Focus and fiesta may return as affordable evs

[Andrew L]

12 minutes ago, akirby said:

I agree except for Fusion.  1st Gen was good, 2nd Gen was and still is the best looking midsized family sedan out there.

 

I honestly didn't care for the first gen till the refresh.  I thought the refreshed first gen was a looker and of course the 2nd gen took it further.  The Milan on the other hand was very sharp. 

Edited August 7 by Andrew L

[akirby]

53 minutes ago, rmc523 said:

 

Tesla promised $35k and then dropped it.

 

They may achieve a $25-30k base model, but like Maverick, I'm sure it'll be offered in limited quantities for model year, and then quietly dropped because of "sales" and then bam, the new base model is $34k that creeps up yearly beyond that (with fewer features in the typical Ford fashion).

I understand the skepticism and it’s deserved and Ford may be too optimistic as usual.   But you guys are looking at current technology and processes where Ford is looking at next gen batteries and assembly processes and they own the battery plants.  I expect they’ll be using new technology that will greatly simplify the construction.

 

I’m thinking a smaller 2 door Maverick with 200 mile range (base) similar to a 1990 Ranger single cab.  Bare bones interior with a couple of touch screens.

 

I’d be a lot more skeptical if it was just Ford engineers or if they were just starting.  But they have folks from Tesla, Apple, Google and other tech companies and they’ve been working for 2 years.

[akirby]

20 minutes ago, Andrew L said:

 

I honestly didn't care for the first gen till the refresh.  I thought the refreshed first gen was a looker and of course the 2nd gen took it further.  The Milan on the other hand was very sharp. 

I had one of the first ones off the truck in late 2005 and I really liked it.  The refresh didn’t do much for me but I already liked it.  And the Milan did look good.  Better than the Zephyr.

[Andrew L]

5 minutes ago, akirby said:

I had one of the first ones off the truck in late 2005 and I really liked it.  The refresh didn’t do much for me but I already liked it.  And the Milan did look good.  Better than the Zephyr.

 

I agree on that, the Zephyr concept looked better than the final product IMO.  Didn't translate so well.  

 

Unpopular opinion but I do think the 06 Zephyr was Lincoln's laziest attempt.  It didn't offer a bigger engine, it had barely more features than the Ford/Mercury counterpart, and worst of all it had WAY less features than the LS which it replaced.  I know a lot of folks like to say the Blackwood was the worst but man it really felt like they put almost no effort into the Zephyr. 

[akirby]

12 minutes ago, Andrew L said:

 

I agree on that, the Zephyr concept looked better than the final product IMO.  Didn't translate so well.  

 

Unpopular opinion but I do think the 06 Zephyr was Lincoln's laziest attempt.  It didn't offer a bigger engine, it had barely more features than the Ford/Mercury counterpart, and worst of all it had WAY less features than the LS which it replaced.  I know a lot of folks like to say the Blackwood was the worst but man it really felt like they put almost no effort into the Zephyr. 

Zephyr was badge engineering to the max.  But it did give Lincoln dealers a vehicle to sell, which was also the only reason they did Blackwood.

[DeluxeStang]

13 hours ago, akirby said:

The skunkworks is 2 years old already.  I think they already know exactly what they’re building and what it should cost.  New batteries are a huge part.  Of course things could change in the next 2 years or things dont work out the way they’re expecting.  
 

I expect 3d printing including metal parts, cheaper smaller lighter batteries, simpler assembly process, more in sourced parts and more software control.  I can see a $25k 250 mile range small vehicle based on today’s prices.

There's a company worth paying attention to called Czingler I believe, based out of Cali. They only make a supercar currently, but they've developed this innovative process combining AI led design and engineering which offers max efficiency, and 3D printing for production. They claim their approach to vehicle development and assembly is highly scalable and cost efficient. Perhaps Ford should consider partnering with them. 

[akirby]

58 minutes ago, DeluxeStang said:

There's a company worth paying attention to called Czingler I believe, based out of Cali. They only make a supercar currently, but they've developed this innovative process combining AI led design and engineering which offers max efficiency, and 3D printing for production. They claim their approach to vehicle development and assembly is highly scalable and cost efficient. Perhaps Ford should consider partnering with them. 

I saw that segment on Motorweek and that’s what prompted my 3D printing statement.  I don’t know the costs or issues with volume production but it has enormous possibilities.

[ehaase]

2 hours ago, Andrew L said:

 

Unpopular opinion but I do think the 06 Zephyr was Lincoln's laziest attempt.  It didn't offer a bigger engine, it had barely more features than the Ford/Mercury counterpart, and worst of all it had WAY less features than the LS which it replaced.  I know a lot of folks like to say the Blackwood was the worst but man it really felt like they put almost no effort into the Zephyr. 

Zephyr was the Versailles of its era. Perhaps Ford couldn't afford any better at the time. 

[DeluxeStang]

29 minutes ago, akirby said:

I saw that segment on Motorweek and that’s what prompted my 3D printing statement.  I don’t know the costs or issues with volume production but it has enormous possibilities.

Absolutely, I'm keeping a real eye on them. If they can break into other segments within the industry, and maybe into other industries as well, then they'll definitely become a household name. They're innovating, but not just for the sake of innovation. 

[akirby]

 

[Sherminator98]

Biggest issue with 3D printing is the time it takes to make larger parts. I use Resin 3D printing at home and it can take 3-4 hours to print something that is 6 inches tall. 

 

Its not really the panacea that many people make it out to be

[akirby]

6 minutes ago, silvrsvt said:

Biggest issue with 3D printing is the time it takes to make larger parts. I use Resin 3D printing at home and it can take 3-4 hours to print something that is 6 inches tall. 

 

Its not really the panacea that many people make it out to be

We’re talking about industrial sized printers that can print multiple parts at the same time with 6 different lasers.  But yes it’s still slower than stamping.  You solve that by having a lot of printers en goes back to the cost issue.

 

The big advantage is you can print any part from any printer so you don’t need huge multiple bespoke stamping dies that have to be swapped out.  Who knows where the technology will be in a few years.

 

Watch the video.  

[DeluxeStang]

41 minutes ago, silvrsvt said:

Biggest issue with 3D printing is the time it takes to make larger parts. I use Resin 3D printing at home and it can take 3-4 hours to print something that is 6 inches tall. 

 

Its not really the panacea that many people make it out to be

Oh, there are definitely shortcomings with it for sure, nothing is perfect, but there is a lot of potential here. Imagine if Ford incorporated some of these production methods into their lower volume products. If something was gonna sell in low numbers, or was gonna be polarizing, utilizing different production methods might help ford save a lot of money. Kinda like how the vehicross utilized a different type of mold for the body panels to save tens if not hundreds of millions of dollars, because the people who made it knew it wouldn't sell very well. 

 

Hell, here's another idea, if Ford's CE1 platform is as game changing as people say it is, and will be as desirable as people claim, what if Ford approaches smaller, and less established car brands with it? Imagine Ford not only generating revenue by selling their own EVs, but by building them for smaller companies as well, something they haven't attempted to do very often in the past, but which can be very lucrative if done properly. 

 

What if Ford combines their super cost efficient platform, and this newer, more cost effient approach of 3D printing body panels, and combines those two ideas to offer to build cars from other brands at a price for less than what those brands would spend trying to get that far on their own? Again, there's just a lot they can do with this. 

[Sherminator98]

31 minutes ago, akirby said:

We’re talking about industrial sized printers that can print multiple parts at the same time with 6 different lasers.  But yes it’s still slower than stamping.  You solve that by having a lot of printers en goes back to the cost issue.

 

The big advantage is you can print any part from any printer so you don’t need huge multiple bespoke stamping dies that have to be swapped out.  Who knows where the technology will be in a few years.

 

Watch the video.  

 

And like many tech innovations it is way over sold (the internet in 2000 and the dot com burst after that.....self driving cars and well AI now) and there are limitations with the printing process when it comes to making parts-who knows if they can survive 150K without falling apart or have other issues

 

Additive manufacturing is good for prototyping and one off items but it is still a long ways off before it becomes a real game changer. 

 

If it made manufacturing that much easier/better, companies would be falling over themselves to use it. Right now the same thing can be done by other processes for cheaper, which leaves its impact low. 

[tbone]

9 hours ago, ice-capades said:

 

 A major factor is the corporate culture at Ford with short sighted decisions designed to prioritize career longevity rather than what's best for the company long term.     

Hmm, this sounds like the federal government, lol. 

[akirby]

37 minutes ago, silvrsvt said:

 

And like many tech innovations it is way over sold (the internet in 2000 and the dot com burst after that.....self driving cars and well AI now) and there are limitations with the printing process when it comes to making parts-who knows if they can survive 150K without falling apart or have other issues

 

Additive manufacturing is good for prototyping and one off items but it is still a long ways off before it becomes a real game changer. 

 

If it made manufacturing that much easier/better, companies would be falling over themselves to use it. Right now the same thing can be done by other processes for cheaper, which leaves its impact low. 

 

Nobody is overselling anything.  It’s a new technology that has a huge potential.  Watch the video.  The company is already working with OEMs in addition to selling their own hypercars.

[tbone]

2 hours ago, ehaase said:

Zephyr was the Versailles of its era. Perhaps Ford couldn't afford any better at the time. 

I actually believe this was the issue at that time.  I usually wouldn’t give them a pass on this, but something was better than nothing.  

[tbone]

1 hour ago, DeluxeStang said:

 

Hell, here's another idea, if Ford's CE1 platform is as game changing as people say it is, and will be as desirable as people claim, what if Ford approaches smaller, and less established car brands with it? Imagine Ford not only generating revenue by selling their own EVs, but by building them for smaller companies as well, something they haven't attempted to do very often in the past, but which can be very lucrative if done properly. 

 

I like this idea to help pay for the overhead. Those companies are likely going to build something anyway, so you might as well extract something from their sales.

[Sherminator98]

1 hour ago, akirby said:

 

Nobody is overselling anything.  It’s a new technology that has a huge potential.  Watch the video.  The company is already working with OEMs in addition to selling their own hypercars.

 

Just like AI or self driving cars? People who parrot hey this is greatest thing since sliced bread is often overselling it. 

[akirby]

42 minutes ago, silvrsvt said:

 

Just like AI or self driving cars? People who parrot hey this is greatest thing since sliced bread is often overselling it. 

If you consider that you can design a part, print it in metal in a few hours, install it on a vehicle and test it and if it works start production immediately without having to develop and install huge stamping dies AND the same machine can print 6 or more different parts at the same time, then it absolutely has the POTENTIAL for huge improvements in the entire design and build process.

 

We’ll know soon enough how this works since Czinger is using it to build production hypercars.  
 

Did you even watch the video???

[DeluxeStang]

2 hours ago, tbone said:

I like this idea to help pay for the overhead. Those companies are likely going to build something anyway, so you might as well extract something from their sales.

Exactly, let's say Ford builds their own products, and the products for someone else in the same factory. Depending on the ever fluctuating demand for each individual product, they can fluctuate output to constantly maximize their resources. Let's say whatever Ford is building at the time is in really high demand, so they prioritize the production for that over external company contracts. 

 

But when sales for the Ford stuff slumps, you crank up production on churning out products for those other guys. Your factory is never sitting dormant,unutilized, or perpetually producing sub par volumes of product. A way to future proof your company, and it's assets, the factory in this case. 

 

Ford partnered with VW over their, let's be honest, inferior EV platforms. If Ford makes all this effort to develop a world class platform, and doesn't entertain the idea of selling it to other brands, then they're insane. This could be potentially billions of dollars of additional revenue Ford leaves sitting on the table if they don't at least attempt to do something like that. 

Edited August 7 by DeluxeStang

[DeluxeStang]

11 minutes ago, akirby said:

If you consider that you can design a part, print it in metal in a few hours, install it on a vehicle and test it and if it works start production immediately without having to develop and install huge stamping dies AND the same machine can print 6 or more different parts at the same time, then it absolutely has the POTENTIAL for huge improvements in the entire design and build process.

 

We’ll know soon enough how this works since Czinger is using it to build production hypercars.  
 

Did you even watch the video???

 

 

1 hour ago, silvrsvt said:

 

Just like AI or self driving cars? People who parrot hey this is greatest thing since sliced bread is often overselling it. 

Guys let's not get heated over this, there's no need really. There are pros and cons the the tech, risks and shortcomings, and also reasons it should be considered. But tying it back into this bigger theme of Ford's affordable products,the bigger idea here is Ford should be open minded and consider a wide range of options and manufacturing methods for producing these vehicles if they're trying to get back to producing affordable, yet profitable products. 

[Sherminator98]

3 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

Guys let's not get heated over this, there's no need really. There are pros and cons the the tech, risks and shortcomings, and also reasons it should be considered. But tying it back into this bigger theme of Ford's affordable products,the bigger idea here is Ford should be open minded and consider a wide range of options and manufacturing methods for producing these vehicles if they're trying to get back to producing affordable, yet profitable products. 

 

I'm not arguing-just that I've been around tech long enough that often the next big thing is oversold and about 5-10 years before it actually work effectively or makes money. We have metal 3D printers at work to make parts that manufactures that have long gone out business don't make any more and it works for that, but nor are these parts cleared for flight operations or for a direct swap out in mission critical roles. 

 

I just have my doubts that additive manufacturing will make sense for Ford to do on a product that will hopefully sell 250K+ units a year vs some company that is maybe making a handful of super cars every year. 

[DeluxeStang]

3 hours ago, silvrsvt said:

 

I'm not arguing-just that I've been around tech long enough that often the next big thing is oversold and about 5-10 years before it actually work effectively or makes money. We have metal 3D printers at work to make parts that manufactures that have long gone out business don't make any more and it works for that, but nor are these parts cleared for flight operations or for a direct swap out in mission critical roles. 

 

I just have my doubts that additive manufacturing will make sense for Ford to do on a product that will hopefully sell 250K+ units a year vs some company that is maybe making a handful of super cars every year. 

It doesn't seem like 3D printing would work, at least in its current form, for super high outputs, like the 250k units a year you mentioned. But could it work if used for things selling in lower volumes? The kinds of products selling in the tens of thousands, not hundreds of thousands on an annual basis?

That's most of Ford's current EV lineup, and enthusiasts offerings like the mustang. The kinds of products that really need to rely on fatter profit margins to stay alive, because sales volume isn't doing the job.

 

I do apologize for taking this thread off topic a bit by discussing 3D printing methods. It just comes back to the bigger picture, this idea that Ford needs to change how they engineer their products. Their gen 1 EVs weren't profitable because the teams who developed them thought too much like a legacy auto brands relying heavily on conventional product development and manufacturing methods. Now is the time for Ford to rethink everything they're doing, and to explore different ideas that Ford wouldn't have entertained in the past. 

[jpd80]

Giga flash castings hold a lot of promise for Ford, it looks like that’s the perfect way to eliminate many manufacturing steps in the body shop and really speed things up. Knowing Ford, it would probably want to build the shell in two or three parts and just rivet and glue them together for a quick job done.

Edited August 8 by jpd80