Ford Universal Electric Platform

[rmc523]

16 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

Yeah not a fan of Ford pulling a Tesla with stretching out all these generation and design cycles. Having shorter product cycles may be more expensive, but it keeps your lineup feeling fresh, not to mention it adds an element of scarcity. 

 

If a brand comes out with a body style you really like, and you only have a few years to buy it, you're gonna be more motivated to go out and buy it sooner rather than later. Whereas if Ford starts keeping generations around for 10-15 years, no-one is in a rush to run out and buy them. 

 

Trying to be optimistic, a few things of note, if these reports are accurate, it means 2028/29 are gonna be huge years for Ford. A new mustang generation, a new mach-e, the mustang sedan, a new bronco and bronco sport, the maverick van, the next maverick will probably come out around this time. A ton of new product in the span of 1-2 years. So that's gonna be an awesome time to be a Ford fan. 

 

Plus this is probably when we'll start to see CE1 really starting to come into its own with new product releases. Then there's the whole off-road supercar thing which sounds like it's happening, and maybe we'll even see performance models inspired by Ford's return to prototype racing and F1, who knows. 

 

It's dry as hell right now, but a year or so from now things should start to heat up. 

 

Given that it's Ford, I'm sure 75% of the currently projected product tsunami will be cancelled before it gets here lol.

 

15 hours ago, mackinaw said:

 

Everybody is increasing the life cycle of their platforms.  Can't find the link now, but GM is shooting for 10-15 years.  The days of 3-4 year product cycle are over. 

 

As was mentioned above, platforms don't need to be changed as often, but they definitely need visual changes.  If they give more thorough refreshes, you can get away with longer cycles in between full redesigns (even if just a body change, keeping the platform).  The problem lies when Ford doesn't do anything beyond changing a grille insert and adding a larger screen AND stretching out the cycle 2 more years.

[Rick73]

8 hours ago, jpd80 said:

Evolution rather than revolution but the key point being

the platform must be on the right path to begin with.

 

True, but I also expect some buyers may not like buying a model that’s about to be updated soon because their vehicle will seem more dated even though almost new.  When manufacturers update every 4 years like clockwork as an example, why buy on 4th year knowing your purchase will not look new within a short period?  On the other hand if manufacturers keep designs much longer, and it is known and expected, some buyers may be drawn by a vehicle that appears newer for a longer time.  Also as vehicles last longer and people drive less, owners keep their cars longer, thereby reducing benefits of frequent updates.  I’d bet buyers who keep their new cars like 10 years prefer fewer redesigns, not more.

 

Just saying there are pros and cons to frequent refreshes, so it’s not all bad when Ford extends a current product.  Mostly I think it’s a way to lower costs which may be more important to buyers than minor updated designs.  In hard financial times, regardless of the cause, it’s not surprising that manufacturers will try to reduce costs in similar manner.  I view a “new look” as a luxury that is no doubt desirable but carries much less weight than fundamentals.  Vehicles have become too expensive and affordability is high on the list.

[fordmantpw]

The vast majority of car buyers have no idea what a refresh, or redesign, or replatform is.  They also have no idea when a new model is coming out.  They don't know that the model they are about to buy is going to get a complete redesign in 3 months and theirs will look outdated.  They just know they want (or need) a new car, they want (or need) it now, and they look at what's on the lot.  Heck, my parents bought a 2010 Mercury Milan in early 2010, shortly after the demise of Mercury was announced.  I made a comment about it being one of the last Mercury vehicles made and they had no idea.  My son has that car now and it just passed 100k last week.

 

Keep in mind that those of us on this forum and other car forums that are certified car nuts are in the minority. 

[Rick73]

3 hours ago, Sherminator98 said:

 

Changing soft items like headlights or bumpers is a lot cheaper then making new stampings or having to retest crash cells if there is a major change to the passenger compartment. 

Agree, but there has to be a balance due to added costs otherwise manufacturers would make minor updates every year.  Tesla claims constant evolution but I don’t count those as significant upgrades.  I don’t know what the right number is for refresh frequency but 3~4 years may not be as needed as previously.  Looking at early Mustangs as example, change was frequent.  First 65-66, then 67-68, followed by 69-70, and finally 71-72-73.  I can’t imagine manufacturers being able to pull that off today given greater competition (not counting Mustang) and higher vehicle costs.  We should probably reset expectations on what is normal. 😀

[jpd80]

15 minutes ago, Rick73 said:

 

True, but I also expect some buyers may not like buying a model that’s about to be updated soon because their vehicle will seem more dated even though almost new.  When manufacturers update every 4 years like clockwork as an example, why buy on 4th year knowing your purchase will not look new within a short period?  On the other hand if manufacturers keep designs much longer, and it is known and expected, some buyers may be drawn by a vehicle that appears newer for a longer time.  Also as vehicles last longer and people drive less, owners keep their cars longer, thereby reducing benefits of frequent updates.  I’d bet buyers who keep their new cars like 10 years prefer fewer redesigns, not more.

 

Just saying there are pros and cons to frequent refreshes, so it’s not all bad when Ford extends a current product.  Mostly I think it’s a way to lower costs which may be more important to buyers than minor updated designs.  In hard financial times, regardless of the cause, it’s not surprising that manufacturers will try to reduce costs in similar manner.  I view a “new look” as a luxury that is no doubt desirable but carries much less weight than fundamentals.  Vehicles have become too expensive and affordability is high on the list.

I meant evolution in terms of not requiring an all new platform as often as previously anticipated; what you said about the timing of refreshes has been part of automotive reality for decades and that’s where incentives come into play.

[Rick73]

6 minutes ago, fordmantpw said:

The vast majority of car buyers have no idea what a refresh, or redesign, or replatform is.  They also have no idea when a new model is coming out.  They don't know that the model they are about to buy is going to get a complete redesign in 3 months and theirs will look outdated.  They just know they want (or need) a new car, they want (or need) it now, and they look at what's on the lot.  Heck, my parents bought a 2010 Mercury Milan in early 2010, shortly after the demise of Mercury was announced.  I made a comment about it being one of the last Mercury vehicles made and they had no idea.  My son has that car now and it just passed 100k last week.

 

Respectfully disagree on much of this sentiment.  Auto manufacturers have learned the hard way not to disclose too much information on upcoming models way in advance because it can adversely affect sales, and it’s not just with cars.  The Osborne Effect is very real and does affect many buyers.  Some may not care but others do.
 

 

6 minutes ago, fordmantpw said:

 

Keep in mind that those of us on this forum and other car forums that are certified car nuts are in the minority. 

On this I agree completely. 😀

[fordmantpw]

6 minutes ago, Rick73 said:

 

Respectfully disagree on much of this sentiment.  Auto manufacturers have learned the hard way not to disclose too much information on upcoming models way in advance because it can adversely affect sales, and it’s not just with cars.  The Osborne Effect is very real and does affect many buyers.  Some may not care but others do.

 

You confirmed my point, though.  Manufacturers don't release much information, so nobody (outside of those of us freaks that seek that information in every free moment of our time) knows what's coming.  Still, the majority of folks don't know when a new model is coming until they see it on the streets.

[Rick73]

23 minutes ago, fordmantpw said:

 

You confirmed my point, though.  Manufacturers don't release much information, so nobody (outside of those of us freaks that seek that information in every free moment of our time) knows what's coming.  Still, the majority of folks don't know when a new model is coming until they see it on the streets.

What more accurate information do buyers need than knowing a manufacturer’s refresh schedule in advance?  Honda for example refreshed Civic on a predictable schedule so it didn’t take a genius to anticipate a refresh.  That’s changed now too because IMO the cost-benefit tradeoff isn’t as attractive or as profitable overall.  Cars are much better and also much more expensive so market conditions must adapt.  Recent emphasis on affordability was so obviously needed that it’s hard to see how manufacturers ignored it for so long.

 

 

[Texasota]

12 hours ago, jpd80 said:

Farley is very protective of the Mustang coupe’s heritage, Ford is not ready to give up on it yet. That and a four door based car will probably have 2.3EB PHEV versions

A 2.3 PHEV Mustang would be amazing. Likely over 400 HP and over 500 lb-ft of torque.

 

JP, please tell me not to buy a 2026 Ranger 2.3 because the Ranger PHEV is coming to North America. I should wait, right? 😉

[fordmantpw]

4 minutes ago, Rick73 said:

What more accurate information do buyers need than knowing a manufacturer’s refresh schedule in advance?  Honda for example refreshed Civic on a predictable schedule so it didn’t take a genius to anticipate a refresh.  That’s changed now too because IMO the cost-benefit tradeoff isn’t as attractive or as profitable overall.  Cars are much better and also much more expensive so market conditions must adapt.  Recent emphasis on affordability was so obviously needed that it’s hard to see how manufacturers ignored it for so long.

 

 

 

The point is, most people don't know that.  They don't care.  They don't pay attention.  We know because it's our hobby.  For 99% of car buyers, it's an appliance to get from point A to B.  They want it to look good, not break the bank, be enjoyable to drive (most don't even care about this either), and be safe.  That's it.  They don't know if it was refreshed last year or if a new one is coming in on the next transport truck.  They don't know, and most, even if they do know, don't care.  "Hey, I can save $2k by buying a 2025 over a 2026?  Let's do it!"

 

That doesn't apply to car enthusiasts for the most part.

[rmc523]

1 hour ago, Rick73 said:

What more accurate information do buyers need than knowing a manufacturer’s refresh schedule in advance?  Honda for example refreshed Civic on a predictable schedule so it didn’t take a genius to anticipate a refresh.  That’s changed now too because IMO the cost-benefit tradeoff isn’t as attractive or as profitable overall.  Cars are much better and also much more expensive so market conditions must adapt.  Recent emphasis on affordability was so obviously needed that it’s hard to see how manufacturers ignored it for so long.

 

 

 

You're giving the average buyer far more credit than they deserve.

[jpd80]

1 hour ago, Texasota said:

A 2.3 PHEV Mustang would be amazing. Likely over 400 HP and over 500 lb-ft of torque.

 

JP, please tell me not to buy a 2026 Ranger 2.3 because the Ranger PHEV is coming to North America. I should wait, right? 😉

Nope, sorry I have no idea  and I haven’t heard anything regarding that

[rmc523]

1 hour ago, jpd80 said:

Nope, sorry I have no idea  and I haven’t heard anything regarding that

 

Not to derail the thread, but Ford did just debut this for Europe:

 

Ford’s Ranger Street Truck Just Got Louder And Greener With New PHEV Punch | Carscoops

 

 

Starting with the street truck, the Ranger MS-RT PHEV generates a combined 277 hp (207 kW / 281 PS) and 697 Nm (514.1 lb-ft) of torque from a turbocharged 2.3-liter four-cylinder gasoline engine and a single electric motor. That’s a healthy 40 hp (30 kW) and 97 Nm (71.5 lb-ft) more than its diesel sibling, channeled through a 10-speed automatic and permanent e4WD system.

 

They also did it to Tourneo Connect:

Fans of sporty vans will be happy to learn that the Tourneo Custom MS-RT is now available in fully electric, plug-in hybrid, and diesel forms. The EV is the most potent option with a single electric motor churning out 282 hp (210 kW / 285 PS).

[T-dubz]

I’ve always liked that ms rt ranger. I think something like that would do well over here. Nice to see they added the phev.

[rmc523]

16 hours ago, T-dubz said:

I’ve always liked that ms rt ranger. I think something like that would do well over here. Nice to see they added the phev.

 

The name is dumb though.

[Sherminator98]

6 minutes ago, rmc523 said:

 

The name is dumb though.

 

Does it even mean anything? WTF is a MS-RT? Some new Microsoft product? A Virus? 

[akirby]

7 minutes ago, rmc523 said:

 

The name is dumb though.

Maybe not in Europe

[rmc523]

12 minutes ago, Sherminator98 said:

 

Does it even mean anything? WTF is a MS-RT? Some new Microsoft product? A Virus? 

 

I just hear MSRP lol.

[jpd80]

On 9/4/2025 at 11:31 PM, rmc523 said:

 

The name is dumb though.

 

On 9/4/2025 at 11:39 PM, Sherminator98 said:

 

Does it even mean anything? WTF is a MS-RT? Some new Microsoft product? A Virus? 

That Ranger is designed by Ford’s rally partner M Sport and their designation RT

haven't seen it advertised in other markets so probably just UK and Western Europe.

[akirby]

2 hours ago, jpd80 said:

 

That Ranger is designed by Ford’s rally partner M Sport and their designation RT

haven't seen it advertised in other markets so probably just UK and Western Europe.

 

On 9/4/2025 at 9:39 AM, akirby said:

Maybe not in Europe

Bingo

[jpd80]

16 minutes ago, akirby said:

 

Bingo

Two prototype V8 Rangers were made in Thailand but Ford AUS decided not to proceed,

they instead imported F150 3.5 EBs and converted them to RHD.

What should have been a fuss free conversion turned into a real problem for the 

Thailand based conversion company, ther were long delays before the vehicles reached owners.

Edited September 6, 2025 by jpd80

[twintornados]

 

 

You are quoting yourself?

[akirby]

6 minutes ago, twintornados said:

 

 

You are quoting yourself?

Pointing out I was right when I said MS-RT made sense in Europe.

[twintornados]

4 minutes ago, akirby said:

Pointing out I was right when I said MS-RT made sense in Europe.

 

Just poking a little and funnin' around before I head out on a Sunday morning...

[Hugh]

On 9/3/2025 at 12:08 PM, rmc523 said:

 

Not to derail the thread, but Ford did just debut this for Europe:

 

Ford’s Ranger Street Truck Just Got Louder And Greener With New PHEV Punch | Carscoops

 

 

Starting with the street truck, the Ranger MS-RT PHEV generates a combined 277 hp (207 kW / 281 PS) and 697 Nm (514.1 lb-ft) of torque from a turbocharged 2.3-liter four-cylinder gasoline engine and a single electric motor. That’s a healthy 40 hp (30 kW) and 97 Nm (71.5 lb-ft) more than its diesel sibling, channeled through a 10-speed automatic and permanent e4WD system.

 

They also did it to Tourneo Connect:

Fans of sporty vans will be happy to learn that the Tourneo Custom MS-RT is now available in fully electric, plug-in hybrid, and diesel forms. The EV is the most potent option with a single electric motor churning out 282 hp (210 kW / 285 PS).

Those are nice. I like the truck.