Ford December/Q4/2024 Sales Results

[CurtisH]

2 hours ago, Rick73 said:

Not EcoBoost, all turbo, whether Ford or BMW.  Would NEVER buy one regardless of how many people do.  I don’t follow crowds anyway.  If I feel it’s a bad decision, that’s all that matters to me.  I don’t personally criticize people who like EB.  It’s your money and can spend it any way you want.  I’ll continue to do the same.

I understand your position on turbos.  However, I believe you are part of a very small group that feels that way.  I doubt it constitutes a large enough market to justify the development of an NA inline six. 

[jpd80]

1 hour ago, Tico said:

I would love to see the hybrid from the ROW Ranger in the Mustang! I would love to see the Fusion come back to Flatrock. I had a 13 titianum with the 2.0 ecoboost and I loved it!

The 2.3 PHEV was supposed to debut in the S650 Mustang but then was delayed/cancelled.

I get the feeling that it didn’t clinic strongly but could have been something potential buyers

either didn’t want or didn’t feel strongly about.

 

In the PHEV Ranger, the battery is located under the rear tray between the chassis rails.

S650 was supposed to have some CD6 components and floor pan changes to allow 

fitting PHEV battery, it is an option there but feels like Ford has gone cold on it.

Edited January 6 by jpd80

[Sherminator98]

32 minutes ago, jpd80 said:

The 2.3 PHEV was supposed to debut in the S650 Mustang but then was delayed/cancelled.

I get the feeling that it didn’t clinic strongly but could have been something potential buyers

either didn’t want or didn’t feel strongly about.

 

In the PHEV Ranger, the battery is located under the rear tray between the chassis rails.

S650 was supposed to have some CD6 components and floor pan changes to allow 

fitting PHEV battery, it is an option there but feels like Ford has gone cold on it.

 

I think it might be a better fit if they ever came out with a Mustang Sedan-hopefully it would make having AWD easier, since the motors would be in the front wheels. 

 

I don't think a hybrid Mustang would appeal to people who are looking as it as a performance option-Ford will add it when they are forced to. 

[Rick73]

1 hour ago, akirby said:

That’s hilarious.  Your personal preferences determine what you like or don’t like.  When you project those preferences to what mfrs should build and what others should buy then that’s bias.

Preferences can also be based on knowledge.  Bias is defined as unfair prejudice.  Some preferences as is the case with liking red over blue are a different matter altogether.  That’s why I avoid subjective arguments.

 

I don’t claim to be an engine expert, though I know far more than most people after studying them in college, and certainly not telling anyone what to buy.  It is obvious Ford was working on an I-6 a few years back, probably to reduce costs compared to a similar V6; so at least the perceived need was also seen by Ford.

 

Had Ford proceeded with I-6 project, I would have hoped they offered it in both EB and NA variants like they do present 3.5L V6.  Not holding my breath for either though since every manufacturer that has introduced a new straight six in last few years has made them turbo AFAIK.  Some are good, others having their share of issues.

[Rick73]

2 hours ago, CurtisH said:

I understand your position on turbos.  However, I believe you are part of a very small group that feels that way.  I doubt it constitutes a large enough market to justify the development of an NA inline six. 

Even though I could not care less what others buy, I disagree that it is a very small group.  People with lots of money and buying more expensive cars likely don’t worry or fear repair costs once warranty expires as those on tight budgets purchasing more affordable vehicles.  Honda is a good example where they offered 1.5L turbo or 2.0L NA on entry level cars and buyer choice was clear.  Difference in gas savings isn’t much, and won’t pay for additional repairs if that day comes.  Now with electrified hybrids, why even bother.  Newest NA Civic is both faster and more economical.  So yeah, I think cost-conscious informed people do care sometimes.  Question is whether to ignore that group of buyers.  Also see what happened to RAM pickup sales.  Twin turbo 3.0L hasn’t gone over well as replacement for Hemi.  Granted, both have issues.

[DeluxeStang]

3 hours ago, akirby said:

They test a lot of vehicles here that aren’t sold here, so it’s not a guarantee.

Probably not, and if it was just once or twice that it had been spied, I wouldn't even have brought it up. But the fact that it's been seen so often, even if it doesn't confirm anything, is at least somewhat interesting. 

 

Leaving flat rock underutilized isn't the best strategy, but it doesn't seem like it's gonna receive substantial renovations anytime soon. So building taller vehicles is out of the question. I'd personally love that RS 200 concept I posted awhile back, the same one that's in my profile pic. Something that only consumed a small amount of resources, yet could be sold for c8 money wouldn't be the worst financial decision.

 

But I understand why you guys don't think it's likely. I only bring it up a lot because I genuinely believe that's one of the biggest holes Ford has in their product lineup if they want to focus on passion products more. Ford has all manner of truck and crossover variants, there really isn't a ton of new variants they can add that aren't already covered by their existing offerings. 

[akirby]

Bias doesn’t necessarily mean unfair.  Turbos do fail and can be slightly expensive to fix, but it’s no worse than the water pump failures on the transverse cyclone V6s.  Ford offered the 3.3Lv6 on F150 and nobody bought them outside fleets.  Most opted for ecoboosts over the coyote v8.

 

When Ford still offered the 3.5 v6 and 2.0eb in the Edge the ecoboost was 3-4 mpg better with the same performance and better low end torque.   Same difference for the Mustang with the 3.7 vs 2.3eb.  Those are objective benefits.

 

Don’t confuse people who just want the cheapest option with people who want simplicity.   Most of those buyers would buy an ecoboost if it was cheaper.
 

 

[jpd80]

On 1/6/2025 at 8:45 AM, Rick73 said:

To be clear, I presumed Ford needs and will have a new inline six for various vehicles, not just Mustang, similar to the one they were studying before BEV mandates killed some new engine projects.  Completely agree Mustang volume is too low to justify a dedicated engine.  Whether Ford resurrects I-6 R&D due to slow BEV sales is anyone’s guess.

Was probably a good one to let go as based on doubling the I-3 Dragon.

If or when Ford revisits I-3, I-4, I-6 engine family, that will be primarily 

to reduce engine plant count and simplify ICE production.

 

When Ford got all excited about early  BEV reservation and electrics

ramping up more quickly,  the decision was made to spend as little as

possible on the remaining ICE developments and refreshes.

Keeping  existing engines going was the less costly option.

 

Edited January 7 by jpd80

[Rick73]

12 hours ago, jpd80 said:

Was probably a good one to let go as based on doubling the I-3 Dragon.

If or when Ford revisits I-3, I-4, I-6 engine family, that will be primarily 

to reduce engine plant count and simplify ICE production.

 

When Ford got all excited about early  BEV reservation and electrics

ramping up more quickly,  the decision was made to spend as little as

possible on the remaining ICE developments and refreshes.

Keeping  existing engines going was the less costly option.

 

It will be interesting to see if Ford expands the new 2.3L MPC engine architecture, now in Mustang and Explorer, to include a straight 6; or possibly even a new V6.  It seems the hard part is already done with the modular design.

 

My personal opinion is that much will depend on how much Ford commits to HEV, PHEV, and EREV, and also how much they emphasize fuel economy.  The 2.3L, especially with turbo, should be enough power for smaller hybrids, but if Ford tries to improve fuel economy as much as reasonably possible, they will likely need a larger-displacement Atkinson engine.  That’s where I see the highest probability for a new 3.4L MPC six cylinder engine; whether I-6 or V6.

[The Handler]

On 1/5/2025 at 8:24 PM, ausrutherford said:

I think the Mustang will need to reinvent itself too not be just a niche player in the future. Of course the coupe and convertible should always be retained, but other variants are needed. 

 

1. Hatch or shooting break

2. Off-road version like the Huracan Sterrato or 911 Dakar

3. Bring back a Shelby above the Dark Horse

4. The "Mustang sedan" should be its own model. Call it Falcon, Fairlane, whatever. However, it would likely need a wagon model to increase global sales for the model. 

Totally agree with your last point. A new Falcon or whatever would be a much more practical offering than a Mustang fastback sedan.

[jpd80]

On 1/7/2025 at 11:44 PM, Rick73 said:

It will be interesting to see if Ford expands the new 2.3L MPC engine architecture, now in Mustang and Explorer, to include a straight 6; or possibly even a new V6.  It seems the hard part is already done with the modular design.

 

My personal opinion is that much will depend on how much Ford commits to HEV, PHEV, and EREV, and also how much they emphasize fuel economy.  The 2.3L, especially with turbo, should be enough power for smaller hybrids, but if Ford tries to improve fuel economy as much as reasonably possible, they will likely need a larger-displacement Atkinson engine.  That’s where I see the highest probability for a new 3.4L MPC six cylinder engine; whether I-6 or V6.

Just my opinion,
If you have followed Ford for any time, it will be blindingly apparent that

doing less or not changing things saves a ton of money. So  this is why

I believe that it will keep things as they are now and lobby the government

for a review of CAFE targets like was done under Trump’s first term.

While some of what you have said makes a lot of sense, the reality is that

the business case is probably not there for entirely new engines to take 

the place of existing V6 Ecoboost engines.
 

The real answer the whole industry is waiting for is better more efficient,

lower cost batteries but until that happens, companies like Ford have to

dig deep and sell as many high profit F Series as possible to fund all of 

the future research and development work. Yes, keep targeting vehicles 

that can feature hybrids and PHEVs but don’t go overboard…

 

Edited January 8 by jpd80

[DeluxeStang]

On 1/6/2025 at 2:01 PM, Sherminator98 said:

 

I think it might be a better fit if they ever came out with a Mustang Sedan-hopefully it would make having AWD easier, since the motors would be in the front wheels. 

 

I don't think a hybrid Mustang would appeal to people who are looking as it as a performance option-Ford will add it when they are forced to. 

It would depend on how that hybrid system is optimized, it would be polarizing for sure. But imagine a performance oriented hybrid for the 5.0, or 2.3, because engineers were apparently working on both. A hybrid 5.0 would be an absolute rocket, and the instance responsiveness from an electric motor would more than make up for the lack of low end torque the 5.0 has. A 2.3 would be a super practical, economical sports coupe with close to V8 levels of power. 

 

Imagine these hybrids are AWD, jack them up slightly, give them some rally looking fog lights, flared fenders, and bigger tires and BAM! There's your mustang raptor, a lucrative new mustang variant that could use the powertrain from a street oriented mustang hybrid to keep the price down. 

[jpd80]

7 minutes ago, DeluxeStang said:

 

Imagine these hybrids are AWD, jack them up slightly, give them some rally looking fog lights, flared fenders, and bigger tires and BAM! There's your mustang raptor, a lucrative new mustang variant that could use the powertrain from a street oriented mustang hybrid to keep the price down. 

Just on the jacked up Mustang, the blow back from research was absolutely savage.

I don’t know whether they were targeting the wrong group or people have a defined image of what Mustang is as a heritage name…

[rmc523]

46 minutes ago, jpd80 said:

Just on the jacked up Mustang, the blow back from research was absolutely savage.

I don’t know whether they were targeting the wrong group or people have a defined image of what Mustang is as a heritage name…

 

Frankly, I don't understand the jacked up sports car trend like the Lamborghini or Porsche, and by extension, the talk of such a Mustang model.

[morgan20]

1 hour ago, DeluxeStang said:

There's your mustang raptor

 

If Ford won't build it, the aftermarket will

 

[akirby]

3 hours ago, rmc523 said:

 

Frankly, I don't understand the jacked up sports car trend like the Lamborghini or Porsche, and by extension, the talk of such a Mustang model.

Toys for the uber wealthy that want something unique.  At least the 911 Dakar has actual race heritage

[pffan1990]

Impressive Q4 and 2024 sales, especially for Lincoln. I'm not too overly concerned about the recent December sales compared to 2023. So many factors and circumstances to make it alarming. I'm just glad to see Lincoln is doing well as well as many other Fords. I'm hoping and sure 2025 will add on to the success of 2024. I do think the 'CE1' skunkworks products may be revealed at some point this year, though possibly in concept form.

Speaking of which, I wonder about this coming Detroit Auto Show. Seeing how some of us are talking about potential future Ford products coming in the next few years, has anyone heard whether Ford plans on revealing anything this Friday in Detroit? I'm guessing not since they haven't done any social media tease about it lately. I can't find an actual schedule on the Detroit Auto Show website other than the general 'media day' on Friday from 9am-1pm.

[Rick73]

On 1/5/2025 at 6:41 PM, ANTAUS said:

To add, supposedly Toyota is talking about bringing the Celica back, and somehow I believe Honda followed suit with saying they might bring the Prelude back.  If I remember correctly (since my friends in HS had these vehicles), the reason they bombed in the 90s, was mainly the price.  A Celica and Prelude back then could hit 25-28K, whereas a Mustang GT could be had for even less.  Now here we are 30 years later in a declining segment of vehicles, and they still think they can pull it off...If that's the case, bring out the Probe?   

Noticed Honda ad today suggesting new 2026 Prelude is indeed coming later this year.  The press release states it will have two-motor hybrid powertrain, so I’d guess at least 200 HP with 2.0L Atkinson used in Accord and Civic.  Being a sports car maybe Honda will add a bit more power, not that Civic hybrid is not quick enough already, and also given Prelude may be lighter.  I like appearance of concept.  Hope designers don’t overdo production car.  Expect greater competition on the way.  Should also confirm if there is a market for small fuel-efficient 2-door sports cars.

 

[ANTAUS]

If that's the case, then let's bring back the PROBE !!! 😛

 

[Rick73]

7 hours ago, jpd80 said:

Just my opinion,
If you have followed Ford for any time, it will be blindingly apparent that

doing less or not changing things saves a ton of money. So  this is why

I believe that it will keep things as they are now and lobby the government

for a review of CAFE targets like was done under Trump’s first term.

While some of what you have said makes a lot of sense, the reality is that

the business case is probably not there for entirely new engines to take 

the place of existing V6 Ecoboost engines.
 

The real answer the whole industry is waiting for is better more efficient,

lower cost batteries but until that happens, companies like Ford have to

dig deep and sell as many high profit F Series as possible to fund all of 

the future research and development work. Yes, keep targeting vehicles 

that can feature hybrids and PHEVs but don’t go overboard…

 

Curious what you consider “entirely new” engine?  The MPC architecture is already done by virtue of modular design.  Adding or removing cylinders should be similar to when Ford made a V10 from a V8, or to lesser degree a V6 from a V8.  I suppose point of view depends greatly on how dated one sees the 3.5L V6 family.  IMO so many new engines from different manufacturers have such very different cylinder geometry that it’s hard for me to see the 3.5L V6 remain operational for next 10 years or so, particularly to support hybrid applications.  And while I see HEV, PHEV and or EREV around for many years to come, I agree with you that capital investment to manufacture a new engine could be high, so maybe we will not see any more new engines at all.  Who knows what Ford will do.

[akirby]

Prelude is a Honda icon.  Sales and profit are secondary.

[jpd80]

5 hours ago, Rick73 said:

Curious what you consider “entirely new” engine?  The MPC architecture is already done by virtue of modular design.  Adding or removing cylinders should be similar to when Ford made a V10 from a V8, or to lesser degree a V6 from a V8.  I suppose point of view depends greatly on how dated one sees the 3.5L V6 family.  IMO so many new engines from different manufacturers have such very different cylinder geometry that it’s hard for me to see the 3.5L V6 remain operational for next 10 years or so, particularly to support hybrid applications.  And while I see HEV, PHEV and or EREV around for many years to come, I agree with you that capital investment to manufacture a new engine could be high, so maybe we will not see any more new engines at all.  Who knows what Ford will do.

Oh boy, where to start.

The latest 2.3 is a result of combustion studies that Ford was doing in the 20 teens when it discovered that  going back to smaller bore longer stroke gave a better emissions profile, especially with the dual injection set up.

Back then, the aim was indeed to develop a common cylinder bore, stroke and cylinder head arrangement to cover multiple engines. 

Thing was,  that Ford scrapped all those plans and just went with the 2.3 because there was no funding to do any other engines. So what you see is  the result of an orphan project, the update to the 2.0 got some changes but they kept the bore and stroke as is.

 

Yes, Ford could do an inline modular family, the bones are ther for I-4, I-5 and I-6. I thought, finally, Ford is going to downsize engine plants ahead of BEVs but then those ideas went up in smoke. All because Ford thought electrification was happening faster than expected

Edited January 9 by jpd80

[Sherminator98]

16 hours ago, jpd80 said:

Just on the jacked up Mustang, the blow back from research was absolutely savage.

I don’t know whether they were targeting the wrong group or people have a defined image of what Mustang is as a heritage name…

 

What research? IMO focus groups when focusing on say a specific model like the Mustang (which in itself is a lightning rod when something changes) I think is going to get beat up by the old guard that hates changes. Not adjusting the nameplate is going to lead to the Mustang dying off. 

 

I see no problem adding to the Mustang lineup (Mach E, Rallye style mustang, Sedan) but not at the expense of getting rid of the coupe. 

[danglin]

On 1/4/2025 at 6:56 PM, GearheadGrrrl said:

Mustang starts at $32K, ain't worth spending $10K more for a V8 soundtrack.

 

That V8 is more than just a "soundtrack". 

[morgan20]

1 hour ago, Sherminator98 said:

beat up by the old guard that hates changes

 

The old guard that hates changes can go fuck themselves. Ford doesn't need to cater to them, as the sales results for Mustang coupe vs. Mach-E last year suggest