Ford Universal Electric Platform

[morgan20]

11 hours ago, jpd80 said:

Err no,

until recently most manufacturers could plan up to 10 years in front for major capital expenditure on new infrastructure. 

 

That's the thing, capex plans involving time horizons like that in the auto industry are always fraught with uncertainty. I worked at the Ford steering systems plant in Indianapolis in the 1990s and 2000s, when major capital expenditures on new infrastructure were planned for the facility.

 

10 years later, this is what remained of the plant:

 

As I mentioned earlier, there's no such thing as "settled times" in this industry

[DeluxeStang]

On 11/24/2025 at 10:46 AM, T-dubz said:

 

I also think manufacturers have a hard time offering a cool, sporty looking designs at an affordable price. Not because it costs them more, but because they think they can sell it for more.
 

The xiaomi su7 has one of the lowest drags in a production vehicle and starts at roughly $30k in US dollars in China. I doubt an automaker would sell something like this for less than twice that price here.

 

 

The fact that Farley is head over heels for this thing, and the fact that we know CE1 was designed to accommodate sedans if they wanted to makes me hope Ford might offer something similar one day. 

 

But I think you hit the nail on the head. Too many brands have for too long tried to squeeze every last bit of money out of consumers, maximizing quarterly profits with no mind on how taking advantage of consumers would make many of them turn on them in the future. Jay Mays once said a good looking car costs about as much to design and manufacture as an ugly car. It's not like these brands have to charge significantly more money for a visually appealing design, but they do anyways. 

 

It's clear the key for EV adoption is making them so enticing for the price that they're almost so good that you can't afford not to buy them. Making a product so compelling that it persuades more consumers to take a chance on EVs. That includes design. So many affordable, small cars are generic, or ugly. There's a real market opportunity to create affordable cars that look great, are well built, and rewarding to engage with. Give these consumers a product that doesn't make them feel like they're being punished for having less money, and it would sell like gangbusters. 

[jpd80]

17 minutes ago, morgan20 said:

 

That's the thing, capex plans involving time horizons like that in the auto industry are always fraught with uncertainty. I worked at the Ford steering systems plant in Indianapolis in the 1990s and 2000s, when major capital expenditures on new infrastructure were planned for the facility.

 

10 years later, this is what remained of the plant:

 

As I mentioned earlier, there's no such thing as "settled times" in this industry

Tanks for the power steering example, it shows what happens when Ford goes another direction, so we may see even more wild decisions depending on the level of chaos.

 

Theres even more uncertainty (I should have said chaos) today because the government keeps changing thins like tariffs and tax credits so even existing long term assets and plans may be in jeopardy 

 

The only products that remain reliable for Ordinary are the local manufactured in USA vehicles but even then, the supplier base is an utter mess

[jpd80]

5 minutes ago, DeluxeStang said:

The fact that Farley is head over heels for this thing, and the fact that we know CE1 was designed to accommodate sedans if they wanted to makes me hope Ford might offer something similar one day. 

 

But I think you hit the nail on the head. Too many brands have for too long tried to squeeze every last bit of money out of consumers, maximizing quarterly profits with no mind on how taking advantage of consumers would make many of them turn on them in the future. Jay Mays once said a good looking car costs about as much to design and manufacture as an ugly car. It's not like these brands have to charge significantly more money for a visually appealing design, but they do anyways. 

 

It's clear the key for EV adoption is making them so enticing for the price that they're almost so good that you can't afford not to buy them. Making a product so compelling that it persuades more consumers to take a chance on EVs. That includes design. So many affordable, small cars are generic, or ugly. There's a real market opportunity to create affordable cars that look great, are well built, and rewarding to engage with. Give these consumers a product that doesn't make them feel like they're being punished for having less money, and it would sell like gangbusters. 

Farley is enamoured with CE1 because it gives him something to reset the vision of BEVs as affordable and closer to what more people will pay, he’s painting a lot of blue sky with this to cover the huge losses/ write downs coming for BOC next year 

 

The big question is what does Fird do with the rest of its products to keep them fresh and bringing in profits.

[rmc523]

16 hours ago, jpd80 said:

Farley is enamoured with CE1 because it gives him something to reset the vision of BEVs as affordable and closer to what more people will pay, he’s painting a lot of blue sky with this to cover the huge losses/ write downs coming for BOC next year 

 

The big question is what does Fird do with the rest of its products to keep them fresh and bringing in profits.

 

 

 

Step 1:  Endlessly extend product cycles/cancel product updates

Step 2:  ???

Step 3:  Profit

Edited November 26, 2025 by rmc523

[morgan20]

41 minutes ago, rmc523 said:

Step 1:  Endlessly extend product cycles/cancel product updates

Step 2:  ???

Step 3:  Profit

 

Good one, rmc523 😄

 

I'd add a prerequisite,

 

Step 0: Get a frickin' clue

 

 

 

[morgan20]

17 hours ago, jpd80 said:

The only products that remain reliable for Ordinary are the local manufactured in USA vehicles but even then, the supplier base is an utter mess

 

Even more of a mess is Ford's relations with suppliers. It was shitty when I worked at Ford, improved after Mulally became head honcho (and when I took my buyout), and is now shitty again. It's been gettin' worse every year since 2020! 

 

For Ford's Universal Electric Production System to work, the company must fix this and fix it fast

 

 

[akirby]

9 hours ago, morgan20 said:

 

Even more of a mess is Ford's relations with suppliers. It was shitty when I worked at Ford, improved after Mulally became head honcho (and when I took my buyout), and is now shitty again. It's been gettin' worse every year since 2020! 

 

For Ford's Universal Electric Production System to work, the company must fix this and fix it fast

 

 

I think the plan is to have fewer parts and to produce them in house which eliminates the issue (or at least makes it an internal issue).

Edited November 26, 2025 by akirby

[rmc523]

9 minutes ago, akirby said:

I think the plan is fewer parts produced in house which eliminates the issue (or at least makes it an internal issue).

 

Huh?

[DeluxeStang]

14 minutes ago, rmc523 said:

 

Huh?

I think he meant more parts produced in-house. 

[Motorpsychology]

37 minutes ago, DeluxeStang said:

I think he meant more parts produced in-house. 

"Fewer parts, (that are) produced in house..." works.

[DeluxeStang]

3 minutes ago, Motorpsychology said:

"Fewer parts, (that are) produced in house..." works.

Yeah, I agree, probably just a missing comma. 

[rmc523]

58 minutes ago, DeluxeStang said:

I think he meant more parts produced in-house. 

 

18 minutes ago, Motorpsychology said:

"Fewer parts, (that are) produced in house..." works.

 

That's what I thought he meant, but the sentence as typed contradicted itself lol.

[jpd80]

4 hours ago, morgan20 said:

 

Even more of a mess is Ford's relations with suppliers. It was shitty when I worked at Ford, improved after Mulally became head honcho (and when I took my buyout), and is now shitty again. It's been gettin' worse every year since 2020! 

 

For Ford's Universal Electric Production System to work, the company must fix this and fix it fast

 

 

Several problems with that, the big one being that CE1 was developed in isolation

away from Ford’s own engineering to avoid valid objections and criticism.

All of this new era stuff is being touted as the solution to everything wrong with

the way Ford has been engineering, developing and manufacturing products,

all push back on potential problems has been stifled and that’s a big worry.

 

On suppliers, the tables have turned in recent years and thanks to so much being

outsourced and so many modules now  controlled by software, suppliers have Ford

and other manufacturers by the nuts, one misstep with just in time supplies can close

down production at the drop of a hat.

 

People gloss over this saying, just in time in play for over 30 years, fine but Ford has

never been this exposed to risk, it’s insane how much production is on a knife edge

……and now, Ford wants to introduce a completely new build process.

[Texasota]

22 hours ago, jpd80 said:

 The big question is what does Ford do with the rest of its products to keep them fresh and bringing in profits.

Rolling out hybrid versions of all models in the Ford Blue division is a partial answer to that question. Obviously more is needed but this is an important step. 
 

I really want a Ranger PHEV in my Christmas stocking but I’m going to have to wait longer than I want.

[akirby]

7 hours ago, Motorpsychology said:

"Fewer parts, (that are) produced in house..." works.

Yes thank you.  Edited.

[DeluxeStang]

Fun interview overall, haven't watched the full vid yet, but he talks about affordable EVs, the main one he's focusing on is an affordable performance EV sedan. 

 

He says how there's still a sizable market for sedans, but talks about how Ford lost a lot of money on things like the fusion because of the platform it used. He goes on to mention how sedans make a lot of sense for an EV due to having really solid aero, and then gets into details on what kind of sedan he has in mind. A RWD affordable performance sedan, with what he calls a unique closure system to presumably improve practicality. 

 

 

[morgan20]

2 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

Fun interview overall, haven't watched the full vid yet, but he talks about affordable EVs, the main one he's focusing on is an affordable performance EV sedan. 

 

He says how there's still a sizable market for sedans, but talks about how Ford lost a lot of money on things like the fusion because of the platform it used. He goes on to mention how sedans make a lot of sense for an EV due to having really solid aero, and then gets into details on what kind of sedan he has in mind. A RWD affordable performance sedan, with what he calls a unique closure system to presumably improve practicality. 

 

Thanks for the video my friend. What the head honcho should have said is Ford lost a lot of money on things like the fusion because those products were commodity anonymous unibody sedans for which Ford had to apply a shit ton of sales incentives. It ain't because of the platform Jimbo!

 

Anyway, an affordable performance EV sedan with a unique design that takes advantage of the newfangled processes developed at the skunkworks sounds promising. If Ford is going to offer new sedans for North America at all (not that it needs to), that's the way to do it.

[DeluxeStang]

14 minutes ago, morgan20 said:

 

Thanks for the video my friend. What the head honcho should have said is Ford lost a lot of money on things like the fusion because those products were commodity anonymous unibody sedans for which Ford had to apply a shit ton of sales incentives. It ain't because of the platform Jimbo!

 

Anyway, an affordable performance EV sedan with a unique design that takes advantage of the newfangled processes developed at the skunkworks sounds promising. If Ford is going to offer new sedans for North America at all (not that it needs to), that's the way to do it.

Couldn't agree more. A new sedan with a more compelling design, and overall package would really give Ford something unique, and relying very heavily on platform sharing should in theory resolve the profitability issues Ford's previous sedans and hatchbacks had. 

[jpd80]

1 hour ago, DeluxeStang said:

Couldn't agree more. A new sedan with a more compelling design, and overall package would really give Ford something unique, and relying very heavily on platform sharing should in theory resolve the profitability issues Ford's previous sedans and hatchbacks had. 

Unfortunately, I think that kind of vehicle is seen as “nice to have” but not essential.

Its kind of the same sort of thinking that GM adopted with the Alpha platform 

and Cadillac CT4 and CT5 vehicles, they cost a lot to develop, unsure of recovery.

Edited November 29, 2025 by jpd80

[DeluxeStang]

1 hour ago, jpd80 said:

Unfortunately, I think that kind of vehicle is seen as “nice to have” but not essential.

Its kind of the same sort of thinking that GM adopted with the Alpha platform 

and Cadillac CT4 and CT5 vehicles, they cost a lot to develop, unsure of recovery.

I agree, I personally view this a "Let's get the volume sellers out the door and see how they do, and then move into the fun stuff" kind of vehicle. A combination of aspirational halo models to give the tech and platform appeal, and more practical volume sellers would be the best mix imo. 

 

I will say this platform is far more performance oriented than many of us thought it would be, so that gives Ford a lot of possibilities in what sorts of products they want to offer. 

[akirby]

6 hours ago, morgan20 said:

 

Thanks for the video my friend. What the head honcho should have said is Ford lost a lot of money on things like the fusion because those products were commodity anonymous unibody sedans for which Ford had to apply a shit ton of sales incentives. It ain't because of the platform Jimbo!

Actually you’re both right.  The platform was too expensive to make money competing in that market.  It doesn’t matter if you have a better design or better features or better performance.  Majority of buyers aren’t willing to pay a premium.

 

What you’re talking about is a performance sedan that can command higher prices and therefore profits, but that’s a much lower volume product which is different than a mid sized family sedans.  In the world of toasters price is king.

[Sherminator98]

9 hours ago, akirby said:

Actually you’re both right.  The platform was too expensive to make money competing in that market.  It doesn’t matter if you have a better design or better features or better performance.  Majority of buyers aren’t willing to pay a premium.

 

What you’re talking about is a performance sedan that can command higher prices and therefore profits, but that’s a much lower volume product which is different than a mid sized family sedans.  In the world of toasters price is king.

 

I think the thing that hurt Ford partly was being hellbent on implementing Ford One to a point-moving volume products to the CD1 and C1 platform seems like it hurt products more then it helped them. The Fusion and Escape where both on Mazda platforms that where presumably cheaper or better suited to the NA market pricing structure. 

I guess Ford corrected the C1 cost issues post 2020 with the Escape redesign and releasing the Bronco Sport and Maverick a few years later, because they are at least profitable for Ford.  

[akirby]

41 minutes ago, Sherminator98 said:

 

I think the thing that hurt Ford partly was being hellbent on implementing Ford One to a point-moving volume products to the CD1 and C1 platform seems like it hurt products more then it helped them. The Fusion and Escape where both on Mazda platforms that where presumably cheaper or better suited to the NA market pricing structure. 

I guess Ford corrected the C1 cost issues post 2020 with the Escape redesign and releasing the Bronco Sport and Maverick a few years later, because they are at least profitable for Ford.  

Yes, I’ve said many times when they chose the European cd4 and c1 platforms it was the wrong choice and should have e stuck with the Mazda platforms.  My cd4 fusion was a great vehicle but it was heavy and expensive and complicated compared to cd3.  They corrected that - at least to some extent - with C2.  Ditching the V6 support e.g.

[DeluxeStang]

11 hours ago, akirby said:

Actually you’re both right.  The platform was too expensive to make money competing in that market.  It doesn’t matter if you have a better design or better features or better performance.  Majority of buyers aren’t willing to pay a premium.

 

What you’re talking about is a performance sedan that can command higher prices and therefore profits, but that’s a much lower volume product which is different than a mid sized family sedans.  In the world of toasters price is king.

What's really interesting is how he's talking about a performance sedan, but talking about making it affordable, that's a pretty unique combination of attributes. 

 

I agree with you, that price matters to a lot of people, hence the whole affordability thing. But I believe other factors play a role as well. I agree that we're the outliers, we notice things your average customer doesn't, but I still believe they have the same appreciation for a good product that we do, it's just more surface level. But it still registers with them, and plays a role in their purchasing decisions. 

 

They're not like us where they're saying "Oh this Ecoboost hits peak torque really low in the RPM range" but they will say things like "This thing is punchy, it'll make merging into the highway a lot less stressful". It's the same with design, they don't really talk about things like proportions, line flow, surfacing, and so on, but they still can recognize a good looking car when they see one. 

 

So why does this matter? It's because Ford's mainstream sedans tend to struggle on the differentiation front, whereas something like the Camry pushes it's unique attributes to the front with things like having class leading reliability that appeals to a lot of people, something that makes it a got to have it product for certain buyers. By comparison, your normal Tarus and fusion models were just kinda mid-pack, not bad cars, but they didn't really do anything to really stand out a ton in their segments. 

 

But I believe if ford comes out with a new sedan, and says "This costs about as much as a Camry, but it will have a better warranty, better long term reliability, lower maintenance costs, better performance, it's more refined due to how good the NVH is, and it's better looking" suddenly Ford has the much more compelling product. I think that'll win more people over than just doing another fusion, but acceptance rates of EV tech near the end of the 2020s will definitely determine that. If people are more open to evs, these affordable EVs will be a slam dunk.