Ford fusion and other sedans popular amongst younger buyers

[jpd80]

6 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

I have a hard time believing the maverick isn't profitable, even in the lower trims. By Ford's own admission, the entire reason they pivoted away from sedans and hatchbacks is because they were losing money on them. A huge chunk of mavericks are lower trim hybrids, if they're losing money on all of those, it kinda defeated the whole purpose to changing their strategy to begin with. 

 

Maybe when the maverick first came out and was around 20k they were losing money. But the entry level maverick will start around 27 grand for 2025, a huge uptick, in just a few years, all while early maverick sales paid down tooling and other manufacturing and development expenses. It has to be profitable, even in hybrid trim. There's no way. 

It’s good to see you analyse some facts but I understand the idea behind offering a Maverick and Bronco Sport 

that are built in the same Mexican plant gives Ford around 25,00 to 30,000 sales per month potential. At the 

same time, Escape keeps soldiering on as a “commodity vehicle”, that triple act with (nearly forgot  Corsair)

shows the versatility of C2. 
 

Since Maverick was devel using the Transit Connect version of C2, Thers a ton of cost savings associated 

with a commercial van, so I have no problem believeing the entry level hybrid is o probably break even but 

Ford preferring a richer trim mix to combine with Bronco Sport in making Hermosillo a more profitable use

of resources/vehicles built. A future Maverick Van will give Ford the opportunity to have both single and

crew cab van option but also offering that same hybrid drive train in the low 20K zone, so obviously the

base hybrid Maverick pickup price has to come up a bit. There’s a marketing strategy behind this.

[DeluxeStang]

1 hour ago, jpd80 said:

It’s good to see you analyse some facts but I understand the idea behind offering a Maverick and Bronco Sport 

that are built in the same Mexican plant gives Ford around 25,00 to 30,000 sales per month potential. At the 

same time, Escape keeps soldiering on as a “commodity vehicle”, that triple act with (nearly forgot  Corsair)

shows the versatility of C2. 
 

Since Maverick was devel using the Transit Connect version of C2, Thers a ton of cost savings associated 

with a commercial van, so I have no problem believeing the entry level hybrid is o probably break even but 

Ford preferring a richer trim mix to combine with Bronco Sport in making Hermosillo a more profitable use

of resources/vehicles built. A future Maverick Van will give Ford the opportunity to have both single and

crew cab van option but also offering that same hybrid drive train in the low 20K zone, so obviously the

base hybrid Maverick pickup price has to come up a bit. There’s a marketing strategy behind this.

Interesting that you mentioned the marketing strategy as well. I can't help but wonder if Ford knew all along that they weren't gonna keep the 20k starting price around for a long time. They used it to create hype, draw people in, and then jack up the prices. 

[DeluxeStang]

1 hour ago, jpd80 said:

It’s good to see you analyse some facts but I understand the idea behind offering a Maverick and Bronco Sport 

that are built in the same Mexican plant gives Ford around 25,00 to 30,000 sales per month potential. At the 

same time, Escape keeps soldiering on as a “commodity vehicle”, that triple act with (nearly forgot  Corsair)

shows the versatility of C2. 
 

Since Maverick was devel using the Transit Connect version of C2, Thers a ton of cost savings associated 

with a commercial van, so I have no problem believeing the entry level hybrid is o probably break even but 

Ford preferring a richer trim mix to combine with Bronco Sport in making Hermosillo a more profitable use

of resources/vehicles built. A future Maverick Van will give Ford the opportunity to have both single and

crew cab van option but also offering that same hybrid drive train in the low 20K zone, so obviously the

base hybrid Maverick pickup price has to come up a bit. There’s a marketing strategy behind this.

I also agree with your sentiments on escape. It may not be as exciting or glamorous as the Bronco Sport, but it's doing quite well all things considered. 

[jpd80]

56 minutes ago, DeluxeStang said:

I also agree with your sentiments on escape. It may not be as exciting or glamorous as the Bronco Sport, but it's doing quite well all things considered. 

The big issue with C2 Escape was the styling, buyers took a long time to accept it,

The truth is that the Euro Kuga design has moved further and further away from 

the original Mazda based boxy Escape which was also a replacement for the even

earlier small Explorer. The Bronco Sport capture a fair bit of that early boxy Escape

but to me, it seems like that cancelled Maverick SUV could have been perfect.

 

I think the real reason Maverick SUV was cancelled was because

1) Hermosillo needed enough production space  for the pick and Bronco Sport

2) Ford has an uncanny knack of making bad choices based on other influences.

For a while Ford was quietly reconsidering reviving San Louis Potosi for more C2

production especially when the UAW strike blew up (sorry, another rabbit hole)

 

That strike put a knife through some other plans Ford had, it seems like doing anything like that

at a UAW plant is now on hold until Ford assesses the added costs (eg Mustang 4Dr/ pickup).

Farley supports them but the UAW has lost a ton of credibility with him.

Edited September 14, 2024 by jpd80

[jpd80]

51 minutes ago, DeluxeStang said:

Interesting that you mentioned the marketing strategy as well. I can't help but wonder if Ford knew all along that they weren't gonna keep the 20k starting price around for a long time. They used it to create hype, draw people in, and then jack up the prices. 

You basically answered your own question, an entry price point with a hybrid power train as standard

drew in a ton of reservations/orders that Ford’s first year or so build profile simply couldn’t handle and

by the time it was able to adjust the supply contract, price increases meant the original price had to go up.

 

It also why I remain skeptical of the CE1 $25,000-$30,000 starting price, everyone saying it must be true

because Farley says it is missing the point. Farley is selling the sizzle for small BEVs that are now being

presented as mid-sized……Is that an opening to change the price as we get closer to actual delivery?

Imagine a super basic XL that starts sub $30k that no one will really buy……we’ve seen this movie before.

Edited September 14, 2024 by jpd80

[jpd80]

The real issue for Ford is the lack of widespread desire for BEV, that is a big issue

as people now see BEVs in their community and get real feedback on living with them.

Some people love themm but a lot of people will avoid the pain and suffering for as long

as they can - those people probably open to a good basic hybrid or maybe a PHEV 

 

While sales volume for Mach E, Lightning and E Transit has increased,

it’s still nothing like Ford imagined a few years ago, so the small CE1s

are being pitched to be all things to all people while using smallish batteries.

It’s the latest in a long line of Ford plans…….

Edited September 14, 2024 by jpd80

[Broncofan7]

I will say that I think a Mustang sedan will be a sales success as long as it is done reasonably well because of how few sedans are sold nowadays. That is not to say the market would support a whole sedan lineup, but I think having one like that sedan will work well. As for vehicles like the Focus, Fusion, etc. I have no idea.

[DeluxeStang]

3 hours ago, jpd80 said:

The big issue with C2 Escape was the styling, buyers took a long time to accept it,

The truth is that the Euro Kuga design has moved further and further away from 

the original Mazda based boxy Escape which was also a replacement for the even

earlier small Explorer. The Bronco Sport capture a fair bit of that early boxy Escape

but to me, it seems like that cancelled Maverick SUV could have been perfect.

 

I think the real reason Maverick SUV was cancelled was because

1) Hermosillo needed enough production space  for the pick and Bronco Sport

2) Ford has an uncanny knack of making bad choices based on other influences.

For a while Ford was quietly reconsidering reviving San Louis Potosi for more C2

production especially when the UAW strike blew up (sorry, another rabbit hole)

 

That strike put a knife through some other plans Ford had, it seems like doing anything like that

at a UAW plant is now on hold until Ford assesses the added costs (eg Mustang 4Dr/ pickup).

Farley supports them but the UAW has lost a ton of credibility with him.

Yeah, the current escape design is very generic. I wouldn't call it unattractive, especially the refreshed models, but it doesn't stand out at all. We'll see what Ford decides to do in the compact utility space. I've heard some propose killing the escape entirely and just expanding bronco sport production, but that would be a mistake imo. 

 

The bronco sport styling is very polarizing, I've met my fair share of people who love, or hate, how the bronco sport looks, not many people seem to be in between on it. But it doesn't seem to have the small appeal of the escape, the higher pricing also is great for profits, not less so for sales volume. 

 

It's definitely gonna be an interesting few years for escape and models like it, that's for sure. 

[DeluxeStang]

2 hours ago, Broncofan7 said:

I will say that I think a Mustang sedan will be a sales success as long as it is done reasonably well because of how few sedans are sold nowadays. That is not to say the market would support a whole sedan lineup, but I think having one like that sedan will work well. As for vehicles like the Focus, Fusion, etc. I have no idea.

Exactly, don't just jump back into sedans and hatchbacks to do the same old thing. A mustang sedan would command a premium, and would have the sporty American sedan market almost entirely to itself. We've seen how profitable those sorts of models can be if done right. 

 

As for CE1, with 80s and 90s retro styling starting to gain traction, and 80s and 90s nostalgia running at full tilt, it would be interesting to do some sort of futuristic areo driven 80s/90s inspired design. A remake of a gen 1 Tarus or a whaletail escort with flared fenders would certainly go against convention and grab attention compared to a lot of the uninspired blobby affordable cars. 

[tbone]

1 hour ago, DeluxeStang said:

Yeah, the current escape design is very generic. I wouldn't call it unattractive, especially the refreshed models, but it doesn't stand out at all. We'll see what Ford decides to do in the compact utility space. I've heard some propose killing the escape entirely and just expanding bronco sport production, but that would be a mistake imo. 

 

The bronco sport styling is very polarizing, I've met my fair share of people who love, or hate, how the bronco sport looks, not many people seem to be in between on it. But it doesn't seem to have the small appeal of the escape, the higher pricing also is great for profits, not less so for sales volume. 

 

It's definitely gonna be an interesting few years for escape and models like it, that's for sure. 

I’ve been paying closer attention to competitors in the compact SUV segment, and nothing really stands out. There’s a lot of similarity between models and nothing super exciting, which doesn’t imply they are all unattractive. I still believe there’s one exception, although it’s considered a sub compact SUV, the Buick in Envista is a very nice looking SUV for its price point and looks much more expensive than it is. 
 

Regarding the bronco sport, I get the love-hate relationship with it. Sometimes I like it sometimes not as much. My biggest issue is the rear looks stubby to me, which is likely the biggest culprit for the tight rear seat legroom.  I still think it’s a good SUV but it too isn’t super exciting to me either.  

[jpd80]

3 hours ago, tbone said:

I’ve been paying closer attention to competitors in the compact SUV segment, and nothing really stands out. There’s a lot of similarity between models and nothing super exciting, which doesn’t imply they are all unattractive. I still believe there’s one exception, although it’s considered a sub compact SUV, the Buick in Envista is a very nice looking SUV for its price point and looks much more expensive than it is. 

Sorry, I split your post in two because two very good points.

Its like the same ol same ol, a specific corridor of styling that permits a certain vanilla that most will accept

and few reject as abjectly horrible. Of course, some people really know what they want/like and will avoid 

what looks bland like the plague. The rest of the buying audience are pretty much onboard so competition 

means these utilities are now becoming super price competitive- that is if manufacturers want to get every

last sale. Ford basically splitting their Escape choices into three with Escape, Maverick or Bronco Sport.

No other manufacturer is covering Maverick properly, it’s difficult for a non-US brand to understand those buyers.

 

 

3 hours ago, tbone said:

Regarding the bronco sport, I get the love-hate relationship with it. Sometimes I like it sometimes not as much. My biggest issue is the rear looks stubby to me, which is likely the biggest culprit for the tight rear seat legroom.  I still think it’s a good SUV but it too isn’t super exciting to me either.  

Had there been no T6 Bronco, the Bronco Sport could have been made longer for not much more than current price.

Perhaps there’s an opportunity to rework the next Gen for global markets and make it as a std and longer wheelbase.

(I know what I want is probably not possible but thinking early 1990s Explorer with 112” wb x 74” wide x 189” long.)

Edited September 14, 2024 by jpd80

[Rick73]

On 9/12/2024 at 3:33 PM, silvrsvt said:

 

I think alot of people are making many assumptions about the Skunkworks EV that is coming-yeah its not going to have a 93 or 131 Kw battery like the Lightning does, but I don't think shape alone makes big deal as much as all the details in that shape that affect the aerodynamics. Those details drive up the manufacturing costs of that said product. 

 

Just look at this- 

https://www.aerocivic.com/

 

Not exactly practical, but you'll at least get the idea. 

That he can get 100 MPG at steady 60 MPH or 75 MPG at 75 MPH is impressive but not unexpected given extreme shape revisions, especially the massive tail cone and covered wheels at four corners.  IMO it’s not really all that difficult to achieve 100 MPG at steady speeds provided a combination of a few key points are optimized.

 

1) Reduce driving speed

2) Reduce drag area (Cd X Frontal Area)

3) Reduce weight

4) Reduce BSFC

 

Over 30 years ago GM’s Ultralite could do 100 MPG at steady 50 MPH, and while it was an experimental car, there have been tremendous improvements in technology over 3 decades that would allow for a more conventional car to be mass produced.  The thing I find technically interesting is that 100 MPG at 50 MPH burns fuel at an incredibly low rate of 0.5 gallons per hour, suggesting engine needs to be pretty small to be efficient at that low a power level.  And if engine is made that small, acceleration would be too slow even with light construction.  That’s where modern hybrid technology can step in and merge a compact fuel efficient gasoline engine with electric motor for acceleration and gradeability.

 

As a side note, BMW and Mercedes both now have compact cars with relatively low coefficients of drag that perform well at steady highway speeds.  Car and Driver reported the 2025 BMW 3 series achieved 42 MPG on their 75 MPH test loop, proving fuel economy doesn’t require an impractical vehicle.  I look forward to see what engineers come up with over next 10 years or so.  Should be exciting.

[DeluxeStang]

On 9/12/2024 at 2:33 PM, silvrsvt said:

 

I think alot of people are making many assumptions about the Skunkworks EV that is coming-yeah its not going to have a 93 or 131 Kw battery like the Lightning does, but I don't think shape alone makes big deal as much as all the details in that shape that affect the aerodynamics. Those details drive up the manufacturing costs of that said product. 

 

Just look at this- 

https://www.aerocivic.com/

 

Not exactly practical, but you'll at least get the idea. 

I think this actually illustrates the issue with taking areo design too far. The finished product might be super efficient, but if it was actually produced, very few people would buy something that looks like that. 

 

I think people like that guy get some honed in on a goal that they lose sight of the bigger picture. It sounds like the Ford three row was an example of aero styling that went too far. 

[rmc523]

15 hours ago, jpd80 said:

The big issue with C2 Escape was the styling, buyers took a long time to accept it,

The truth is that the Euro Kuga design has moved further and further away from 

the original Mazda based boxy Escape which was also a replacement for the even

earlier small Explorer. The Bronco Sport capture a fair bit of that early boxy Escape

but to me, it seems like that cancelled Maverick SUV could have been perfect.

 

I think the real reason Maverick SUV was cancelled was because

1) Hermosillo needed enough production space  for the pick and Bronco Sport

2) Ford has an uncanny knack of making bad choices based on other influences.

For a while Ford was quietly reconsidering reviving San Louis Potosi for more C2

production especially when the UAW strike blew up (sorry, another rabbit hole)

 

That strike put a knife through some other plans Ford had, it seems like doing anything like that

at a UAW plant is now on hold until Ford assesses the added costs (eg Mustang 4Dr/ pickup).

Farley supports them but the UAW has lost a ton of credibility with him.

the facelift did wonders for Escape’s design, even if it is still somewhat boring.

 

14 hours ago, Broncofan7 said:

I will say that I think a Mustang sedan will be a sales success as long as it is done reasonably well because of how few sedans are sold nowadays. That is not to say the market would support a whole sedan lineup, but I think having one like that sedan will work well. As for vehicles like the Focus, Fusion, etc. I have no idea.

 

I’ve said for a while that in the US there’s probably room for 1 premium priced sedan offering…whether it be Mustang or an alternative like Evos (the latter could command higher prices).

 

after being in Europe and seeing how small roads are, they definitely need smaller cars.

[DeluxeStang]

I will say as this topic has transitioned into a discussion on Ford's CE1 EVs, I find it interesting that the guy who was Ford's head of EV design, and thus, came up with Ford's CE1 EV designs is now the head of Ford global design. 

 

I might be reading too much into this, as I've been known to do in the past, but his promotion to head of Ford design immediately following his work on CE1 EVS implies to me Ford liked what he came up with. 

[Rick73]

On 9/14/2024 at 10:24 AM, DeluxeStang said:

I think this actually illustrates the issue with taking areo design too far. The finished product might be super efficient, but if it was actually produced, very few people would buy something that looks like that. 

 

I think people like that guy get some honed in on a goal that they lose sight of the bigger picture. It sounds like the Ford three row was an example of aero styling that went too far. 

The do-it-yourself aerodynamic modifications on that Honda Civic no doubt look horrendous, but the important point is to quantify what fuel-economy results are possible.  Evaluating extremes should always be done with caution, and in proper context, but if nothing else this guy’s experiment shows what he achieved by reducing coefficient of drag in half, reportedly from 0.34 to 0.17.

 

You’re correct no one would buy that contraption, but there are now a lot of mass-produced cars with Cd in range of 0.20 to 0.22, so the majority of benefit reducing from initial 0.34 can be obtained without extreme and goofy looks.  I personally like a few cars with Cd in range of 0.20, and in time could get used to even more aero cars like the experimental Mercedes Benz Vision EQXX which also claims a Cd of 0.17; while resembling a modern vehicle.  Just saying aerodynamic efficiency doesn’t necessarily have to be ugly. 

[Sherminator98]

5 minutes ago, Rick73 said:

You’re correct no one would buy that contraption, but there are now a lot of mass-produced cars with Cd in range of 0.20 to 0.22, so the majority of benefit reducing from initial 0.34 can be obtained without extreme and goofy looks.  I personally like a few cars with Cd in range of 0.20, and in time could get used to even more aero cars like the experimental Mercedes Benz Vision EQXX which also claims a Cd of 0.17; while resembling a modern vehicle.  Just saying aerodynamic efficiency doesn’t necessarily have to be ugly. 

 

But will other buyer actually like it? I know there is a lot of people who don't like the Ioniq 6 styling for example. 

 

As for the Civic thing-the point I was trying to make is that you can pretty much make anything aerodynamic at the expense of looks and functionality. Also manufacturing costs go up with tighter tolerances in say smaller panel gaps or adding cladding to the underside of the car to improve aerodynamics. 

[DeluxeStang]

36 minutes ago, silvrsvt said:

 

But will other buyer actually like it? I know there is a lot of people who don't like the Ioniq 6 styling for example. 

 

As for the Civic thing-the point I was trying to make is that you can pretty much make anything aerodynamic at the expense of looks and functionality. Also manufacturing costs go up with tighter tolerances in say smaller panel gaps or adding cladding to the underside of the car to improve aerodynamics. 

I think there would be an audience for it, a few thousand buyers, that's about it. I've seen 1 Ioniq 6 and it looks horrific, the super droopy rear end in particular is visual torture. 

[Rick73]

Because an ugly car is aerodynamic, it doesn’t mean every aerodynamic car has to be ugly.  Ionic 6 is indeed ugly, but Mercedes in particular has accomplish much in this area lately with mass produced models.

 

Some features associated with making cars aerodynamic indeed add to higher costs, but others reduce costs.  Manufacturers are more concerned with initial costs because it affects sales more directly, but improved aerodynamics can also reduce fuel consumption and hence longer-term costs.  Cars that are more aerodynamic, especially HEV and PHEV, can operate with smaller engines which reduce weight and costs.  And we shouldn’t ignore that reducing frontal area by making vehicles narrower and or lower (i.e.— smaller) typically also reduces aerodynamic drag and manufacturing costs at same time.  Just saying aero reductions can be overdone, but not every improvement adds costs.  In my opinion it is wrong to assume all aero improvements lead to more expensive and ugly vehicles.

[rmc523]

1 hour ago, Rick73 said:

Because an ugly car is aerodynamic, it doesn’t mean every aerodynamic car has to be ugly.  Ionic 6 is indeed ugly, but Mercedes in particular has accomplish much in this area lately with mass produced models.

 

Some features associated with making cars aerodynamic indeed add to higher costs, but others reduce costs.  Manufacturers are more concerned with initial costs because it affects sales more directly, but improved aerodynamics can also reduce fuel consumption and hence longer-term costs.  Cars that are more aerodynamic, especially HEV and PHEV, can operate with smaller engines which reduce weight and costs.  And we shouldn’t ignore that reducing frontal area by making vehicles narrower and or lower (i.e.— smaller) typically also reduces aerodynamic drag and manufacturing costs at same time.  Just saying aero reductions can be overdone, but not every improvement adds costs.  In my opinion it is wrong to assume all aero improvements lead to more expensive and ugly vehicles.

 

The recent Mercedes models are hardly anything to hold up as a success of aero design....they look like melted bars of soap.

 

In fact, I have a sneak peek at the newest Mercedes model that I'll share only with you guys...