You know, I actually didn't realize that this was outright replacing the ICE/hybrid Highlander completely.....I thought it'd be an EV alongside the ICE/hybrid version.
I'm still skeptical...
I'm not against the technology, just understand it is fallible.
Here's the difference. Parts are going to fail and sometimes a crash is inevitable. But when the fly by wire software fails it can crash an airplane that was 100% mechanically sound and otherwise perfectly flyable.
One case the computer sent airspeed as angle of attack data making autopilot think the plane was climbing and about to stall when it was actually flying level. It pushed the nose down almost crashing before the pilot's regained control.
Another one the pilot at an airshow was flying super low over the airfield and the plane thought it was landing and refused to climb and crashed into trees. Amazingly most survived.
And Bronco Sport.
Small C-segment CUV is the fastest growing automotive segment in the world, particularly in APAC and EMEA. Ford just decided to sit out all the growth and watch the competitors from the sidelines.
The Question is: if they are generating profit by cutting back investments in new products and R&D, that profit isn't a sign of a strong business but a weak one.
As a homeowner, if my roof is leaking, I could spend money upfront to replace the roof, repair the roof, or buy more buckets. Buckets are cheap and look great on a P+L.
and a working zonal Software Architecture, and an established Battery supply, and Advanced Motors. All designed and sourced in the USA
How Rivian Developed Its Zonal Architecture In Just Two Years
EV profitability is about scale; without it, you can't bring costs down.
They weren't anti car. They were anti losing money and their cars were not as profitable as other vehicles. New architecture is lowering costs so they can potentially make money on cars. But don't expect a dull boring Corolla competitor.