ice-capades Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 (edited) Low-Cost Ford EV Platform Will Directly Compete with Chinese https://fordauthority.com/2024/04/low-cost-ford-ev-platform-will-directly-compete-with-chinese/ Earlier this year, Ford revealed that it was shifting its focus away from larger, pricier all-electric vehicles and toward smaller, lower-cost models, based on consumer preferences and global trends. At that time, we also learned that a skunkworks team led by a former Tesla executive had been working on a low-cost Ford EV platform for the past two years already, one that will underpin a handful of future models starting with a crossover slated to launch in 2026 with a $25k price tag. However, this future low-cost Ford EV platform won’t just do battle with rivals in the U.S. – rather, it’s also seemingly aimed at potential Chinese competition as well, according to Ford CFO John Lawler. “Yeah. I think ultimately we have to compete head-to-head with them,” Lawler said at the 2024 Bank of America Automotive Summit. “And that’s why I think we raised the alarm bell on it I think before anybody else did. We started talking about it. And that was a big impetus to why we’ve gone ahead with the small platform in California, our skunkworks project, because we knew we would need to compete there.” Ford CEO Jim Farley noted that – amid fledgling sales – the automaker needed to reboot its strategy in China, and has since shifted from creating models specifically for that market to producing existing vehicles locally. However, that market is also arguably the most competitive in terms of electric vehicles right now, spurred on by government subsidies and loads of competition. That means Chinese EVs are not only plentiful – but cheap – in some cases, with price tags of less than $10k. As such, Farley has previously stated that he views those models are more of a threat to the automaker’s business than mandates – sentiments echoed by Tesla CEO Elon Musk and Marin Gjaja, COO of Ford Model e. Edited April 9 by ice-capades Additional Content Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted April 11 Share Posted April 11 I’m sorry but how many times has Ford tried this same idea, they now have an new plan that lets them compete with brand x…only to find that the competition have also moved on…. God for them trying new things but it also shows just how much Ford rushed its roll out of BEVs, everything now is curling up the moment the economy backs off, amazing how many $$$ they burn…. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted April 11 Share Posted April 11 7 hours ago, jpd80 said: I’m sorry but how many times has Ford tried this same idea, they now have an new plan that lets them compete with brand x…only to find that the competition have also moved on…. God for them trying new things but it also shows just how much Ford rushed its roll out of BEVs, everything now is curling up the moment the economy backs off, amazing how many $$$ they burn…. They didn’t rush T3. They didn’t rush Mach-E or Lightning - they are good first effort vehicles and learning experiences and they’re doing ok with proper pricing. The only thing rushed was Oakville. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oac98 Posted April 11 Share Posted April 11 2 hours ago, akirby said: They didn’t rush T3. They didn’t rush Mach-E or Lightning - they are good first effort vehicles and learning experiences and they’re doing ok with proper pricing. The only thing rushed was Oakville. What about Oakville was rushed?? The decision to get rid of the Edge too early? Or the product that they still can’t get right it seems?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted April 11 Share Posted April 11 1 hour ago, Oac98 said: Or the product that they still can’t get right it seems?? Getting it right and making money on it are two different things. Apparently the new benchmark is EVs have to be profitable after a year of production, going by Fords comments. Given how the economy and market demand is, to launch a product early just for it flounder in the marketplace isn't the best course of action. I get your in a shitty position, but blowing up about it in every single post isn't going to fix or change it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oac98 Posted April 11 Share Posted April 11 18 minutes ago, silvrsvt said: Getting it right and making money on it are two different things. Apparently the new benchmark is EVs have to be profitable after a year of production, going by Fords comments. Given how the economy and market demand is, to launch a product early just for it flounder in the marketplace isn't the best course of action. I get your in a shitty position, but blowing up about it in every single post isn't going to fix or change it. I will work on reducing my venting. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oac98 Posted April 11 Share Posted April 11 42 minutes ago, silvrsvt said: Getting it right and making money on it are two different things. Apparently the new benchmark is EVs have to be profitable after a year of production, going by Fords comments. Given how the economy and market demand is, to launch a product early just for it flounder in the marketplace isn't the best course of action. I get your in a shitty position, but blowing up about it in every single post isn't going to fix or change it. I’m fully aware that ranting won’t help the situation. Like i said in another post, Ford is doing what they feel is best for the company. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted April 11 Share Posted April 11 3 hours ago, Oac98 said: What about Oakville was rushed?? The decision to get rid of the Edge too early? Or the product that they still can’t get right it seems?? They rushed to kill Edge and Nautilus too early just to meet an anticipated demand that now isn’t happening and apparently with the wrong kind of product. They could have brought a C2 edge and nautilus to Oakville and decided later if it made sense to convert to EVs. I think it started with the 5 EVs from VW’s platform and pending government mandates to go EV quickly around the world. But then the VW platforms didn’t work out. And then the market cooled off and govts backed off the EV mandates, but by the time that happened it was too late to save Nautilus and Edge and there was no suitable Edge to import either. And now the direction is cheaper EVs and a whole factory sits idle. All because they rushed to get EVs out. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GearheadGrrrl Posted April 11 Share Posted April 11 OAC needs to stay open- There's a payroll there to make and closing the plant would rile Canadian buyers for decades. The new assembly plants under construction can be delayed- There will be contractual penalties but nothing near the cost of paying OAC's workers with no cars built and no revenue produced. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oac98 Posted April 11 Share Posted April 11 1 hour ago, akirby said: They rushed to kill Edge and Nautilus too early just to meet an anticipated demand that now isn’t happening and apparently with the wrong kind of product. They could have brought a C2 edge and nautilus to Oakville and decided later if it made sense to convert to EVs. I think it started with the 5 EVs from VW’s platform and pending government mandates to go EV quickly around the world. But then the VW platforms didn’t work out. And then the market cooled off and govts backed off the EV mandates, but by the time that happened it was too late to save Nautilus and Edge and there was no suitable Edge to import either. And now the direction is cheaper EVs and a whole factory sits idle. All because they rushed to get EVs out. I totally agree with what you’re saying. Spot on assessment of the situation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted April 11 Share Posted April 11 1 hour ago, GearheadGrrrl said: OAC needs to stay open- There's a payroll there to make and closing the plant would rile Canadian buyers for decades. The new assembly plants under construction can be delayed- There will be contractual penalties but nothing near the cost of paying OAC's workers with no cars built and no revenue produced. From what I recall Ford pays a portion of pay and the rest of it is made up by unemployment, but this is based on US workers. Plus skilled trades will still be working at the plant also. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted April 11 Share Posted April 11 3 hours ago, GearheadGrrrl said: The new assembly plants under construction can be delayed- There will be contractual penalties but nothing near the cost of paying OAC's workers with no cars built and no revenue produced. Idling blue oval city would do nothing to help OAC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GearheadGrrrl Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 Blue Oval City doesn't have a 3000 employee payroll to make. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 (edited) 28 minutes ago, GearheadGrrrl said: Blue Oval City doesn't have a 3000 employee payroll to make. I'm going to assume Canadian workers are cheaper then UAW employees in the payroll dept too. Edited April 12 by silvrsvt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 46 minutes ago, GearheadGrrrl said: Blue Oval City doesn't have a 3000 employee payroll to make. And again how does idling BOC help OAC? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 (edited) 19 hours ago, akirby said: They didn’t rush T3. They didn’t rush Mach-E or Lightning - they are good first effort vehicles and learning experiences and they’re doing ok with proper pricing. The only thing rushed was Oakville. On the contrary, The vehicles for Oakville were transferred from Cuautitlan after being delayed two years and redesigned, so by the time they arrive they will be delayed four years and hopefully, not only up to date but cutting edge. Double the production cost, Mach E was a massive redesign, so basically double the funding was thrown at it to correct not only the styling error but also the inadequate battery and driveline which were simply extensions of what was used in the previous E Focus. None of that was going to work. Priority, The need for a quickly developed Lightning meant that it went first while Ford delayed it’s answer to the Silverado BEV. The current Lightning allowed Ford to get a BEV truck up and running faster, the lessons learned for the current Lightning are still continuing which is why Ford is already revising T3 batteries, there much to be grateful about this pull back as Ford was always going to struggle with battery range looking inadequate. The biggest gift will be if the Cybertruck turns out to be a disappointment to the many eager buyers …..hopefully Tesla plays its part and snatches defeat from the jaws of victory Whats not mentioned anywhere is that Ford has had a good look under the hood of VW and that MEB tool kit, deciding it didn’t need the over priced batteries, the VW controller or the drives and motors……LOL, with the Ford top hats, there’s not much VW left in them… Maybe I should have said this first…. I probably sound critical of Ford and I apologise for the high horse attitude. I just want Ford to be the best it can be and not settle for just good enough, get out in front and lead…. Edited April 12 by jpd80 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 4 hours ago, jpd80 said: On the contrary, The vehicles for Oakville were transferred from Cuautitlan after being delayed two years and redesigned, so by the time they arrive they will be delayed four years and hopefully, not only up to date but cutting edge. Double the production cost, Mach E was a massive redesign, so basically double the funding was thrown at it to correct not only the styling error but also the inadequate battery and driveline which were simply extensions of what was used in the previous E Focus. None of that was going to work. Priority, The need for a quickly developed Lightning meant that it went first while Ford delayed it’s answer to the Silverado BEV. The current Lightning allowed Ford to get a BEV truck up and running faster, the lessons learned for the current Lightning are still continuing which is why Ford is already revising T3 batteries, there much to be grateful about this pull back as Ford was always going to struggle with battery range looking inadequate. The biggest gift will be if the Cybertruck turns out to be a disappointment to the many eager buyers …..hopefully Tesla plays its part and snatches defeat from the jaws of victory Whats not mentioned anywhere is that Ford has had a good look under the hood of VW and that MEB tool kit, deciding it didn’t need the over priced batteries, the VW controller or the drives and motors……LOL, with the Ford top hats, there’s not much VW left in them… Maybe I should have said this first…. I probably sound critical of Ford and I apologise for the high horse attitude. I just want Ford to be the best it can be and not settle for just good enough, get out in front and lead…. I don’t disagree with any of that. Were just looking at it from different angles. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 55 minutes ago, akirby said: I don’t disagree with any of that. Were just looking at it from different angles. Thank you for being patient with me, and agree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.