Ford Universal Electric Platform

[rmc523]

1 hour ago, Rick73 said:

Risk is normal and an Inherent part of most if not all business decisions, and therefore a given; which then begs the question of why emphasize to such an unusual degree?   I get the feeling there’s something else in play we don’t see yet.

 

It can also be a PR approach to make it sound even more revolutionary......if he keeps pushing out how risky it is, it'll make Ford seem at the forefront of tech ......"we're pushing so far forward, we don't even know if it'll work!"

[Texasota]

1 hour ago, Rick73 said:

Or dishonesty if there’s more going on behind the scenes that we are not being made aware of.  Actual truth is unknowable, and probably somewhere in the middle.

Every company has things going on behind the scenes that are not made public until the company is ready to do so. This is normal business, not dishonesty. 

[akirby]

2 hours ago, Rick73 said:

Risk is normal and an Inherent part of most if not all business decisions, and therefore a given; which then begs the question of why emphasize to such an unusual degree?   I get the feeling there’s something else in play we don’t see yet.

Every part of this is new and untried from the assembly/casting process to the batteries to the electronics to the vehicle shape.   If you can’t understand that this represents an order of magnitude more risk than normal projects then you really don’t understand business.

[Rick73]

1 hour ago, rmc523 said:

 

It can also be a PR approach to make it sound even more revolutionary......if he keeps pushing out how risky it is, it'll make Ford seem at the forefront of tech ......"we're pushing so far forward, we don't even know if it'll work!"

Yeah, I considered it can be some form of posturing as well, but by definition that can include misleading which is not necessarily associated with high level of honesty.  Hope that’s all it is. 😀

 

I haven’t and don’t anticipate failure; it’s more questioning the why because it’s so rare or unusual for a CEO.  And personally, I don’t buy the honesty assumption.

 

It could simply be a way for Farley and Ford to hedge in case the price is higher than previously suggested, or delays in schedule, or a way to purposely delay the project for various reasons, including financial, and blame it on the “complexity”, etc.  Could be a lot of things.

[Rick73]

3 minutes ago, akirby said:

Every part of this is new and untried from the assembly/casting process to the batteries to the electronics to the vehicle shape.   If you can’t understand that this represents an order of magnitude more risk than normal projects then you really don’t understand business.

That’s a joke.  Seriously.

[fordmantpw]

30 minutes ago, Rick73 said:

That’s a joke.  Seriously.

 

Which is it?

[T-dubz]

1 hour ago, Rick73 said:

 

I haven’t and don’t anticipate failure; it’s more questioning the why because it’s so rare or unusual for a CEO.  And personally, I don’t buy the honesty assumption.

 

As a consumer who has had multiple ford vehicles crap right after the warranty expires, I can tell you I’m not buying one of these products for a while. The more he talks about risk, the more I want to wait and see how they last.

[akirby]

1 hour ago, Rick73 said:

That’s a joke.  Seriously.

Which part is incorrect?

[akirby]

12 minutes ago, T-dubz said:

As a consumer who has had multiple ford vehicles crap right after the warranty expires, I can tell you I’m not buying one of these products for a while. The more he talks about risk, the more I want to wait and see how they last.

I don’t know they seem to have as many if not more problems on the not new stuff.

[jpd80]

12 hours ago, akirby said:

I don’t know they seem to have as many if not more problems on the not new stuff.

This, the more conventional platform now appear to be ever increasingly complicated and difficult to build/get completely right without those annoying recalls.

 

It just feels like Ford throwing their arms in the air and saying anything has to be better than this……carful what you wish for, the devilishly simple can also be a trap for new players. Casting off one set of problems in the hope that new ones won’t find them…

Edited October 1 by jpd80

[Rick73]

https://stocks.apple.com/AiffqDTPxQxqDmJWbC5WEFg

 

 

Quote

Ford (F) CEO Jim Farley says US buyers aren't interested in $75,000 electric vehicles — and the automaker doesn't want to keep living in Tesla's (TSLA) shadow.

 

"We've learned ... people are not willing to pay [a] $30,000 premium for that big battery on a [$50,000], $60,000 utility," Farley told Yahoo Finance at Ford's Accelerate Pro conference in Detroit, Mich. "But they're willing to buy a $30,000 EV if they save $2,000 a year compared to gas costs."

 

Video covers need for affordability, and a different duty cycle for new retail electric vehicles expected to be mostly used for short trips and charged at home.  Does not state specifics, but would not be a surprise if base truck has small battery and relatively short range, which would obviously help with costs.

[Captainp4]

As Farley told us in that video a while back and I pointed out that he was basically saying they're going to copy Tesla's approach, they are doing it exactly how Tesla does it. Not saying it's a bad thing or that it's wrong to lift some things from someone that is doing it better than you (and open sources it so you can), but calling it a revolutionary or risky or brand new/untried is absurd.

[akirby]

3 hours ago, Captainp4 said:

As Farley told us in that video a while back and I pointed out that he was basically saying they're going to copy Tesla's approach, they are doing it exactly how Tesla does it. Not saying it's a bad thing or that it's wrong to lift some things from someone that is doing it better than you (and open sources it so you can), but calling it a revolutionary or risky or brand new/untried is absurd.

If you were paying attention you’d see that what they’re doing has not been done by Tesla.

[rmc523]

Ford IonBoost Trademark Filing Suggests EV Battery Branding On The Way

 

I wonder if they'll use the IonBoost name?

[jpd80]

Never stop learning, never be afraid to hit the reset button and start again with a better plan. Ford learning about how to build

these new era vehicles is both exciting and scary as hell.

 

 

Edited October 4 by jpd80

[Captainp4]

21 hours ago, akirby said:

If you were paying attention you’d see that what they’re doing has not been done by Tesla.

Which part? 

[akirby]

7 minutes ago, Captainp4 said:

Which part? 

 

Quote

I said it last week, and I’ll emphasize it now: there are no assurances that we can do this. No one has ever built a car in three pieces. No one’s offered their own electric architecture at this price. We’ve never done it. We’ve never had two large unit castings and high quality. No one’s done it. Tesla’s talked about it, but it hasn’t done it. In fact, our manufacturing process has radically moved on beyond what Tesla’s ever shown in its unboxing. So, there’s a lot of risk here. This is not a guarantee that Ford’s going to get this done.

 

[rmc523]

14 hours ago, jpd80 said:

Never stop learning, never be afraid to hit the reset button and start again with a better plan. Ford learning about how to build

these new era vehicles is both exciting and scary as hell.

 

 

Except for if you’re constantly hitting the reset button and having ancient product in the meantime because you’re continually pushing back the new products you were working on…

[Texasota]

5 hours ago, rmc523 said:

Except for if you’re constantly hitting the reset button and having ancient product in the meantime because you’re continually pushing back the new products you were working on…

It would have been worse if Ford had continued with the 3-row EV SUVs. It would have been an expensive product that would only sell in small numbers. It would have been worse if Ford had continued with the T3 given today's expensive battery technology. It would sell no better than the Lightning or Silverado EV. 

 

The problem all comes back to grossly overestimating the EV market. Ford, GM, Stellantis and numerous other OEMs all made that same mistake. Toyota was the only one that that didn't make that mistake and they were crucified in the media for not jumping on the EV bandwagon. 

[akirby]

They tried to shortcut development by partnering with Rivian then VW.  The 3 rows were a terrible idea on their own and they killed edge and Nautilus in the process.

 

Lightning and Mach-E were good moves at the time. CE1 sounds like a good move.  I think T3 will end up being a good move but delays will hurt.  
 

What hurts the most is killing Escape and Edge and Corsair and Nautilus instead of having all 4 with hybrid versions made in North America.

[rmc523]

On 10/4/2025 at 6:56 PM, akirby said:

They tried to shortcut development by partnering with Rivian then VW.  The 3 rows were a terrible idea on their own and they killed edge and Nautilus in the process.

 

Lightning and Mach-E were good moves at the time. CE1 sounds like a good move.  I think T3 will end up being a good move but delays will hurt.  
 

What hurts the most is killing Escape and Edge and Corsair and Nautilus instead of having all 4 with hybrid versions made in North America.

 

Yup, Oakville should've just been retooled and made Edge/Nautilus, and possibly even Escape/Corsair.  Then you let Louisville still transition to CE1 if you're dead set on that plan.

[rmc523]

Ford CEO Jim Farley Says EV Pickup Will Launch With 'Simple' BlueCruise Tech

 

“We don’t need all the singing and dancing, hands-free automation at launch. Maybe we focus BlueCruise on a simple operating domain like high-speed safety, with hands-off highway operations for the autonomy solution,” Farley said during a recent appearance on The Verge‘s Decoder podcast.

“Then gradually, as we verify the delivery of that base capability – whether it’s the vehicle structure, the manufacturing process of the suppliers, or even automation – we start to introduce more complexity and capability over time when we feel comfortable. That makes it stressful for the go-to-market team because, frankly, they don’t know what they’re going to be selling in a year and a half. But that’s the only way we’ve found to do this.”

Farley previously admitted that he was worried about taking cost-cutting measures too far with the company’s future low-cost EVs, but the exec has assured us that the new pickup will come with a robust list of features, regardless. That includes a “mostly digital interior featuring a large screen,” and Mustang EcoBoost-rivaling performance in a standard rear-wheel drive format. Additionally, Farley previously revealed that the EV pickup will be able to “power your house for six days.”

 

[jpd80]

You know it’s amazing that Ford loads it’s vehicles with compulsory equipment to increase it profit margin and then complains about complexity

 

No buyer asked for or expected to buy a vehicle with 200 computer controlled modules, this is all on Ford and other manufacturers for outsourcing so much design and critical components to suppliers

[Rick73]

51 minutes ago, jpd80 said:

You know it’s amazing that Ford loads it’s vehicles with compulsory equipment to increase it profit margin and then complains about complexity

 

No buyer asked for or expected to buy a vehicle with 200 computer controlled modules, this is all on Ford and other manufacturers for outsourcing so much design and critical components to suppliers

It’s called hypocrisy, isn’t it? 😀 Only kidding.

 

Personally love that they are taking a step back on autonomous controls.  Some people love more but expect others want less.  I’ll be fine with it when I get so old I can’t drive myself safely.  For now enjoy self-piloting. 🤔
 

On that subject, was surprised that Tesla actually deleted lane centering from cheaper Models 3 and Y though it likely only affects software, which means no real cost savings.  It would appear that it’s a move to force buyers to upgrade software package, which seems highly unlikely to me for “budget-minded” models, or else they believe there is a subset of buyers who avoid vehicles with self-driving capabilities.  Hard to guess what they know or are testing in principle because it makes little sense on surface.

[jpd80]

1 hour ago, Rick73 said:

It’s called hypocrisy, isn’t it? 😀 Only kidding.

 

Personally love that they are taking a step back on autonomous controls.  Some people love more but expect others want less.  I’ll be fine with it when I get so old I can’t drive myself safely.  For now enjoy self-piloting. 🤔
 

On that subject, was surprised that Tesla actually deleted lane centering from cheaper Models 3 and Y though it likely only affects software, which means no real cost savings.  It would appear that it’s a move to force buyers to upgrade software package, which seems highly unlikely to me for “budget-minded” models, or else they believe there is a subset of buyers who avoid vehicles with self-driving capabilities.  Hard to guess what they know or are testing in principle because it makes little sense on surface.

I just find it funny how Farley or Musk spin a topic to suit their narrative 

 

No buyer ever asked for overly complicated vehicles that was always done by manufacturers to suit their own ends. It was all to boost profits but look at where we are now, vehicles get more expensive while CEOs cry poor…….