Ford May Postpone New EV Launches Amid Strategy Reboot

[Dequindre]

12 minutes ago, ExplorerDude said:

So much is changing at a fairly rapid pace. I’m hearing that most EVs have been put on indefinite hold except for the next gen “Lightning” and the 7-seater Ford/Lincoln EVs for OAC. 

What other EVs were in the pipeline that got axed? 

[ExplorerDude]

13 minutes ago, Dequindre said:

What other EVs were in the pipeline that got axed? 

Not axed per se but on hold. Development work stops.

[jpd80]

18 minutes ago, ExplorerDude said:

So much is changing at a fairly rapid pace. I’m hearing that most EVs have been put on indefinite hold except for the next gen “Lightning” and the 7-seater Ford/Lincoln EVs for OAC. 

Well Ford just announced the ‘skunkworks compact BEV” working behind the scenes, we heard about this

last year as the CE1 architecture planned for Louisville after Escape ends in 2027 as  BEV Bronco Sport.

 

Everything looks bleak at the moment but all of that could change by the end of the year, we just don’t know.

If I’ve learned anything, most of the experts are terrible at predicting the future or even next six months..

[ExplorerDude]

Ford’s going to have too much EV plant capacity. I’m hoping the flexibile manufacturing is still a possibility if they need to convert a plant back to ICE production. It’s a very tough spot that they’ve painted themselves into a corner with.

 

You have Electric Vehicle Centers at Dearborn Truck, Cuautitlan, then all the work happening at Blue Oval City, then the Oakville Complex, plus the various battery plants everywhere. It’s going to be an expensive mess.

 

I know technically different but look at Michigan Assembly Plant, it when from BOF Expeditions and Navigators to Unibody FWD Focus and C-Max and back to BOF Ranger and Bronco. Conversions are possible but at a heavy price.

Edited February 10 by ExplorerDude

[silvrsvt]

11 minutes ago, ExplorerDude said:

You have Electric Vehicle Centers at Dearborn Truck, Cuautitlan, then all the work happening at Blue Oval City, then the Oakville Complex, plus the various battery plants everywhere. It’s going to be an expensive mess.

 

Dearborn Truck was apparently getting folded into BOC when it opens per the UAW contract, so that takes care of that.

 

Keep in mind things getting worked on now won't be out till 2027-29 time frame, so I can see things like the Escape EV replacement sliding closer to 2030.

[jpd80]

11 minutes ago, ExplorerDude said:

Ford’s going to have too much EV plant capacity. I’m hoping the flexibile manufacturing is still a possibility if they need to convert a plant back to ICE production. It’s a very tough spot that they’ve painted themselves into a corner with.

 

You have Electric Vehicle Centers at Dearborn Truck, Cuautitlan, then all the work happening at Blue Oval City, then the Oakville Complex, plus the various battery plants everywhere. It’s going to be an expensive mess.

Imagine Jim Farley explaining to Bill Ford that at full BEV capacity, the Rouge Electric Vehicle Center

can deliver all the Truck BEV capacity required for the remainder of this decade…

[jpd80]

26 minutes ago, silvrsvt said:

 

Dearborn Truck was apparently getting folded into BOC when it opens per the UAW contract, so that takes care of that.

 

Keep in mind things getting worked on now won't be out till 2027-29 time frame, so I can see things like the Escape EV replacement sliding closer to 2030.

Im hearing next decade for all of the above, hope that’s not correct btw..

(but could be MY30)

Edited February 10 by jpd80

[DeluxeStang]

1 hour ago, jpd80 said:

Remembering the whole reason why the three rows were transferred away from Cuautitlan was exactly because

of the anticipated production capacity required by Mach E……So, there’s that….

 

I just think Ford did not renew  OAC Edge / Nautilus as a way of eliminating internal competition with Mach E,

they gave it every chance but in th east twelve months, Mach E sales have nose dived globally.

In China, Mache sells in the hundreds, has done so for over a year because Ford disappointed Chinese buyers with delivery delays (important because of China’s registration deadline windows)

 

The whole reason why Ford went so aero on the three row utility was because it has fallen behind on battery range targets, that’s not good because it covers a mistake with an even bigger one….Ford buyers prefer big boxy utilities and Ford knows that.

We'll have to see what these three rows look like. Based on how they're being described, I'm envisioning something that looks like a model X with sharper Ford styling. A vehicle that looks like something you'd see with a 1980s sci-fi film set in the future, striking, radically different. I'm imagining many people are gonna see this thing, and say "I hate that" and many others are gonna say "That's so striking, so exotic and different looking, I have to have it". 

 

Everyone else is gonna show up with 11 different flavors of refrigerator box, and Ford is gonna be selling a scifi prop. It's a bold strategy, but it's so different, I can see how it works in their favor. Everyone else is making boxy SUVs, and chasing that trend. There will be no way to differentiate between a Kia three row, or a Toyota or gm three row. But people will take notice of Ford's three row. For good or bad reasons, I really can't say.

 

Ford just needs to stick to what they have. One of their biggest issues is they can't make any progress because they're constantly canceling and starting different projects with no follow through. 

[twintornados]

Instead of a C2 line at Oakville, move the entire CD6 production from Chicago Auto Production to OAC and and turn CAP into a parking lot. Then, make CD6 Edge/Nautilus replacements and build them next to Explorer/Aviator production.

Edited February 10 by twintornados

[jpd80]

20 minutes ago, DeluxeStang said:

We'll have to see what these three rows look like. Based on how they're being described, I'm envisioning something that looks like a model X with sharper Ford styling. A vehicle that looks like something you'd see with a 1980s sci-fi film set in the future, striking, radically different. I'm imagining many people are gonna see this thing, and say "I hate that" and many others are gonna say "That's so striking, so exotic and different looking, I have to have it". 
 

polarising is the term you’re looking for….

https://www.carscoops.com/2023/02/mystery-ford-or-lincoln-sporty-model-spotted-at-dearborn-premises/

 

 

20 minutes ago, DeluxeStang said:

 

Everyone else is gonna show up with 11 different flavors of refrigerator box, and Ford is gonna be selling a scifi prop. It's a bold strategy, but it's so different, I can see how it works in their favor. Everyone else is making boxy SUVs, and chasing that trend. There will be no way to differentiate between a Kia three row, or a Toyota or gm three row. But people will take notice of Ford's three row. For good or bad reasons, I really can't say.

If Ford had really been all in on BEVs, it would be doing a BEV Explorer ass a 3-row boxy Utility,

the fact that it designed away from competing with an existing ICE Explorer tells us a lot.

Well apart form the fact that it was behind on battery range, it kinda says we want to compete

with Tesla but on a larger vehicle like X but, in saying that offer maybe a bit more then Tesla.

If people were interested in the now Discounted X ($79k?) then this Ford might be worth a go.

 

20 minutes ago, DeluxeStang said:

 

Ford just needs to stick to what they have. One of their biggest issues is they can't make any progress because they're constantly canceling and starting different projects with no follow through. 

Everytime Ford rips up plans and does something different , it’s a minimum two years delay,

the only reason for doing so is to avoid imminent disaster, so I’m not convinced that “changing” helps.

Until it has a much better plan, maybe keep going and see what happens, can’t engineer  for a lack of buyers.

[GearheadGrrrl]

One of the maxims of the auto industry is that to turn a profit on low to medium price cars you need to build them at around a car a minute line rate for two shifts and one shift just to break even. But having shut down Fusion production that was running better than that break even line rate, Ford is repeating the mistake by permanently shutting down Edge production to spend hundreds of millions to build an EV when Ford NA's dedicated EV, the MME, has yet too and will probably never turn a profit. 

[jpd80]

18 minutes ago, GearheadGrrrl said:

One of the maxims of the auto industry is that to turn a profit on low to medium price cars you need to build them at around a car a minute line rate for two shifts and one shift just to break even. But having shut down Fusion production that was running better than that break even line rate, Ford is repeating the mistake by permanently shutting down Edge production to spend hundreds of millions to build an EV when Ford NA's dedicated EV, the MME, has yet too and will probably never turn a profit. 

The issue with Fusion was that Ford dragged out refreshes to the point where it’s high value customers

abandoned it and so Ford was left selling at volume but the low profit models, this happened in the late

20  teens. So somewhere along the line, Fusion was targeted as a vehicle with a lot of production and

resources costs but low ROI, ford chasing at least 10% profit on revenue. They are defiantly wanting to

build less than the maximum possible and just trade on the more profitable trims…..

 

it’s the lazy  ass view of making cars but makes sense in not wasting resources building excessive vehicles.

Today, Ford has a Taurus sized C2 Mondeo available in China that would probably do well in

North America but I’m betting we’ll never see it outside of China where it will slowly fade away…

Edited February 10 by jpd80

[DeluxeStang]

1 hour ago, jpd80 said:

polarising is the term you’re looking for….

https://www.carscoops.com/2023/02/mystery-ford-or-lincoln-sporty-model-spotted-at-dearborn-premises/

 

 

If Ford had really been all in on BEVs, it would be doing a BEV Explorer ass a 3-row boxy Utility,

the fact that it designed away from competing with an existing ICE Explorer tells us a lot.

Well apart form the fact that it was behind on battery range, it kinda says we want to compete

with Tesla but on a larger vehicle like X but, in saying that offer maybe a bit more then Tesla.

If people were interested in the now Discounted X ($79k?) then this Ford might be worth a go.

 

Everytime Ford rips up plans and does something different , it’s a minimum two years delay,

the only reason for doing so is to avoid imminent disaster, so I’m not convinced that “changing” helps.

Until it has a much better plan, maybe keep going and see what happens, can’t engineer  for a lack of buyers.

Sounds like they'd afraid of this three row cannibalizing sales from the ICE explorer and are trying to differentiate the two as much as possible. Like you said, this product may not appeal to traditional explorer owners, but for people who want something like a model X at a much lower price, it could appeal to them.

 

I do find it somewhat short sighted on Ford's end that they're making so many crossovers and trucks now that they're struggling to differentiate them. They're having to take these wild swings, and risks with new crossovers just to justify their existence in an already crossover heavy lineup.

 

Yet they can't justify making a single car product that isn't a mustang. They'd rather make 30 different crossover and truck models in segments so crowded that they can't compete. But the thought hasn't crossed their mind that "Hey, maybe instead of making a 17th suv, let's re-enter a segment that we aren't competing in at all". This new affordable EV platform would be perfect for something like a new escort, a sporty small sedan/hatchback, something very few EV brands offer. Yet they'll just end up making like an EV blob with a lift kit and sell it in 9 different shades of gray and wonder why it doesn't stand out. 

 

Ford needs to get their act together, and fast. This changing product plans every five seconds approach is a great way to burn through billions of dollars without getting any product out the door. Even if things like the three row don't sell particularly well, 50,000 units a year is better than nothing. 

[tbone]

3 hours ago, ExplorerDude said:

Ford’s going to have too much EV plant capacity. I’m hoping the flexibile manufacturing is still a possibility if they need to convert a plant back to ICE production. It’s a very tough spot that they’ve painted themselves into a corner with.

 

You have Electric Vehicle Centers at Dearborn Truck, Cuautitlan, then all the work happening at Blue Oval City, then the Oakville Complex, plus the various battery plants everywhere. It’s going to be an expensive mess.

 

I know technically different but look at Michigan Assembly Plant, it when from BOF Expeditions and Navigators to Unibody FWD Focus and C-Max and back to BOF Ranger and Bronco. Conversions are possible but at a heavy price.

You read my mind. They’re building a brand new 5+ billion dollar plant as we speak for production of the next GEN Lightning,   The anticipating capacity of this plant is 500,000 vehicles. They’re having trouble selling 100,000 lightnings right now that are currently being built in another plant.
 

Flex manufacturing has been the standard for a very long time, so I would anticipate this plant would be a flex plant like the rest. Why not consolidate all BEV production into this plant since they will have battery production on site, until BEV adoption becomes greater?

 

They have been all over the place with their battery plant construction plans, but they certainly seem to need batteries, but more specifically hybrid batteries since their hybrid production always seems to be limited.  Can anyone explain the difference between a hybrid battery and a BEV battery?

 

Ford has shown they’re willing to stop construction on new plants in the past, however, I don’t think they’re going to do that with BOC. With that said, they certainly could stop their plans at OAC, and Switch to an alternative. As stated above the obvious consideration would be to move Chinese Nautilus production to this facility, along with the C2 based Chinese edge L, perhaps with some styling changes, although it has grown on me,  but it does already exist.  And put the dang Evos there as well already. People like the MME, but I think they would just prefer a gas version. 
 

I wonder if they’re still pumped about getting rid of all those ICE engineers? Ultimately, this has turned into a major debacle. If I care to guess nobody will be held accountable for it either.

Edited February 10 by tbone

[tbone]

5 hours ago, Oacjay98 said:

The Evos is an ICE MACH E to me but  it’s gonna be interesting to hear what kind of delays or changes are forthcoming. BOC OAC AND CUATITLAN will all be under capacity if sales remain low if and when the products launch.

Ford is contractually obligated to put something in your plant for you guys to build correct?  The solutions are there. See above post.☝️

[rmc523]

18 hours ago, jpd80 said:

You know, I was just about to post that same thought, it seems like the natural thing to do.

 

Just a thought on contingency plans,

To save time and money, Ford could just  rebrand the Evos as the new Edge,

it and Nautilus could be imported from China until OAC reconfigure is completed.

Evos is not the proper form to be an Edge and would fail as “Edge” - id guess we’ll see 50/50 conquests from sedans and edge, as there could be some overlap but edge is higher and more upright  

 

11 hours ago, tbone said:

You read my mind. They’re building a brand new 5+ billion dollar plant as we speak for production of the next GEN Lightning,   The anticipating capacity of this plant is 500,000 vehicles. They’re having trouble selling 100,000 lightnings right now that are currently being built in another plant.
 

Flex manufacturing has been the standard for a very long time, so I would anticipate this plant would be a flex plant like the rest. Why not consolidate all BEV production into this plant since they will have battery production on site, until BEV adoption becomes greater?

 

They have been all over the place with their battery plant construction plans, but they certainly seem to need batteries, but more specifically hybrid batteries since their hybrid production always seems to be limited.  Can anyone explain the difference between a hybrid battery and a BEV battery?

 

Ford has shown they’re willing to stop construction on new plants in the past, however, I don’t think they’re going to do that with BOC. With that said, they certainly could stop their plans at OAC, and Switch to an alternative. As stated above the obvious consideration would be to move Chinese Nautilus production to this facility, along with the C2 based Chinese edge L, perhaps with some styling changes, although it has grown on me,  but it does already exist.  And put the dang Evos there as well already. People like the MME, but I think they would just prefer a gas version. 
 

I wonder if they’re still pumped about getting rid of all those ICE engineers? Ultimately, this has turned into a major debacle. If I care to guess nobody will be held accountable for it either.

it looks better there than other photos

[Oac98]

11 hours ago, tbone said:

Ford is contractually obligated to put something in your plant for you guys to build correct?  The solutions are there. See above post.☝️

Federal and provincial government gave them 590 million dollars for this project. As far as I know plant is proceeding as planned FOR NOW.  I don’t know if Ford is obligated to do anything to be honest. 

[rmc523]

23 minutes ago, Oacjay98 said:

Federal and provincial government gave them 590 million dollars for this project. As far as I know plant is proceeding as planned FOR NOW.  I don’t know if Ford is obligated to do anything to be honest. 

didn’t the last contract also promise several vehicles that never appeared?

[GearheadGrrrl]

I wonder if Ford is going ahead with BEV in Canada because they figure if it fails, Canada is more likely to give them a bailout?

[Oac98]

35 minutes ago, rmc523 said:

didn’t the last contract also promise several vehicles that never appeared?

They promised 5 EVs which at the time sounded amazing but many were skeptical. It would’ve likely been 2 platforms with different top hats like we did with D471/472 flex mkt and U387/388 Edge/ Nautilus. 

[Oac98]

19 minutes ago, GearheadGrrrl said:

I wonder if Ford is going ahead with BEV in Canada because they figure if it fails, Canada is more likely to give them a bailout?

If shit hits the fan and Ford wants to downsize no amount of money will keep the plant here. It didn’t save St Thomas Assembly went Ford was offered 150 million at the time to try and save the plant.

[Oac98]

12 hours ago, tbone said:

You read my mind. They’re building a brand new 5+ billion dollar plant as we speak for production of the next GEN Lightning,   The anticipating capacity of this plant is 500,000 vehicles. They’re having trouble selling 100,000 lightnings right now that are currently being built in another plant.
 

Flex manufacturing has been the standard for a very long time, so I would anticipate this plant would be a flex plant like the rest. Why not consolidate all BEV production into this plant since they will have battery production on site, until BEV adoption becomes greater?

 

They have been all over the place with their battery plant construction plans, but they certainly seem to need batteries, but more specifically hybrid batteries since their hybrid production always seems to be limited.  Can anyone explain the difference between a hybrid battery and a BEV battery?

 

Ford has shown they’re willing to stop construction on new plants in the past, however, I don’t think they’re going to do that with BOC. With that said, they certainly could stop their plans at OAC, and Switch to an alternative. As stated above the obvious consideration would be to move Chinese Nautilus production to this facility, along with the C2 based Chinese edge L, perhaps with some styling changes, although it has grown on me,  but it does already exist.  And put the dang Evos there as well already. People like the MME, but I think they would just prefer a gas version. 
 

I wonder if they’re still pumped about getting rid of all those ICE engineers? Ultimately, this has turned into a major debacle. If I care to guess nobody will be held accountable for it either.

The market is so unstable the situation could improve in terms of sales. BOC won’t be cancelled, no way! They would sooner shut down and older plant and put more capacity in their new crown jewel. Ford could’ve just had edge nautilus hybrid at OAC and continued on in redesigned form like you said. Easy to say now but the market shifted so fast and my shift again. We will see how it plays out in the coming months and years.

[Oac98]

14 hours ago, twintornados said:

Instead of a C2 line at Oakville, move the entire CD6 production from Chicago Auto Production to OAC and and turn CAP into a parking lot. Then, make CD6 Edge/Nautilus replacements and build them next to Explorer/Aviator production.

They won’t do that, I’m not advocating for another ford plant to close to benefit us. The UAW would go ballistic. I just can’t see that happening although I’ve heard a lot of  bad things  about CAP.

[tbone]

45 minutes ago, Oacjay98 said:

They won’t do that, I’m not advocating for another ford plant to close to benefit us. The UAW would go ballistic. I just can’t see that happening although I’ve heard a lot of  bad things  about CAP.

I have had pretty good luck with the explorers that we’ve had, which have been built there. However, they are known for a lot of quality problems. Moving the explorer to OAC is an interesting concept though. 

[Oac98]

On 2/10/2024 at 12:58 PM, tbone said:

I have had pretty good luck with the explorers that we’ve had, which have been built there. However, they are known for a lot of quality problems. Moving the explorer to OAC is an interesting concept though. 

Don’t hold your breath, ain’t happening. They sure have had quality problems but that’s a ford wide problem at the moment. 

Edited March 3 by Oacjay98