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

[jpd80]

14 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

Maybe multiple people are right on this? Maybe the overall truck shape doesn't resemble the sketches, but some of the finer details like the light design does?

The important part is the snub nose and whether it will be off putting to potential buyers,

Im willing to believe that people who truly want a nice mid sized BEV pickup will be

prepared to give it a go and experience the very good space efficiency….

[lincolnt6]

https://fordauthority.com/2026/04/three-row-ford-ev-heres-a-real-world-look-at-the-cancelled-bullet-train/
 

Edited April 25 by lincolnt6

[DeluxeStang]

The more I see of it, the more it becomes clear that this was a case of some cool individual ideas and design details that just didn't work together. Someone on here mentioned the DRLs looked a bit like a Ford GT headlight, and they really, really do. They look neat, but the fluid and curved nose just doesn't work with the tall Prius style roofline imo. 

 

Between that and the low, sloping nose, I feel like the ford GT was used as styling inspiration for this, which is an awesome idea,but the execution was lacking. Hopefully they revisit that idea in the future in a way that's more cool and sleek, and less dorky and clunky looking. 

[Sherminator98]

7 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

The more I see of it, the more it becomes clear that this was a case of some cool individual ideas and design details that just didn't work together. Someone on here mentioned the DRLs looked a bit like a Ford GT headlight, and they really, really do. They look neat, but the fluid and curved nose just doesn't work with the tall Prius style roofline imo. 

 

Between that and the low, sloping nose, I feel like the ford GT was used as styling inspiration for this, which is an awesome idea,but the execution was lacking. Hopefully they revisit that idea in the future in a way that's more cool and sleek, and less dorky and clunky looking. 

 

IMO the biggest problem with it is that it lacked any sort of style to it...its an amorphic blob 

[DeluxeStang]

29 minutes ago, Sherminator98 said:

 

IMO the biggest problem with it is that it lacked any sort of style to it...its an amorphic blob 

It just wasn't cohesive either. It's a super round front end with a squared off and sharp roof and rear end. It just doesn't work visually. 

[BenKohnen]

41 minutes ago, Sherminator98 said:

 

IMO the biggest problem with it is that it lacked any sort of style to it...its an amorphic blob 

It violates the "No Boring Products" edict. Problem is, because of aerodynamics needed for a proper EV, any proper EV is going to do the same. There's going to have to be a sacrifice made to have some excitement injected into these things.

[DeluxeStang]

1 hour ago, BenKohnen said:

It violates the "No Boring Products" edict. Problem is, because of aerodynamics needed for a proper EV, any proper EV is going to do the same. There's going to have to be a sacrifice made to have some excitement injected into these things.

It seems like when Farley talks about differentiating when he talks about no boring products. In that sense, with its aero radical shape, it's certainly different and not boring. That being said, I feel like this differentiated strategy is really smart, but I feel like Ford needs to understand better the difference between good and bad different. Just because something is different doesn't mean it's good. 

 

When it comes to different design, there's "That's awesome, I want one" and there's "What the hell is that abomination". Ford needs to put trusted talent in place where they're constantly doing the former, and avoiding the later. 

[fordmantpw]

I actually like the looks of the red one.  I wouldn't have bought one because I don't need a 7-seater.

 

It's really a shame it never made it to market after all that work.  Had to be very disappointing for the team involved to put all that effort into something that never was produced.

 

But, Ford will definitely make more money producing Super Duty trucks at OAC as opposed to this thing that would have likely sold in similar volumes to the Flex.

[Zestyg]

3 hours ago, Sherminator98 said:

 

IMO the biggest problem with it is that it lacked any sort of style to it...its an amorphic blob 

It would be a great look for a sedan. The GT DRLs would make sense. Could be like a Ford Xiaomi SU7.

 

Edit: a liftback would work too anc I get the feeling its going to be increasingly favored for aero and practicality. 

Edited April 25 by Zestyg

[DeluxeStang]

44 minutes ago, Zestyg said:

It would be a great look for a sedan. The GT DRLs would make sense. Could be like a Ford Xiaomi SU7.

 

Edit: a liftback would work too anc I get the feeling its going to be increasingly favored for aero and practicality. 

 

44 minutes ago, Zestyg said:

It would be a great look for a sedan. The GT DRLs would make sense. Could be like a Ford Xiaomi SU7.

 

Edit: a liftback would work too anc I get the feeling its going to be increasingly favored for aero and practicality. 

Something like this would be perfect for a CE1 sedan. Sedans are naturally pretty areo efficient, so hopefully we can just skip the odd areo look in favor of something more conventional. 

[rmc523]

11 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

The more I see of it, the more it becomes clear that this was a case of some cool individual ideas and design details that just didn't work together. Someone on here mentioned the DRLs looked a bit like a Ford GT headlight, and they really, really do. They look neat, but the fluid and curved nose just doesn't work with the tall Prius style roofline imo. 

 

Between that and the low, sloping nose, I feel like the ford GT was used as styling inspiration for this, which is an awesome idea,but the execution was lacking. Hopefully they revisit that idea in the future in a way that's more cool and sleek, and less dorky and clunky looking. 

i don’t like the look of the headlights at all.  They seem odd, and out of place.  Honestly, they remind me of those motor homes that use random lights from various production vehicles that are clearly out of place but just “work”.

 

 

its also funny that on the red one with that white line graphic on the rear most window, it almost makes it look like a truck with the red paint and with how the back end is cut off straight.

[T-dubz]

The worst part about this is that after all the talk of radical, aero, bullet train designs, this thing comes out looking like the most boring vehicle ever.

 

 

[rmc523]

41 minutes ago, T-dubz said:

The worst part about this is that after all the talk of radical, aero, bullet train designs, this thing comes out looking like the most boring vehicle ever.

 

 

yeah it’s very Tesla-esque

[Oac98]

On 4/15/2026 at 4:45 PM, DeluxeStang said:

Dang, looks like we have the same source 😉. 

Lol, we sure do. This vehicle would’ve been a massive failure. I’m glad the project was canned. Initially I wasn’t glad facing downtime til 2027 at the time of that announcement. 

[DeluxeStang]

2 hours ago, rmc523 said:

its also funny that on the red one with that white line graphic on the rear most window, it almost makes it look like a truck with the red paint and with how the back end is cut off straight.

I thought the same. Cut the angled roof for the third row off and turn it into a bed, and I bet the proportions are pretty close to the skunk truck, because we know it's gonna have a larger cab and short bed. 

 

Also realize the truck has a more traditional, boxy truck front end than the three row, so don't really pay attention to that lol. But this kinda hints at what I believe the proportions will be, short hood, massive cabin, short bed. 

 

I'll be honest, I'm not loving it, but people who've seen it have said it's not terrible, so maybe they found a way to make those proportions look good. 

[DeluxeStang]

15 minutes ago, DeluxeStang said:

I thought the same. Cut the angled roof for the third row off and turn it into a bed, and I bet the proportions are pretty close to the skunk truck, because we know it's gonna have a larger cab and short bed. 

 

Also realize the truck has a more traditional, boxy truck front end than the three row, so don't really pay attention to that lol. But this kinda hints at what I believe the proportions will be, short hood, massive cabin, short bed. 

 

I'll be honest, I'm not loving it, but people who've seen it have said it's not terrible, so maybe they found a way to make those proportions look good. 

Actually, because we know the rear of the cab roof isn't flat, but that it angles down, I made a small change to this rendering, it's incredibly small, but I think it improves the look. I added a bit of a slant to the roof. This looks a lot better with a short bed than a super traditional, vertical cab imo, it looks more fluid. 

 

So maybe this body side with a more upright truck front end. 

[Oac98]

2 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

Actually, because we know the rear of the cab roof isn't flat, but that it angles down, I made a small change to this rendering, it's incredibly small, but I think it improves the look. I added a bit of a slant to the roof. This looks a lot better with a short bed than a super traditional, vertical cab imo, it looks more fluid. 

 

So maybe this body side with a more upright truck front end. 

Let’s just hope Ford surprises us with a great looking product. Maybe they will unveil it later this year. 

[jpd80]

Also, remember the context of the time with Ford cancelling

its contract with Rivian for a three row Lincoln Utility…..

Ford engineering had brass kill that plan and double down

on its proposed three row BEV Utility.

 

Ford could pick any design and style it wanted for a three row Utility 

but ultimately it shoes that low riding wedged looking crossover 

mainly because it was way behind on battery range.

Ford chose to keep developing something because they were on a mission

and completely lost sight of the fact that it has to engage potential buyers.

The reason Ford cancelled so damned late tells you that Ford stopped 

listening to buyers many years before (thank you Doug Field)

 

There is a theory within Ford that Farley leaned into BEVs

the way that Bill Ford how investing so much money was

no guarantee of success…

Edited April 25 by jpd80

[Oac98]

45 minutes ago, jpd80 said:

Also, remember the context of the time with Ford cancelling

its contract with Rivian for a three row Lincoln Utility…..

Ford engineering had brass kill that plan and double down

on its proposed three row BEV Utility.

 

Ford could pick any design and style it wanted for a three row Utility 

but ultimately it shoes that low riding wedged looking crossover 

mainly because it was way behind on battery range.

Ford chose to keep developing something because they were on a mission

and completely lost sight of the fact that it has to engage potential buyers.

The reason Ford cancelled so damned late tells you that Ford stopped 

listening to buyers many years before (thank you Doug Field)

 

There is a theory within Ford that Farley leaned into BEVs

the way that Bill Ford how investing so much money was

no guarantee of success…

To be honest when I look at the product I’m shocked it made it so far in developement. It would’ve failed and been overpriced and underwhelming. Well, Ford needs too listen to customers more that’s forsure.  Cancelling this oversized Prius was a good decision although it didn’t seem like it to me at the time.

[DeluxeStang]

50 minutes ago, jpd80 said:

Also, remember the context of the time with Ford cancelling

its contract with Rivian for a three row Lincoln Utility…..

Ford engineering had brass kill that plan and double down

on its proposed three row BEV Utility.

 

Ford could pick any design and style it wanted for a three row Utility 

but ultimately it shoes that low riding wedged looking crossover 

mainly because it was way behind on battery range.

Ford chose to keep developing something because they were on a mission

and completely lost sight of the fact that it has to engage potential buyers.

The reason Ford cancelled so damned late tells you that Ford stopped 

listening to buyers many years before (thank you Doug Field)

 

There is a theory within Ford that Farley leaned into BEVs

the way that Bill Ford how investing so much money was

no guarantee of success…

The three row is what happens when you chase spreadsheet data and engineering objectives over product appeal. A lot of engineers seem to struggle with this, where they can get really into the numbers, the engineering geekiness, without realizing that frankly, most people outside of them don't give a damn about all of that. 

 

They just want a good product. Sometimes that engineering obsession can yield incredible results, which is what we're hoping for with the UEV platform. But other times it results in a spreadsheet dream machine that's a nightmare to actual customers, like the three row. 

[jpd80]

3 minutes ago, DeluxeStang said:

The three row is what happens when you chase spreadsheet data and engineering objectives over product appeal. A lot of engineers seem to struggle with this, where they can get really into the numbers, the engineering geekiness, without realizing that frankly, most people outside of them don't give a damn about all of that. 

 

They just want a good product. Sometimes that engineering obsession can yield incredible results, which is what we're hoping for with the UEV platform. But other times it results in a spreadsheet dream machine that's a nightmare to actual customers, like the three row. 

Unfortunately, the only way Ford seems to learn is by the pain of crippling losses.

Hopefully the recent large losses are enough to sharpen its focus on what’s important.

[jpd80]

9 minutes ago, Oac98 said:

To be honest when I look at the product I’m shocked it made it so far in developement. It would’ve failed and been overpriced and underwhelming. Well, Ford needs too listen to customers more that’s forsure.  Cancelling this oversized Prius was a good decision although it didn’t seem like it to me at the time.

Stubborn bloody mindedness, Ford had to know that the more extreme ,

the design became the lower the interest and fewer the buyers.

 

Stupid is as stupid does, they nearly went over the cliff into the abyss….

[T-dubz]

I’m still not even sure how this would have been a 3 row to begin with. It looks like there’s zero head room for what would be the 3rd row, unless they faced backwards and even then it looks like it would be tight.

 

Another problem with this design is it already looks dated. I feel like I’m looking at a 2010’s vehicle. Copying Tesla when Tesla hasn’t changed its design in forever just means you are making a new product look old. Even the wheels look dated.

 

I think ford needs to stop focusing on making SUVs and trucks as EVs. These types of vehicles are not conducive to being an EV due to their shape. To make them work as EVs, you have to change all the design cues that people love about them. It would be far better imo for ford to go after sedans and hatchbacks. It’s easier to get away with the aerodynamic design (like a low stubby front) needed on one of those, then trying to make it work on a truck or suv.

[Oac98]

2 hours ago, jpd80 said:

Stubborn bloody mindedness, Ford had to know that the more extreme ,

the design became the lower the interest and fewer the buyers.

 

Stupid is as stupid does, they nearly went over the cliff into the abyss….

Imagine they delayed this product multiple times too. I know they were trying to get a head start but they can do better than that. I hope they make better decisions going forward and these new upcoming EVs look much better. They will be improved tech wise but I hope the styling matches that. I agree with you some of the decisions Farley has made have been nothing but questionable in my opinion. 

[Sherminator98]

1 hour ago, T-dubz said:

I think ford needs to stop focusing on making SUVs and trucks as EVs. These types of vehicles are not conducive to being an EV due to their shape. To make them work as EVs, you have to change all the design cues that people love about them. It would be far better imo for ford to go after sedans and hatchbacks. It’s easier to get away with the aerodynamic design (like a low stubby front) needed on one of those, then trying to make it work on a truck or suv.

 

What are you going to do? Sell a product that sells to only 25% of the market or 75% of the market? Your automatically kneecapping yourself with sales chasing a sedan or a hatchback, at least in the NA market, but it appears that CUVs are becoming more popular in the EU now. 

 

Ultimately, the three row was nothing more then hubris from Ford-they saw what Tesla was selling and doing and decided to make their own interpretation/copy of it, meanwhile completely forgetting about their typical customer wants in a product. 

 

As for aerodynamics, from what I've seen of extreme updates to existing cars for max aero (AKA tape and a cardboard) the biggest issue is how "smooth" the car-like tightening up panel line gaps and smoothing out the underneath of the a vehicle. Frontal area is also important, but there is only so much you can do without going to styling extremes that might turn off a customer. Having tighter panel line gaps and smoother bottom trays add to manufacturing costs, which hopefully Ford figured out solutions to on the CE1. 

 

EVs can be made to look decent-look at the Mach E for example-outside of people getting pissed that it was getting called a Mustang, the styling was generally well received. It doesn't look like a generic blob.