U.S. assembly plants weeks away from shutdowns due to new chip shortage, trade group warns

[Harley Lover]

As if the aluminum plant fire weren't enough, now the industry (including Ford) are staring down the gun barrel of this shortage:

Quote

U.S. auto plants are two to four weeks away from “significant impacts” on vehicle production due to the conflict with China over chipmaker Nexperia, according to MEMA, the largest vehicle supplier association in the states.

Beijing this month blocked Nexperia, a key supplier of chips used by the automotive and consumer electronics industries, from exporting from its facilities in China. The move was in response to the Dutch government seizing control of the Chinese-owned chipmaker, and highlighted worsening trade relations between China and the West.

The chips Nexperia supplies to the auto industry use older technology that powers more basic functions like turning on a windshield wiper or opening a window, Horaney said. They’re different from the newer, faster, more powerful wafers that handle sophisticated functions like assisted driving. Because they’re older tech, not as many companies make them.

 

Ford CEO Jim Farley called the Nexperia conflict a “political” matter and said he raised it with government officials on a trip to Washington this week.

“It’s an industrywide issue,” Farley told analysts Oct. 23 during the automaker’s third-quarter earnings call. “A quick breakthrough is really necessary to avoid fourth-quarter production losses for the entire industry.”

 

https://www.autonews.com/manufacturing/suppliers/an-nexperia-chips-us-production-outlook-1025/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Newsletter-ANBreakingNewsAlert-20251025

[Biker16]

[jpd80]

One word from the big short…….BOOM.

[Joe771476]

My 1985 Ford LTD II V6 was the best car I ever had. Fuel injection, no points or condenser, just cap and rotor. There was a control module on the front fender well 5 in. square with two mounting bolts and a plastic multi-pronged connection.  The Standard ignition part # was LX203.  It took 5 minutes to replace and you were on your way!  You can have the chips and junk they make today.

[fordmantpw]

2 minutes ago, Joe771476 said:

My 1985 Ford LTD II V6 was the best car I ever had. Fuel injection, no points or condenser, just cap and rotor. There was a control module on the front fender well 5 in. square with two mounting bolts and a plastic multi-pronged connection.  The Standard ignition part # was LX203.  It took 5 minutes to replace and you were on your way!  You can have the chips and junk they make today.

 

You've replaced the part so many times you have the part # memorized, but it's better than chips and junk they make today.  LOL!  😄 

[rmc523]

53 minutes ago, Joe771476 said:

My 1985 Ford LTD II V6 was the best car I ever had. Fuel injection, no points or condenser, just cap and rotor. There was a control module on the front fender well 5 in. square with two mounting bolts and a plastic multi-pronged connection.  The Standard ignition part # was LX203.  It took 5 minutes to replace and you were on your way!  You can have the chips and junk they make today.

 

That's nice!

[Motorpsychology]

There probably is (or is not) a good reason to have a chip control for basic functions, but how did power windows and electric wipers operate without them in the 50's? Switch> Relay>Motor.

Boom. 

 

[fordmantpw]

7 minutes ago, Motorpsychology said:

There probably is (or is not) a good reason to have a chip control for basic functions, but how did power windows and electric wipers operate without them in the 50's? Switch> Relay>Motor.

Boom. 

 

 

They also did not have auto-up and auto-down, and sensors to keep from smashing fingers if they got in the way of the auto-up function.

[akirby]

3 hours ago, fordmantpw said:

 

They also did not have auto-up and auto-down, and sensors to keep from smashing fingers if they got in the way of the auto-up function.

Or global open or close from the fob.

[rmc523]

2 minutes ago, akirby said:

Or global open or close from the fob.

 

I haven't seen one have global close.  My Bronco won't do it.  it'll open but not close.

[akirby]

3 hours ago, rmc523 said:

 

I haven't seen one have global close.  My Bronco won't do it.  it'll open but not close.

Various vehicles have had it at one time but it usually gets deleted.  My 2000 Lincoln LS had it.

[Biker16]

The ability to use a network to direct functions from switch to motor rather than having a direct homerun from multiple switches to that motor. 

[Rick73]

9 hours ago, fordmantpw said:

 

They also did not have auto-up and auto-down, and sensors to keep from smashing fingers if they got in the way of the auto-up function.

Great reminder that everything is relative. 😀. A good friend in high school and his dad restored classic MGAs, beautiful cars that lacked conventional glass windows.  Made me grateful that my Mustang had crank-up windows.  No auto up or down, but also hard to smash a finger — at least your own.  Somehow I managed through the indignity of the manual labor.

 

Seriously though having sensors to limit finger damage is a good idea, mostly to protect children, yet only finger damage I’ve actually witnessed myself were fingers caught in closing doors.  Another reminder that we have to be careful and personally responsible for lots of other things, and that automation for safety’s sake can get expensive and still not protect everything that can go wrong.

 

 

[akirby]

10 hours ago, Rick73 said:

 

 

Seriously though having sensors to limit finger damage is a good idea, mostly to protect children, yet only finger damage I’ve actually witnessed myself were fingers caught in closing doors.  Another reminder that we have to be careful and personally responsible for lots of other things, and that automation for safety’s sake can get expensive and still not protect everything that can go wrong.

 

 

The difference is if you’re in the vehicle and someone gets a hand or other part in the way you see it immediately and can reverse it.  With global close you may not even be able to see the vehicle so if someone got their head stuck you’d never know.  

[Rick73]

2 hours ago, akirby said:

The difference is if you’re in the vehicle and someone gets a hand or other part in the way you see it immediately and can reverse it.  With global close you may not even be able to see the vehicle so if someone got their head stuck you’d never know.  

I recall the following accident from a few years ago.

 

https://www.kold.com/2021/10/04/girl-dies-after-power-window-accident-inside-parked-car-phoenix/

 

From my perspective this tragic accident or others like them should never happen because children and pets should not be left unattended in vehicles.

 

For what it’s worth, these global open and close features have almost no value whatsoever to me personally because I rarely open and close windows.  Can’t remember last time I did.  Obviously auto manufacturers include these kinds of features for the segment of population that want them, so everyone else gets them whether they want or need them or not.  The question I ask myself is where should the line be drawn in the name of convenience and or safety?  Possibilities are endless and so is overall complexity and associated vehicle cost creep.  I suppose free markets will take care of it because a lot of these features are not required and if costs get too high then buyers will push back demanding more affordable vehicles.  Maybe we’re getting close to that now. 😀

[Sherminator98]

2 hours ago, Rick73 said:

From my perspective this tragic accident or others like them should never happen because children and pets should not be left unattended in vehicles.

 

But it happens anyways-locally we've had couple incidents with people leaving kids in cars and them dying because of that, and that is with reminders programmed into cars to check your backseat. 

 

Its really easy to say that, but more often then not human nature screws things up.