jpd80

There’s only so much you can say about vehicles delayed until MY30 or later….. These are the BEV Maverick & Bronco Sport that we’ve known about on the boards for the last 12 months Ford identifies them internally as CE1 and were developed as a smaller version of GE2, replacing GE (Mach E) Originally these BEVs were to replace Escape & Corsair at Louisville beyond MY28 but thanks to the UAW, increase costs probably now mean that Ford has delayed this project and it will probably head to Mexico.

Let me explain my thoughts further, a Sport Trac built off the CD6 Explorer would have been much bigger and wider than the original Sport Track offering a superior experience by using Explorer’s IRS versus Ranger’s rather cramped second row and leaf suspension. The down side is that it would have competed with is the F150, an absolute no on in Ford’s opinion. The up side would have been that EB 2.3 and EB 3.0 combined with lighter weight than F150 would have made it easier to achieve CAFE numbers. In turn, the F150 could have graduated to ann efficient heavy half ton, perhaps avoiding CAFE completely, but would the EPA accept that?

Interestingly, when the Edge was first introduced, it’s starting price was similar to that of Explorer and in fact lived comfortably in that space battery Explorer and Escape, like an enlarged Escape. IMO, the hatchback styling is exactly why it worked.

The interesting part is that the front half of Everest is basically Ranger so a lot of commonality. Most of the main T6 design team is now gone so apart from planned mid model updates, there’s nothing new planned. Importantly every everest sold would be one less Bronco produced and sold, Ford sees it as an either /or choice not incremental addition to sales…..that's a big difference and why it won’t be coming anytime soon. This. It’s cost prohibitive to stop a project this far along but different situation, Ford did that with the CD6 Edge when they determined that it wouldn’t work and exactly why a C2 Edge wasn’t developed for North America, the funds were already wasted on a RWD that was canned. Total 100% commitment to Mach E to succeed meant that the car that cost $25,000 less to produce must go to encourage more buyers into Mach E. Also as above, developing a new C2 for Nth America, that ship sales with ill fated CD6 RWD Edge. If Mach E doesn’t recover, all bets are off, I think Ford will dust off a couple of possibilities but as said, it all takes time. Maybe a lengthened and widened Escape is a better proposition?

About 50% of the current dealer inventory looks to be the Premium trim, so either Ford has over produced or it’s the model buyers like the least. Select trim looks to be about a quarter of the vehicles currently in stock, likewise GT version. California Route trim is only a small amount maybe 1,200. Ford still doesn’t understand why buyers abandoned Mach E, so their strategy to move the backlog is imprecise. Ford needs to better target who their potential buyers are, I would shovel a ton of Pemiums into dealer courtesy vehicles to deal with the problem now and flick them to the used market in 18 month- 2 years time as a Ford leasing deal to cover them another two years - just subvent the whole thing

You’re right about that but think about what the product is exactly and the price. Ford is basically offering an equivalent to the Tesla X which begs the question of what will starting price for the Ford version vs the Lincoln versions be? Tesla dropped the starting price of X to $79k, they know few are interested so what does that tell us about Ford/Lincoln versions and actual interest? Looking at Tesla in the current vehicle slow down: I’m wondering if Tesla will find itself boxed into building mostly 2, 3 and Y. Like Lightning reservations, Cybertruck orders are not a guaranteed thing, much of that may evaporate by the time product ramp up happens in ‘25.

Keep in mind that the 6F based E-CVT was basically a lower cost in-house replacement for the two previous Aisin designed E-CVT s used by Ford. So probably looking at continuing existing CVT strategy but with a better design that it didn’t have to pay royalties on, so they weren’t even thinking hybrid 6F…..

Sorry, I misled you a bit by using 6AT without clarifying whether that was FWD or RWD transmission. I was talking about using a drive motor in place of the torque converter in a 6F Transmission versus the E-CVT. At the time the latter was developed, mid-gear lockup strategies were in their infancy, I think only ZF was using it.

In a way, maybe Ford missed an opportunity by not producing a CD6 based Explorer Sport Trac, I could imagine that ticking a lot of boxes for buyers as an alternative to F150, particularly the 2.3 EB.

This, I bet the value of these things heads for the cellar, so it’s better to lock in a hand in price value now. If these discounts are impressive, what will Ford do if they still don’t move enough of them? Wouldn’t it be ironic if Ford had to pay dealers a million bucks to sell their BEVs…..

OAC is turning into a shit sandwich of epic proportions, the best thing Ford can do is lump it and keep going, it needs to at least see a ROI for the development but let’s not forget that part of that CN$1.8 billion investment is also for a battery plant separate to Oakville I’m curious to know who those suppliers are and suspect that since CD4 Edge/Nautilus was developed from EUCD which itself was an expansion of the original C1 (sorry for the torture) maybe many of them also supply for C2 vehicles? So while last supply orders for Nth American CD4s were locked in 12 months ago, I wonder how quickly a C2 Edge/Nautilus with hatchback rear would take to develop if done as an extension of the current 3-row Edge…. How serious are Ford? As I mentioned above, how far would Ford go to reverse course and build a restyled C2 Edge/Nautilus in North America? Ford is pretty much committed to building the EVs at OAC and backing out would cause major delays to a replacement arriving but in such a large facility, is there an opportunity to build more than one vehicle type that also use batteries like Edge /Nautilus hybrid PHEV ? Instead of either/or, could Ford be open to both of them? If not OAC, perhaps Louisville which already builds C2 vehicles? Now the counterpoint, Sorry, beyond my enthusiasm, I just don’t see the Ford I know making immediate major changes and at the moment, they’re probably laser focused (LOL) on cutting red ink rather than adding to it.

Not necessarily, Ford Europe is managing to do it with Puma hybrid and BEV along with Tornio Courier in the same Romanian plant. Makes you wonder if we’re fed a certain narrative as an excuse to do clean sheet designs when perhaps the truth is that the lines are very blurred, depending on which way the accountants push the business case……

I think BOC is turning to shit, there’s more than enough BEV capacity at Dearborn, Ford just doesn’t want to admit it yet. Think, massive red ink because BEV sales haven’t significantly ramped up and Ford has this big ass plant in development, so something has to give, it can’t keep pushing back the timeline and pretending that hundreds and thousands of buyers are interested in buying a Lightning now or in two or three years time…..

I would add to that, Ford will probably message differently in the 18 states aligned with California an perhaps a few other pockets where BEVs have more sales traction. Like, using a bit more push advertising in those places and less emphasis in other areas where gas sales and hybrids do better. Nothing earth shattering in that…. There’s a ton of issues in flux at the moment but in the light of an aggressive UAW campaign, building compact BEVs at Louisville has become an untenable business case, I think that Ford is getting ready to move the project to Mexico and share it more with the Hermosillo twins, much like Ford Europe is doing with its smaller BEV and hybrids being built in the Romanian plant. It can be done.

I’m betting that the biggest change will be that just Ford stops talking about BEVs. It’s a good way to patch up things with dealers…….for now.

Ironically, the dry clutch DCT was pushed through because Europe wasn’t going to use it in their vehicles, could you imagine the carnage with European sales if they did…….a bullet dodged.

Absolutely, I was intrigued with this design when it first came out, the epicyclic gear train allows the two electric motors combine with the ICE (running or not) to form variable gearing….. It’s brilliant and probably a lot less mechanical parts than a regular 6-speed auto, I can see how strengthening for the stronger EB engine would fairly straight forward. The irony here is that the original 6F transmission was developed jointly with GM, Im a little surprised that they didn’t get involved with this project as well but then, GM had the Volt and its transmission which was very different in that it actually allowed direct coupling for ICE at higher speeds for greater efficiency…. Mind you, the E-CVT was developed before automatic began mid gear lockup, so part of me wonders if like RWD hybrid transmissions, Ford could use a 6AT but with an electric motor in place of the torque converter….. ^^^^^ It’s probably not worth the effort to change now, the E-CVT is mature tech and works well. Sorry for going off track here, it just such an interesting topic….. an Ecoboost 2.0 hybrid is mind blowing.

Making and selling vehicles is a license to print money, I cannot believe Ford’s continuing propensity to self harm. The Ford brass need to do a cost analysis to realise how much profit they throw away thanks to poor choices and then actually do something about it.

So for those wondering about the history of the current Hybrid Transmission, the original HF35 released in 2012 was replaced in 2022 by the HF45 and a stronger HF55 for the 2.0 EB. heres a great technical video explaining how the gearbox works, rambles a bit but still good all the same…enjoy and this one talks about forst two generations of Aisin hybrid and then the HF35 shows how gearing works https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hHU5xFOBcsU&list=PLIn3FrDiB1lyI_hRGrKtG4PQf2OpcTqZ4&index=4

Makes sense, the E-CVT is based on the 6F transmission but with many obvious changes, upgrading to take 2.0 EB wouldn’t be a huge stretch. Excited to know if this heralds a new engine combo for eventual wider use….

Probably a lost Aussie Ford guy……

Exactly and I’d say that depending on the trim level, there’s now a lot more room for incentives if sales slow down, I’m just a little surprised that it’s taken Ford so long to work this out. Maybe you’re right about dealers testing the market with those ADMs and Ford sensing that they could charge a lot more….

Wow, gotta say I don’t blame you, there’s a far bit of helmet factor in that price increase. Looks like Ford has its own markup scheme (scam).

Under normal production conditions, Ford has three main F Series plants working at three shifts, they are worked hard and are very efficient but prone to strike action which is why for the longest time, Ford had no Union worries as they were happy to buy the peace. Since the last contract negotiations, Ford has seen the folly of being so reliant on UAW good will an I think that it would serve them better to go back to more Mexican plants out of the UAW’s reach….

The biggest advance in vehicle quality came from better designs in the first place coupled with a standardised build process where each station did a similar or the same operation across Ford’s plants. That improved line training and skills required to do jobs properly. If you give line workers vehicles that are easier to assemble, then of course the quality of the build must go up and everyone is happy, Ford gets a better product they can charge more for and workers get better bonus checks.