Ford is done with making boring cars

[jpd80]

3 hours ago, akirby said:

The difference is about $75/month in fuel so for me that’s not significant.

This.

The hybrid factor is more important to manufacturers meeting CAFE

than to buyers, especially in periods where gas prices are relatively low. 

 

Sometimes we overlook all the good work done by Ford to make the F150

fuel efficient these days, light cruising in 2.7/3.5 EB is very frugal.

 

[akirby]

56 minutes ago, jpd80 said:

 

Sometimes we overlook all the good work done by Ford to make the F150

fuel efficient these days, light cruising in 2.7/3.5 EB is very frugal.

 

I was amazed at how easy it is to hit 26+ with my 3.5 ecoboost.  It’s a combination of big low end torque and the 10 speed that allows it to loaf along at 1100 rpm at 45 mph even going up hills.

[jpd80]

1 hour ago, akirby said:

I was amazed at how easy it is to hit 26+ with my 3.5 ecoboost.  It’s a combination of big low end torque and the 10 speed that allows it to loaf along at 1100 rpm at 45 mph even going up hills.

Wow, that’s excellent and with effortless light cruise in high gears.
Ford Australia is now selling post factory RHD converted F150 but limited to crew cab 4x4 EB 3.6,

owners are appreciating the fuel efficiency on light cruise - our fuel is roughly USD$4.50-$5/gallon.

Also have RHD Ram and Silverados here but feels like Ford is now chopping into those sales a bit

but those guys are definitely V8 centric buyers, probably take Ford a while to win those types over.

Edited October 19, 2024 by jpd80

[Rick73]

19 minutes ago, jpd80 said:

Wow, that’s excellent and with effortless light cruise in high gears.
Ford Australia is now selling post factory RHD converted F150 but limited to crew cab 4x4 EB 3.6,

owners are appreciating the fuel efficiency on light cruise - our fuel is roughly USD$4.50-$5/gallon.

Also have RHD Ram and Silverados here but feels like Ford is now chopping into those sales a bit

but those guys are definitely V8 centric buyers, probably take Ford a while to win those types over.

Curious if Australians can buy Chevy 2.7L Turbo in addition to V8, and also whether RAM has eliminated V8 for turbo-six in Australia?  Sounds from your post that Hemi V8 is still available?

[Rick73]

2 hours ago, jpd80 said:

This.

The hybrid factor is more important to manufacturers meeting CAFE

than to buyers, especially in periods where gas prices are relatively low. 

 

Sometimes we overlook all the good work done by Ford to make the F150

fuel efficient these days, light cruising in 2.7/3.5 EB is very frugal.

 

Correct, financial benefits are not always straight forward.  Comparing approximate costs for economy-size hybrids suggests that eventual battery replacement could offset much of the gas savings at present fuel costs.  Assuming battery needs replacing at 100,000 miles, savings between 50 and 33 MPG is about $3,000 over that 100,000 miles (~1,000 gallons of gas).  Hybrids usually also cost more to buy, so unless they have less depreciation, that’s another headwind to offset.  In my case since I drive most miles on the highway and very little in town, fuel costs difference is even less.  Biggest value a hybrid offers IMO is CO2/GHG reduction for those who want to reduce their carbon footprint.  To save money, downsizing is my preference, provided it’s a viable option.

 

Having stated above, I’d like option to buy a PHEV van, but not primarily to save on fuel.

[DeluxeStang]

I will say my dealership experience today was alarming. We took our explorer in for an oil change and were walking the lot while we waited. Every single space was taken up by inventory, one other group besides us taking a Nautilus on a test drive. Not a single sales person walking the lot freely, it was eerie. 

 

Some of the prices, Ford's affordable EVs can't get here soon enough, that's all I'll say. Some weren't too bad, most of their mustang gt's with options were in the 40s and 50s. Several bronco sports in the 30s, a fully loaded explorer Platinum for about 57k. 

 

But there were some escapes that were like 45k, that's a joke. The Mach-es were also all in the 50s for the most part, and they had lines of them on the lot. 

[AM222]

1 hour ago, DeluxeStang said:

I will say my dealership experience today was alarming. We took our explorer in for an oil change and were walking the lot while we waited. Every single space was taken up by inventory, one other group besides us taking a Nautilus on a test drive. Not a single sales person walking the lot freely, it was eerie. 

 

Some of the prices, Ford's affordable EVs can't get here soon enough, that's all I'll say. Some weren't too bad, most of their mustang gt's with options were in the 40s and 50s. Several bronco sports in the 30s, a fully loaded explorer Platinum for about 57k. 

 

But there were some escapes that were like 45k, that's a joke. The Mach-es were also all in the 50s for the most part, and they had lines of them on the lot. 

The body on frame Broncos have gotten really expensive in the last 3 years. 

 

Doesn't the lower trim Big Bend (about $40k now) cost more than the Outer Banks of 3 years ago? I think the Outer Banks started at around $38k 3 years ago. Crazy price increase. 

Edited October 20, 2024 by AM222

[jpd80]

8 hours ago, Rick73 said:

Curious if Australians can buy Chevy 2.7L Turbo in addition to V8, and also whether RAM has eliminated V8 for turbo-six in Australia?  Sounds from your post that Hemi V8 is still available?

This is a tricky one because no factory RHD but the post plant changes 

have been vetted and approved by OEMs so the vehicles are treated as

brand new with full factory warranty. A joint venture between Ateco and 

Walkinshaw Special Vehicles process both Ram and Silverados. These are

limited to the 6.4 Hemi and LS 6.2 versions respectively. They are also looking  at Cadillac SUV conversions, so mostly high end stuff.

With Ram ending the V8s, I think local ops will probably order up the last of the 

V8s because I’m thinking those buyer may need time to get used to the I-6T,

For has the same situation with the F150 EB 3.5.

 

I would say that the type of customer that pays AUS $100k-$180k is basically 

someone who knows exactly what type they want and probably in place

of other German or Brit Lux brands.

 

Edited October 20, 2024 by jpd80

[jpd80]

8 hours ago, Rick73 said:

Correct, financial benefits are not always straight forward.  Comparing approximate costs for economy-size hybrids suggests that eventual battery replacement could offset much of the gas savings at present fuel costs.  Assuming battery needs replacing at 100,000 miles, savings between 50 and 33 MPG is about $3,000 over that 100,000 miles (~1,000 gallons of gas).  Hybrids usually also cost more to buy, so unless they have less depreciation, that’s another headwind to offset.  In my case since I drive most miles on the highway and very little in town, fuel costs difference is even less.  Biggest value a hybrid offers IMO is CO2/GHG reduction for those who want to reduce their carbon footprint.  To save money, downsizing is my preference, provided it’s a viable option.

 

Having stated above, I’d like option to buy a PHEV van, but not primarily to save on fuel.

Different people like different things, so respecting your POV, I would suggest that

most buyers probably prefer the path of least resistance, lowest cost, less chance 

of unexpected roadside breakdowns and unexpected future costs. A reversion to

basic engines if you will, that get the job done with enough satisfaction  factor.

[Sherminator98]

8 hours ago, AM222 said:

The body on frame Broncos have gotten really expensive in the last 3 years. 

 

Doesn't the lower trim Big Bend (about $40k now) cost more than the Outer Banks of 3 years ago? I think the Outer Banks started at around $38k 3 years ago. Crazy price increase. 

All Broncos have gone up in price-keep in mind people where willing to pay 10k more for them back in 2022 to dealerships and Ford was missing out on that profit. 
 

Fast forward a few years with all the changes in the market place and Ford is willing to keep pricing flat because it is discouraging dealerships from marking them up. 
 

my Big Bend Bronco went up about 7K and you can’t get certain options like the V6 or now the signature LED lights in 2025MY. 
 

im guessing Ford is more then willing to keep pricing flat if they can sell 100-120k of them with almost no incentives unlike the Wrangler that has some decent incentives on them regularly 

[Rick73]

6 hours ago, jpd80 said:

Different people like different things, so respecting your POV, I would suggest that

most buyers probably prefer the path of least resistance, lowest cost, less chance 

of unexpected roadside breakdowns and unexpected future costs. A reversion to

basic engines if you will, that get the job done with enough satisfaction  factor.

Many of those attributes are exactly what make vehicles boring, and for many buyers, an acceptable compromise.

[DeluxeStang]

53 minutes ago, silvrsvt said:

All Broncos have gone up in price-keep in mind people where willing to pay 10k more for them back in 2022 to dealerships and Ford was missing out on that profit. 
 

Fast forward a few years with all the changes in the market place and Ford is willing to keep pricing flat because it is discouraging dealerships from marking them up. 
 

my Big Bend Bronco went up about 7K and you can’t get certain options like the V6 or now the signature LED lights in 2025MY. 
 

im guessing Ford is more then willing to keep pricing flat if they can sell 100-120k of them with almost no incentives unlike the Wrangler that has some decent incentives on them regularly 

Beyond pricing, I've heard some people say negative things about the reliability of these broncos. Could that be scaring some buyers away? 

[Sherminator98]

1 hour ago, DeluxeStang said:

Beyond pricing, I've heard some people say negative things about the reliability of these broncos. Could that be scaring some buyers away? 

Problems always get over reported or over covered on the internet. 
 

 

[mackinaw]

1 hour ago, DeluxeStang said:

Beyond pricing, I've heard some people say negative things about the reliability of these broncos. Could that be scaring some buyers away? 

 

I doubt it.  The Jeep Wrangler has never scored very well on most quality surveys, yet people line up to buy them.  Another "must have" vehicle.

[DeluxeStang]

27 minutes ago, silvrsvt said:

Problems always get over reported or over covered on the internet. 
 

 

If I was looking at one, as an owner, which engine option would you say is more reliable, the 2.3 or 2.7? 

[Sherminator98]

1 hour ago, DeluxeStang said:

If I was looking at one, as an owner, which engine option would you say is more reliable, the 2.3 or 2.7? 

 

Good question, mine is just over 2 1/2 years old but I haven't even hit 20K on it, so I wouldn't be the best to ask

 

I head into work 2 days a week and my commute is just under 30 miles and I wasn't going into the office for a few months because of mold issues recently. 

 

Ive been doing oil changes 2x a year and that is about it for trips to the dealership. 

Edited October 20, 2024 by silvrsvt

[DeluxeStang]

1 hour ago, silvrsvt said:

 

Good question, mine is just over 2 1/2 years old but I haven't even hit 20K on it, so I wouldn't be the best to ask

 

I head into work 2 days a week and my commute is just under 30 miles and I wasn't going into the office for a few months because of mold issues recently. 

 

Ive been doing oil changes 2x a year and that is about it for trips to the dealership. 

I feel ya on the shorter drives. I work from home, but I live in an area where everything is super close. At best, you're driving 7-10 miles away. I let my brother take the maverick to his work, which is only about a mile away, and that has me concerned because the engine is almost never at operating temp, it's a hybrid, so I can't really let it idle and warm up before driving it as the engine usually only kicks on once you're moving. Hopefully that's not gonna cause some sort of engine issues down the road. 

 

Our maverick is about 2 years old with 11k miles on it. Getting ready for the third oil change. 

[jpd80]

15 hours ago, Rick73 said:

Many of those attributes are exactly what make vehicles boring, and for many buyers, an acceptable compromise.

Not necessarily, it’s just the way you’re hard wired to see those comments.

 

and,

Ford always does this, they crap on good basic vehicles as a way of distancing 

themselves from volume so they just pick the eyes out of the top end sales.

[rmc523]

On 10/19/2024 at 5:10 PM, akirby said:

I was amazed at how easy it is to hit 26+ with my 3.5 ecoboost.  It’s a combination of big low end torque and the 10 speed that allows it to loaf along at 1100 rpm at 45 mph even going up hills.

 

I wish they'd had been able to give Bronco better FE.....but I know a lot of it is aerodynamics on the highway (upright windshield probably the biggest culprit).....I likely would've gotten a hybrid if it were available.  That said, it's rated 17 on the highway, but I can beat that by 1-2 mpg if I keep it at 73/74....going too much faster and it starts dropping.

 

On 10/20/2024 at 2:10 AM, AM222 said:

The body on frame Broncos have gotten really expensive in the last 3 years. 

 

Doesn't the lower trim Big Bend (about $40k now) cost more than the Outer Banks of 3 years ago? I think the Outer Banks started at around $38k 3 years ago. Crazy price increase. 

 

I know for '23 and '24, my trim equally equipped (with the lone exception being HOSS 3.0) was $8k more sticker vs. my out the door price....not sure how a '25 will compare yet, since they dropped Wildtrak.

 

20 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

If I was looking at one, as an owner, which engine option would you say is more reliable, the 2.3 or 2.7? 

 

Knock on wood, I haven't had issues with my 2.7.

[Rick73]

8 hours ago, jpd80 said:

Not necessarily, it’s just the way you’re hard wired to see those comments.

 

and,

Ford always does this, they crap on good basic vehicles as a way of distancing 

themselves from volume so they just pick the eyes out of the top end sales.

Maybe meaning was lost in translation. 😀

 

In any case, I was thinking that some buyers, but not all, prefer to keep things simple, even if it means less performance, or fuel economy, or whatever.  It doesn’t have to be a bad thing though.  Think of Ford rolling back technology with pushrod 7.3L Godzilla V8 replacing SOHC 6.8L Triton V10.  My recollection is that commercial buyers requested a simpler and lower-cost engine, and after driving both in E-Series applications, I’d say it was a win-win all around.

 

I understand government regulations limit much of what Ford and other manufacturers can offer buyers, but hopefully they can find ways to offer more cost-effective and simpler vehicle choices.  Somewhat similar in logic to Ford offering Godzilla V8 with a 6-speed transmission in larger trucks and E-Series, some manufacturers are offering cars with larger naturally-aspirated 4-cylinder engines and 6 or 8 speed auto transmissions.  Maybe boring to a few, but meet the needs of many.  Fuel economy may not be the very best in their class, but long-term cost of ownership should be lower.

[DeluxeStang]

I've mentioned it before, but I wonder if Ford will use this transition to more enthusiasts vehicles to spice up their design language. That's a criticism I've heard from quite a few people, especially younger buyers when it comes to Ford's, that they look "boring" or "plain". I personally find Ford's design language very tasteful, like Mazda's, eye catching, but not too over the top. 

 

I wouldn't change much about the mustang or bronco, they look fantastic. But if Ford is having to apply more radical areo to things like their more affordable EVs to improve range, it would be wise to introduce a new Ford design language on those EVs that was more daring, and bold. Lean into the futuristic look instead of making your affordable EVs look like something I'd find in a bargain bin. In other words, Ford should try both and see what works. 

 

From the VERY small portion of what we can see of the t3 design from this model, the a-pillar, beltline, and heavily angled front fender, it seems like they're gonna lean more into the futuristic styling for these upcoming EVs. 

[jpd80]

Go back a step and understand why Ford’s main BEV plan is struggling,

Ford thought it knew what buyers wanted but got caught in a change

in buyer momentum. It bet everything on a 100% BEV future….

 

The fact that Ford is still trying to formulate a plan of exciting, desirable

vehicles shows that it doesn’t  really understand what the bulk of those

buyers actually want. The narrative coming from Farley is Ford openly

trying to quantify what it must do to get those buyers who will pay more

for what they want.

 

The biggest issue I have with that sort of thinking is that it’s more about

what Farley wants Ford to sell to make lots of money versus what those 

buyers actually want……it’s a mental thing, like how the Maverick would

show Ford the way back to quicker product concept to production route.

Since the Maverick, it’s like Ford went back to the next big thing, those

small BEVs…….they need to do more than that but it feels like Ford is

thinking problem solved…

[akirby]

1 hour ago, jpd80 said:

Go back a step and understand why Ford’s main BEV plan is struggling,

Ford thought it knew what buyers wanted but got caught in a change

in buyer momentum. It bet everything on a 100% BEV future….

 

The fact that Ford is still trying to formulate a plan of exciting, desirable

vehicles shows that it doesn’t  really understand what the bulk of those

buyers actually want. The narrative coming from Farley is Ford openly

trying to quantify what it must do to get those buyers who will pay more

for what they want.

 

The biggest issue I have with that sort of thinking is that it’s more about

what Farley wants Ford to sell to make lots of money versus what those 

buyers actually want……it’s a mental thing, like how the Maverick would

show Ford the way back to quicker product concept to production route.

Since the Maverick, it’s like Ford went back to the next big thing, those

small BEVs…….they need to do more than that but it feels like Ford is

thinking problem solved…

I think Ford’s resources are just spread thin especially with all the changes to the EV program the last few years.  Plus changing their minds causing too many stops and starts killing momentum.  Ford’s unwillingness to add people and factories (outside Blue Oval City) has really handcuffed them in terms of product development.

[Sherminator98]

1 hour ago, akirby said:

I think Ford’s resources are just spread thin especially with all the changes to the EV program the last few years.  Plus changing their minds causing too many stops and starts killing momentum.  Ford’s unwillingness to add people and factories (outside Blue Oval City) has really handcuffed them in terms of product development.

 

I think its just them being overly cautious...in the grand scheme of things not many other makers have been adding plants and does Ford really need another 150-200K more capacity in a market that really doesn't have much growth opportunity?  

I've always seen BOC as a replacement for another plant in NA down the road. 

 

The smart thing would be to fix Flat Rock so it can build taller products, but I guess the costs of doing that would be on par with building a completely new plant. 

[DeluxeStang]

3 hours ago, jpd80 said:

Go back a step and understand why Ford’s main BEV plan is struggling,

Ford thought it knew what buyers wanted but got caught in a change

in buyer momentum. It bet everything on a 100% BEV future….

 

The fact that Ford is still trying to formulate a plan of exciting, desirable

vehicles shows that it doesn’t  really understand what the bulk of those

buyers actually want. The narrative coming from Farley is Ford openly

trying to quantify what it must do to get those buyers who will pay more

for what they want.

 

The biggest issue I have with that sort of thinking is that it’s more about

what Farley wants Ford to sell to make lots of money versus what those 

buyers actually want……it’s a mental thing, like how the Maverick would

show Ford the way back to quicker product concept to production route.

Since the Maverick, it’s like Ford went back to the next big thing, those

small BEVs…….they need to do more than that but it feels like Ford is

thinking problem solved…

It's been very frustrating to many of us Ford enthusiasts to see the constant changing of plans, I can only imagine how it feels to be within the company with the rest of you as this is happening. It wouldn't be fun to say the least. That being said, I think everyone got it wrong at first.

 

When you're new to something, you're gonna make mistakes. Ford having no real EV experience prior to Mach-e meant they didn't really know how to make a profitable EV. So they defaulted to applying the same logic that made their ICE products profitable, the bigger the vehicle, the more you can charge for it, and the more profit you can make. 

 

Except as Ford knows now, that's a losing game with the battery size and cost. EVs flipped everything on it's head, the path to EV profitability isn't a massive expedition, it's an escape, or an escort revival, or something else small, low, and light that use a smaller cheap battery. Ford's EV plans never made much sense prior to CE1, we were trying to find work around to justify it. But CE1, developing small, enticing EVs in the high 20s and low 30s, it immediately made sense. It didn't require us to expend a ton of mental effort to justify it, because it justified itself. It's been a really bumpy road getting here, it it feels like Ford finally is on the right track.