garner ATPs that at least match Maverick’s.Hybrid only, XLT as the base model. Look at Honda Accord for example. A local dealer has 9 in stock listing from $33k to $40k and no rebates. A new Fusion would likely share a lot of commonality with the Maverick and Escape including the drivetrain. Ford certainly has the excess capacity to build 75 to 100,000 but has chosen to invest its money elsewhere (EVs) which obviously hasn’t worked out as hoped. 

 

The fusion is completely different class of car then the BS/Escape/Maverick-its a Mid sized car vs a compact (that the C platform is)

 

Note I said FOCUS, not Fusion. 

[DeluxeStang]

22 hours ago, silvrsvt said:

 

But they gutted Chryslers and Dodge's lineups too. Chrysler sells a minivan and Dodge has only couple products....trucks/vans where split off into RAM and SUVs where mostly done by Jeep. 

 

Seems like a stupid marketing exercise to keep all of them around. 

I'm calling it now, dodge and Chrysler will be dead within ten years. Ram and jeep with live on. But all dodge makes now is an uncompetitive three row Durango, and muscle cars, which are probably gonna struggle now that they're electric and 6 cyl only. 

[DeluxeStang]

I'm curious just how many affordable EVs Ford is planning to develop using this platform. For now, it's looking like it's going to be some sort of compact, non bronco sport crossover, as well as a bronco sport, and a maverick. All solid choices. A small transit connect with around 100-150 miles of range would also go over quite well for small businesses who couldn't afford, or didn't need something as big as a full-sized e-transit, and would further strengthen Ford's dominance in the commercial space. We've already discussed the potential of an electric sedan, and why that probably isn't happening.

 

As for other things that probably aren't gonna happen, but screw it, I can dream, a sporty halo model for the platform. Something like an rs200 successor in the 40 to 50 grand price range, maybe with 250-300 hp. AWD, with a mid mounted battery pack. That would let Ford test the waters with a sporty EV model, without commiting fully to making an electric mustang or something, and would give Ford's new affordable EV platform a ton of wow factor right out of the gate. 

[Trader 10]

54 minutes ago, silvrsvt said:

 

The fusion is completely different class of car then the BS/Escape/Maverick-its a Mid sized car vs a compact (that the C platform is)

 

Note I said FOCUS, not Fusion. 

The Maverick isn’t compact. It’s longer and about the same width as the Edge and about the same length as Explorer. Focus ATPs never reached that $25k point you mentioned, but the Fusion did. The C2  platform certainly has the ability to underpin mid sized vehicles. The next gen Edge would have been built on it. 

[Trader 10]

 

1 hour ago, akirby said:

They didn’t replace Fusion with EVs.  They replaced it with Bronco Sport and Maverick.  

I didn’t say they did. I did say that the excess capacity at C2 plants could be at least partially be filled by a new Fusion but Fords huge investments in EV development has sapped it of funds for new ICE vehicles. 

[akirby]

19 minutes ago, Trader 10 said:

 

I didn’t say they did. I did say that the excess capacity at C2 plants could be at least partially be filled by a new Fusion but Fords huge investments in EV development has sapped it of funds for new ICE vehicles. 

I agree they diverted resources to EVs but I’m not sure they have excess C2 capacity.  Certainly not in Hermosillo.  If they had excess capacity at Louisville they wouldn’t have killed edge and Nautilus they would have just moved them there.  I do agree they need an extra C2 factory in North America.

 

However, had EV sales continued to explode as predicted then the EV investment would have paid off big time pretty soon.  It’s a gamble either way.

[GearheadGrrrl]

As Trader 10 noted, a 2024 Fusion would have about the same or higher ATP as a Maverick. And unlike the Broncos and other "icons", it would have regular predictable sales that can keep an assembly line busy for a decade.  

[silvrsvt]

24 minutes ago, GearheadGrrrl said:

As Trader 10 noted, a 2024 Fusion would have about the same or higher ATP as a Maverick. And unlike the Broncos and other "icons", it would have regular predictable sales that can keep an assembly line busy for a decade.  

 

Most likely not...why would they invest in a market that is shrinking? Using the past couple years as a benchmark is disingenuous at best due to shortages.

 

This just like the Panther argument years back-the market has moved on. 

[silvrsvt]

11 hours ago, Trader 10 said:

The Maverick isn’t compact. It’s longer and about the same width as the Edge and about the same length as Explorer. Focus ATPs never reached that $25k point you mentioned, but the Fusion did. The C2  platform certainly has the ability to underpin mid sized vehicles. The next gen Edge would have been built on it. 

 

Its a freaking pickup truck-which is longer than most other products because of its bed.

 

Remember its determined by interior size. 

[Rick73]

21 minutes ago, GearheadGrrrl said:

As Trader 10 noted, a 2024 Fusion would have about the same or higher ATP as a Maverick. And unlike the Broncos and other "icons", it would have regular predictable sales that can keep an assembly line busy for a decade.  

If nothing else, Fusion exterior appearance could be way better than Honda Accord and Toyota Camry, which have become hard to look at for my taste; especially the Camry.  Toyota front end styling are hideous.  Not to get off topic, but in my opinion part of the issue is that Ford seems to resist entry-level vanilla-flavored offerings, which is where Accord and Camry do well.  That leads to “affordability” for the masses who care more about price than performance.

 

Whether BEV or ICE, a large percentage of population just wants affordable and reliable transportation that looks good.

[akirby]

27 minutes ago, Rick73 said:

Whether BEV or ICE, a large percentage of population just wants affordable and reliable transportation that looks good.

True but that doesn’t mean Ford has to build sedans if they have better options.   If a company wants to build sedans there is a business case and it can be done profitably.  There are also business cases for companies to build other things.  Honda builds sedans and minivans and hatchbacks.  Ford doesn’t.  Ford builds full sized trucks, SUVs, vans, and Broncos.  Honda doesn’t.  
 

Get over it and stop trying to rationalize personal desires.

[DeluxeStang]

14 hours ago, Trader 10 said:

The Maverick isn’t compact. 

Are...are you serious? It can't get much smaller man. My maverick next to a full sized truck for scale. 

[HotRunrGuy]

4 minutes ago, DeluxeStang said:

Are...are you serious? It can't get much smaller man. My maverick next to a full sized truck for scale. 

 

 

It's all about perspective. My Mav last weekend,,,,,

 

HRG

[ice-capades]

Ford may have cancelled Focus production and converted the MIchigan Assembly Plant in order to produce the all-new Bronco and Ranger models which have been very successful, but I don't consider them to be replacements for the Focus. To me it was a matter of better plant utilization for producing the all-new Bronco and reintroducing the Ranger to the North American market. 

 

I fail to understand or agree with plant commitments being part of the UAW contracts. Ford is the employer and UAW members employed to produce products in the Ford owned facilities. What products Ford chooses to produce in its plants should not be a contract matter nor the subject of potential plant closures.

 

It's unfortunate that Ford for years has teased about plans for the Flat Rock plant with plans delayed numerous times and no new product commitments announced or put in place. Most of us are aware of the production limitations at Flat Rock related to vehicle height which limits Ford's options. It would have been interesting if Ford had moved Fusion production, with an updated model, back to Flat Rock to better utilize the plant's production capacity. 

[rmc523]

15 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

I'm calling it now, dodge and Chrysler will be dead within ten years. Ram and jeep with live on. But all dodge makes now is an uncompetitive three row Durango, and muscle cars, which are probably gonna struggle now that they're electric and 6 cyl only. 

 

Chrysler seems like a lost cause, especially with the Airflow being canceled for that weirdo looking concept.

 

Dodge just added Hornet, and a new larger Durango is supposedly on the way (rebodied Wagoneer), with a new "Stealth" model slotting where Durango currently occupies.

I'll still never understand why they broke Ram out of Dodge - it never made sense.

 

3 hours ago, GearheadGrrrl said:

As Trader 10 noted, a 2024 Fusion would have about the same or higher ATP as a Maverick. And unlike the Broncos and other "icons", it would have regular predictable sales that can keep an assembly line busy for a decade.  

 

Predictable sales?  In the last 5 years, the midsize sedan segment dropped 2% overall market share (all model types).  That's the opposite of predictable.

[akirby]

1 hour ago, ice-capades said:

Ford may have cancelled Focus production and converted the MIchigan Assembly Plant in order to produce the all-new Bronco and Ranger models which have been very successful, but I don't consider them to be replacements for the Focus. To me it was a matter of better plant utilization for producing the all-new Bronco and reintroducing the Ranger to the North American market. 

 

But from a factory perspective and a corporate resource perspective - Bronco and Ranger did replace Focus just like Mav and BS replaced Fusion.  It’s all about budgets and projects not the products themselves.

 

Think of it as having a fixed amount of shelf space in the grocery store.  You have room for 10 products.  If you want to add a new product you have to get rid of an existing one or you have to expand the store.  They didn’t want to build a new factory so they replaced existing products.