What’s the driving factor in Ford changing it processes to avoid recalls?
A. Public embarrassment…………Bssst
B. Fear that customers may never return………..Bsst
C. A $2 billion enema every quarter that destroys profit………….Ding Ding Ding.
Seems like Ford only changes when the pain of financial loss is so incredibly overwhelming.
That applies to Warranty costs, bad product investments and failed projects/business ventures.
All we can hope for is that Ford gets on top of the root cause of those losses and stems the bleeding.
Probably as EVs start to become more mainstream. I highly doubt we'll ever see some 1,000 hp EV being sold in the 30s. But I can see a day where you can buy a super high performance EV for about as much as a mustang GT or something.
So I noted in the Ford Accessory site a nice 4 pc. locking cleat set for the 150..$105 came today and very heavy hardware.
Only problem is the four locations in the bed that have tapped drill holes to accept this kit, according to pg. 414 of the owners manual show a plate that is attached that the cleats obviously lock into.
So my logic says, as these four plates are not included in kit, must be that plates are installed when truck is built..Perhaps KC employee was distracted when this bed went by his station. Value of these four plates?...probably 5 bucks...tapping the holes probably a more costly figure.
Sent note to my salesman, stand by🤔
While price is a concern and people complain about the Mustang moniker, as a Mach E customer on his second Mach E (my Rally arrived this week to replace my 2021 Premium), one of the things that I appreciate most is that it's essentially an conventional car that happens to have an electric powertrain.
While I don't have and would never have a Tesla product, I'm very acquainted with them due to various benchmarking activities that I participate in. If "EV" means "austere," then I don't want that type of EV, despite how many idiots are suckered into Elon's reality distortion field.
If you try to re-imagine an EV to a "Smart" car, then I don't want it. Make it a car that I'd like anyway as an ICE, and you've got a winner.
I love my Mach E. It doesn't do 100% of what I want out of a car, but there's not a car in existence that does. It's why I have, for example, a trailer tow vehicle and Home Depot runner and family road trip vehicle – it supplements the Mach E.
I've got the big touchscreen on the Mach E and the Expedition. Without the haptic feedback, I'm often not actually activating the on-screen button. I have no idea why, since if it were an Apple device it would work flawlessly. For example, if I'm viewing navigation but want to hit CarPlay, it doesn't always actuate. And within CarPlay, if I want to switch applications, they don't always activate. The iPhone OS is able to learn where I'm touching versus where I think I'm touching, but Sync 4 doesn't, which makes it kind of suck. Physical controls wouldn't have this problem.
There are really cool haptic feedback technologies available for flat screens that make them feel like tactile controls, but Ford isn't using them. Until then, physical controls are superior, but I have confidence that someday, flat screens will work just as well as tactile controls. I just wish I weren't a test subject.
I think the advance of battery technology will make that disparity a short term phenomena. As soon as the gap in price between 'small' and 'large' EV batteries narrows, consumers will opt for larger vehicles with longer range even if they are still somewhat more expensive. As I said it may be true short-term but I don't expect it to be the norm in the future. Battery technology is advancing to fast.
Good post.
And it’s the exact reason that Ford needs to pivot away from an over reliance on T3 mass roll out.
Not a criticism of Ford but a big discovery of the new reality of battery cost vs vehicle size/profit.
Where exactly is the sweet spot, is it compacts or perhaps a well designed mid sized?
Vehicle design and space efficiency are going to be big factors going forward
and you’re right, a whole rethink of how Ford and buyers perceive vehicles.
Wondering about midsize because Maverick’s interior room is pretty close to Ranger but it’s a lot lighter,
maybe that example of C2 space efficiency will shine a light or be a eureka moment for Ford BEVs.
We should be optimistic about Ford’s success/failures, early days and still getting things right while
ICE sales are still strong and support the company. It’s not like mass BEVs are needed tomorrow…..
Perhaps, but isn't GE2 dead in the water to a degree? At least for the mustang, it seems like the logical choice is to develop an all new scalable architecture that can underpin everything from pure ICE, to hybrid and EVs, something the current platform can't do according to insiders.