The Ford Fathom($28,350 EV truck thread)

[rmc523]

I'm using a bit of BORG vision here, but the taillight shape loosely matches what we've also seen in the patent images.........I also just noticed the dual pane rear window on this patent image....

 

[DeluxeStang]

Guys, if even I'm not trying to over analyze these latest images, I'm pretty sure it's a lost cause lol. Let's just wait until we get more details. 

[T-dubz]

Two panes of glass seems like a weird choice. I’m not sure that’s making production. We’ve seen the rear glass before.

 

[fuzzymoomoo]

On 7/23/2026 at 9:40 AM, Sherminator98 said:

Apple Maps to Power the Navigation Experience for the Ford Universal Electric Vehicle Platform

 

Meh not a fan of Apple Maps, but I haven't used in sometime, so maybe I'll have to try it again. 

Never had a problem with it myself. The latest update was really nice. 

[rmc523]

20 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

Guys, if even I'm not trying to over analyze these latest images, I'm pretty sure it's a lost cause lol. Let's just wait until we get more details. 

 

Yeah, there's not much to analyze in this particular tease.

 

Except maybe the mirror housing and maybe door handle blades.

[blazerdude20]

17 hours ago, T-dubz said:

Two panes of glass seems like a weird choice. I’m not sure that’s making production. We’ve seen the rear glass before.

 

I could see a split rear window making sense on a more expensive EV truck, where there is a mid-gate. Likely easier to move two smaller window sections than the one larger one. If you've watched the rear glass come out of the Silverado EV you can tell its awkward for one person to remove. I cannot imagine this truck having a mid-gate when the top priority is affordability. 

[rmc523]

10 minutes ago, blazerdude20 said:

I could see a split rear window making sense on a more expensive EV truck, where there is a mid-gate. Likely easier to move two smaller window sections than the one larger one. If you've watched the rear glass come out of the Silverado EV you can tell its awkward for one person to remove. I cannot imagine this truck having a mid-gate when the top priority is affordability. 

 

We pretty much know it has a midgate.   But the rumor is that the glass won't move, so more like a pass through like a sedan, with the difference being it'd (obviously) connect to the bed floor, vs. a trunk.

 

 

[Zestyg]

1 hour ago, rmc523 said:

 

Yeah, there's not much to analyze in this particular tease.

 

Except maybe the mirror housing and maybe door handle blades.

I actually didn’t notice the door handle blades. The blurred lights are probably a red herring, they are exposing the wiring harness and many modules here.

[blazerdude20]

21 minutes ago, rmc523 said:

 

We pretty much know it has a midgate.   But the rumor is that the glass won't move, so more like a pass through like a sedan, with the difference being it'd (obviously) connect to the bed floor, vs. a trunk.

 

 

Interesting. I missed that previously. 

[rmc523]

7 minutes ago, Zestyg said:

I actually didn’t notice the door handle blades. The blurred lights are probably a red herring, they are exposing the wiring harness and many modules here.

 

I was hesitant to call them out, as I couldn't tell if they were the full on blades or if it was just a placeholder thing.

[rmc523]

Just now, blazerdude20 said:

Interesting. I missed that previously. 

 

a few caveats, though......

 

not all patents make it.

I'd also venture to say it's not a standard feature, but rather an option to keep costs down, to your point.

[T-dubz]

Wish ford would have skipped the midgate and gone with a power rear window instead. 

[fordmantpw]

5 minutes ago, T-dubz said:

Wish ford would have skipped the midgate and gone with a power rear window instead. 

 

Why not have both?  The rear window rolls down into the midgate.  Makes sense.

[Willwll313wll]

4 hours ago, rmc523 said:

 

We pretty much know it has a midgate.   But the rumor is that the glass won't move, so more like a pass through like a sedan, with the difference being it'd (obviously) connect to the bed floor, vs. a trunk.

 

 

 

What you described isn't what's shown here. This glass is moving. I wonder what will make it to production. Wouldnt make sense for the glass not to move unless they really couldnt make it work due to cost. A fixed glass would be very limiting.

[Willwll313wll]

2 hours ago, fordmantpw said:

 

Why not have both?  The rear window rolls down into the midgate.  Makes sense.

 

That's what makes the most sense imo! But cost and weight... We'll see!

[rmc523]

14 hours ago, Willwll313wll said:

 

What you described isn't what's shown here. This glass is moving. I wonder what will make it to production. Wouldnt make sense for the glass not to move unless they really couldnt make it work due to cost. A fixed glass would be very limiting.

 

I understand the patent images are slightly different and showing movable glass.We obviously see the patent showing that, but BORG has also claimed the glass isn't movable, but also consider that source.

 

A fixed glass would still let you hold long low objects (like plywood), but I do agree, that it'd prevent you from having a longer, taller item that may need to extend into the cab to fit within the vehicle's footprint.

 

 

The above patent images show two different setups, I think:

 

1) The ones with the whole vehicle profile seem to show the bulkhead sliding forward behind the front row with or without the glass....not quote sure how that'd work, unless there's just a mounting point somewhere near the b-pillar instead of it sliding?

 

2) the lower two images seem to show the bulkhead pivoting backward into the bed (see the section view), with the last one showing the locking pin mechanism, which would have to be from the inside of the cab, with handles to pull it back up when finished.

 

 

A "simpler"/more familiar design I could see is that the rear seat bottom pivots forward into the footwell area, then the back seats/rear bulkhead flip down where the seat bottom was....this approach makes more sense than what's shown above.  Ideally, it'd make a completely flat floor from the rear end of the bed all the way up to the under side of the flipped up seat cushions.

 

Similar to how Bronco 2 door folds the second row seats, but instead of the seatback, you'd have a solid panel that is the back of the bulkhead/front of the bed:

 

 

As to where the glass would go if it's removable....not sure?  maybe a compartment built into the floor?

Edited July 29 by rmc523

[rmc523]

On a different note,

 

I was looking for some pictures of the rear window, and this popped up.

 

I know it's not at all what the truck will look like, but I kind of like how this looks

 

[blazerdude20]

Have there been any trustworthy rumors regarding peak charging speed for the new platform? The Lightning and Mach-E could only achieve a max of 160-170 kWh. You see some new platforms with 800V systems that are doing 250-400 kWh. Would significantly reduce charging times if Ford can push bigger than 170. 

[fuzzymoomoo]

20 hours ago, fordmantpw said:

 

Why not have both?  The rear window rolls down into the midgate.  Makes sense.

My guess would be weight. Thinking back to the Bronco of the 90s with its roll down full window, that tailgate weighed a TON. 

[fordmantpw]

25 minutes ago, fuzzymoomoo said:

My guess would be weight. Thinking back to the Bronco of the 90s with its roll down full window, that tailgate weighed a TON. 

 

Good point.  And that thing was THICK too!

[akirby]

11 minutes ago, fordmantpw said:

 

that thing was THICK too!

 

 

[Zestyg]

2 hours ago, blazerdude20 said:

Have there been any trustworthy rumors regarding peak charging speed for the new platform? The Lightning and Mach-E could only achieve a max of 160-170 kWh. You see some new platforms with 800V systems that are doing 250-400 kWh. Would significantly reduce charging times if Ford can push bigger than 170. 

I haven’t heard any, but I do want to point out that even at 170 kw, it’s gonna charge pretty quickly due to the battery being pretty small.

[Captainp4]

8 hours ago, rmc523 said:

On a different note,

 

I was looking for some pictures of the rear window, and this popped up.

 

I know it's not at all what the truck will look like, but I kind of like how this looks

 

I like this, but like you said, we know it won't look like this.

[rmc523]

14 hours ago, Captainp4 said:

I like this, but like you said, we know it won't look like this.

 

With that solid dividing line there, I think a two-tone paint job would look good on there.

[BenKohnen]

19 hours ago, fuzzymoomoo said:

My guess would be weight. Thinking back to the Bronco of the 90s with its roll down full window, that tailgate weighed a TON. 

I just had a customer point out how much weight difference there can be in tailgates. He was commenting that a 26 F-150 on our lot had a tailgate that was so much lighter than his 23. That didn't make sense until he mentioned he had the bed utility package with tailgate step, and the 26 didn't.

 

Taking another look at the camo-tape-wrap truck, I wonder if maybe they'd just go with what they've already got on the Bronco Sport. Not super likely, but another option other than roll down or remove and stow.