rmc523 Posted January 21 Share Posted January 21 4 minutes ago, akirby said: Other than EVs they haven't really developed anything new since Maverick. And it's not the same thing. This is an even more streamlined design process but it's also a cheaper simpler platform. That's the point..... Had they taken that approach and applied it to even existing products (like Escape, for instance), it may have helped those products. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted January 21 Share Posted January 21 10 minutes ago, rmc523 said: That's the point..... Had they taken that approach and applied it to even existing products (like Escape, for instance), it may have helped those products. But that's backwards. You don't build something just because you have a new process. You use the new process on whatever you decide to build. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted January 21 Share Posted January 21 16 minutes ago, akirby said: But that's backwards. You don't build something just because you have a new process. You use the new process on whatever you decide to build. Huh? I'm not understanding what you're getting at? The entire point is they didn't use the new process on anything but one product. It worked well on that product, why would you not build other products using that approach? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted January 21 Share Posted January 21 (edited) Maybe it’s more a case of “ we’re doing BS and Maverick now so Escape doesn’t matter” I would think it’s a great way to develop Escape and Edge replacements in one go using a new approach to make them more profitable again even if volume sellers. A lot of Ford’s product decisions are obviously driven by what it sees as mounting costs vs the projected returns, so change one side of the equation by lowering costs and maybe Ford’s views can change… Edited January 21 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sherminator98 Posted January 22 Author Share Posted January 22 2 hours ago, jpd80 said: Maybe it’s more a case of “ we’re doing BS and Maverick now so Escape doesn’t matter” I would think it’s a great way to develop Escape and Edge replacements in one go using a new approach to make them more profitable again even if volume sellers. The updated Escape was the first of the three of them to be launched. the 2020 was a major change from the 2019. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted January 22 Share Posted January 22 (edited) 24 minutes ago, Sherminator98 said: The updated Escape was the first of the three of them to be launched. the 2020 was a major change from the 2019. Not the same thing, it bombed with buyer because the major styling change was a problem The other major change was a weight reduction close to 200 lbs. What I’m talking about is getting away from a simple evolutionary model change to something that significantly lowers design and manufacturing costs which did not happen with the 2020 Escape. Edited January 22 by jpd80 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sherminator98 Posted January 22 Author Share Posted January 22 7 minutes ago, jpd80 said: Not the same thing, it bombed with buyer because the major styling change was a problem The other major change was a weight reduction close to 200 lbs. What I’m talking about is getting away from a simple evolutionary model change to something that significantly lowers design and manufacturing costs which did not happen with the 2020 Escape. But the 2020 Escape did fix the manufacturing costs-look at the reviews of how the interior changed and how reviewers thought it was "cheap" vs the previous gen, but yet it had same or better materials in it vs the Bronco Sport or Maverick. Yet again-personal experience-the 2020 Escape and 2025 Bronco Sport are almost identical to one another outside of some shape changes in the dash area and button/screen placement to make them look different, but stupid little details are in identical places like the little pockets on the inside of the front seats and other pockets on the lower console. The previous gen Escape was a complete fucking mess pricing wise-I've seen this personally-when a 4 year newer SE has more standard options in it vs a 2013 Titanium model and costs 5K less, you know you have issues on your hands. Then all the decontenting that happened at the end of that gen with cheaper tail lights and cutting back on fog lights, if I remember correctly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted January 22 Share Posted January 22 (edited) 10 minutes ago, Sherminator98 said: But the 2020 Escape did fix the manufacturing costs-look at the reviews of how the interior changed and how reviewers thought it was "cheap" vs the previous gen, but yet it had same or better materials in it vs the Bronco Sport or Maverick. Yet again-personal experience-the 2020 Escape and 2025 Bronco Sport are almost identical to one another outside of some shape changes in the dash area and button/screen placement to make them look different, but stupid little details are in identical places like the little pockets on the inside of the front seats and other pockets on the lower console. The previous gen Escape was a complete fucking mess pricing wise-I've seen this personally-when a 4 year newer SE has more standard options in it vs a 2013 Titanium model and costs 5K less, you know you have issues on your hands. Then all the decontenting that happened at the end of that gen with cheaper tail lights and cutting back on fog lights, if I remember correctly. I’m talking about the in-built costs with C1-C2 suppliers, not just cheapening down the price of parts - it’s all about the costs attached to outsourcing the various software controlled modules and how Ford is now prisoner to suppliers controlling software changes and costs of each subassembly. That is where a lot of money goes out the door and why commodity vehicles have become a dirty word for Ford but not necessarily so for other manufacturers. CE1 made huge changes in both software control and how the modules connect to a CPU that drives most functions. I’m hoping that Ford applies some or all of the changes made to reduce outgoings. Edited January 22 by jpd80 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted January 22 Share Posted January 22 6 hours ago, rmc523 said: Huh? I'm not understanding what you're getting at? The entire point is they didn't use the new process on anything but one product. It worked well on that product, why would you not build other products using that approach? They appear to be doing that with ce1 and presumably the new ICE truck and other new products. My point was they had no new products in the pipeline outside of the EVs that were cancelled. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sherminator98 Posted January 22 Author Share Posted January 22 10 hours ago, akirby said: They appear to be doing that with ce1 and presumably the new ICE truck and other new products. My point was they had no new products in the pipeline outside of the EVs that were cancelled. On the flip side no new ICE products where being developed either.... I'd hope that software defined controller software is coming to ICE products, just to hopefully cut down on the costs of needing so many bespoke control modules around the car, but also its going to lead to a bigger point of failure if it screws up. Given how much Sync IV can screw up on my Bronco, that kinda gives me some pause, but its normally cleared up with a quick reset of pushing two buttons for 5 seconds together. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted January 22 Share Posted January 22 16 hours ago, jpd80 said: Maybe it’s more a case of “ we’re doing BS and Maverick now so Escape doesn’t matter” I would think it’s a great way to develop Escape and Edge replacements in one go using a new approach to make them more profitable again even if volume sellers. A lot of Ford’s product decisions are obviously driven by what it sees as mounting costs vs the projected returns, so change one side of the equation by lowering costs and maybe Ford’s views can change… Agree - I'm hopeful that they'll figure it out this go around and reintroduce some canceled products. 11 hours ago, akirby said: They appear to be doing that with ce1 and presumably the new ICE truck and other new products. My point was they had no new products in the pipeline outside of the EVs that were cancelled. Right, that was the problem. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted January 22 Share Posted January 22 3 minutes ago, rmc523 said: Right, that was the problem. If you're saying they should have used it to do a redesigned escape then I agree but I thought we were talking about all new models. I think the problem was they had already decided to repurpose Oakville and Louisville for EVs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted January 22 Share Posted January 22 33 minutes ago, akirby said: If you're saying they should have used it to do a redesigned escape then I agree but I thought we were talking about all new models. I think the problem was they had already decided to repurpose Oakville and Louisville for EVs. Uhhhh.........lol I do also think it could've helped with other new models, but obviously that's with some hindsight viewing of EV product plans not working out as intended. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted January 22 Share Posted January 22 45 minutes ago, rmc523 said: Uhhhh.........lol I do also think it could've helped with other new models, but obviously that's with some hindsight viewing of EV product plans not working out as intended. I guess I stopped reading at that's the point 😎 The real issue is that they decided to divert so many ICE resources to EV development that yielded absolutely nothing and killed Edge in the process. I wish they kept Oakville and gave it a c2 Edge and Nautilus. Redesigned Escape and Corsair in Louisville and put ce1 in BOC. But that ship has sailed. I still think it's possible they move Maverick/replace it with something new in TTP, import Bronco Sport and give Hermosillo a new Escape and/or Edge/Nautilus. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted January 22 Share Posted January 22 1 hour ago, akirby said: I guess I stopped reading at that's the point 😎 The real issue is that they decided to divert so many ICE resources to EV development that yielded absolutely nothing and killed Edge in the process. I wish they kept Oakville and gave it a c2 Edge and Nautilus. Redesigned Escape and Corsair in Louisville and put ce1 in BOC. But that ship has sailed. I still think it's possible they move Maverick/replace it with something new in TTP, import Bronco Sport and give Hermosillo a new Escape and/or Edge/Nautilus. Yup, this was my idea too, but I guess they decided to scrap T3 too late in the game to shift CE1 there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted January 22 Share Posted January 22 1 hour ago, rmc523 said: Yup, this was my idea too, but I guess they decided to scrap T3 too late in the game to shift CE1 there. Maybe they were already planning to move/replace Escape Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted January 22 Share Posted January 22 (edited) I think we’re all correct is in some respects but the big takeaway for me is that you can see how Ford’s plans keep changing either by setbacks in one area offset by advances or opportunities in others. Amazing the evolution of plans over the past two or even four years, current plans seem more rooted in what is doable in the now and give electrification more time to mature. A chastened Ford is now focused on reaching more buyers but with the twist of those new learnings. Edited January 22 by jpd80 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted January 25 Share Posted January 25 (edited) The only new T6 I see is the Ranger Super Duty but I never really thought about it for the US market. What if Ford stuck a Bronco body on it, could they sell it at a premium price and really stick it to other manufacturers? Yeah, I know that doesn’t fit with the affordable statement…… Edited January 25 by jpd80 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bzcat Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 (edited) I just think there are a lot of untapped potential for more T6 derivatives and I would like to see Ford really lean into it. So far, Ford has produced Ranger, Ranger HD, Dadao, Everest, and Bronco, and we are not exactly sure if Bronco EV is T6 or not. What's missing... a cheaper truck and more expensive (Lincoln perhpas?) SUV. Production extension on both ends. On the lower end, Ford has a pickup trucks covering the entry level price but only in China... I'm sure Farley has looked at how that could be incorporated into the next gen T6 product plan outside China. From cheapest to most expensive: JMC Baodian JMC Yuhu JMC Dadao (basically VW Amarok but with JMC grille) Ford Ranger Ford Ranger HD Baodian and Yuhu are the same truck but Yuhu has less safety feature and stripped down to the basics. Dadao and Ranger are the same truck but just different badge. There is probably an opportunity to converge next gen Baodian/Yuhu on T6 and roll that truck out other markets. On the higher end, Ranger HD is a solid development of T6 but too early to tell whether it will be successful. It is narrowly tailored to Australia of course but some of that hardware could easily be adopted for Everest or Lincoln SUV if Ford wants to push in that direction. The off-road capable lux SUV is one of the fastest growing segment right now and everyone from Audi to Genesis are working on their version of it to challenge Mercedes, Lexus, and Land Rover. Edited January 26 by bzcat 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted January 27 Share Posted January 27 (edited) …without being nit picky you forgot VW Amorok that is built in South Africa alongside of the Ranger. Ranger Supr Duty is intended as a Landcruiser pickup competitor, a very lucrative if small market in Australia That and plenty of mining companies here paying mechanics to install GVM upgrade kits, Ford saw this and thought huh, that’s probably worth money to larger fleet buyers… Edited January 27 by jpd80 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted January 27 Share Posted January 27 16 hours ago, bzcat said: I just think there are a lot of untapped potential for more T6 derivatives and I would like to see Ford really lean into it. So far, Ford has produced Ranger, Ranger HD, Dadao, Everest, and Bronco, and we are not exactly sure if Bronco EV is T6 or not. What's missing... a cheaper truck and more expensive (Lincoln perhpas?) SUV. Production extension on both ends. On the lower end, Ford has a pickup trucks covering the entry level price but only in China... I'm sure Farley has looked at how that could be incorporated into the next gen T6 product plan outside China. From cheapest to most expensive: JMC Baodian JMC Yuhu JMC Dadao (basically VW Amarok but with JMC grille) Ford Ranger Ford Ranger HD Baodian and Yuhu are the same truck but Yuhu has less safety feature and stripped down to the basics. Dadao and Ranger are the same truck but just different badge. There is probably an opportunity to converge next gen Baodian/Yuhu on T6 and roll that truck out other markets. On the higher end, Ranger HD is a solid development of T6 but too early to tell whether it will be successful. It is narrowly tailored to Australia of course but some of that hardware could easily be adopted for Everest or Lincoln SUV if Ford wants to push in that direction. The off-road capable lux SUV is one of the fastest growing segment right now and everyone from Audi to Genesis are working on their version of it to challenge Mercedes, Lexus, and Land Rover. Why do we need a cheaper T6 truck when we have Maverick? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ausrutherford Posted January 27 Share Posted January 27 15 hours ago, jpd80 said: …without being nit picky you forgot VW Amorok that is built in South Africa alongside of the Ranger. Ranger Supr Duty is intended as a Landcruiser pickup competitor, a very lucrative if small market in Australia That and plenty of mining companies here paying mechanics to install GVM upgrade kits, Ford saw this and thought huh, that’s probably worth money to larger fleet buyers… I would note the LC70 is a great seller in the Middle East and Africa as well serving the same roles in Australia...and maybe a few many terrorists. Hopefully Ford can move into the LC70's market without the latter use issue. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted January 27 Share Posted January 27 24 minutes ago, ausrutherford said: I would note the LC70 is a great seller in the Middle East and Africa as well serving the same roles in Australia...and maybe a few many terrorists. Hopefully Ford can move into the LC70's market without the latter use issue. There is a strong business case for RSD outside of North America, I was simply wondering if a Bronco bodied RSD would add different spice to the US market A pickup that could command F Series price without directly competing with it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ausrutherford Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 3 hours ago, jpd80 said: There is a strong business case for RSD outside of North America, I was simply wondering if a Bronco bodied RSD would add different spice to the US market A pickup that could command F Series price without directly competing with it. I think a full-size Bronco would work well. It would be a much better option than a Sequoia TRD Pro. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 16 hours ago, jpd80 said: There is a strong business case for RSD outside of North America, I was simply wondering if a Bronco bodied RSD would add different spice to the US market A pickup that could command F Series price without directly competing with it. Why not offer a Expedition Raptor instead? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.