mustang84isu

From what I am reading, the "Model e" structure of the company sounds like it is dead from an financial reporting standpoint. I.e. Ford Blue and Ford Model e are merging together again. Maybe that is not correct, but if it is, that was a short-lived experiment that was solely done to placate Wall Street. I remember when Wall Street was pushing Ford to spin off Model e because Ford Blue would eventually be "killed off" because EV's were going to be the future and Ford Blue would become such a small part of the business. So much for that BS. https://electrek.co/2026/04/15/ford-doug-field-leaves-ev-unit-dissolved/ So Doug Field likely left due to the plan to fold Model e back into the larger organization. Ford is folding it back in solely because continuing to have Model e exist as a separate entity highlights the massive financial losses from the EV side of the business, which they are now trying to distance themselves from, IMO.

Farley needs to stop talking and just deliver. Hard to believe anything he says anymore because of all the past goals and statements that went by the wayside.

That's sad that only a single new vehicle is being revealed at the Detroit auto show--not just a single Ford, but a single vehicle by any automaker period. I was last there in 2015 and that's when Ford had the GT, GT350R, and Raptor reveals in that liquid blue paint. I think they might have even had a Focus RS and Fusion Sport in the same paint color. And there were a lot of other reveals from other automakers. Lincoln also had a pretty large display. It was an amazing show, but that was all before social media reveals took over and ruined the autoshow experience.

This company changes their product plans as frequently as someone changes their underwear. A $19.5 billion writedown is insane. How are heads not rolling at Ford over that. Half joking, but how long before we read about the CE1 program being dead? I want to remain optimistic about the future, but this company seems lost. Battery storage feels like a distraction, trying to cash in on the data center boom and throwing some red meat to Wall Street, but they're already way late to the game. EREV sounds promising, and is probably the direction they should have gone initially, but the amount of time and resources wasted to get to this point is tough to swallow.

There is this mindset that Ford will automatically fail unless the product fits into "x" or "y" bracket, and it is something that has bothered me as a fan, shareholder, and a consumer for quite a while. Ford fails because Ford doesn't try hard enough in certain product categories. If Ford put the same effort into a Lincoln sedan that they put into the F-150 or the Bronco or the Aviator, it could be a success. Lexus, BMW, Mercedes, and Cadillac have no issues selling multiple sedans of various types, alongside utilities. Ford can't figure out how to build just one Ford and Lincoln sedan that would sell and be competitive in North America? They were out of the compact truck market for a decade and came back strong with the Maverick. I have no doubt they could do the same with sedans if they actually tried. Dealers wouldn't be asking Ford for sedans if there wasn't interest from customers. I think of all the billions (it has to be nearing $15 billion at this point) that Ford has lost on its EV strategy, which still has borne hardly any fruit all these years later. Yet Ford never seems to have the funds to invest in programs outside of core segments. And then all the hundreds of millions that get wasted each quarter on warranty costs. For all the talk I hear from Farley about how Ford culture is changing, I don't see it. I don't see enough discipline from management. I see a company that has been reacting to changing market conditions for the last 10 years, even under Farley's tenure. In fact, I think there have been more major about-faces on product strategy under Farley than there were under Hackett and Fields. Each time, Ford gets caught flat-footed when the market swings another direction. Meanwhile, their less reactionary competitors continue to churn along with a full portfolio of vehicles across multiple segments.

There is a Motor Trend magazine issue from 1988 I have that is titled "How Ford Became #1". It is a special issue where they reviewed all the current Fords from that era. There are some neat photos that show the Ford lineup back-to-back, and I agree - it may not look fresh today, but it was back then. Especially when you compare to what GM and Chrysler had been doing. GM was just starting to go aero in 1988, but Ford had a 4-5 year head start on them. Jack Telnack was a great designer. It's also interesting to me that Ford went from some of the most homely styling in the early 1980's (1980-82 T-bird for example, Granada and Fairmont weren't great either) to probably the best all-around vehicle lineup styling by the end of the decade. It shows how much good leadership can have an impact.

I was expecting more from this event, so I'm a bit underwhelmed. I get not wanting to reveal too much too early, but if you're going hold an event emphasizing Ford's "Model T moment" but then give no real details or even a design sneak peek, it feels like they would have been better off delaying this presentation until they were further along or ready to reveal more. We have been hearing nuggets about simplification and cost savings for years ever since Farley started talking about CE1. It's nice to get a few more details, but today's presentation did nothing to get investors or the public excited about it. I'm skeptical about gigacasting. It will help Ford's bottom line if they can make it work, but as we seem from Teslas getting totaled and insurance coverage costs skyrocketing for Tesla vehicles, it doesn't always help the consumer. So I am really curious to hear more details on the three parts of the cast and how it will work together, including repairs.

I want to like Farley, being that he is a car enthusiast and seems to have quite a bit of passion for Ford, but when I read things like this it just leaves me scratching my head. https://fordauthority.com/2025/07/ford-ceo-jim-farley-says-dealers-can-switch-edge-buyers-to-mach-e/ What Edge customers are really buying Mach-E's? I rarely see the Mach-E here in the Midwest, but I see Edges everywhere. We have an Edge and wouldn't consider the Mach-E when it comes time to replace it, mostly because the charging infrastructure is still not widespread enough, and we tow with our Edge and wouldn't be able to tow nearly as far with the Mach-E. I think Farley is underestimating Ford's need for an ICE 2-row crossover in places where EV's still haven't caught on, which is a good portion of the country even today. Comments like these, plus the lack of progress on quality / warranty costs, the stock price still in the toilet all these years later, and cutting Ford's product portfolio to the bone without key replacements (abandoning well-known nameplates that Ford spent decades building up brand equity) leaves me with a sour taste in my mouth. I hope CE1 is a blockbuster, because Ford has hyped it up so much and their future growth is basically hinging on that platform, but if it turns out to be a dud I think Farley needs to go.

That might be the case. I didn't like the current Nautilus when it was first shown in photos, but it has really grown on me and I actually like it quite a bit having seen it in person a few times.

When I was in high school I was all about the new edge Mustang, but seeing it today it really hasn't aged well. The 94-98 Mustang felt more honest without unnecessary design cues, and then they tacked on all the fake scoops and added sharp angles in '99 and made it look like a caricature. Weirdly, I felt like the S550 Mustang had some cues that were a nod back to the new edge Mustang (headlights, and some of the sharper angles on the hood). I really liked the S550 despite the early criticism toward it, and think it has aged well and IMO has been an apex for modern Mustang styling. Ford really took at step backward with the S650. The proportions are all out of whack - headlights too low, grille too big, too sharp of an angle at the rear trunklid. Even the overhangs look longer. It's like new edge where they tried too hard to make it menacing and just made it into a caricature of what a Mustang should be.

I hope I don't jinx myself, but weirdly we've had almost zero issues with most of our FoMoCo vehicles over the last 10 years. The only one that gave me a lot of headaches was my '01 Lincoln LS V8, which started having a lot of issues after 100K. But my '07 MKZ that I kept until 140K never had anything major fail on it, and our '17 Edge 2.0 now at about 130K had the turbo wastegate valve recently replaced but otherwise we've had no issues with it. My Continental also has been great so far, but it only has 65K on it. I probably spent more on the LS for mechanical repairs than I have on the last three vehicles combined. We'll be replacing the Edge in the next year, but kinda nervous looking at newer Fords with all of the recalls going on lately. I'm glad Ford is being proactive, but it is not a good look that these issues are getting shipped out and not being caught at the factory or during testing when they have supposedly been lased focused on quality the last couple years.

I could see the current Mustang simply become a "Mustang GT" line, with a V8 only - and then the affordable EV Mustang would be on the CE1 platform. And IMO, the body of each vehicle should be differentiated from one another. I would love to see Ford use something like fox body heritage cues for the affordable Mustang, sort of like how Hyundai Ioniq 5 has retro cues but still is a modern package.

I hate the wheels, but I like the rest. It seems like they were trying to play off the turbine wheels, but it's not done very well and the all-white makes it worse. I don't mind the white badging, but I think the nostrils on the grille would have been better in the teal color. I really hope we see more color like this across the line at Ford. I was at a Ford dealership earlier today, and it was literally a sea of white, black, and gray - 90% of the vehicles on the lot were one of those three colors.

Ford at the executive level has been rudderless since Alan Mulally left. I had high hopes for Jim Farley, but he's been there now, almost 5 years? And the execution still is not there. The company is way too reactionary to the whims of the market at whatever moment in time and it doesn't feel like there is a truly a multi-year plan to improve and grow back lost market share. Lots of bad product decisions, including letting nameplates wither on the vine that used to be very competitive, and then finally killing them off with the excuse that it is the market's fault and not Ford's for failing to invest and keep it fresh. It's the same old Ford story, just a different decade. With the current political environment we are in, I think the CE1 program is going to be another uphill battle. Meanwhile, Ford continues to send nameplates like Escape to the dustbin right as buyers are looking for affordable vehicles to counter inflation. The current generation Mustang is not aging well and is too expensive. Ford is SUV heavy when sedans made a significant comeback in sales in 2024 as consumers are looking to scale down. GM has also been doing very well with the Buick and Chevy small crossovers while Ford will soon be MIA in that segment. Negatives aside, the one good thing Farley has done is monetizing Ford Pro and telematics. That is a very positive step to mitigate the normal automotive boom and bust cycle. So I will give him kudos for that, but everything else leaves much to be desired and I think many of us are getting impatient with the continued excuses for mediocre execution.

I'm not against the $7500 tax credit, but it should be based on income and perhaps step down and terminate once certain income thresholds are hit. It never should have been a blanket tax credit for everyone. Once again, Ford is caught between a rock and a hard place. They killed off all sorts of high volume gas-powered nameplates and now the EV rug is being pulled out from under them in the US after they have spent billions building out EV production infrastructure domestically, about 10 years too late. The incoming administration and a certain high-profile CEO will abuse the system to keep his car company afloat while every other automaker that has made significant EV investments will be cast off to fend for themselves in this new era of austerity.