Ford Escape Remains On Track For Discontinuation By 2026: Report

[Rick73]

Quote

This past January, a report surfaced that indicated Ford Escape production at the Louisville Assembly plant was slated to end by the conclusion of 2025, after which The Blue Oval was said to be shifting its focus to the Ford Bronco Sport as its compact crossover of choice.

There’s a lot going on but the statement above suggests to me that eliminating Escape expecting majority of sales to transfer to Bronco Sport is a mistake.  April sales data show Escape volume is as high as Bronco Sport and continues to hold its own; and with so many competing crossovers,  some or many buyers would go elsewhere.  There’s also the risk of BS possibly becoming more expensive relative to Escape, making the shift in focus from Escape to BS even more of a risk.

 

It is also possible the new low-cost EV platform may be behind schedule which would affect many things including other product schedules.  Perhaps a reason we haven’t seen more rumors on new affordable EVs.  Given weaker than anticipated EV sales, Ford may not be in as big a rush to bring low-cost EVs to market.  If nothing else it delays investment.

 

With all the uncertainty, including future of $7,500 tax credit which would likely affect affordable EVs most, it may be a good time to sit back and take a breath.

[akirby]

11 minutes ago, Rick73 said:

There’s a lot going on but the statement above suggests to me that eliminating Escape expecting majority of sales to transfer to Bronco Sport is a mistake.  

They never said or implied that.  Only that Bronco Sport would be their 2 row crossover entry going forward.

[twintornados]

13 minutes ago, akirby said:

They never said or implied that.  Only that Bronco Sport would be their 2 row crossover entry going forward.

 

Then they need to do a couple of things - my girlfriend bought a 2024 Escape and considered the Bronco Sport but no matter what trim level you got, no power rear hatch on BS, but available on Escape ST-Line. Hood on BS was "too intrusive" for her liking as well. Those two issues caused her to go with Escape over Bronco Sport. It is as simple as that.

[akirby]

1 hour ago, twintornados said:

 

Then they need to do a couple of things - my girlfriend bought a 2024 Escape and considered the Bronco Sport but no matter what trim level you got, no power rear hatch on BS, but available on Escape ST-Line. Hood on BS was "too intrusive" for her liking as well. Those two issues caused her to go with Escape over Bronco Sport. It is as simple as that.

Why are you assuming they need escape buyers to buy Bronco Sports?  Thats not the plan.  They’re replacing Escape production with EVs.  Much like they replaced Fusion with BS and Maverick.

 

That said it does open the door for a longer wheelbase version of BS with more amenities and a hybrid powertrain.

[twintornados]

1 hour ago, akirby said:

...  They’re replacing Escape production with EVs.  Much like they replaced Fusion with BS and Maverick.

 

Then she will not buy another Ford if the only choice is an EV.....she does not want one.

[jpd80]

8 hours ago, Sherminator98 said:

 

IMO its kind of a nothing burger-the 26MY can start in the late summer/fall of 2025 and its not like Ford is going to shut the plant down for 2 years (well maybe given what is happening at Oakville)-so the Escape/Corsair will be built till the end of the year at least, maybe into the Spring of 2026 then retool for whatever is coming next and that would lead into the 2027MY Product at the end of 2026

I see what you mean and given how many times Ford changes plans,

it would be easy to build a house of cards to support whatever theory

one wanted to peruse down the nearest rabbit hole….(that’s me, LOL)
 

 

I was curious that last August,

Ford’s advise was that eTransit would arrive in 2026 and the smaller BEV

pickup in 2027….they were clearly talking calendar year for the ETAs.

Add to that, the previous  advice that Louisville would go off line in

December 2025 for about 10 months…Escape continuing with YM26 has

changed all of that……others now suggest CE1 pickup going elsewhere,

I really don’t know but that would free up a C2 plant that Ford could use.

Edited May 18 by jpd80

[Rick73]

6 hours ago, akirby said:

They never said or implied that.  Only that Bronco Sport would be their 2 row crossover entry going forward.

Is it not implied?  If most Escape volume doesn’t switch over to BS then Ford is conceding net sales, are they not?  If not Ford, at least Ford Authority seems to think that is what Ford is planning or hoping for.  I get your point that ultimately Escape will be replaced by low-cost BEV, but that’s down the road.  And who knows if that will even materialize at present Escape volume and profit margin.  I think Ford is doing the right thing by delaying.  IMO it is far better to do nothing than the wrong thing.

 

Another variable that may have changed in last year or two is that if new low-cost EVs are now anticipated to sell in much lower volume, Ford may not need quite as much space to manufacture them.  In any case, with Ford hybrids doing better than BEVs, it seems odd to switch from Escape to a new and unproven BEV.  Maybe Escape should be upgraded instead of being cancelled.

 

 

[akirby]

4 hours ago, twintornados said:

 

Then she will not buy another Ford if the only choice is an EV.....she does not want one.

And they’re ok with that.  When the profit margin is low sometimes you save money by not selling them.

[akirby]

1 hour ago, Rick73 said:

Is it not implied?  If most Escape volume doesn’t switch over to BS then Ford is conceding net sales, are they not?  

 

Sure they’re conceding net sales until the EVs come online, but every indication is Escape isn’t very profitable so what are they really losing in the meantime?  By shutting down production they might actually save money.  In any event it depends on what happens with the EVs down the road whether it’s the right decision.  I still think they’ll upgrade Bronco Sports to fill some of the gap.

[Joe771476]

Dropping the Escape, Taurus, Edge are/were some of the dumbest moves Ford has ever made. If I didn't know better, I'd call it corporate sabotage. 

[DeluxeStang]

5 hours ago, akirby said:

And they’re ok with that.  When the profit margin is low sometimes you save money by not selling them.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but from an engineering and cost efficiency standpoint, you often want volume and economies of scale working in your favor. I'm not against this strategy in a broader sense, but I fear what happens if Ford keeps throwing sales volume out the window. 

 

They'll keep having to jack up the price to boost profit margins, which will lead to even fewer sales, so they have to increase the price even more, and then you enter into this really vicious cycle that could put you out of business if you aren't careful. I just hope Ford is mindful of that and manages to strike the right balance. 

 

I don't want Ford to be a brand in 20 years that you hardly see anyone driving because all they sell is 150k mustangs and raptors. 

[DeluxeStang]

4 hours ago, Joe771476 said:

Dropping the Escape, Taurus, Edge are/were some of the dumbest moves Ford has ever made. If I didn't know better, I'd call it corporate sabotage. 

Dropping them as they were made sense, vehicles Ford was losing money on and that didn't really do much to improve Ford's reputation in recent decades. The original Tarus was iconic, but beyond that, it was just a car. 

 

I'm of the mindset that Ford should get creative and ask themselves how to offer alternatives to the edge, escape, and sedans that are more compelling. Stop beating your head against the wall trying to repeat what doesn't work, but at the same time, don't just walk away from everything all together. 

 

Remaking the escape as a sporty low slung crossover is something I've thrown out before. When it comes to aspirational crossovers and SUVs, there are two flavors that really seem to work for people. Boxy, rugged off-road vehicles, and sporty coupe like designs. I'm of the mindset Ford should do both, the mach-e is one of the best selling non Tesla EVs, so it resonates with buyers. 

 

Instead of making the escape look like a bland jelly bean, make it like Ford's version of an electric Macan. So you can have that, and the boxy rugged bronco sport, two compact crossovers that appeal to passionate buyers with wildly different tastes so they don't overlap a ton. 

[Sherminator98]

18 hours ago, twintornados said:

 

Then she will not buy another Ford if the only choice is an EV.....she does not want one.

 

Here lies the issue-its not just going to be Ford doing this-given how CAFE is determined with footprint, smaller vehicles are going to be forced into becoming EVs because it makes most sense to do so-their smaller size/weight makes them great candidates to do so. Not to mention once the Battery cost issue is solved or lowered, it will be easier for manufactures to make money on them vs ICE products of the same size that will be much more complicated to produce (Hybrid/EREV tech) to meet CAFE.  

[Sherminator98]

8 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

I'm of the mindset that Ford should get creative and ask themselves how to offer alternatives to the edge, escape, and sedans that are more compelling. Stop beating your head against the wall trying to repeat what doesn't work, but at the same time, don't just walk away from everything all together. 

 

Once again those products where replaced by other products that went into a completely different direction-

 

I've argued that the Edge market was covered by the Mach E and the Bronco to an extent. The Maverick replaced the Focus and Fiesta as a low cost product. 

[Sherminator98]

8 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

I don't want Ford to be a brand in 20 years that you hardly see anyone driving because all they sell is 150k mustangs and raptors. 

 

The world wide Auto manufacturing base is way over due for a consolation-as a stock holder, I don't have an issue with Ford prevailing in commercial sales vs consumer sales because the consumer market is going to change quite a bit over the next 20 years-I'm not saying self driving cars are going to be a thing (they will but not in as big of an impact as some people are expecting), but with demographics getting older and younger people not as interested in driving, there are going to be some major changes coming. 

 

Commercially I don't see changes being as impactful

[Rick73]

15 hours ago, akirby said:

Sure they’re conceding net sales until the EVs come online, but every indication is Escape isn’t very profitable so what are they really losing in the meantime?  By shutting down production they might actually save money.  In any event it depends on what happens with the EVs down the road whether it’s the right decision.  I still think they’ll upgrade Bronco Sports to fill some of the gap.

Perhaps Ford could upgrade Escape?  It is no doubt in a very crowded space, but Car and Driver ranks it 12th based largely on inferior interior and driving dynamics.  These do not seem that major to upgrade unless it is just cost prohibitive.  Car and Driver ranks Escape high on styling, fuel economy, and infotainment.

 

To your point, if it cost too much to build Escape to make it more competitive, what exactly is it that drives higher costs?  And will that disadvantage disappear when replaced with a BEV?  If higher costs is based on design, then it can be addressed, but if more fundamental to Ford versus competitors, that’s a bigger issue.

 

https://www.caranddriver.com/rankings/best-suvs/compact

 

 

[akirby]

1 hour ago, Sherminator98 said:

I've argued that the Edge market was covered by the Mach E and the Bronco to an extent. 

As an Edge, MKX and Nautilus owner and longtime forum and FB group up moderator I can assure you that’s an incorrect assumption.  

[DeluxeStang]

2 hours ago, Sherminator98 said:

 

Once again those products where replaced by other products that went into a completely different direction-

 

I've argued that the Edge market was covered by the Mach E and the Bronco to an extent. The Maverick replaced the Focus and Fiesta as a low cost product. 

Respectfully, while the maverick is a low cost vehicle like the focus and fusion were, I don't see it as a direct replacement for those vehicles. Some of those owners transitioned into a maverick for sure, but many of them are looking at other brands now because they want a sedan body style. 

[akirby]

10 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but from an engineering and cost efficiency standpoint, you often want volume and economies of scale working in your favor. I'm not against this strategy in a broader sense, but I fear what happens if Ford keeps throwing sales volume out the window. 

 

They’re not throwing sales volume out the window.  What they’ve been doing is sacrificing current volume to fund new vehicles - Edge being the most recent.  And they’ve totally screwed the pooch getting new EVs out the door which makes the numbers look worse.  It’s better to sell 2M at 8% margin the 2.5M at a 4% margin.

 

Volume matters most at a platform level since that’s where most of the R&D happens.  C2 has already been heavily amortized worldwide.  Secondary is factory volume - you don’t want an entire factory running on one shift (or less) like Flat Rock.  2 full shifts covers overhead costs pretty well.  3 is gravy.  But this is where margin also comes into play.  2 shifts with an ATP of $35k at a 8% margin is far better than 3 shifts at $25k with 4% margin which I think describes Hermosillo perfectly.

 

In 2006 Ford’s entire Hapeville GA plant was dedicated to building Taurus rental cars.  They were lucky if they broke even which is why they closed it as part of the Way Forward Plan.

 

It’s a tricky equation that you have to balance between volume, ATP and profit margin and they are inversely proportional.   Adding volume is easy if you lower prices but you lose profit and increase your fixed overhead.  
 

And the part I feel is most misunderstood by many here is the corporate level resources that are needed to develop new vehicles.  It’s not just the dollar cost.  You can’t assign hundreds of engineers and designers to the CE1 platform and 3 new vehicles without taking them from other vehicles and programs.  You’re not going to just hire a thousand new employees so it’s a zero sum game where you have to move resources around.

[Motorpsychology]

I thought it ironic that at about the time Ford announced the Focus would be discontinued, Toyota invested ~$170 Million to expand Corolla production at the Blue Springs, MS plant.

Things worked out ok for both mfrs, Focus was less profitable than Mavrick or Bronco Sport for Ford, and volume efficiency improved for TMMMS.

[akirby]

9 minutes ago, DeluxeStang said:

Respectfully, while the maverick is a low cost vehicle like the focus and fusion were, I don't see it as a direct replacement for those vehicles. Some of those owners transitioned into a maverick for sure, but many of them are looking at other brands now because they want a sedan body style. 

And meanwhile we have tons of non Ford owners buying Mavericks.  Honda Civic is the most conquested vehicle for Maverick buyers.  I imagine Bronco Sport has similar conquest rates bringing in tons of first time Ford buyers who are passionate about those products.  That didn’t happen with Fusion.  

[akirby]

4 minutes ago, Motorpsychology said:

I thought it ironic that at about the time Ford announced the Focus would be discontinued, Toyota invested ~$170 Million to expand Corolla production at the Blue Springs, MS plant.

Things worked out ok for both mfrs, Focus was less profitable than Mavrick or Bronco Sport for Ford, and volume efficiency improved for TMMMS.

Focus was replaced by Ranger and Bronco which probably has 2-3 times the ATPs of Corolla.  Corolla works for Toyota because they’re very good at amortizing that platform and keeping costs low.  That’s something they perfected over decades and they’re good at it.  Ford is better at making and selling Broncos.

 

What works for one mfr doesn’t work for all.  

[Rick73]

Maverick is not as affordable as it once was, and that was before tariffs on Mexico.  Conquest rate may decline if prices keep going up.  Granted, Ford is likely making much more profit on Maverick than at first when priced at +/- $20k.

[Sherminator98]

1 hour ago, akirby said:

As an Edge, MKX and Nautilus owner and longtime forum and FB group up moderator I can assure you that’s an incorrect assumption.  

 

But your argument isn't any different then what your saying with the Focus getting replaced by the Ranger-The Edge/MKX where replaced by different products in the lineup like I mentioned that might appeal to that demographic that would have bought them. Like I have said before-don't mistake the vocal minority with who actually buys things.

 

If that was the case, I could give you a list of cars that should have sold well over the past 20 years like wagons, stick shifts, etc. 

[Sherminator98]

52 minutes ago, DeluxeStang said:

Respectfully, while the maverick is a low cost vehicle like the focus and fusion were, I don't see it as a direct replacement for those vehicles. Some of those owners transitioned into a maverick for sure, but many of them are looking at other brands now because they want a sedan body style. 

 

But sales numbers of sedans over the past 15 years have been in decline. 

 

I think what a lot of people miss is that there is a substantial amount of buyers out there that don't give a shit or buy the cheapest thing possible without any other considerations. 

 

I also believe Ford is targeting the ones that do give or want something "extra" in their products, because more often then not they'll be loyal buyers down the road.