2005Explorer
-
Posts
3,078 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
21
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Downloads
Store
Posts posted by 2005Explorer
-
-
What do these results tell me? People want affordable vehicles that are filled with value for the price. That doesn't mean cheap, but it means something other than $85k+ F-Series or Broncos that have become overpriced in the last couple years. Look at the Maverick, Bronco Sport and Escape? Build more. The Edge? WTF are they canceling that model? I promise it makes good money and it's in demand.
-
6 hours ago, akirby said:
The greenhouse is fine if it was shortened and sloped a little more in the rear but it’s really the front end I don’t like. It’s too upright. Edge was successful because of its sporty styling and perfect size.Now if you want to go RWD then just bring Everest and keep the truck styling. Won’t replace edge styling wise but should garner enough sales and would support Raptor and off road versions. Problem is where do you build it.
Everest is T6. They'd have to run it down the line with Rangers and Broncos to be cost effective.
-
1
-
-
6 hours ago, Deanh said:
looks like a BUNCH of MSRPs have been adjusted in fmcdealer regarding our inventory.................theres some big uns. Really not surethis is actually a good thing..not that resale was a good thing from the get go...but theres absolutey ZERO chance Id recommend a purchase over a lease in any way or form.....resale was bad before...now for people that bought a Mach E prior to these price slashes their trade in values will be suicidal....
I'm not a car dealer by any means, but would it be better to leave MSRP what it was and just offer large rebates or actually lower the MSRP when it comes to resale or does it make little difference?
-
I just read this article. Terrible idea on these big price cuts and huge incentives. Higher ATPs should be the focus.
-
'19-'23 Ford Ranger. It's probably isn't the kind of vehicle they want, but it's been very reliable. The Maverick is also doing very well in reliability.
-
15 hours ago, akirby said:
Unless it’s a first gen Prius……True. lol
-
22 hours ago, Deanh said:
raises the question...theres already been "cheap" BEVs...and they were basically sales flops....and then GM and Honda canned their plans for affordable BEVs as well...so Im scratching my head...
Yeah, but the expensive ones are also turning out to be flops as well. The manufacturers need affordable BEVs that are also compelling to the consumer. Look at affordable ICE products that have been successful and follow that formula. Weird stuff doesn't sell.
-
Everyone said Toyota was making the wrong decision prioritizing high mileage hybrids over BEV. At least at this stage and for the foreseeable future Toyota might have made the right choice instead of being drawn in by "shiny objects."
-
I recently watched a YouTube video where someone drove over an object on the road that would have caused a minor amount of repairable damage on an ICE vehicle completely total out a Kia BEV. The object caused a small dent in the battery pack and battery replacement was so high the car was totalled. If these kinds of things become common and repair costs are much higher than comparable ICE vehicles insurance cost will skyrocket.
-
1 hour ago, akirby said:
Commodity isn’t necessarily cheap. It just means people shop mainly on price and won’t pay a premium for any particular model. But I agree Edge isn’t necessarily a commodity just a victim of circumstance for BEV production.
As for Hyundai - their platform costs are lower and they have a lot more global sales to amortize costs. The Asian brands have done a great job minimizing costs on their car platforms. Last I checked they were still only running about a 4% profit margin in NA. If you’re dealing in a mostly commodity market you need low costs and high volume to make a decent profit.
If Ford can easily sell over 2 million vehicles at a 10% margin why bother with sedans? The best case for bringing Evos is having spare capacity in a Mexico C2 plant. Can’t build it in the U.S. - labor costs are too high. And unfortunately any spare capacity in Hermosillo needs to go to more Mavericks and Bronco Sports.
Maybe they can move 2nd Gen Mach-E to Oakville and convert Cuatitlan to C2 production with a revised Escape and Edge and Evos. Freeing up Louisville for Corsair and Nautilus.
Unfortunately the new UAW contract makes it even harder to build affordable vehicles in the US and make a profit. All affordable vehicle production needs to go to Mexico. Your ideas are good.
-
5
-
-
35 minutes ago, paintguy said:
Ford had a 3.3 L V6 hybrid on Explorer, now discontinued, at least for retail purchase. Not feeling the commitment by Ford to hybrid. Buy a threatened with cancellation Escape? Or a Maverick pickup which went from a standard hybrid to optional?
Honestly I think there were 2 reasons that the Maverick went from standard hybrid to optional 1) battery supply and 2) the hybrid powertrain is likely more costly to make than the ICE powertrain. Ford might want to rethink plans to cancel the Escape and should probably be thinking about developing one more ICE/hybrid generation. The BEV "revolution" is just not happening yet. The whole Edge fiasco should make them re-think canceling popular products when the BEV replacement might not make any profit at this time. Too many money pits in the line-up long term = bankruptcy.
-
5
-
-
10 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:
Basically any product that isn't profitable as it relies on a low price and incentives to sell. There just isn't a ton of profit in those types of products. Expanding on that idea, we could also look at commodity products as your generic transportation devices. Ford is shifting it's strategy to offer more "icons" vehicles that sell based on passion and uniqueness, and as such, can command a higher price.
I'd have an extremely hard time believing even with some incentives the Edge isn't profitable. I bet it's a hell of a lot more profitable than the Mach E. I believe that's also taking incentives to sell right now. The Edge has a solid and still modern platform. They could have easily extended it with a facelift and an available high MPG hybrid option, but I guess Farley knows best. I just hope the replacement actually makes more profit than the Edge. Looking at the current state of the Ford Model e business I'm doubtful.
-
Ending production on a product like the Edge when it’s still a hot seller and definitely making money for Ford is a bad idea. They won’t do it, but how about rush a facelift and offer a high MPG hybrid model? Toyota keeps platforms around for years and just updates them. If it was a failing undesirable product I could understand, but the Edge still has life in it. I’m afraid what they are canceling the Edge for is going to be a slow selling money pit.
-
5
-
-
3 hours ago, Deanh said:
same shite for me...had the bronco less than a month...guess those vertical windsheilds are a rock magnet...total bill was $1200...me $250 deductible...it was funny though...car had to be recalibrated, Ihad to ask if the Tech could drive stick....lol....
The rake of the windshield must really make a difference. I never had even one rock chip after 3 years on my 2019 Ranger. I haven't had one on my 2022 Ranger either. Knock on wood of course. lol
-
I wouldn't buy after those price increases because if it's not selling they will lower it again. They did it once before. If I was a Lightning customer I'd wait awhile.
-
The fact is automobile prices are rising much faster than wages are increasing. This coupled with the fact many automakers are trying to exit the affordable vehicle categories because they are low profit makes things even tougher for middle class consumers to buy new vehicles. Public transportation isn't really an option in some places, but if new vehicle prices keep rising at the rate we've seen over the last 2-3 years people will be quickly priced out.
-
27 minutes ago, ausrutherford said:
Bronco, Bronco Sport, Ranger, Maverick AWD please.....
They already have an Escape Hybrid with AWD correct? I don't see how it could take much work to offer a similar set-up in the Maverick and Bronco Sport.
-
I think Ford is starting to realize that the whole transition to BEV is going to take much longer. I wanted to share because there has been a lot of discussion on this forum about the need for a stronger focus on hybrids right now.
https://fordauthority.com/2023/12/ford-cfo-says-company-became-complacent-on-hybrids/
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, akirby said:
Uh no I’m saying keep the Bronco styling just drop the off-road stuff.Wouldn’t that technically be a Maverick with the rear end enclosed? I’d like to see Ford explore these affordable markets more. Really the only affordable vehicles they have right now is the Maverick, Escape and Bronco Sport. There is room for another one.
-
2 hours ago, jpd80 said:
Yeah, the base Maverick hybrid was a deliberate and provocative $23k price point to really catch buyers attention
but once Ford had the ‘fish on the line’ the loss leader becomes less available until supplies stabilised with higher price. People will still buy the Maverick hybrid because it’s still well below $30k, way below ICE Bronco Sport & Escape entry point. Maverick’s pricing absolutely screams at the other two….
The fact that the Escape and Bronco Sport are priced higher than the Maverick sort of takes you back to the early 90s when the Bronco was always more expensive than an F-150 or an Explorer was always more expensive than a Ranger. The lines have blurred today, but traditionally pickups were the cheapest entry compared to the SUV based on them.
-
2
-
-
7 hours ago, jpd80 said:
The three most profitable vehicle groups in Ford Globally are F Series, T6 (Ranger/Bronco/Everest)
and then Transit in third place.
North America is F Series, Europe it’s Transit and in Asia Pacific it’s T6 (Ranger/Everest).
Whenever those vehicle sales are reduced for whatever reason, profit drops significantly.
All the other vehicles that Ford tries to sell add little to their bottom line - Europe previously had high volume sales of Focus and Fiesta but those were barely break even. The hard part is changing to higher profit vehicles, there’s a lot less interest form buyers so sales data takes a big hit and profits are still small, change looks ineffective.
Ford claims supplier issues for deleting the standard hybrid in the Maverick, but it was probably most likely done to make the line more profitable. The hybrid powertrain most certainly costs Ford more than the Ecoboost.
-
1
-
-
On 12/9/2023 at 11:03 AM, LSchicago said:
Ford has always pushed the EB in everything. I never buy the EB though. Give me the 5.0 in the F150 or Mustang, and the Hybrid in the Maverick!
We have a 2022 Maverick XLT AWD FX4 in our family. We made a 700 mile round trip in it to see family for Thanksgiving and averaged right at 30 MPG over the whole trip. On the way down we drove 70-80 MPH highway speeds and averaged over 30 MPG. On the way, back we were forced to drive solid ice/snow roads home in slippery mode at 55 MPH or less. That was a stressful 350 miles! I was thankful for AWD and the smart drive controls.
I will say the optional Falken Wildpeak AT3W's were very helpful on the extremely bad roads.
So although the Ecoboost won't return the kind of MPG the hybrid will it does have excellent performance and still does very well on fuel economy. My niece has a 2018 Escape with the 2.0 EcoBoost and I have no idea why, but the Maverick will beat it all day in fuel economy. Maybe the new Escape does better. I'm not sure.
-
11 minutes ago, akirby said:
It’s not quite that simple. You have existing factories and workers and suppliers and you need to amortize shared components like powertrains. So you need volume. You just have to prioritize resources so when you have a new product like Bronco, Bronco Sport, Maverick or BEVs you either have to build a new factory or two and hire a bunch of people or you kill your lower profit vehicles. And I’m not sure why you think Maverick and Bronco Sport are low profit. They have very little direct competition and they’re built in Mexico. 8% profit on a $30K vehicle is only $2400 which should t be hard at all given the lack of price wars and huge discounts.Compared to a higher trim level F-150 they are low profit. Now generally speaking lower profit margin vehicles can be very profitable, but you need volume. Interestingly it does appear from November sales data the more affordable vehicle lines are seeing better sales increases vs the expensive ones. 2024 might be an interesting year for auto sales.
-
On 12/7/2023 at 8:34 AM, rperez817 said:
Both Honda and Toyota are well known for being laggards among legacy automakers in the ongoing transition to BEV. GM President Mark Reuss explained the dilemma with hybrids nowadays.
GM, and Ford are much better off devoting their resources "on the answer that we all know is going to happen (BEV), and get there faster and better than anybody else". Or at least faster and better than legacy automakers from Japan, South Korea, and Europe.
You were also the person that wanted Ford to spin off it's Blue ICE operations into a new stand-alone company ASAP when they announced the whole Ford Blue and Model e division restructuring. Just imagine if Ford had went ahead with your plan right now. They'd be bankrupt. Heck they'll be bankrupt if they did that in the next few years. Heck not long ago you were calling for Ford to ax all ICE product in the next 2 to 3 years.
2024 Mustang Mach-E Gets New e-Motor, More Range
in E.V. Central
Posted
You should. It’s just as exciting as a better motor on your air compressor.