Ford might make more EVs using VW platforms

[DeluxeStang]

https://carbuzz.com/ford-volkswagen-collaboration-potential-fiesta-revival/

 

The general consensus is if this goes through, it'll be a revival of the fiesta and focus. I could see Ford reentering those segments, when the time is right and once they could make a profit on them, but I see them using their own platform to do it. 

[T-dubz]

I find this hard to believe. Unless the explorer and capri are huge successes, I can’t see them going forward with VW. However since ford changes their mind on EVs every other second, I guess anything is possible.

[DeluxeStang]

9 minutes ago, T-dubz said:

I find this hard to believe. Unless the explorer and capri are huge successes, I can’t see them going forward with VW. However since ford changes their mind on EVs every other second, I guess anything is possible.

They don't seem to be selling well, but the person being interviewed was talking about how the partnership has been very successful. It could just be corporate BS, or it could mean the profit margins on these EVs are pretty substantial even if the volume isn't there right now. 

 

We've seen a few people within Ford, and partner with Ford who've implied smaller, lower, more affordable models like their hatchbacks could make a return as EVs one day. But again, I see Ford just using their own platform instead of extending the VW partnership in that case. 

[Sherminator98]

I can maybe see a city car or B class EV shared with VW if it comes to a passenger vehicle, but I wouldn't give that more then a 50/50 chance of happening. 

[twintornados]

14 hours ago, Sherminator98 said:

I can maybe see a city car or B class EV shared with VW if it comes to a passenger vehicle, but I wouldn't give that more then a 50/50 chance of happening. 

 

..and there is only an 80% chance of that happening.

[Rick73]

The VW ID.2ALL concept in article seems pretty nice to me, and is much larger than it appears in some pictures so may appeal to many Americans looking for a cheaper BEV.  It’s no doubt short but is wide and tall so as long as a roomy back seat is not a priority, it offers buyers a lot more space than a city car for hopefully not much more cost.  And should be safer than many tiny city cars too.  Not suggesting it’s a city car or that VW will market as such.

 

According to VW the ID.2ALL concept is about 2-feet shorter than a Civic, Corolla, or Tesla Model 3, but is taller and at least as wide.  When people are standing next to it, its relatively large size is more noticeable.  A Fiesta that size with VW’s anticipated ~ 250+ miles of EPA range could do well if price was indeed as low as VW hopes to achieve.  Demand would obviously depend greatly on cost.

 

[bzcat]

ID.2 is the replacement for Polo so a Fiesta version wouldn't be too hard to do.

 

But I fail to see any strategic rationale for Ford to do this. VW of course think it is a good idea since Ford is paying them but I think Farley should put the resources into its own EV (like Puma).

[jpd80]

58 minutes ago, bzcat said:

ID.2 is the replacement for Polo so a Fiesta version wouldn't be too hard to do.

 

But I fail to see any strategic rationale for Ford to do this. VW of course think it is a good idea since Ford is paying them but I think Farley should put the resources into its own EV (like Puma).

Couldn’t agree more, Thers nothing worse than getting sucked into a deal and then spending a bunch to change things.

 

Just observing the results of the MEB agreement signed back in 2018, Ford Europe now has two heavily re-engineered 

VW designed Electric vehicles that struggle to sell, have cost Ford a bunch to develop on top of the arrangement with VW..

In hindsight, Ford may have been better off buying rebadged/eskinned ID4 and ID5 with much less trouble, faster delivery.

It all seems such a huge waste of time and resources for very little return….

[Rick73]

17 hours ago, bzcat said:

ID.2 is the replacement for Polo so a Fiesta version wouldn't be too hard to do.

 

But I fail to see any strategic rationale for Ford to do this. VW of course think it is a good idea since Ford is paying them but I think Farley should put the resources into its own EV (like Puma).

Found it interesting that VW introduced the ID.2 as “spacious like a Golf, affordable like a Polo”.  Comparing dimensions the ID.2 is wide and tall like Golf, but short like a Polo.  No doubt that should make driver and passenger feel more space around them, but compared to previous Polo the added vehicle frontal area will likely reduce driving range per kWh of battery capacity.  Suppose VW can just add more capacity, which apparently they must have given projected range, though this is counter to affordability.

 

Don’t know specifics of deal between Ford and VW, but perhaps one advantage to manufacturing a Fiesta on VW platform is minimizing capital investment and thereby reducing financial risks.  If EV Fiesta doesn’t sell well, there may be much less to lose.  I have never seen how the deal or contract is structured, so just speculating on Ford likely having less exposure.

 

On a related note, the VW ID.2 is FWD, as would likely be a Fiesta.  This makes me wonder if new affordable EV platform being designed by Ford for NA compact vehicles is FWD, RWD, or AWD?  As much as I prefer driving RWD over FWD, it seems many new small EVs are going to FWD, which I expect is cheaper to build.  Curious how skunkworks may weigh possible FWD affordability versus traditional RWD performance?  Not even sure there is a FWD versus RWD EV cost advantage for most affordable smaller vehicles, but there seems to be a trend in that direction.

 

[bzcat]

Not much cost difference with cost between FWD or RWD in EV. It's just the location of motors and most EV are designed to have motors between both axles so you can do AWD/multiple motors. 

 

All things being equal, I think if you are going with 1 motor, RWD makes more sense because of packaging... it doesn't take up any space that could be used for passenger cabin (mainly because no transmission required), and gives you a frunk or bigger cabin if you it properly. 

 

 

[jpd80]

Would a FWD BEV work better in winter time in snow states and northern Europe?

Thinking particularly of subcompact like Fiesta

[Rick73]

16 hours ago, bzcat said:

Not much cost difference with cost between FWD or RWD in EV. It's just the location of motors and most EV are designed to have motors between both axles so you can do AWD/multiple motors. 

 

All things being equal, I think if you are going with 1 motor, RWD makes more sense because of packaging... it doesn't take up any space that could be used for passenger cabin (mainly because no transmission required), and gives you a frunk or bigger cabin if you it properly. 

 

 

Agree there shouldn’t be much cost difference, but if a manufacturer was trying to squeeze every penny out, then I expect FWD should hold a slight advantage due to proximity of all equipment.  Using VW platform as example, it appears pretty much everything is located under the hood in what could be a single subassembly.  Even little things like heat recovery from drivetrain cooling used for HVAC would seem cheaper to build due to close proximity.  EVs usually have cooling heat exchangers in front, and HVAC is also in front/dash area, so placing drive motor in rear probably adds a little cost, though probably not a big difference.

 

Also agree FWD likely eliminates a frunk or severely limits its size, but in case of VW MEB FWD platform used for ID.2ALL, the lack of a rear motor frees up space between rear wheels which VW uses to make trunk very deep.  I like that feature a lot having had two FWD ICE vehicles with similar wells at very rear and under floor level.  Pictures of VW platform show these two advantages.  I still prefer RWD for myself, but expect most buyers would value a lower cost more.

 

[Rick73]

15 hours ago, jpd80 said:

Would a FWD BEV work better in winter time in snow states and northern Europe?

Thinking particularly of subcompact like Fiesta

Yes, would seem a FWD EV “car” would end up with more weight over drive wheels than an equivalent RWD.  However, for vans and pickups the same would not apply when they are heavily loaded with cargo.  Either way wouldn’t we expect AWD to be popular option for those who live in heavy snow areas?  Having said that, not all affordable vehicles offer AWD.

 

It will be interesting to see what Ford comes up with if trying to minimize costs and also make platform flexible for different types of vehicles.

[Sherminator98]

15 hours ago, jpd80 said:

Would a FWD BEV work better in winter time in snow states and northern Europe?

Thinking particularly of subcompact like Fiesta

One thing to consider-the reason why FWD works better in inclement weather is because the powertrain is over the driving wheels. In an EV the vast majority of the weight is in the center of the vehicle. With traction control and other things, it wouldn’t really matter from a traction perspective which wheels where driving it. 

[Sherminator98]

So talking about weight-

 

FWD 2.0L Ecoboost 235 pounds mated to a 8F 192 pounds=427 pounds not including cooling or accessories. 
 

Tesla motor is 300 pounds or so

[rmc523]

On 5/2/2025 at 9:24 PM, DeluxeStang said:

They don't seem to be selling well, but the person being interviewed was talking about how the partnership has been very successful. It could just be corporate BS, or it could mean the profit margins on these EVs are pretty substantial even if the volume isn't there right now. 

 

We've seen a few people within Ford, and partner with Ford who've implied smaller, lower, more affordable models like their hatchbacks could make a return as EVs one day. But again, I see Ford just using their own platform instead of extending the VW partnership in that case. 

 

One thing to point out for better or worse is that the guy they're talking to WAS recently Ford Europe's old boss and is now VW's boss.  So he has seen both sides of the partnership now, which can either mean he's telling the truth that it was beneficial for both sides, OR.....he's talking from the VW side of things, and what didn't make sense numbers-wise from his perspective last week (figuratively speaking) at Ford now makes complete sense to him at VW this week, as VW is profiting from sharing the tech and making them for Ford.

 

Ford Of Europe Boss Martin Sander Resigns, Heads Back To VW

 

 

I have always viewed these VW-based models as stop gaps until Ford got its own in-house platform developed.  With CE1 on the horizon, I would have to assume that FoE also has access to CE1 for its own products (if not a few global ones) going forward, right?  So, IMO, why would they bother intertwining themselves more with VW for another 6-7 year product cycle times 2 more vehicles on what has been reported as an overpriced, underperforming platform, when they have their own shiny new in-house version nearly ready to go now??

Edited May 5 by rmc523

[Biker16]

19 hours ago, bzcat said:

Not much cost difference with cost between FWD or RWD in EV. It's just the location of motors and most EV are designed to have motors between both axles so you can do AWD/multiple motors. 

 

All things being equal, I think if you are going with 1 motor, RWD makes more sense because of packaging... it doesn't take up any space that could be used for passenger cabin (mainly because no transmission required), and gives you a frunk or bigger cabin if you it properly. 

 

 

FWD EVs are less complex and Simpler to produce than RWD/AWD and are more Space Efficient. 

FWD keeps all the high-value/high-voltage systems in the front of the vehicle, simplifying assembly and reducing cost. 

MEB

 

MEB FWD

[Rick73]

3 hours ago, Biker16 said:

FWD EVs are less complex and Simpler to produce than RWD/AWD and are more Space Efficient. 

IIRC the most affordable BEVs in US seem to have been FWD, including Chevy Bolt, Nissan Leaf, Fiat 500e, Mini EV, etc. Obviously MSRP doesn’t necessarily reflect what they cost to manufacture so only speculating.  Tesla RWD Model 3 is not far behind in price though.

 

There have been low-cost RWD exceptions including BMW I3 and Smart EV which are at smallest size range; though sales volume of these were much lower than the FWD mass-market vehicles mentioned previously.  When vehicles are extremely small, like the Microlino city car with only two seats (European Isetta EV concept), RWD seems to work well.  Not sure there is a firm design rule that must be followed, but expect that for mass-market 4-door affordable cars, FWD will be most popular.

[AM222]

11 hours ago, Rick73 said:

IIRC the most affordable BEVs in US seem to have been FWD, including Chevy Bolt, Nissan Leaf, Fiat 500e, Mini EV, etc. Obviously MSRP doesn’t necessarily reflect what they cost to manufacture so only speculating.  Tesla RWD Model 3 is not far behind in price though.

 

There have been low-cost RWD exceptions including BMW I3 and Smart EV which are at smallest size range; though sales volume of these were much lower than the FWD mass-market vehicles mentioned previously.  When vehicles are extremely small, like the Microlino city car with only two seats (European Isetta EV concept), RWD seems to work well.  Not sure there is a firm design rule that must be followed, but expect that for mass-market 4-door affordable cars, FWD will be most popular.

Outside the US and Canada there's the MG4, a mainstream RWD EV that also happens to be one of the brand's most popular modern models. In Australia it starts under $37,000 AUS ($23,920 US)


Since it's also available as a dual motor AWD, in theory it can also be built as a FWD EV if they wanted. Cargo volume is average for a compact hatchback (the MG4 is about as big as the previous Mk3 Focus hatch). 

Edited May 6 by AM222

[Sherminator98]

14 hours ago, Rick73 said:

IIRC the most affordable BEVs in US seem to have been FWD, including Chevy Bolt, Nissan Leaf, Fiat 500e, Mini EV, etc. Obviously MSRP doesn’t necessarily reflect what they cost to manufacture so only speculating.  Tesla RWD Model 3 is not far behind in price though.

 

But most of those cars are based off ICE platforms and aren't purely clean sheet EVs

 

Not sure how the packaging works with RWD Evs, but it might be better for a van type product that needs a flat floor. 

 

[Rick73]

Loaded cargo vans typically have better traction when RWD in design (versus FWD) because much of the cargo mass is over driven wheels.  Ford E-Transit and E-Custom are both RWD IIRC though both available as FWD in ICE variants in Europe.  To me just shows that traction is not only variable to consider, since FWD ICE cargo vans tend to be lighter and therefore can have higher payload.  Ability to carry more cargo is apparently of greater value than a little incremental improvement in traction. In BEV variants there is much less vehicle weight difference between FWD and RWD designs so not as much payload to gain.

 

It’s interesting that when empty, a FWD ProMaster van has a much greater percentage of weight over driven wheels than RWD Transit, and therefore better traction in snow when empty.  However, when fully loaded, weight distribution over driven wheels reverses, giving advantage to RWD Transit.  In the middle when partially loaded there can be little or no difference in weight distribution.  Obviously Transit AWD option wins on traction no matter the conditions.

[Rick73]

5 hours ago, AM222 said:

Outside the US and Canada there's the MG4, a mainstream RWD EV that also happens to be one of the brand's most popular modern models. In Australia it starts under $37,000 AUS ($23,920 US)


Since it's also available as a dual motor AWD, in theory it can also be built as a FWD EV if they wanted. Cargo volume is average for a compact hatchback (the MG4 is about as big as the previous Mk3 Focus hatch). 

Agree RWD can be more popular than FWD under various conditions as Tesla has demonstrated in US market.  Being a Chinese car the MG4’s price is not comparable to US or European vehicles, so hard to say to what degree its RWD design affects cost.  Having said that, if we get back to prioritizing affordability, and therefore making a BEV as inexpensive as practical, the popular low-cost Chinese BYD Seagull may be a great example, and it has FWD platform.

 

Not saying it’s the only way to go, but FWD seems to offer more bang-for-the-buck when affordability is a priority.  The Seagull’s price is roughly half that of MG4 IIRC, though clearly it’s comparing apples and oranges, so we don’t really know how much is due to powertrain layout.  The only thing we know is Seagull was designed to be ultra cheap, and they chose FWD over RWD.  Granted only one data point so not conclusive. 😀

 

 

[akirby]

For a pure EV platform I see no difference in single motor fwd vs rwd.  The batteries don’t move.

[Biker16]

1 hour ago, akirby said:

For a pure EV platform I see no difference in single motor fwd vs rwd.  The batteries don’t move.

 FWIW, the low-cost versions of GM's Ultium Platform are FWD with optional AWD drive.

[akirby]

54 minutes ago, Biker16 said:

 FWIW, the low-cost versions of GM's Ultium Platform are FWD with optional AWD drive.

That’s probably dictated more by the AWD setup which uses a smaller motor in the rear.