Focus and fiesta may return as affordable evs

[AM222]

1 hour ago, akirby said:

It’s not the market.  Ford’s costs are too high everywhere but especially in Europe where they lost money even when sales were good.  Too many new platforms and powertrains on top of internal inefficiencies.  Companies that make money on small cars use cheap platforms and powertrains amortized over decades with only minor changes.

The Fiesta that was recently discontinued can trace its platform back to 2002.  It's old and one of the reasons it had a disadvantage when it came to interior space. 

Most of Ford's rivals from Asia and Europe had already switched to new platforms by 2020. 
This includes the following top 10 best-selling B-segment hatchbacks.
Dacia Sandero
Renault Clio
Peugeot 208
Citroen C3
Toyota Yaris
Opel Corsa
VW Polo
Skoda Fabia
Seat Ibiza
Hyundai i20

Edited August 9 by AM222

[tbone]

2 hours ago, Rick73 said:

Worth repeating from the interview, and article above, where Farley seemed sincere.  To what degree he’s allowed to pursue smaller vehicles, or whether he can build them profitably is another discussion.

 

 

In an interview with CNBC at the Aspen Ideas Festival in late June, Ford's head honcho said: "We have to start to get back in love with smaller vehicles. It's super important for our society and for EV adoption. We are just in love with these monster vehicles, and I love them too, but it's a major issue with weight."

 

 

A big difference in North America that doesn’t help is that many prospective buyers may love smaller vehicles because they are fun to drive, easy to park, and generally more affordable, particularly as second or third vehicle in family, but fear driving smaller cars for safety reasons.  I know many people who truly fear a wreck with huge pickup or SUV.  When roads are heavily populated with large and heavy vehicles, it will prevent adoption of smaller ones.  In my opinion transition to “smaller” vehicles in NA would need to occur over time while also discouraging unnecessarily large vehicles.  I’m not sure that’s really possible unless penalties are imposed as done in some other countries.  I’m not suggesting penalizing large vehicles, just stating that more buyers would buy smaller ones if there were not so many large ones on roads.

These companies need to aggressively target young people with these smaller EVs so they get used to them and see them as normal.  It is a tall task to convert the older generations accustomed to large vehicles to buying small vehicles.  None of the people I associate with would choose a small vehicle, including myself, unless it was a second or third vehicle.  
 

It will take time for that transition to happen naturally.  I am absolutely, unequivocally against government intervention to force that scenario.

[DeluxeStang]

3 hours ago, akirby said:

Does no good to sell small cars if you can’t make a profit.  Hopefully they can get their costs under control and reenter the market.

Exactly. Ford can't make a profit of a gas powered sedan or hatchback, or at least would struggle to do so. But we've discussed how it's basically reversed for these affordable EVs, they need something small and sleek to get away with using smaller, cheaper batteries. 

 

The confusing thing is if these upcoming EVs are a bronco sport and maverick, why do the people in the know keep talking about how they won't look like anything else in Ford's lineup? A bronco sport with a nose cone or something is still gonna look like a bronco sport.

[DeluxeStang]

2 hours ago, silvrsvt said:

Does 

I think the aero issue might be overstated to a point with chunky vehicles-There are some older vehicles that have mods done to them to make them more aero efficient and some of things are radical (like covered wheels) but I think the primary factor is making surfaces smoother and gaps tighter, which in turn drive up manufacturing costs. If say Ford said a 12-15mm gap between panels was fine in an ICE vehicle, but a 6-8mm gap would be better for aerodynamics. That might be another thing to look at. 

 

 

Interesting, I didn't know panel gaps made that much of an impact on areo, but it does make sense in hindsight. But could Ford reach those tighter tolerances, especially on a cheaper vehicle? That remains to be seen. 

[lfeg]

Ford is going to have to compete in entry level vehicles at some point. The buyers of current entry level cars are probably lost to Ford, and those who bought Ford's late entry level CUV the EcoSport, are probably lost for good, as a friend who has one has had it sitting at the dealer for well over a year (he has a loner Escape and is less than impressed).

[akirby]

3 hours ago, lfeg said:

Ford is going to have to compete in entry level vehicles at some point. The buyers of current entry level cars are probably lost to Ford, and those who bought Ford's late entry level CUV the EcoSport, are probably lost for good, as a friend who has one has had it sitting at the dealer for well over a year (he has a loner Escape and is less than impressed).

Buyers of entry level cars are usually not brand loyal.  They buy whatever is cheapest.  Look how many civic buyers flipped to Maverick.  It’s certainly not important enough to do a loss leader.  They have a chance to start from scratch with EVs so hopefully they’ll be able to sell the less expensive ones and still make a decent margin.  

[akirby]

4 hours ago, AM222 said:

The Fiesta that was recently discontinued can trace its platform back to 2002.  It's old and one of the reasons it had a disadvantage when it came to interior space

But it started out too expensive and flawed.  Ideally they could just shrink C2.

[morgan20]

2 hours ago, akirby said:

They have a chance to start from scratch with EVs so hopefully they’ll be able to sell the less expensive ones and still make a decent margin.  

 

Yea, start from scratch is the only way Ford can succeed with affordable EV. The head honcho big shot said last year that the Chinese companies are going to dominate and Ford has no chance competing with them on cost, so Ford has to become an iconic brand for EV

 

He said Chinese are going to be the powerhouse, I think, we think. To beat them, you either have to have a very distinct brand, which we think we do by leaning into our icons, or you have to beat them on cost. But how do you beat them on cost if their scale is five times yours? So I don’t know.

[tbone]

19 hours ago, akirby said:

Buyers of entry level cars are usually not brand loyal.  They buy whatever is cheapest.  Look how many civic buyers flipped to Maverick.  It’s certainly not important enough to do a loss leader.  They have a chance to start from scratch with EVs so hopefully they’ll be able to sell the less expensive ones and still make a decent margin.  

I know this is typically your position, but to have zero exposure to entry level customers is also problematic, IMO. Ford is typically not considered an aspiration type brand like a lot of the luxury brands in the United States. As such they need to be bringing in customers from across their lineup for sustainability. If you can produce a car that actually makes money, you’re still making money, and if you’re able to convert 20 to 40% of those people to another Ford vehicle those are easy customers.

 

I am a Ford customer today because of my introduction to Ford vehicles as a youth. Perhaps some or most of the young people today are not like that anymore, but I don’t think that means you should not try to sell them something.  I don’t think the recipe is complicated to attract customers.  Build an attractive, reliable, vehicle at the right price point and people will buy them.  For Ford, it likely boils down to whether or not they can hit the price point and still make money.  I think there are ways to do it, but you probably aren’t going to get an 8% margin.  

[Sherminator98]

27 minutes ago, tbone said:

I know this is typically your position, but to have zero exposure to entry level customers is also problematic, IMO. Ford is typically not considered an aspiration type brand like a lot of the luxury brands in the United States. As such they need to be bringing in customers from across their lineup for sustainability. If you can produce a car that actually makes money, you’re still making money, and if you’re able to convert 20 to 40% of those people to another Ford vehicle those are easy customers.

 

So here is something you might be missing from this-Ford isn't a "aspirational" brand like a Luxury brand, but it does have several name plates that are desirable to average people like the F-series, Bronco, and Mustang and maybe the Explorer, that do fit what people want.

 

I personally can't think of a aspirational entry level car-people buy them because its cheap. The VW Bug has a cult following but how does that really help VW now, outside of coming out with recycled knockoffs of products like the new Beetle or van?  

[DeluxeStang]

16 minutes ago, silvrsvt said:

 

So here is something you might be missing from this-Ford isn't a "aspirational" brand like a Luxury brand, but it does have several name plates that are desirable to average people like the F-series, Bronco, and Mustang and maybe the Explorer, that do fit what people want.

 

I personally can't think of a aspirational entry level car-people buy them because its cheap. The VW Bug has a cult following but how does that really help VW now, outside of coming out with recycled knockoffs of products like the new Beetle or van?  

What if Ford took less inspiration from a focus or fiesta, and more inspiration from a fox body hatchback or 90s escort cosworth. I agree, the fiesta and focus aren't really iconic, not in the way that many of Ford's other products are. Some ugly electric fiesta probably wouldn't sell in super high numbers but a hatchback inspired by the foxbody? Like a 300 hp, angular, sporty looking thing? Or an escort cosworth whaletail made over in the same retrofuturism design language similar to the Hyundai 45 concept, or the Hyundai n74? That could be something worthwhile. 

 

Give us a mustang foxbody with a retrofuturism makeover. That would appeal to people who wanted a fun, but sensible hatchback, and people who wanted a smaller, more nimble sporty car from Ford. 

Edited August 10 by DeluxeStang

[jpd80]

On 8/10/2024 at 2:04 AM, DeluxeStang said:

Exactly. Ford can't make a profit of a gas powered sedan or hatchback, or at least would struggle to do so. But we've discussed how it's basically reversed for these affordable EVs, they need something small and sleek to get away with using smaller, cheaper batteries. 

What was truly brutal was Ford Europe decision to end small cars there which were the bulk of its sales. That business model was based on selling vehicles that dealerships would service well into the future, now European Ford dealers will get none of that future servicing.

 

Farley is a salesman, he is telling investors and future buyers what they want to hear, ok large BEVs don’t make sense, so we’re now working on smallerBEVs that attract more customers and make better profits.
 

It’s amazing just how many people accepted that complete turnaround in profit focus after Ford and others had be been  telling us for years that it couldn’t make money on compact BEVs unless premium priced. If all it took was a statement, we’re now doing this, imagine what the truth behind the scenes is…..that Ford’s institutionalised Engineering Development team are incapable of learning new things and can be replaced by smaller more nimble project teams……nobody caught the ramifications of that for the rest of Ford’s ICE product development, maybe things are hard and costly because of the design approach?

 

 

 

On 8/10/2024 at 2:04 AM, DeluxeStang said:

The confusing thing is if these upcoming EVs are a bronco sport and maverick, why do the people in the know keep talking about how they won't look like anything else in Ford's lineup? A bronco sport with a nose cone or something is still gonna look like a bronco sport.

I think you’re taking that too literally, the rumour was a boxy Utility and a compact pickup, the approximations were made air quotes of “”Bronco Sport” and “Maverick” but could equally apply to a new squarer BEV Escape and some form of Transit Van and pickup. 

 Be careful about taking Mr Borg too literally, some of us get snippets of info and piece things together and form opinions but the real story can sometimes be a lot more complex Also, Ford won’t correct red herring rumours unless it suits them.

With regards the compact BEVs,

Originally, the skunkworks was started because North America passed on the VW based MEB Electric Vehicles, so naturally, Ford North America would prioritise models suitable for its region. I would think that a squarer BEV Edge replacement for North America would be a safe bet and may work in Europe/ROW too. A compact BEV pickup would be ideal complementary product for Nth America and maybe work in Europe/ROW but something tells me that Ford would prefer its own BEV Transit Connect over buying BEV Caddys  from VW but that just my opinion, take it with a grain of salt.

Edited August 10 by jpd80
Autotext mistakes, also corrections for clarity and tone

[akirby]

6 hours ago, tbone said:

I know this is typically your position, but to have zero exposure to entry level customers is also problematic, IMO. Ford is typically not considered an aspiration type brand like a lot of the luxury brands in the United States. As such they need to be bringing in customers from across their lineup for sustainability. If you can produce a car that actually makes money, you’re still making money, and if you’re able to convert 20 to 40% of those people to another Ford vehicle those are easy customers.

 

I am a Ford customer today because of my introduction to Ford vehicles as a youth. Perhaps some or most of the young people today are not like that anymore, but I don’t think that means you should not try to sell them something.  I don’t think the recipe is complicated to attract customers.  Build an attractive, reliable, vehicle at the right price point and people will buy them.  For Ford, it likely boils down to whether or not they can hit the price point and still make money.  I think there are ways to do it, but you probably aren’t going to get an 8% margin.  

I just think entry level buyers have changed over the last 20 years and the market changed.  But there is definitely a benefit to attracting younger buyers which Maverick and Bronco Sport are doing.

 

It really boils down to a lack of resources due to all the new EVs.  Unless you’re willing to hire a lot more people and build several new factories (and probably go into debt to do it) something had to be cut and when certain vehicles aren’t making much profit it’s an easy decision.  But so far the lack of cars hasn’t really impacted their bottom line yet.

[Rick73]

jpd80, IMO boxy shape in a small SUV is a range killer, and essentially relegates vehicle to City Car use for all practical purposes.  The new Hyundai INSTER is a prime example of how real-world range suffers.  WLTP city rating paints a rosy picture, but those test, much like EPA City, where average speed is very low, are not representative of real driving.  The INSTER is a tiny boxy and tall SUV and consumes more energy than various much larger and heavier BEVs.  I really like its space packaging, and very low price too, but if I purchased an INSTER it would be knowing it can’t really go on highway trips, not even short ones.  Not sure I’d even drive it across city of Houston.  It’s not coming to US for now, so not an option anyway.

 

At one time Farley said this new affordable BEV would be small and aerodynamic, and I hope Ford doesn’t deviate too much from the aero part of goal.  I think most Americans won’t consider any car even in $25~30k price if driving range is well below 200 miles in real-world driving.  I expect Hyundai know Americans won’t buy such a vehicle in large numbers even with low price.

 

 

[jpd80]

24 minutes ago, Rick73 said:

jpd80, IMO boxy shape in a small SUV is a range killer, and essentially relegates vehicle to City Car use for all practical purposes.  The new Hyundai INSTER is a prime example of how real-world range suffers.  WLTP city rating paints a rosy picture, but those test, much like EPA City, where average speed is very low, are not representative of real driving.  The INSTER is a tiny boxy and tall SUV and consumes more energy than various much larger and heavier BEVs.  I really like its space packaging, and very low price too, but if I purchased an INSTER it would be knowing it can’t really go on highway trips, not even short ones.  Not sure I’d even drive it across city of Houston.  It’s not coming to US for now, so not an option anyway.

 

At one time Farley said this new affordable BEV would be small and aerodynamic, and I hope Ford doesn’t deviate too much from the aero part of goal.  I think most Americans won’t consider any car even in $25~30k price if driving range is well below 200 miles in real-world driving.  I expect Hyundai know Americans won’t buy such a vehicle in large numbers even with low price.

 

Yes, understand perfectly  but please know that  I’m only relaying the rumours of the intended first two vehicles, these could be two of several more being kept secret.
 

If Ford had any sense, it wouldn’t lock itself into one or two vehicles  that don’t suit a wider audience. We all know how versatile C2 is so there’s no reason not to assume the same versatility with the coming CE1.

 

This is also why I’m wary of Farley releases, he’s a salesman trying to convince Wall Street and investors that Ford’s EV plans are robust and able to adapt to changing needs. He’s actually not officially mentioned anything about the proposed vehicle types and agree that for Europe and ROW, ford will need why more affordable BEVs then it is planning. All of this new come to Jesus moment is being done on the fly, so many things may change depending on perceived need now that small BEVs ar the flavour of the month….

 

 

Edited August 10 by jpd80

[jpd80]

6 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

What if Ford took less inspiration from a focus or fiesta, and more inspiration from a fox body hatchback or 90s escort cosworth. I agree, the fiesta and focus aren't really iconic, not in the way that many of Ford's other products are. Some ugly electric fiesta probably wouldn't sell in super high numbers but a hatchback inspired by the foxbody? Like a 300 hp, angular, sporty looking thing? Or an escort cosworth whaletail made over in the same retrofuturism design language similar to the Hyundai 45 concept, or the Hyundai n74? That could be something worthwhile. 

 

Give us a mustang foxbody with a retrofuturism makeover. That would appeal to people who wanted a fun, but sensible hatchback, and people who wanted a smaller, more nimble sporty car from Ford. 

Honestly, I doubt that Ford is even looking in that direction but maybe it should…Farley has been really negative about past cars and profitability, clearly focusing on Pockups, Utilities and crossovers.

 

The new Ford is trying to maximise sales with fewest models which perhaps is not the smartest long term choice. We’ll see but I have a feeling that this new BEV plan will see changes in the next two years….

Edited August 10 by jpd80

[DeluxeStang]

56 minutes ago, jpd80 said:

Yes, understand perfectly  but please know that  I’m only relaying the rumours of the intended first two vehicles, these could be two of several more being kept secret.
 

If Ford had any sense, it wouldn’t lock itself into one or two vehicles  that don’t suit a wider audience. We all know how versatile C2 is so there’s no reason not to assume the same versatility with the coming CE1.

 

 

Farley claims there's a slew and wide variety of different top hats coming for CE1, which implies more than 2 or 3 models to me. I'm guessing we'll see this small utility and truck first. Then if CE1 is successful, and makes it's initial development costs back relatively quickly, we might see some other form factors. I could see Ford offering this boxy utility we've discussed, as well as something like a coupe-like crossover, similar in style to the mach-e, but maybe at a smaller size and lower price point. 

 

 

I've said it before, but now is the time to show the world what Ford is working on, show us some advanced concepts Ford. Yeah, we might have to wait 2 years or so to see the first of them enter production, but that's nothing compared to the 5-7 years between concept and production we often experience. 

 

Ford needs to do something to keep people excited about their future, and their future EVs. Show us what you're doing instead of just talking about it, even something as simple as design renderings. I get they don't want to tip their hand too early, but this could be a really good move to gauge interest in these products and get feedback on design and features while you still have years to tweak and improve them. 

 

Ford needs to remind the world that they're Ford, they're the car company to end all car companies. The brand that builds the car of your dreams for the budget of your reality. This platform is the chance for them to do that, to get back to what everyone loves about Ford, making special cars people can actually afford. 

[rmc523]

On 8/10/2024 at 12:32 PM, DeluxeStang said:

What if Ford took less inspiration from a focus or fiesta, and more inspiration from a fox body hatchback or 90s escort cosworth. I agree, the fiesta and focus aren't really iconic, not in the way that many of Ford's other products are. Some ugly electric fiesta probably wouldn't sell in super high numbers but a hatchback inspired by the foxbody? Like a 300 hp, angular, sporty looking thing? Or an escort cosworth whaletail made over in the same retrofuturism design language similar to the Hyundai 45 concept, or the Hyundai n74? That could be something worthwhile. 

 

Give us a mustang foxbody with a retrofuturism makeover. That would appeal to people who wanted a fun, but sensible hatchback, and people who wanted a smaller, more nimble sporty car from Ford. 

 

Eh, I think the n74 should stay in the 80s where it was designed.

 

On 8/10/2024 at 8:06 PM, DeluxeStang said:

Farley claims there's a slew and wide variety of different top hats coming for CE1, which implies more than 2 or 3 models to me. I'm guessing we'll see this small utility and truck first. Then if CE1 is successful, and makes it's initial development costs back relatively quickly, we might see some other form factors. I could see Ford offering this boxy utility we've discussed, as well as something like a coupe-like crossover, similar in style to the mach-e, but maybe at a smaller size and lower price point. 

 

 

I've said it before, but now is the time to show the world what Ford is working on, show us some advanced concepts Ford. Yeah, we might have to wait 2 years or so to see the first of them enter production, but that's nothing compared to the 5-7 years between concept and production we often experience. 

 

Ford needs to do something to keep people excited about their future, and their future EVs. Show us what you're doing instead of just talking about it, even something as simple as design renderings. I get they don't want to tip their hand too early, but this could be a really good move to gauge interest in these products and get feedback on design and features while you still have years to tweak and improve them. 

 

Ford needs to remind the world that they're Ford, they're the car company to end all car companies. The brand that builds the car of your dreams for the budget of your reality. This platform is the chance for them to do that, to get back to what everyone loves about Ford, making special cars people can actually afford. 

 

I'm hopeful, but we'll see.

CD6 also had sedans and whatnot planned too.....until they weren't.  We'll see what ends up making it to the production line...

[tbone]

We are opining here about the possibilities and affordability of CE1, however there is still an infrastructure problem throughout the country.  I have not seen any significant uptick in building out the charging infrastructure.   I have a young person that works with me, and they live in an apartment complex that is maybe 3 years old and it does not have one charging station in it.

 

A lot of the people who would be interested in CE1 are not typically going to be living in a single family residence with charging capability.  IMO you may get artificial supression of demand because these people who may want to buy one pass on it because they don’t have anywhere to charge it. 
 

I still think Ford needs an ICE platform, such as the Chevy Trax, to continue to bridge the gap.  Like the Maverick, 2024 Traxs fly off the lots at or above MSRP, because they are affordable and nice looking. I’ve tried to identify how much Chevy is making on those, and have read anywhere from $150 to $1000, but haven’t been able to confirm anything.  You could argue the Bronco Sport is similar, however the starting prices are vastly different.  

[ehaase]

3 hours ago, tbone said:

I still think Ford needs an ICE platform, such as the Chevy Trax, to continue to bridge the gap.  Like the Maverick, 2024 Traxs fly off the lots at or above MSRP, because they are affordable and nice looking. I’ve tried to identify how much Chevy is making on those, and have read anywhere from $150 to $1000, but haven’t been able to confirm anything.  You could argue the Bronco Sport is similar, however the starting prices are vastly different.  

GM also has a lower cost country (S Korea) as a manufacturing base for Trax, Trailblazer, Encore, and Envision, which Ford doesn't. 

[Biker16]

 

4 hours ago, tbone said:

We are opining here about the possibilities and affordability of CE1, however there is still an infrastructure problem throughout the country.  I have not seen any significant uptick in building out the charging infrastructure.   I have a young person that works with me, and they live in an apartment complex that is maybe 3 years old and it does not have one charging station in it.

 

 

Infrastructure is a chicken-and-egg problem, made worse by this country's political dysfunction. Some states, due to politics, do not use federal incentives.  

 

On 8/10/2024 at 7:05 PM, jpd80 said:

The new Ford is trying to maximise sales with fewest models which perhaps is not the smartest long term choice. We’ll see but I have a feeling that this new BEV plan will see changes in the next two years….

When you shrink your lineup, you lose so much from an engineering design and manufacturing POV. In the short term, you reduce costs, but in the long term, you lose the ability to quickly adapt to changes in the marketplace. 
 

On 8/10/2024 at 6:11 PM, akirby said:

It really boils down to a lack of resources due to all the new EVs.  Unless you’re willing to hire a lot more people and build several new factories (and probably go into debt to do it) something had to be cut and when certain vehicles aren’t making much profit it’s an easy decision.  But so far the lack of cars hasn’t really impacted their bottom line yet.

Companies with an active and productive product development system can pivot quickly and efficiently to develop new products with marginal investment.

 We're going to develop a new architecture anyway, so why not make it electric?

In contrast, firms with lumbering Product development systems are not actively looking toward change. They require substantial investment and time to build momentum toward change and are prone to dysfunctional decision-making due to powerful incentives to maintain the status quo. 

This looks really hard, do we really need to make this change?
 

On 8/10/2024 at 12:22 PM, silvrsvt said:

 

So here is something you might be missing from this-Ford isn't a "aspirational" brand like a Luxury brand, but it does have several name plates that are desirable to average people like the F-series, Bronco, and Mustang and maybe the Explorer, that do fit what people want.

 

I personally can't think of a aspirational entry level car-people buy them because its cheap. The VW Bug has a cult following but how does that really help VW now, outside of coming out with recycled knockoffs of products like the new Beetle or van?  

2 things 
First:
Aspirational products are based on the idea that people can be persuaded to pay more for a product that emotionally connects to them. Versus a Commodity product that meets the basic needs of a customer. 

All vehicles are commodities; There is a difference between charging a premium price for a better vehicle and charging a premium price for a vehicle's novelty. 

While novelty is sexy, consistently better products are more sustainable, and a good example is the F150.  

Ford has struggled to command a premium price to make a better vehicle. Novelty seems to meet Ford's management needs better than better products. 

The problem is that novelty wears off, leaving products that fail to regain their premium status.

Second

Ford needs to be able to profitably compete with its competitors in commodity products. Failure to do so creates inconsistent profits (Novelty Sugar Rush) and an inability to compete on price in the long and medium term. 

Edited August 12 by Biker16

[DeluxeStang]

4 hours ago, tbone said:

We are opining here about the possibilities and affordability of CE1, however there is still an infrastructure problem throughout the country.  I have not seen any significant uptick in building out the charging infrastructure.   I have a young person that works with me, and they live in an apartment complex that is maybe 3 years old and it does not have one charging station in it.

 

A lot of the people who would be interested in CE1 are not typically going to be living in a single family residence with charging capability.  IMO you may get artificial supression of demand because these people who may want to buy one pass on it because they don’t have anywhere to charge it. 
 

I still think Ford needs an ICE platform, such as the Chevy Trax, to continue to bridge the gap.  Like the Maverick, 2024 Traxs fly off the lots at or above MSRP, because they are affordable and nice looking. I’ve tried to identify how much Chevy is making on those, and have read anywhere from $150 to $1000, but haven’t been able to confirm anything.  You could argue the Bronco Sport is similar, however the starting prices are vastly different.  

They have that, it's called c2. Yes, the bronco sport is more expensive than the trax, but it's a much better vehicle. I will say the Trax is a very good looking vehicle for the price point, but I wonder about the quality/reliability. 

[morgan20]

On 8/10/2024 at 8:06 PM, DeluxeStang said:

Ford needs to remind the world that they're Ford, they're the car company to end all car companies.

 

Ford hasn't been in that position for almost a hundred years and sure as heck ain't today. When I took a buyout from Ford in the late 2000s, they were the car company that came dang close to ending itself. The Ford, later Visteon, later ACH plant where I used to work was demolished years ago and was recently redeveloped as a beer distribution center for Monarch Beverage

 

[tbone]

5 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

They have that, it's called c2. Yes, the bronco sport is more expensive than the trax, but it's a much better vehicle. I will say the Trax is a very good looking vehicle for the price point, but I wonder about the quality/reliability. 

The BS may be a better vehicle, but people are a lot more price conscious than they were a few years ago.  The pre-2024 Trax, by most accounts, were not good, but the 2024 appears to be a better vehicle.  
 

Chevy has nine SUVS, including EVs, and a car (10)  Ford has seven, including the MME. Three of the Chevy SUVs start below the 2025 Escape.  The Edge and the Malibu are going away so it will be 9 and 6.  Nobody really cares about the Malibu, but the disappearance of the Edge puts another hole in Fords affordability calculation, and the Bronco is not a proper replacement.  On the truck side, the Maverick certainly helps the affordability, but it is a truck.  I honestly never would have expected Chevy to better positioned than Ford.  
 

I’ll continue to beat a dead horse that Ford needs to be finding young/new customers, and that isn’t going to happen without more affordable compelling products, and not just in the EV category.  

[DeluxeStang]

56 minutes ago, tbone said:

The BS may be a better vehicle, but people are a lot more price conscious than they were a few years ago.  The pre-2024 Trax, by most accounts, were not good, but the 2024 appears to be a better vehicle.  
 

Chevy has nine SUVS, including EVs, and a car (10)  Ford has seven, including the MME. Three of the Chevy SUVs start below the 2025 Escape.  The Edge and the Malibu are going away so it will be 9 and 6.  Nobody really cares about the Malibu, but the disappearance of the Edge puts another hole in Fords affordability calculation, and the Bronco is not a proper replacement.  On the truck side, the Maverick certainly helps the affordability, but it is a truck.  I honestly never would have expected Chevy to better positioned than Ford.  
 

I’ll continue to beat a dead horse that Ford needs to be finding young/new customers, and that isn’t going to happen without more affordable compelling products, and not just in the EV category.  

Between the maverick, BS, and the wide range of CE1 EVs coming, it seems like Ford has younger buyers pretty well covered. The Ecoboost even isn't that expensive, starting in the low 30s, so even younger buyers who want a sports coupe are being catered to. 

 

A gas powered fiesta or focus just doesn't seem profitable, even if it was, there's the issue of space, where do you build it? Depending on Ford's future, maybe Flat Rock will find additional investment as Ford's go to plant not just for the mustang, but for other potential car form factors. But many view that sort of investment in flat rock as being unlikely.