Ford to launch 5 new sub 40k affordable models by 2030.

[akirby]

1 hour ago, sullynd said:

We shall see. The battery cannot be that much smaller or it will be using the engine a lot. If it uses the engine a lot it will need to be a larger engine. If it is a larger engine it will be both expensive and inefficient. 

Rumor is it's half the size.  If you charge at home it's probably fine and for longer trips you use the engine. 
 

But I also wonder if this is a solution nobody is asking for.

[Andrew L]

19 hours ago, rmc523 said:

 

Well, we've heard for so long that Mustang's platform couldn't handle a sedan, etc. etc.....so if that's true...

 

I just dont believe that it "cant handle" a sedan. Ford has some good engineers I'm sure there are even some southern bumpkins in a barn who can stretch a Mustang and add 2 rear doors lol. Joking of course but I just don't buy into "cant handle it" narrative.

 

I remember back in the day a bunch of Ford "insiders" kept saying the Lincoln LS failed cause it was RWD only and that DEW98 couldn't handle AWD and wasn't designed for it. Yet when Ford sold Jaguar, they had no issues adding AWD to the XF which was using DEW98.

Edited February 7 by Andrew L

[Sherminator98]

18 minutes ago, morgan20 said:

 

Yea, and what the market has said is that affordability is an issue with the full size BEV pickups being offered currently. When I got my F-150 Lightning PRO in 2022, it was priced just above $42k. Last time I checked, a similar 2025 F-150 Lightning PRO had an MSRP of $57k

 

Everything has gone up since then, my Bronco Big Bend costs more and has less options in it 4 years after the fact.

 

[akirby]

37 minutes ago, Andrew L said:

 

I just dont believe that it "cant handle" a sedan. Ford has some good engineers I'm sure there are even some southern bumpkins in a barn who can stretch a Mustang and add 2 rear doors lol. Joking of course but I just don't buy into "cant handle it" narrative.

 

I remember back in the day a bunch of Ford "insiders" kept saying the Lincoln LS failed cause it was RWD only and that DEW98 couldn't handle AWD and wasn't designed for it. Yet when Ford sold Jaguar, they had no issues adding AWD to the XF which was using DEW98.

I think the problem with the Lincoln LS was Jaguar wanting exclusivity.  They forced Lincoln to drop the v8 stroke by a mm making it a 3.9L instead of 4.0L and would not allow a supercharger.   I loved everything about my 2000 LS v8 sport except the cheap dash.

 

I think the issue with making a 4 door S650 is too much extra weight because it was designed to be a 2 door ragtop with a lot of reinforcement.  Not that itcouldn't be done.

 

I think cd6 would be a much better starting point.

Edited February 7 by akirby

[DeluxeStang]

5 minutes ago, akirby said:

I think the issue with making a 4 door S650 is too much extra weight because it was designed to be a 2 door ragtop with a lot of reinforcement.  Not that itcouldn't be done.

 

I think cd6 would be a much better starting point.

If they can get the weight, size, and cost down, I believe Ford should just move the next gen couple and sedan over to cd6. It's obvious a lot more modern of a platform, it's more flexible, it can accommodate hybrid and AWD tech, and so on. 

[jpd80]

6 hours ago, sullynd said:

The thing is the EREV is a BEV with a gas engine added. It makes no sense to offer only the EREV when the BEV is essentially the same truck, less an engine, and probably a nominally larger battery.
 

I have no idea how Ford can add an engine to the Lightning without either increasing the price, making it even less profitable, or both. 

The thing about these plans is that to Ford, it’s seems like a logical step

considering all the other F150 manufacturing that’s continuing at the plant.

 

The question is , do they add an ICE to Lightning or do the easy way out 

by adding a bigger battery to the Powerboost hybrid and call that job done?

 

Or is it something in between that uses the Lightning’s electric motors and drives, a smallish battery and an ICE Gen set?

 

[jpd80]

4 hours ago, akirby said:

I think the problem with the Lincoln LS was Jaguar wanting exclusivity.  They forced Lincoln to drop the v8 stroke by a mm making it a 3.9L instead of 4.0L and would not allow a supercharger.   I loved everything about my 2000 LS v8 sport except the cheap dash.

 

I think the issue with making a 4 door S650 is too much extra weight because it was designed to be a 2 door ragtop with a lot of reinforcement.  Not that itcouldn't be done.

 

I think cd6 would be a much better starting point.

CD6 is too expensive that’s why CD6 projects for Mustang and the four door sedan were scrapped.

 

If the business plan didn’t work then, it certainly won’t work today.

Edited February 7 by jpd80

[akirby]

15 minutes ago, jpd80 said:

CD6 is too expensive that’s why CD6 projects for Mustang and the four door sedan were scrapped.

 

If the business plan didn’t work then, it certainly won’t work today.

One would assume they've figured out how to lower costs since then plus there is the rumored midsized rwd SUV that would also share the platform and add a lot more volume than just the cars.  It's just a different environment now.  

[DeluxeStang]

12 minutes ago, jpd80 said:

CD6 is too expensive that’s why CD6 projects for Mustang and the four door sedan were scrapped.

 

If the business plan didn’t work then, it certainly won’t work today.

Would they be able to apply the cost learnings from CE1 to CD6 to make it more cost efficient? It just feels logical to move every unibody rwd vehicle to one platform within reason. I believe the biggest issue with the CD6 mustang was the size, and the weight. If they can make considerable improvements there, it would suit mustang well. 

 

It just feels like we can't go on like this. The s650's classis in certain forms dates all the way back to 2004. We need a modern, more dynamic and flexible platform that can handle things like hybrid and EV tech without being horribly compromised, or can accommodate a sedan. 

 

Idk if it'll take the form of CD6 or something else entirely, but a future RWD platform that underpinned the explorer, a gas powered mustang SUV, a sedan, and a coupe could be the key to giving the mustang the fresh platform it deserves without making the price insane. In theory, having it share it's platform with several other high volume models would be more cost efficient by far than it riding on an orphan platform. 

[DeluxeStang]

19 minutes ago, jpd80 said:

CD6 is too expensive that’s why CD6 projects for Mustang and the four door sedan were scrapped.

 

If the business plan didn’t work then, it certainly won’t work today.

I definitely agree price is an important factor, especially with how much of a turn off it is with the s650. But I feel like there has to be a way where Ford could be smart about this. 

[Texasota]

21 minutes ago, jpd80 said:

or do the easy way out by adding a bigger battery to the Powerboost hybrid and call that job done?

I assume that bigger battery pack you are suggesting could be charged by plugging it in resulting in a drive train very similar to a Ranger PHEV?

 

That seems to be the direction Volvo is going. That is, a conventional PHEV but with a higher capacity battery pack to give it an electric range of ~100 miles. The advantage of this approach for the F-150 is you don't suffer a highway efficiency penalty and the long distance towing penalty that will be the Achilles heel of EREVs. Another advantage is that you don't compromise the 4x4 off road capability that the Shark 6 suffers from.

 

But, Ford keeps stating that the F-150 EREV will be a serial hybrid (wheels only driven by electric motors). 

[fordmantpw]

1 hour ago, jpd80 said:

The thing about these plans is that to Ford, it’s seems like a logical step

considering all the other F150 manufacturing that’s continuing at the plant.

 

The question is , do they add an ICE to Lightning or do the easy way out 

by adding a bigger battery to the Powerboost hybrid and call that job done?

 

Or is it something in between that uses the Lightning’s electric motors and drives, a smallish battery and an ICE Gen set?

 

 

Adding a bigger batter to the Powerboost hybrid is a PHEV.

 

Adding an ICE to the Lightning is an EREV.

 

Ford said the next Lightning will be EREV.

[jpd80]

1 hour ago, fordmantpw said:

 

Adding a bigger batter to the Powerboost hybrid is a PHEV.

 

Adding an ICE to the Lightning is an EREV.

 

Ford said the next Lightning will be EREV.

This is good and not really arguing with you on this point as you’ll read later

in this post but to Ford, A PHEV battery that’s between 25 and 80 Kw hr

makes the PHEV an EREV, well at least to Ford China but I digress…..

 

on the subject at hand,

I went back a page or so in this thread and found the confirmation

by Ford that Lightning EREV will keep its electric drive motors.

 

So that answers the question of battery size vs adding an ICE and generator

being lower cost (more profitable) to Ford than pure big battery BEV.

 

So now the question is what size ICE to add to the generator and how does it fit over around the front power axle?

Does Ford turn the engine/generator  transverse  and incorporate it into the front axle to achieve the direct link at or above 50 mph?

 

Thinking like a full sized Ford truck version of BYD Shark 6 but we’ll see….

 

Edited February 7 by jpd80

[jpd80]

2 hours ago, Texasota said:

I assume that bigger battery pack you are suggesting could be charged by plugging it in resulting in a drive train very similar to a Ranger PHEV?

 

That seems to be the direction Volvo is going. That is, a conventional PHEV but with a higher capacity battery pack to give it an electric range of ~100 miles. The advantage of this approach for the F-150 is you don't suffer a highway efficiency penalty and the long distance towing penalty that will be the Achilles heel of EREVs. Another advantage is that you don't compromise the 4x4 off road capability that the Shark 6 suffers from.

 

But, Ford keeps stating that the F-150 EREV will be a serial hybrid (wheels only driven by electric motors). 

Ford is definitely searching for the sweet spot with regards electrification

and enough ICE supplied power to avoid disappointing owners that want

to do occasional towing for more than say, 100 miles.

 

Exactly what Form that power train comes in is a real pickle for Ford and

getting the balance right may end up pleasing people in the Center but

ticking off the BEV purists by pulling back too much

[jpd80]

2 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

Would they be able to apply the cost learnings from CE1 to CD6 to make it more cost efficient? It just feels logical to move every unibody rwd vehicle to one platform within reason. I believe the biggest issue with the CD6 mustang was the size, and the weight. If they can make considerable improvements there, it would suit mustang well. 

 

It just feels like we can't go on like this. The s650's classis in certain forms dates all the way back to 2004. We need a modern, more dynamic and flexible platform that can handle things like hybrid and EV tech without being horribly compromised, or can accommodate a sedan. 

 

Idk if it'll take the form of CD6 or something else entirely, but a future RWD platform that underpinned the explorer, a gas powered mustang SUV, a sedan, and a coupe could be the key to giving the mustang the fresh platform it deserves without making the price insane. In theory, having it share it's platform with several other high volume models would be more cost efficient by far than it riding on an orphan platform. 

It just seems like all the money spent to make and sell the C2 Mondeo in China was to appease an ever diminishing audience. That same effort applied to a cost efficient blending of the CD4/CD6 to the Taurus  and Continental could have been so……..I have to stop myself…

[Andrew L]

9 hours ago, akirby said:

I think the problem with the Lincoln LS was Jaguar wanting exclusivity.  They forced Lincoln to drop the v8 stroke by a mm making it a 3.9L instead of 4.0L and would not allow a supercharger.   I loved everything about my 2000 LS v8 sport except the cheap dash.

 

I think the issue with making a 4 door S650 is too much extra weight because it was designed to be a 2 door ragtop with a lot of reinforcement.  Not that itcouldn't be done.

 

I think cd6 would be a much better starting point.

 

I am sure that's closer to the REAL reason why the LS failed, that and the cost of the platform and the other models planned for it getting scrapped which upped the costs.  I was more talking about the folks over at FIN and GMI who would beat their chest over and over again how DEW98 could not accommodate AWD and kept saying that's why that platform failed.  Then boom XF gets AWD which spit on that entire narrative lol 

[mackinaw]

11 minutes ago, Andrew L said:

I am sure that's closer to the REAL reason why the LS failed,.....

 

Who says the LS was a failure?  

[jpd80]

23 minutes ago, Andrew L said:

 

I am sure that's closer to the REAL reason why the LS failed, that and the cost of the platform and the other models planned for it getting scrapped which upped the costs.  I was more talking about the folks over at FIN and GMI who would beat their chest over and over again how DEW98 could not accommodate AWD and kept saying that's why that platform failed.  Then boom XF gets AWD which spit on that entire narrative lol 

It was none of that.

DEW was an expensive platform that wasn’t shared with the affordable large vehicles but the Thunderbird used it in 2002-2005.

 

Jaguar Land Rover actively lobbied about Ford using it and raising Lincoln to the level of a competitor 

so yeah, Lincoln LS was that good…..

Edited February 8 by jpd80

[DeluxeStang]

3 hours ago, jpd80 said:

It just seems like all the money spent to make and sell the C2 Mondeo in China was to appease an ever diminishing audience. That same effort applied to a cost efficient blending of the CD4/CD6 to the Taurus  and Continental could have been so……..I have to stop myself…

It really is a shame. The plans for cd6 seemed so promising, and nothing came of it. I'm hoping this will be a better late than never situation where Ford gets smarter at leveraging platforms like cd6. 

[Andrew L]

2 hours ago, jpd80 said:

It was none of that.

DEW was an expensive platform that wasn’t shared with the affordable large vehicles but the Thunderbird used it in 2002-2005.

 

Jaguar Land Rover actively lobbied about Ford using it and raising Lincoln to the level of a competitor 

so yeah, Lincoln LS was that good…..

 

Is that NOT what I said?  I mentioned it was an expensive platform and that other models were scrapped which kept it expensive and not being able to spread the costs among other models.  Thunderbird got a shorter version of DEW98 and Jaguar got the S-Type and later XF but those were the only 4 ever offered.  There was more planned for DEW98 but they never came.  I could be wrong but I am pretty sure they were looking at doing a Mark IX (MK9 and Mark X concepts) off of DEW98 and potentially a Lincoln crossover I think the Navicross concept was built on DEW98 as well as a new LS but all of that was scrapped.  JLR being upset about Lincoln having a piece of DEW98 killed a lot of the momentum Lincoln was getting back then.

 

  

2 hours ago, mackinaw said:

 

Who says the LS was a failure?  

 

It was supposed to turn the Lincoln brand around but only lasted 6 years.  It had one good year and sales dropped every year since introduction.  I had an LS I loved it to death I still love them when I see them on the road but the car was a failure otherwise it would still be around.  It needed a hotter version to compete with the CTS-V but we all know JLR would have never allowed it and it needed a more significant refresh in 2003.  The updates were nice but it needed better interior materials.  That silver plastic trim that Lincoln loved in the 2000s did not hold up well at all.

 

The other issue was the Zephyr which replaced it was like a step backwards in every way of what the LS was trying to do.  The only engine offered in the Zephyr was a 3.0 V6 which was the base engine for the LS and made less power 221 vs 232.  They fixed this in 2007 when it got the 3.5 but it still had less power than the LS V8.  Also the Zephyr and MKZ had a lot less features than the LS did in its refresh. 

 

No power tilt telescope wheel - LS had

No rear HVAC vents - LS had

No heated rear seats - LS optional

No rain sensing wipers - LS optional till 2004

No power adjustable pedals - LS had

 

MKZ didn't get some of those features till 2013 which is pretty crazy to think about.  The first gen Zephyr/MKZ was like a step backwards but you could argue the bean counters loved it, it shared a ton with the Fusion and Milan and thus was way more profitable than the LS.  But everything the LS tried to do image wise for Lincoln was undone with the Zephyr/MKZ.  Zephyr/MKZ was not sporty, had less features, was a lot closer to it's Ford/Mercury counterparts.  You could also make the argument too that it was far more reliable since the LS did have some quirkyness to them.  If the LS was a success those things wouldn't have gone away and Lincoln would have had a far more competitive mid size sedan in the luxury segment.

 

Again don't get me wrong I LOVED my LS I miss it a ton it was a great car.  I also love my current 2017 MKZ Black Label but it took a while for Lincoln to get it's mojo back and it caused them to revert to old habits after the LS was canceled.

 

Anyway my 2 cent rant.

Edited February 8 by Andrew L

[jpd80]

1 hour ago, Andrew L said:

 

Is that NOT what I said?  I mentioned it was an expensive platform and that other models were scrapped which kept it expensive and not being able to spread the costs among other models. 
 

You misunderstood me, my comments were aimed at you listening to wankers over on other sites. As a

n LS owner you know the truth, the vehicles weren’t failures and in fact such a threat to J/LR that they lobbied For to kill all those projects you mentioned.

I never understood Ford scrapping DEW for Lincoln s it was perfect for them and the T’Bird.

 

 

1 hour ago, Andrew L said:

 

Again don't get me wrong I LOVED my LS I miss it a ton it was a great car.  I also love my current 2017 MKZ Black Label but it took a while for Lincoln to get it's mojo back and it caused them to revert to old habits after the LS was canceled.

 

Anyway my 2 cent rant.

DEW was Ford harvesting a Jaguar developed platform for its own premium vehicles that Lincoln had the capacity to pay for where J/LR couldn’t which is why they (J/LR) needed to go as their product cycle renewal costs were more than the value of the brands, Tata agreeing to fund the $8 billion product cycle costs

 

By 2006, it was all getting too hard for Bill Ford and all he could see is money bleeding everywhere, pity some smart heads around him didn’t keep some of the gems like DEW to keep Lincoln going to a more upmarket level of vehicles.

Edited February 8 by jpd80

[rmc523]

17 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

It really is a shame. The plans for cd6 seemed so promising, and nothing came of it. I'm hoping this will be a better late than never situation where Ford gets smarter at leveraging platforms like cd6. 

well, I think Fields was the real champion for CD6, and IIRC, an Edge replacement (and presumably Nautilus), as well as a Ford/Lincoln sedan, and once he went, there went those plans.

[tbone]

On 2/6/2026 at 5:03 PM, Deanh said:

Yep, read 2wd less off road oriented and cheaper....

I’m convinced they are purposely kneecapping it.  There are lots of potential customers for cheaper options. 

[DeluxeStang]

4 hours ago, rmc523 said:

well, I think Fields was the real champion for CD6, and IIRC, an Edge replacement (and presumably Nautilus), as well as a Ford/Lincoln sedan, and once he went, there went those plans.

Agreed. It's a shame those plans went out the window, but of all the Ford plans, they seem like some of the most logical to dust off and try again. Cd6 seems like a really capable platform, heck, if it can make the explorer a solid performance car, I can only imagine how well an actual sedan or coupe on that platform would handle if just a bit of effort was put in. 

 

It's just sitting there begging to be optimized and improved. 

[DeluxeStang]

Borg is claiming the sub 40k car is the mustang sedan. So I wonder if the sedan is gonna be this affordable EV sedan after all, or if the mustang sedan will co-exist with another affordable EV rwd sedan that goes by a different name like escort, falcon, or Galaxie.