Ford CEO Outlines How Many EVs Company Will Sell With New Platform

[morgan20]

14 hours ago, Zestyg said:

if you could consistently get the Maverick for cheaper with competitive features why would anybody except Tesla conquests buy the skunk truck?

 

Since the Ford big shots describe the skunkworks as an internal Apollo style mission, the expectation is that the skunk truck (love that phrase!) will be a generation maybe even two generations ahead of Maverick (or any other small or midsized truck) in terms of features, capability, design, and performance.

 

So even if you could consistently get the Maverick for cheaper, the skunk truck would still be appealing to a large base of prospective customers. 

[DeluxeStang]

18 hours ago, Zestyg said:

You could be right, although the wiggle room in affordable + I can’t predict trim mix is why I went to ATP.

 

What they have inched around on for price makes me think MSRP of base trim will be like $32,500. I don’t see it being higher than $35,000 (the EV Equinox is already like $34,950 or something before incentives). I do think the MSRP of the Maverick probably limits how high they could put the skunk truck; if you could consistently get the Maverick for cheaper with competitive features why would anybody except Tesla conquests buy the skunk truck?

I was watching an interview with the head engineer on it, and he basically brought up how the goal with the skunk truck wasn't just to do something that was like a maverick, but happened to be electric. But to create something that was better than a maverick, so that people didn't even care about it being an EV, they just cared that it was a better product. 

 

We know the cost of ownership will be lower, and it'll have more interior space, and be more refined with better interior tech than a maverick. We also know it'll have a pass through, and it'll be a lot faster and funner to drive. He also said the truck was designed to have what he called instant aesthetic appeal, how that was one of their most important goals. I don't know what that'll look like, he just said they "turned the knobs" on the form factor and design to make it fun and different. 

 

So it's not just an electric maverick. It's an electric truck that's more reliable, faster, advanced, and better looking. So it has a lot of benefits and compelling selling points over a maverick. 

[twintornados]

1 hour ago, DeluxeStang said:

So it's not just an electric maverick. It's an electric truck that's more reliable, faster, advanced, and better looking. So it has a lot of benefits and compelling selling points over a maverick. 

 

Here's to hoping so....I really like my Maverick, so it will be interesting to see how this new truck stacks up...I am almost ready to join the EV crowd. 

[Zestyg]

2 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

I was watching an interview with the head engineer on it, and he basically brought up how the goal with the skunk truck wasn't just to do something that was like a maverick, but happened to be electric. But to create something that was better than a maverick, so that people didn't even care about it being an EV, they just cared that it was a better product. 

 

We know the cost of ownership will be lower, and it'll have more interior space, and be more refined with better interior tech than a maverick. We also know it'll have a pass through, and it'll be a lot faster and funner to drive. He also said the truck was designed to have what he called instant aesthetic appeal, how that was one of their most important goals. I don't know what that'll look like, he just said they "turned the knobs" on the form factor and design to make it fun and different. 

 

So it's not just an electric maverick. It's an electric truck that's more reliable, faster, advanced, and better looking. So it has a lot of benefits and compelling selling points over a maverick. 

I want to believe this and it makes sense, but without knowing the details of the truck, it’s hard to suspend my disbelief. The Maverick  is a really fucking good  product that I fear is difficult to internally compete against. Hell I drive an Escape and am looking forward to the EV sedan, but if I had to get a new car now it would probably be a Maverick.
 

Then again this is Ford so if there’s anything they would be able to do what you’re talking about with it would be a truck. There is nobody better than them at these, perhaps aside from Ram doing the luxury-ish truck better as I’ve heard.

Edited April 11 by Zestyg

[jpd80]

So, imagine an enlarged version of the Maverick still on C2 but say, 76” wide.

With the growing interest in hybrids and electric range, I could imagine that

type of vehicle replacing a lot more mid sized buyers…..

Edited April 11 by jpd80

[DeluxeStang]

22 minutes ago, jpd80 said:

So, imagine an enlarged version of the Maverick still on C2 but say, 76” wide.

With the growing interest in hybrids and electric range, I could imagine that

type of vehicle replacing a lot more mid sized buyers…..

Which is nice, more interior space, and having more width could help sell a sportier, more muscular look if they indeed end up calling it Ranchero and want to make it like a sporty muscle truck. Like a maverick but wider and maybe with some sporty cues that kinda throw back to the mustang or something. That would be really neat. 

[DeluxeStang]

54 minutes ago, Zestyg said:

I want to believe this and it makes sense, but without knowing the details of the truck, it’s hard to suspend my disbelief. The Maverick  is a really fucking good  product that I fear is difficult to internally compete against. Hell I drive an Escape and am looking forward to the EV sedan, but if I had to get a new car now it would probably be a Maverick.
 

Then again this is Ford so if there’s anything they would be able to do what you’re talking about with it would be a truck. There is nobody better than them at these, perhaps aside from Ram doing the luxury-ish truck better as I’ve heard.

I love my maverick hybrid, but there are definitely some things that could be improved on it, like interior, performance, and design. It's a really good, affordable, reliable and efficient truck. But the interior is pretty basic, the styling is kinda mid tier and uninspired, and the performance is lacking. 

 

So something that was affordable, practical, reliable, but also tech savvy, fun to drive, and cool looking would be a really compelling package. 

[Trader 10]

4 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

I was watching an interview with the head engineer on it, and he basically brought up how the goal with the skunk truck wasn't just to do something that was like a maverick, but happened to be electric. But to create something that was better than a maverick, so that people didn't even care about it being an EV, they just cared that it was a better product. 

 

We know the cost of ownership will be lower, and it'll have more interior space, and be more refined with better interior tech than a maverick. We also know it'll have a pass through, and it'll be a lot faster and funner to drive. He also said the truck was designed to have what he called instant aesthetic appeal, how that was one of their most important goals. I don't know what that'll look like, he just said they "turned the knobs" on the form factor and design to make it fun and different. 

 

So it's not just an electric maverick. It's an electric truck that's more reliable, faster, advanced, and better looking. So it has a lot of benefits and compelling selling points over a maverick. 

Unfortunately it will have two huge disadvantages. Limited range and slow charging. 

[akirby]

1 hour ago, Trader 10 said:

Unfortunately it will have two huge disadvantages. Limited range and slow charging. 

Says who?

[Zestyg]

1 hour ago, akirby said:

Says who?

I dunno why they’re saying limited range when the while thing is designed otherwise, but the charging is probably because 400V architecture 

[jpd80]

3 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

Which is nice, more interior space, and having more width could help sell a sportier, more muscular look if they indeed end up calling it Ranchero and want to make it like a sporty muscle truck. Like a maverick but wider and maybe with some sporty cues that kinda throw back to the mustang or something. That would be really neat. 

The biggest contribution to an easy sell is extra internal space, be that added canopy area or extra width or both.

I like Maverick but in another universe, could such a pickup have been built on two widths for a wider audience.

 

3 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

I love my maverick hybrid, but there are definitely some things that could be improved on it, like interior, performance, and design. It's a really good, affordable, reliable and efficient truck. But the interior is pretty basic, the styling is kinda mid tier and uninspired, and the performance is lacking. 

 

So something that was affordable, practical, reliable, but also tech savvy, fun to drive, and cool looking would be a really compelling package. 

I’m often reminded of the difference between the current T6 Ranger high series versus

the added luxury interiors on the older Explorer Sport Trac - there’s a lesson to be learned.

And I think that sort of High series /luxury pack would work well in Maverick with Escape going away

[DeluxeStang]

3 hours ago, Trader 10 said:

Unfortunately it will have two huge disadvantages. Limited range and slow charging. 

To be fair, I think it's time to rethink priorities and requirements as we try to get back to affordable vehicles. Range is one of those areas. I feel like everyone wants cheap vehicles but doesn't want to accept cheap vehicle compromises like a smaller battery with less range. 

 

It depends on how bad the range is. If this thing comes out and it has like 150 miles of range, it'll be DOA. But if it has 250-300, maybe even more, then I don't see an issue. The head engineer during the bounties video kinda implied a 300 mile range, or close to it. 

 

The main concerns I have are range and styling, but it's starting to seem like it's a pretty compelling product on both of those fronts. I believe we were learning that test clinics were responding a lot better to the styling than they did with the three row for instance. 

[jpd80]

It’s important to understand Farley’s position at the moment, there is no choice for Ford

but to be up beat and positive about the coming mid sized BEV pickup. To do otherwise

would simply undo and traction that’s being made with credibility.

 

The flip side to all of that is to understand that ever since Mark Fields was fired in 2017,

Ford CEOs have been directed by Bill Ford to advance plans for BEVs and bring them 

to market as soon as possible. For the most part both Jim Hackett and Jim Farley have

played the cards before them with mixed success and a ton of “experience”…….

 

In a nut shell, Farley is asking people to believe that this time, Ford’s BEV plans will be

successful…….the very same spiel the company has been saying for the past five years.

 

It’s time for Ford to put up or shut up and start showing us more about this amazing vehicle

or it risks potential buyers going off the boil with interest….

[DeluxeStang]

56 minutes ago, jpd80 said:

It’s important to understand Farley’s position at the moment, there is no choice for Ford

but to be up beat and positive about the coming mid sized BEV pickup. To do otherwise

would simply undo and traction that’s being made with credibility.

 

The flip side to all of that is to understand that ever since Mark Fields was fired in 2017,

Ford CEOs have been directed by Bill Ford to advance plans for BEVs and bring them 

to market as soon as possible. For the most part both Jim Hackett and Jim Farley have

played the cards before them with mixed success and a ton of “experience”…….

 

In a nut shell, Farley is asking people to believe that this time, Ford’s BEV plans will be

successful…….the very same spiel the company has been saying for the past five years.

 

It’s time for Ford to put up or shut up and start showing us more about this amazing vehicle

or it risks potential buyers going off the boil with interest….

We're almost there, I believe Farley said it would be revealed later this year, so it won't be long until we see it. Giving Ford credit where it's due, it has been a rough road to get here, but I believe they're finally on the right path with EVs. 

 

Earlier moves with large, expensive EVs, we can kinda see the reasoning behind it. They were Ford's most popular, profitable, successful models. So we can kinda see why Ford may have thought offering electric versions of said models made a lot of sense.

 

The issue is we now know no-one wants large, heavy, expensive EVs. Maybe that'll change decades down the road, but for now, they're selling very poorly. Partially because EV tech as it currently stands isn't well suited to the use case of a heavy duty truck, or large SUV. It's much better for a commuter style vehicle. 

 

Additionally, the people who tend to be able to afford more expensive vehicles are often on the older side. Not all, but a sizable portion of older individuals are very anti tech. They don't want to have to relearn the car ownership process, how to charge at home, differences in driving styles, and so on. They also tend to be skeptical of newer tech. Again, that's not everyone, I know people like Akirby are examples of matured individuals who embrace new kinds of technology and consumer experiences, I'm just saying it's not as common with older generations as a whole even if there are exceptions. 

 

Whereas these new EVs are affordable vehicles, making them obtainable to younger buyers who have been proven to be more accepting of EVs and willing to buy them if the opportunity presents itself. I also believe people are far more willing to take a chance on a new kind of product if the financial risks are minimal. Buying an 80k EV is a huge risk because if you buy it, hate it, and want to sell it, you're gonna lose tens of thousands in depreciation most likely. 

 

Whereas with these 25-40 grand EVs, realistically you could buy one, try it for a year, and not lose a ton of money due to depreciation. That's gonna encourage more consumers to try EVs who've never owned one before. 

[Zestyg]

12 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

To be fair, I think it's time to rethink priorities and requirements as we try to get back to affordable vehicles. Range is one of those areas. I feel like everyone wants cheap vehicles but doesn't want to accept cheap vehicle compromises like a smaller battery with less range. 

 

It depends on how bad the range is. If this thing comes out and it has like 150 miles of range, it'll be DOA. But if it has 250-300, maybe even more, then I don't see an issue. The head engineer during the bounties video kinda implied a 300 mile range, or close to it. 

 

The main concerns I have are range and styling, but it's starting to seem like it's a pretty compelling product on both of those fronts. I believe we were learning that test clinics were responding a lot better to the styling than they did with the three row for instance. 

I would be very surprised if it doesn’t have 300 miles of range, since it seems that a lot of the design of this thing is an optimization problem of “how little LFP can we use to get 300?”. It just wouldn’t make sense for it to have less than that.

[akirby]

1 hour ago, Zestyg said:

I would be very surprised if it doesn’t have 300 miles of range, since it seems that a lot of the design of this thing is an optimization problem of “how little LFP can we use to get 300?”. It just wouldn’t make sense for it to have less than that.

I can't find it but I think Ford recently said it would be 300 or close to it.  I'm sure that whatever the base range is there will be longer range options.

[Zestyg]

12 minutes ago, akirby said:

I can't find it but I think Ford recently said it would be 300 or close to it.  I'm sure that whatever the base range is there will be longer range options.

The presentation they had earlier this year about the technology of the platform I don’t recall quoting a specific range number but they did say that they chose LFP as the base in part because it would make longer range options on any other chemistry easy to implement. Basically it should offer ~300 on base LFP and a lot more on NMC or sodium or whatever.

Edited April 12 by Zestyg

[Trader 10]

32 minutes ago, akirby said:

I can't find it but I think Ford recently said it would be 300 or close to it.  I'm sure that whatever the base range is there will be longer range options.

300 miles isn’t very good when buyers coming from ICE vehicles can typically run 400 to 500 miles between fill ups. Manufacturers say that running batteries below 20% will shorten battery life. 80% of 300 is 240. Subtract what, another 20% when temperatures are below freezing? 

[DeluxeStang]

1 hour ago, akirby said:

I can't find it but I think Ford recently said it would be 300 or close to it.  I'm sure that whatever the base range is there will be longer range options.

If I'm remembering correctly, Alan Clark said that the team knew 300 miles of range was about the minimum that consumers would accept. Which is a very weird comment to make if their truck didn't have 300 miles of range or close to it. 

[DeluxeStang]

57 minutes ago, Trader 10 said:

300 miles isn’t very good when buyers coming from ICE vehicles can typically run 400 to 500 miles between fill ups. Manufacturers say that running batteries below 20% will shorten battery life. 80% of 300 is 240. Subtract what, another 20% when temperatures are below freezing? 

LFP batteries are different than lithium in that you can run them down to close to 0 and charge to 100% with virtually no longevity penalty. Ford has said they'll encourage buyers to do so because the batteries can handle it. 

 

My explorer can go about 380 miles on a tank, so a range of 300 miles really isn't bad. I have a hard time believing your average gas vehicle can go 500 miles on a tank considering that's pretty close to what my maverick will do, and it's insanely fuel efficient. I'd say most gas vehicles are in the 200 to 400 range give or take unless you have a vehicle that has like a monster 40 gallon tank. 

[DeluxeStang]

1 hour ago, Trader 10 said:

300 miles isn’t very good when buyers coming from ICE vehicles can typically run 400 to 500 miles between fill ups. Manufacturers say that running batteries below 20% will shorten battery life. 80% of 300 is 240. Subtract what, another 20% when temperatures are below freezing? 

As for weather, my brother borrowed the maverick often for work, his drives are only about 2 miles, so the engine doesn't have much time to warm up. It almost never does. Hopefully that doesn't cause issues long term. 

 

But as a result, in the winter, my maverick hybrid is doing like 18 mpg on some drives lol. Cold weather inefficiency isn't exclusive to EVs. 

[Zestyg]

14 minutes ago, DeluxeStang said:

LFP batteries are different than lithium in that you can run them down to close to 0 and charge to 100% with virtually no longevity penalty. Ford has said they'll encourage buyers to do so because the batteries can handle it. 

 

My explorer can go about 380 miles on a tank, so a range of 300 miles really isn't bad. I have a hard time believing your average gas vehicle can go 500 miles on a tank considering that's pretty close to what my maverick will do, and it's insanely fuel efficient. I'd say most gas vehicles are in the 200 to 400 range give or take unless you have a vehicle that has like a monster 40 gallon tank. 

A lot of the most popular SUVs (the Big 3’s full sized SUVs, Rav4, etc) can get 400+ miles on paper. I full expect this doesn’t happen in reality because most people don’t drive in a fuel efficient manner, but its definitely possible. I have no clue if this is something people actually think about or if its just something that they notice when range gets too low (i.e. below 300)

 

edit: I really want to echo the fact that cold weather also affects ICE

Edited April 12 by Zestyg

[Texasota]

14 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

Again, that's not everyone, I know people like Akirby are examples of matured individuals who embrace new kinds of technology and consumer experiences, I'm just saying it's not as common with older generations as a whole even if there are exceptions. 

@akirby, @DeluxeStang just called you old. Should he be banned?

[DeluxeStang]

15 minutes ago, Texasota said:

@akirby, @DeluxeStang just called you old. Should he be banned?

Look at this absolute Brutus over here 🤣. I was nice about it lol. 

[Zestyg]

17 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

The main concerns I have are range and styling, but it's starting to seem like it's a pretty compelling product on both of those fronts. 

 

On styling, one thing I had noticed a month or so ago was that one of the sketches for the skunk truck looked really similar to the Lightning Supertruck.