Ford has been working on developing a low-cost EV platform for the past couple of years via a skunkworks team led by a former Tesla exec, though until earlier in 2024, that project remained a huge secret. At first, this new platform was rumored to underpin a crossover, followed by a small pickup and rideshare vehicle, but The Blue Oval recently announced that it would instead debut in a mid-size Ford EV pickup – which could utilize the Ford Ranger nameplate. However, it seems as if the developmental process for that model gave CEO Jim Farley a bit of anxiety.
According to the Wall Street Journal, Farley and the Ford EV pickup team spent quite a bit of time looking at a spreadsheet of line items for that future model, all with one specific goal in mind – how to find a way to trim $800 in costs. They ultimately realized that they could save $500 by reducing the size of the battery pack – which was made possible by the fact that it had overachieved in terms of providing 16 more miles of driving range than expected – but the last $300 proved to be a bit of a challenge.
Farley and his team reportedly mulled over this decision for a while, thinking about deleting things like the heated steering heel or maybe even the front trunk, but the executive soon expressed concerns that FoMoCo may be going a bit too far in terms of cutting corners. “The product could end up being really sh—y,” he reportedly said, then suggested the team place sticky notes on the prototype with ideas on how to proceed. “Then let’s get 20 people who we all trust in a room, and we argue about it,” he added.
We’ve seen this sort of process play out previously with the Ford Mustang Mach-E, which has shaved thousands in costs since its launch back in 2021. However, one could argue that this future Ford EV pickup is even more pivotal, given the fact that Farley previously called a low-cost platform “non-negotiable” as the automaker works to compete with cheap Chinese rivals, even as it has no ambitions of becoming a major player in that market.
Comments
LMAO. All he does is cut corners. Each model year a product is out they decontent and decontent. Standard keypads that now cost $500. Standard spare tires that now cost $200.
I agree! Every year there is a refresh, they remove features and make them dealers options, while the cost of the vehicles continue to increase. if you are removing features, shouldn’t the vehicle cost less?
Also, why can’t the streamline their designs? Why does every trim level need to look so different from each other? Shouldn’t some of the features be the main differences, wheels, bages, types of seating, etc. But they have too many screens, which could create more costs and confusion with their techs. Take a page out fo Tesla’s playbook and streamline the interiot dash area, order the same parts, which should cut down on costs.
But I also think that Ford is doing it all wrong and shouldn’t be focusing on EV trucks, they needt to focus on EV cars, crossovers and SUVs. This is what a ton of people want. Trucks are great, but if you use them for what they are intended for, then they will use up too much power and drain the battery….and from this article, Farley already told the team to put in a smaller battery to save costs. Again, the consumers want a bigger range for these EVs.
Annual decontenting has been “the Ford way” for over 10 years now. Before Farley. It’s their credo.
EV cars, crossovers and SUVs aren’t the right choice either. Hardly anyone wants those. A small pickup that could be used commercially might not be that bad of an idea. Commercial EV applications for short local runs hold the most promise for at least the next 5, maybe 10, years.
I wouldn’t say no one wants EVs and SUVs as their market share continues to grow. Also, when a great SUV comes as an EV, it sells like hotcakes (KIA EV9). The market is there. Small pick-up and small SUV EVs, I agree is the way to go forward.
So instead of fixing the cost cutting problem by not cutting the costs, they decided to just have a sound bite.
The bigger issue is that Ford doesn’t recognize that people would have paid $500 more for that extra 16 miles of range, and will pay $300 more to not lose key features. The problem is that they inflate prices and then nickel and dime the costs.
“how to find a way to trim $800 in costs…” That new UAW contract cost $900 per vehicle. The de-contenting was to pay for the new contract.