We might finally know what the cancelled Ford three row looked like

[DeluxeStang]

Using AI to generate these angles, but I bet this gets pretty close. Yeah I actually kinda like it from the side and rear in a futuristic, bold kinda way. But the front really lets it down, that headlight placement in particular. 

[rmc523]

This thing would've failed if it looked like that lol.  No wonder they canceled it.

[joseodiaga4]

25 minutes ago, rmc523 said:

This thing would've failed if it looked like that lol.  No wonder they canceled it.

What worries me is that they spent so much money, time, heck even spoke a lot to the media about it…….very difficult to understand

[rmc523]

2 minutes ago, joseodiaga4 said:

What worries me is that they spent so much money, time, heck even spoke a lot to the media about it…….very difficult to understand

 

I think what I also hate about it is that that product could be from anyone.   There's nothing "Ford" about it.

[ExplorerDude]

41 minutes ago, DeluxeStang said:

Using AI to generate these angles, but I bet this gets pretty close. Yeah I actually kinda like it from the side and rear in a futuristic, bold kinda way. But the front really lets it down, that headlight placement in particular. 

The real thing didn’t have a light bar that went across the front or across the back. There was also no “blue oval” it was just the Ford name in script. I think it lit up. It was very different and not Ford like.

Still sad to think the Edge was primarily dropped for this thing and it still never made it to the market. The “bullet train” was its nickname.

[twintornados]

15 minutes ago, ExplorerDude said:

..... The “bullet train” was its nickname.

 

Thankfully, it got the "bullet" instead. 

[DeluxeStang]

1 hour ago, ExplorerDude said:

The real thing didn’t have a light bar that went across the front or across the back. There was also no “blue oval” it was just the Ford name in script. I think it lit up. It was very different and not Ford like.

Still sad to think the Edge was primarily dropped for this thing and it still never made it to the market. The “bullet train” was its nickname.

Made some changes based on your feedback to the lights, added Ford script as well. I noticed it also looked like the entire rear bumper was black, so I changed that. Guessing this is pretty close. 

 

Edited April 16 by DeluxeStang

[mackinaw]

1 hour ago, rmc523 said:

I think what I also hate about it is that that product could be from anyone.   There's nothing "Ford" about it.

 

To me, that's a good thing.

[Sherminator98]

2 hours ago, rmc523 said:

 

I think what I also hate about it is that that product could be from anyone.   There's nothing "Ford" about it.

 

It looks like what would happen if Ford told their designers to make a copy of the Tesla X and S

[T-dubz]

3 hours ago, rmc523 said:

This thing would've failed if it looked like that lol.  No wonder they canceled it.

Makes me wonder how it got as far along as it did? They should reach out here and set up a section that lets us give our feedback to designs. Then they wouldn’t waste so much money on bad ideas 😆

[rmc523]

1 hour ago, mackinaw said:

 

To me, that's a good thing.

 

My point is it's anonymous.

[rmc523]

1 minute ago, T-dubz said:

Makes me wonder how it got as far along as it did? They should reach out here and set up a section that lets us give our feedback to designs. Then they wouldn’t waste so much money on bad ideas 😆

 

That'd be amazing.

[DeluxeStang]

1 hour ago, T-dubz said:

Makes me wonder how it got as far along as it did? They should reach out here and set up a section that lets us give our feedback to designs. Then they wouldn’t waste so much money on bad ideas 😆

Genuinely a good idea. I've said for some time these brands spend billions developing designs in secret only to reveal them when it's too late to change anything. I feel like more transparency with passionate members of the community wouldn't be the worst thing in the world. 

[DeluxeStang]

Its still not gonna be everyone's cup of tea, but with the lower, sloping hood, cab forward proportions, and coupe style roofline, I kinda wished they have pulled some styling inspiration from something like the gt. I feel like approach would have made the aero approach cooler, and more desirable. 

[jpd80]

1 hour ago, rmc523 said:

 

That'd be amazing.

A me too Tesla x copy.

Ford could literally design anything it wanted as a three row Utility and

it chose that because they couldn’t get the range number they wanted…

 

The problem still is battery density is still not high enough and no matter

what fiddling Ford does with aero, that doesn’t take affect until highway speed.

The issue here is that if anyone loads up that range immediately goes south but

unlike a gas vehicle, the charging stops become annoying…

 

The CE1 will probably sell “OK” but it seems that Ford is pulling back on hyping,

the last thing they need is the perception of disappointing potential buyers.

Edited April 16 by jpd80

[rmc523]

11 minutes ago, jpd80 said:

A me too Tesla x copy.

Ford could literally design anything it wanted as a three row Utility and

it chose that because they couldn’t get the range number they wanted…

 

The problem still is battery density is still not high enough and no matter

what fiddling Ford does with aero, that doesn’t take affect until highway speed.

The issue here is that if anyone loads up that range immediately goes south but

unlike a gas vehicle, the charging stops become annoying…

 

The CE1 will probably sell “OK” but it seems that Ford is pulling back on hyping,

the last thing they need is the perception of disappointing potential buyers.

 

That's my concern too - that the aero doesn't come into play until certain speeds, so hopefully CE1 ranges will be ok.

 

 

Yup, this thing is clearly an aero-first design (makes sense given the name).  Borg said he loved how it looked and would've bought one.........I feel like it's equivalent to Flex/MKT in that it may have had a group of loyal followers, but the general buying public would be turned off by it.

[Sherminator98]

8 minutes ago, rmc523 said:

Borg said he loved how it looked and would've bought one.....

 

That is a good sign that it would have sold like crap lol

 

[DeluxeStang]

Interesting tidbit from Borg, the skunktruck has a similar front end slope to this. Not super surprising, but I hope it looks more appealing on that. I've heard it looks pretty close to the electric small Toyota pickup concept that was called like the TPU. 

 

If it looked basically identical to that with a beefier looking front end, it would look pretty good imo. 

[T-dubz]

13 minutes ago, DeluxeStang said:

Interesting tidbit from Borg, the skunktruck has a similar front end slope to this. Not super surprising, but I hope it looks more appealing on that. I've heard it looks pretty close to the electric small Toyota pickup concept that was called like the TPU. 

 

If it looked basically identical to that with a beefier looking front end, it would look pretty good imo. 

I can’t imagine it being anywhere near as sloped as this and still look like a truck. I think he might be off on this one. Even from the pics we have seen, it was maybe sloped a bit more than usual but nothing close to this (at least that we could tell)

[Zestyg]

1 hour ago, Sherminator98 said:

 

That is a good sign that it would have sold like crap lol

 

the fact that he seems to like how the skunk truck looks concerns me

[Zestyg]

1 hour ago, DeluxeStang said:

Interesting tidbit from Borg, the skunktruck has a similar front end slope to this. Not super surprising, but I hope it looks more appealing on that. I've heard it looks pretty close to the electric small Toyota pickup concept that was called like the TPU. 

 

If it looked basically identical to that with a beefier looking front end, it would look pretty good imo. 

makes me think that the sketch they showed here was deliberate and not a red herring then. Doug Field design style?

Edited April 16 by Zestyg

[Trader 10]

2 hours ago, jpd80 said:

A me too Tesla x copy.

Ford could literally design anything it wanted as a three row Utility and

it chose that because they couldn’t get the range number they wanted…

 

The problem still is battery density is still not high enough and no matter

what fiddling Ford does with aero, that doesn’t take affect until highway speed.

The issue here is that if anyone loads up that range immediately goes south but

unlike a gas vehicle, the charging stops become annoying…

 

The CE1 will probably sell “OK” but it seems that Ford is pulling back on hyping,

the last thing they need is the perception of disappointing potential buyers.

Are EV range estimates determined by the automaker, or does the EPA determine the estimates? (Seems the EPA wouldn’t since there’s no tailpipe emissions). I wonder what the range difference is between highway and city driving. 

[Zestyg]

2 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

Interesting tidbit from Borg, the skunktruck has a similar front end slope to this. Not super surprising, but I hope it looks more appealing on that. I've heard it looks pretty close to the electric small Toyota pickup concept that was called like the TPU. 

 

If it looked basically identical to that with a beefier looking front end, it would look pretty good imo. 

not hard to see

 

edit: played with proportions more to make it look more like the airflow graphic they showed in that presentation.

Edited April 16 by Zestyg

[morgan20]

25 minutes ago, Trader 10 said:

Are EV range estimates determined by the automaker, or does the EPA determine the estimates?

 

Yea, by the automaker. Automakers follow the rules defined by the EPA in 40 CFR 600

 

For EV Range Testing:

1. A vehicle with a fully charged battery is driven continuously over the EPA city cycle until the battery is depleted and the vehicle can drive no further. The distance driven is recorded. This is repeated, again starting with a full charge, over the EPA highway cycle, again recording the distance driven when the battery is depleted. This “single cycle” test consists of multiple repeat drives of the city or highway cycle.
2. Automakers also have the option of doing a multi-cycle test, which consists of four city cycles, two highway cycles, and two constant speed cycles.*
3. All testing is done in a laboratory on a dynamometer.
4. The city and highway driving ranges determined from this testing are adjusted to account for real-world factors that are not represented on the laboratory test procedures. These factors include such things the impact of air conditioning, of cold temperatures, and of high speed and aggressive driving behavior. Although the regulations allow some optional approaches, the most common approach is to use a factor of 0.7 to adjust all the test parameters, including range. For example:
   • An EV achieves 200 miles on the highway laboratory test. Real-world highway driving range → 200 x 0.7 = 140 miles to account for aggressive driving and HVAC use.
5. The adjusted city and highway range values are weighted together by 55% and 45%, respectively, to determine the combined city and highway driving range that appears on the EPA fuel economy label. For example:
   • Assume an adjusted city range of 168 miles and an adjusted highway range of 140 (from example above). The official combined range value → (0.55 x 168) + (0.45 x 140) = 155 miles (values are rounded to the nearest whole number).

Edited April 16 by morgan20

[Oac98]

9 hours ago, Sherminator98 said:

 

Yep your correct

 

https://www.just-auto.com/features/future-ford-evs-whats-coming-when/

 

 

Upon further review I’m glad Ford cancelled this product. We at Oakville Assembly would’ve been in a bad predicament had they proceeded with the project. Super Duty overflow will generate more production I believe than that bland EV would’ve. In the short term forsure SD is better than that.