The CEO of Ford says he's been driving a Xiaomi EV for the past 6 months and doesn't want to give it up

[akirby]

6 minutes ago, Biker16 said:

Re: the Gen 2 EVs

My red flag is the lack of hard dates and timelines for the products based on this architecture. 

GM and VW will make their existing EV Platform the basis for their Future low-cost EV platform, while Ford is starting almost from scratch. This seems to be a higher risk than incremental improvements on existing mature platforms.

They started from scratch 2 years ago.  We’ll have to wait and see but I expect Ford’s platform to be significantly cheaper than just evolving existing stuff.  If it’s not then it’s a massive failure.

 

And lack of hard dates is actually good.  There is no need to throw out hard dates that might change, especially with something this new.  That way there is no pressure to put something out before it’s ready.

[Biker16]

1 hour ago, akirby said:

They started from scratch 2 years ago.  We’ll have to wait and see but I expect Ford’s platform to be significantly cheaper than just evolving existing stuff.  If it’s not then it’s a massive failure.

 

And lack of hard dates is actually good.  There is no need to throw out hard dates that might change, especially with something this new.  That way there is no pressure to put something out before it’s ready.

I hope so

[DeluxeStang]

I will say Ford should address this controversy in their upcoming earnings call. Not directly, I don't mean Faley should apologize for driving a Chinese ev. Quarterly earnings calls are full of teasers and hints about future product, that's the best part about them. Perhaps Ford should more openly discuss their CE1 plans as kind of a "Look, we know people are worried, but here's what we're cooking up" type of situation. 

 

 

Find a way to shift the conversation from affordable Chinese EVs to your own upcoming affordable EVs. People are criticizing Farley and Ford over this, give them a reason to praise Ford. 

[akirby]

1 hour ago, DeluxeStang said:

I will say Ford should address this controversy in their upcoming earnings call. Not directly, I don't mean Faley should apologize for driving a Chinese ev. Quarterly earnings calls are full of teasers and hints about future product, that's the best part about them. Perhaps Ford should more openly discuss their CE1 plans as kind of a "Look, we know people are worried, but here's what we're cooking up" type of situation. 

 

 

Find a way to shift the conversation from affordable Chinese EVs to your own upcoming affordable EVs. People are criticizing Farley and Ford over this, give them a reason to praise Ford. 

But they’ve already done this publicly.

[mackinaw]

1 hour ago, DeluxeStang said:

I will say Ford should address this controversy in their upcoming earnings call. Not directly, I don't mean Faley should apologize for driving a Chinese ev. Quarterly earnings calls are full of teasers and hints about future product, that's the best part about them. Perhaps Ford should more openly discuss their CE1 plans as kind of a "Look, we know people are worried, but here's what we're cooking up" type of situation. 

 

 

Find a way to shift the conversation from affordable Chinese EVs to your own upcoming affordable EVs. People are criticizing Farley and Ford over this, give them a reason to praise Ford. 

 

What controversy?  I find it interesting that this topic hasn't even been mentioned in either of the Detroit newspapers, which love to cover this type of stuff.  It's only a big deal to a handful of people on BON.

[Sherminator98]

2 hours ago, mackinaw said:

 

What controversy?  I find it interesting that this topic hasn't even been mentioned in either of the Detroit newspapers, which love to cover this type of stuff.  It's only a big deal to a handful of people on BON.

I’ve seen some other auto related websites mention it, but in the grand scheme of things, much of this just wrong context and making tempest in a tea pot?

[twintornados]

Bu..bu..bu...but, it's a sedan.....

[tbone]

7 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

Interesting take. Mine is Chinese brands have made massive gains this last decade, we're taking them seriously so we can beat them. 

all I saw were a bunch of headlines on Google that stated, “Ford CEO Jim Farley says he doesn't want to give up his Chinese EV.”  Considering most people won’t read past the headline, I don’t think it’s a good look for Ford.  

[akirby]

20 minutes ago, tbone said:

all I saw were a bunch of headlines on Google that stated, “Ford CEO Jim Farley says he doesn't want to give up his Chinese EV.”  Considering most people won’t read past the headline, I don’t think it’s a good look for Ford.  

Nobody cares,  We overreact to things the normal car buying public would never know or care about,

[jpd80]

1 hour ago, akirby said:

Nobody cares,  We overreact to things the normal car buying public would never know or care about,

Exactly, how many times does history have to repeat…

1. Japanese car invasion brought higher quality levels that Detroit couldn’t match

2. Korean Automakers ere the second wave that brought generally lower prices 

So will the third wave be Chinese automakers BEVs bringing affordable BEVs at near ICE prices?

and by that I don’t mean the Ford GM premium priced desirable vehicle prices…

[Rick73]

In my opinion Farley likely regretted the way he made the point.  It seems to me that during discussion he occasionally looked to his left as if receiving information or feedback, and right after his comment he took a much longer look to left and also down, and his facial expression changed for a few seconds before resuming.  I’m impressed how well he recovered, but think he or others there realized it wasn’t a good thing to say.  Agree it’s not that big a deal but one he would like to have back nonetheless.  Just my 2 cents.

[rmc523]

8 hours ago, tbone said:

all I saw were a bunch of headlines on Google that stated, “Ford CEO Jim Farley says he doesn't want to give up his Chinese EV.”  Considering most people won’t read past the headline, I don’t think it’s a good look for Ford.  

 

Eh, give the public a day or two and they'll forget when the newest headline comes out lol

 

[Biker16]

14 hours ago, jpd80 said:

Exactly, how many times does history have to repeat…

1. Japanese car invasion brought higher quality levels that Detroit couldn’t match

2. Korean Automakers ere the second wave that brought generally lower prices 

So will the third wave be Chinese automakers BEVs bringing affordable BEVs at near ICE prices?

and by that I don’t mean the Ford GM premium priced desirable vehicle prices…

 Price parity is closer than you think 

 

 

[jpd80]

1 hour ago, Biker16 said:

 Price parity is closer than you think 

 

 

I get what your saying but,

Considering that the gas Transit is now a more expensive vehicle than a few years ago

you can see what Ford is up to with premium pricing, resting the most profit from those

Ford Pro ICE sales but also easing the path for the BEV Transit by equalising the price.

Just to clarify my point re Chinese BEV pricing,

I was referring to is Chinese BEVs that approximate the prices of current commodity vehicles,
all those vehicles that Ford is not really interested in. Its the major flaw in Ford’s plan and just

like  when the first major Japanese imports arrived, Ford, GM and Chrysler didn’t see that as

a threat because their least profitable vehicles.

 

How ironic that Farley loves his Chinese BEV car, he is driving something that Ford could have

easily done years ago with Fusion and shared with a utility also on modified C2.

 

Edited October 25, 2024 by jpd80

[DeluxeStang]

22 hours ago, twintornados said:

Bu..bu..bu...but, it's a sedan.....

 

 

2 hours ago, jpd80 said:

How ironic that Farley loves his Chinese BEV car, he is driving something that Ford could have

easily done years ago with Fusion and shared with a utility also on modified C2.

 

Ford really needs to consider bringing back a sedan/hatchback form factor, at least one. Farley and others within Ford are clearly fond of that body style, they've openly stated how it's the perfect shape for areo, which is what these affordable evs need. 

 

I understand how something like say the c2 fusion isn't a particularly aspirational product and doesn't align with Ford's future product strategy, but things like hot hatches are part of Ford's enthusiasts car DNA. They have a track record of success, and command a premium. 

 

Akirby and others are right, there's no point in doing boring hatchbacks and sedans, they don't sell super well, the profit margins are razor thin, and there's a ton of competition. But using CE1 to develop a badass looking car that looks like something Ken Block would be sliding around in, I see that appealing to car enthusiasts, and I see that appealing to broader car buyers just because it looks a lot cooler than all the other boring blobs. 

 

There's just so much you can do with CE1 that would be iconic, but I get the impression Ford's gonna launch a blob of a crossover, a blob of a truck, and then be done with it. 

 

 

[balthisar]

I wonder what it looks like when we tear it down? The Chinese market treats cars like call phones. There's not a large secondary market, and no one cares about a car after three years or warranty expiration.

 

[Texasota]

On 10/25/2024 at 9:07 AM, 02MustangGT said:

Totally agree.  And let’s be honest, I doubt Farley would make the same comments publicly regarding vehicles that are actually publicly available in the USA.   

Farley already did this in spades when he praised the Tesla products and stated that Tesla had shown the way.

 

Farley’s comments may be uncomfortable to hear but he is being honest/open about the reality of the situation. I respect that. Sounding the alarm in this forthright manner is needed to get things moving in the right direction.

 

[akirby]

15 hours ago, Texasota said:

Farley already did this in spades when he praised the Tesla products and stated that Tesla had shown the way.

 

Farley’s comments may be uncomfortable to hear but he is being honest/open about the reality of the situation. I respect that. Sounding the alarm in this forthright manner is needed to get things moving in the right direction.

 

More importantly he’s already taking steps to compete with it.

[jpd80]

At Ford, it normally takes about four years to engineer products to buyers,

so off the  skunkworks has been running for two years or more, then most likely

the product envelope was set early and all engineering modules would now be

developed to work across all anticipated versions covered by the architecture.

 

At the moment, Farley has definitely green lit  the project and locked in a timetable 

 for the selected vehicles to be through developed. 

So where does the efficiency cost savings come from?

Consider the two halves of a BEV, the top hat superstructure and the lower “skateboard”.

With that, it’s easy to see that the majority of costs are contained within that “skateboard”

the battery alone being about a third of the cost of the vehicle, followed by the motor, drive

and control system….. the big savings with CE1 come from things Ford discovered about 

what BYD was doing with its vehicles, they  motor, drive and control module into a single unit,

that alone saves a ton of cost  while making the thing moe compact as Thers normally zero

maintenance required anyway. The big one for BYD is that it makes its own batteries so Ford

setting up JV battery plants is the next big thing.

Commodity vs value perception buyer

Currently, Ford is seeking a differnt customer to those ultra competitive commodity vehicles

and we should let it play its hand - this is where a Maverick sized BEV pickup and SUV will be 

presented as efficient mid-sized vehicles (cost and weight of a compact sold in next size up)

I think this is where efficient design and marketing spin begin to convince people to reconsider 

what sized vehicles they actually need. A lighter more efficient design begets a smaller battery,

everything works together…….can they pull it off?

 

Honestly, I wasn’t impressed with the $25,00 Robotaxi, this is Ford’s chance to offer a near $25K

starting price on a base BEV pick and grab a ton of buyers that like what they see.

Edited October 26, 2024 by jpd80

[DeluxeStang]

28 minutes ago, jpd80 said:

At Ford, it normally takes about four years to engineer products to buyers,

so off the  skunkworks has been running for two years or more, then most likely

the product envelope was set early and all engineering modules would now be

developed to work across all anticipated versions covered by the architecture.

 

At the moment, Farley has definitely green lit  the project and locked in a timetable 

 for the selected vehicles to be through developed. 

So where does the efficiency cost savings come from?

Consider the two halves of a BEV, the top hat superstructure and the lower “skateboard”.

With that, it’s easy to see that the majority of costs are contained within that “skateboard”

the battery alone being about a third of the cost of the vehicle, followed by the motor, drive

and control system….. the big savings with CE1 come from things Ford discovered about 

what BYD was doing with its vehicles, they  motor, drive and control module into a single unit,

that alone saves a ton of cost  while making the thing moe compact as Thers normally zero

maintenance required anyway. The big one for BYD is that it makes its own batteries so Ford

setting up JV battery plants is the next big thing.

Commodity vs value perception buyer

Currently, Ford is seeking a differnt customer to those ultra competitive commodity vehicles

and we should let it play its hand - this is where a Maverick sized BEV pickup and SUV will be 

presented as efficient mid-sized vehicles (cost and weight of a compact sold in next size up)

I think this is where efficient design and marketing spin begin to convince people to reconsider 

what sized vehicles they actually need. A lighter more efficient design begets a smaller battery,

everything works together…….can they pull it off?

 

Honestly, I wasn’t impressed with the $25,00 Robotaxi, this is Ford’s chance to offer a near $25K

starting price on a base BEV pick and grab a ton of buyers that like what they see.

It all comes down to the execution. If Ford develops an affordable series of EVs, but they look terrible like the 3 row did, or if they're horrifically unreliable because Ford cheaped out where they shouldn't have, they'll be DOA. 

 

If Ford can pull off a series of designs that look great, with above average reliability and low ownership costs, they'll knock it out of the park. I was worried about range, that these affordable EVs would only be able to go like 120 miles or something, but Farley hinted at a 300 mile range in one of his interviews. 

[jpd80]

On 10/25/2024 at 6:07 AM, Biker16 said:

Re: the Gen 2 EVs

My red flag is the lack of hard dates and timelines for the products based on this architecture. 

GM and VW will make their existing EV Platform the basis for their Future low-cost EV platform, while Ford is starting almost from scratch. This seems to be a higher risk than incremental improvements on existing mature platforms.

The problem with MEB is also the requirement to provide labor to build it,

seems like the requirement for more jobs is getting in the way of simplify

some of the build processes. Also VW will need longer lead on changing

manufacturing of motor-drive-control units to bring them up to speed

with the competition- something Ford has already done with its versions…

[jpd80]

 

[Sherminator98]

So some more info on the car Farley was driving

 

Xiaomi CEO Claims SU7 Ultra Is Over 20 Seconds Faster Than Porsche Taycan Turbo GT At The Ring

[GearheadGrrrl]

Impressive, but that was obviously a race prepped car and can't be fairly compared to a street legal car.

[Biker16]

On 10/28/2024 at 4:08 AM, jpd80 said:

 

This is really interesting. 

It confirms that the existing OEM Model of delegating to suppliers is biting them in the ass, during the EV transition. 

Basically confirms that Vertical integration is a necessity for Future product Development

This video on lucid's development philosophy lays out the difference between New companies and the legacy Automakers.