Ford hits the brakes on $12 billion in EV spending in KY

[dbsb3233]

I'm trying to figure out what 4-hour trip takes two hour-long charging sessions.

I assume the point was that with a noon deadline to get to a meeting, and a DCFC needed along the way, he'd want to "play it safe" to make sure they weren't late for the meeting. Thus, building in extra time in case that DCFC station they're dependent on (likely with no backup option nearby) is full (or more likely, half broken and the rest full). Especially when responsible for getting 3 other employees there, not just himself.

If I had an important arrival deadline like that, and people depending on me, I'd be a bit reluctant to count on a timely DCFC along the way as well. Fortunately all of our road trips have just been for leisure, so an hour or two delay from a problem station isn't a huge deal.

Sponsored

 

[azerik]

Well, for solid state those things are mostly “hopes and wishes” still at this point.

As far as we know, zero people on the planet have built a solid state battery large enough and cheap enough and reliable enough to power a car. Not even at the working prototype level, yet billions of dollars are chasing this dream.

In my opinion, the target for all these numbers is about 50%.

Half the weight
Half the price
Half the charging time

I just don’t know that any of those are possible, let alone all 3 at once.

Yup. You can have 1, but not the other 2.

This whole thread has me believing everyone in America drives 250 miles a day.

I drove my buddies to a bachelor party in Wisconsin earlier this year. We stopped for charge once in madison and grabbed lunch. I didn't have to sell anyone on the idea.

You also didn't ask for gas money, which is why you didn't need to sell them on it lol.

I don't see range as being the selling point in the future really. The way range has been sold to those who bought EV's left a layer of confusion that's only gotten worse with worse stories and 'articles'. Even if we give a car 500 miles of range you have to deal with having only 1 of the 3 bullet points above. If you don't get at least 2 of them it won't be solid enough to get the general public to buy into it. The Bolt would check the 'around town' box for most people but, gosh, the hassle of having to plug it in nightly. Just. Too. Hard. for most. My wife has also been driving my FFE's for 10+ years as well. When the battery was replaced in our current one it doubled the range. 100+ miles! She drives 8 miles to work. The day it doesn't end up on the charger she's calling me with 85 miles of range trying to figure out if she can also pick up our kid from school (all of 10 more miles down the road). I think they need to get rid of the giant 'You can only go this far today' number on the dash and get people into the '1/2 a tank mentality. It's only the fact that chargers arn't sitting all over on every single corner or 3 in an intersection! Make the car as great as you want, but until a 'fill up' takes less than 5 minutes it's going to be met with hesitation.

 

[Mach1E]

I'm trying to figure out what 4-hour trip takes two hour-long charging sessions.

4 hours there, 4 hours home. No destination charger. Wouldn’t be two full charges, likely a big and small one because of the lack of chargers on alligator alley. And the range of a GTPE at 80 mph? Not a lot. Especially if only DC charging 20% to 80%. Maybe 150 miles?

But the exact math matters not. No one in the carpool (including the driver) is waking up early and taking the chance of being late while we hunt for and wait to charge on the way there, and none of us want to take that extra time on the way home either.

 

[Rotmeat]

I think manufacturers are starting to catch on that you don't need new battery tech, you don't need solid state, you don't need motor breakthroughs, you just need to make better use of what you got.

I get about 2.8 miles per kW in my GTPE most days.

My brother (in his EV6) gets about 3.5.

The Ioniq 6 gets 4.6.

Not-yet-in-production vehicles like the Aptera get a clean 10 miles per kW.

The Aptera has similar performance to my GTPE, gets 50% more range, charges more miles per hour, can solar charge about 30 miles per day in my city, and costs half as much (granted, it's only a 2-seater).

Once the average person doesn't have to plug their vehicle in at all on a day-to-day basis, and has 400+ miles of range for road trips, and the cars cost half as much, I think we'll see mass adoption pretty quickly.

This is all available with current technology - it's mostly an issue of consumer awareness and comfort. No solid state batteries, no cold fusion, no perpetual motion machines, just building an EV like it's an EV and not an ICE (e.g. utilizing hub motors) and taking aerodynamics seriously.

I think EV tech will be safe.

 

[Mach1E]

I think manufacturers are starting to catch on that you don't need new battery tech, you don't need solid state, you don't need motor breakthroughs, you just need to make better use of what you got.

I get about 2.8 miles per kW in my GTPE most days.

My brother (in his EV6) gets about 3.5.

The Ioniq 6 gets 4.6.

Not-yet-in-production vehicles like the Aptera get a clean 10 miles per kW.

The Aptera has similar performance to my GTPE, gets 50% more range, charges more miles per hour, can solar charge about 30 miles per day in my city, and costs half as much (granted, it's only a 2-seater).

Once the average person doesn't have to plug their vehicle in at all on a day-to-day basis, and has 400+ miles of range for road trips, and the cars cost half as much, I think we'll see mass adoption pretty quickly.

This is all available with current technology - it's mostly an issue of consumer awareness and comfort. No solid state batteries, no cold fusion, no perpetual motion machines, just building an EV like it's an EV and not an ICE (e.g. utilizing hub motors) and taking aerodynamics seriously.

I think EV tech will be safe.

The Aptera still doesn’t really exist and has more in common with a motorcycle than a Mach E though. Very few people are interested in a trike like that.

I do agree that we have to use current tech better. But not because it’s the ideal solution, it’s because I don’t really think battery tech is going to drastically change much.

And the solution? I also agree it already exists- PHEV.

PHEV should be where car manufacturers focus, not only fully electric. Solves sooooooo many problems.

 

[dbsb3233]

I think manufacturers are starting to catch on that you don't need new battery tech, you don't need solid state, you don't need motor breakthroughs, you just need to make better use of what you got.

I get about 2.8 miles per kW in my GTPE most days.

My brother (in his EV6) gets about 3.5.

The Ioniq 6 gets 4.6.

Not-yet-in-production vehicles like the Aptera get a clean 10 miles per kW.

The Aptera has similar performance to my GTPE, gets 50% more range, charges more miles per hour, can solar charge about 30 miles per day in my city, and costs half as much (granted, it's only a 2-seater).

Once the average person doesn't have to plug their vehicle in at all on a day-to-day basis, and has 400+ miles of range for road trips, and the cars cost half as much, I think we'll see mass adoption pretty quickly.

This is all available with current technology - it's mostly an issue of consumer awareness and comfort. No solid state batteries, no cold fusion, no perpetual motion machines, just building an EV like it's an EV and not an ICE (e.g. utilizing hub motors) and taking aerodynamics seriously.

I think EV tech will be safe.

Sure, the smaller the car, the better the efficiency (typically). That's always been the case. But most consumers (especially in the North American market) don't want tiny cars. If they did, there would have been millions of Smartcars all over. The Aptera is basically the Smartcar of EVs (if/when it actually makes it to production).

Most consumers like size and utility. It's why SUVs and pickups are the biggest sellers, and why sedans have been fading for 25 years.

Building a vehicle with 300-500 mile range is not the problem. Building a vehicle with 300-500 mile range THAT PEOPLE WANT is. (And at a cost point they can afford.)

 

[Mach1E]

Sure, the smaller the car, the better the efficiency (typically). That's always been the case. But most consumers (especially in the North American market) don't want tiny cars. If they did, there would have been millions of Smartcars all over. The Aptera is basically the Smartcar of EVs (if/when it actually makes it to production).

Most consumers like size and utility. It's why SUVs and pickups are the biggest sellers, and why sedans have been fading for 25 years.

Building a vehicle with 300-500 mile range is not the problem. Building a vehicle with 300-500 mile range THAT PEOPLE WANT is. (And at a cost point they can afford.)

And what we really want/need is much simpler-

SUV with 50 miles electric and 500 miles hybrid range.

Maybe the best part about the above vehicle? We need ZERO extra infrastructure.

 

[Blue highway]

On other forums I have been advocating for years that a pure serial hybrid is the best solution if society wants to reduce emissions and vastly reduce fuel consumption. A true serial hybrid where an ICE powers an on-board electrical generator that then powers the EV drivetrain, as you said, solves most all the problems with adopting EV. The serial hybrid vehicle will need a small battery (<15kWh) for surge energy needs and as a load shed.

The ICE can be tuned to produce power at maximum efficiency within a narrow RPM band. Because the ICE would no longer be structually tied to the drive wheels it can be made much lighter and of more heat-tolerant materials such as ceramic components, which will increase efficiency of the combustion process and reduce waste heat loss.

The hybrid model does not affect the electric grid and does not affect the petrochemical industry, provides 5-minute recharge times, and eliminates range anxiety.

The problem is governments are banning combustion (emissions) and we've moved too far along on EV charging infrastructure to go back.

The upcoming Mazda MX30 does this using a small rotory engine generator. we will see how that goes.

The plug in hybrid solution is suffering from more than governmental push on emissions. The reality is that

• Plug in hybrids are mostly never plugged in.
• Plug in hybrids are declining as a share of electrified vehicles.

pure play ICE and pure play BEV are dominating and are going to continue to do so partly because car companies have to make bets years in advance of production and they can't afford to spend on half step solutions. They have to have EVs for regulatory and market shift reasons and they need ICE for cash flow.

 

[Mach1E]

The upcoming Mazda MX30 does this using a small rotory engine generator. we will see how that goes.

The plug in hybrid solution is suffering from more than governmental push on emissions. The reality is that

• Plug in hybrids are mostly never plugged in.
• Plug in hybrids are declining as a share of electrified vehicles.

pure play ICE and pure play BEV are dominating and are going to continue to do so partly because car companies have to make bets years in advance of production and they can't afford to spend on half step solutions. They have to have EVs for regulatory and market shift reasons and they need ICE for cash flow.

Plug in hybrids are mostly never plugged in?

Where did you get that idea from?

That’s pretty much the whole point of a plug in hybrid. My neighbors have a Porsche Cayenne hybrid and like to play a game called “how many months can I drive it before having to fill the gas tank.”

PHEV is the solution for “the rest of us” who say they’ll never drive a pure BEV. If we want 100% adoption, it’s necessarily.

That, and there’s plenty of easy arguments that show that they’re better for the environment than a pure BEV.

 

[thekat03]

And what we really want/need is much simpler-

SUV with 50 miles electric and 500 miles hybrid range.

Maybe the best part about the above vehicle? We need ZERO extra infrastructure.

No. I do not want to back to an ICE car. I had a crap EV, and still realized that driving an EV is awesome. Sure, especially right now, with infrastructure in North America as patchy as it is, it's not for everyone. I can and will road trip my EV, and feel the slower charging is a fair trade for no tail pipe emmisions, no filling up on gas, always having a full "tank" every morning, and driving a car I love. We need a mix of vehicles, and we need to continue to move towards more fuel efficient vehicles, so hybrids, plug-in hybrids, and full EVs.

 

[dbsb3233]

Plug in hybrids are mostly never plugged in?

Where did you get that idea from?

That’s pretty much the whole point of a plug in hybrid. My neighbors have a Porsche Cayenne hybrid and like to play a game called “how many months can I drive it before having to fill the gas tank.”

PHEV is the solution for “the rest of us” who say they’ll never drive a pure BEV. If we want 100% adoption, it’s necessarily.

That, and there’s plenty of easy arguments that show that they’re better for the environment than a pure BEV.

There was a study done a few years back that constantly gets referred to (often by the EV purists) that said PHEVs only get plugged in a small% of the time. I was skeptical of the findings from the start, mostly because it doesn't make much sense NOT to plug in overnight when you can easily do so.

That's the key. Obviously the reason that someone buys a PHEV instead of a pure EV is that they can't plug in all the time and need gas some of the time. So I'd never expect it to be plugged in the vast majority of the time. IMO, the reasonable usage pattern for a PHEV is to plug in at home overnight and have 20-30 cheap miles per day before it kicks over to gas. And that's it. I wouldn't be chasing plugs all day when out and about. That would be a PITA. But I would plug in every night at home.

Anyone that CAN easily plug in their PHEV at home at night, but isn't, is just stupidly costing themselves money. Or perhaps it's ignorance (they just don't know). Another case of more education needed.

 

[Mach1E]

No. I do not want to back to an ICE car. I had a crap EV, and still realized that driving an EV is awesome. Sure, especially right now, with infrastructure in North America as patchy as it is, it's not for everyone. I can and will road trip my EV, and feel the slower charging is a fair trade for no tail pipe emmisions, no filling up on gas, always having a full "tank" every morning, and driving a car I love. We need a mix of vehicles, and we need to continue to move towards more fuel efficient vehicles, so hybrids, plug-in hybrids, and full EVs.

That’s your use case.

But for 100% adoption (or close to it) of more efficient and environmentally conscious vehicles, PHEV is the solution.

And your last sentence is exactly what I agree with. We do need it all, but manufacturers (and the government) seem hyper focused on the most difficult and most expensive solution, pure BEV.

Unfortunately it’s also the one that requires the most resources to make the batteries.

I want electric cars.

But I don’t think manufacturers should target 100% electric (unless they’re a limited model new manufacturer like Rivian or Tesla).

 

[Mach1E]

There was a study done a few years back that constantly gets referred to (often by the EV purists) that said PHEVs only get plugged in a small% of the time. I was skeptical of the findings from the start, mostly because it doesn't make much sense NOT to plug in overnight when you can easily do so.

That's the key. Obviously the reason that someone buys a PHEV instead of a pure EV is that they can't plug in all the time and need gas some of the time. So I'd never expect it to be plugged in the vast majority of the time. IMO, the reasonable usage pattern for a PHEV is to plug in at home overnight and have 20-30 cheap miles per day before it kicks over to gas. And that's it. I wouldn't be chasing plugs all day when out and about. That would be a PITA. But I would plug in every night at home.

Anyone that CAN easily plug in their PHEV at home at night, but isn't, is just stupidly costing themselves money. Or perhaps it's ignorance (they just don't know). Another case of more education needed.

Yeah, I have a hard time believing any homeowner with a PHEV wouldn’t plug it in.

People are cheap and lazy. And plugging it in is cheaper and lazier than going to a gas station.

 

[Billyk24]

Opinion:

The development cycle for cars is several years, at a cost of billions of dollars. The mad dash to build EVs moved faster than the normal economic conditions that usually mold the automotive business cycle. i.e. new technology, ( solid state batteries) interest rates, etc.

It would make no sense to invest billions in battery plants when Toyota is claiming solid state batteries with twice the range, smaller, lighter and faster charging rates. When you consider the current negatives of EV's it is range, weight, and charging speed. So, any auto company that can build an EV that is lighter and goes twice as far as their competitors is going to have the market advantage.

Ironically, the current hottest selling ( and short supply) vehicles are hybrids, plug in or w/o plug in. Toyota was the first company to introduce a hybrid vehicle, 2000 Prius and now every auto manufacture offers hybrids. ( At the time of the Prius introduction, it was "poo poo'd" by the industry, but not anymore. )

Right now, if you wanted to buy a new hybridFord Maverick ,Escape, or Toyota Hybrid, in some cases you cannot even place an order and if you can it is a 1 year delivery wait time. There are cases were a used Hybrid is commanding prices over new MSRP! I recently visited a Ford dealer that was selling used Hybrid Mavericks at $8k over MSRP! Yikes . .

Ford has a problem. They made a commitment to EVs, but chose the wrong battery technology and the amount of investment and time needed to catch up and compete is a problem. They invested billions, put cannot quickly change direction. Other competitors that waited, (like Toyota) are well into the development cycle and it looks like they will have the battery technology advantage. It takes 3 to 5 years to bring a new vehicle to market and Toyota is at least 1 to 2 years ahead of Ford. Add a UAW strike and new contract that will drive prices up, and for Ford, GM & Chrysler it is the perfect storm. I have seen comments lately that EVs are too expensive. Well, have you priced a new or used hybrid car or pickup lately?


My prediction is, the US auto companies will be scrambling for the next 2 to 3 years, as Toyota gets even bigger. The big 3 in the US will struggle to be profitable and they will shorten new product development cycle times, or die.

Short term, the market will buy hybrids from whom ever and whenever it can. New technology plug in hybrids will be hot items. Current plug in Hybrid range is barely 50 miles, but with the new solid batteries it should jump to about 100 and that will drive more enthusiasm.

Future new EVs will have double the range but first mover advantage goes to the Japanese, not the US manufactures. I suspect most of the new EV startups will fail, they have no backup ability to quicly build hybrid vehicles. Within a couple of years, the market could be dominated by plug in Hybrids and solid state battery EVs. Any car manufacture that does not have these options in their product line is going to suffer.

The "game is afoot" we shall see what happens next . . . . . . ?

800V platforms exist and "can" do the 20 to 80% road trip charge a lot faster than the Mach E or other 400V platform cars. Increased charger locations can ease road tripping issues. Slowing EV sales in the usa can be countered by selling in new markets/countries. Yes the Mach E is somewhat limited by its battery tech.

 

[Peugfan]

Opinion:

The development cycle for cars is several years, at a cost of billions of dollars. The mad dash to build EVs moved faster than the normal economic conditions that usually mold the automotive business cycle. i.e. new technology, ( solid state batteries) interest rates, etc.

It would make no sense to invest billions in battery plants when Toyota is claiming solid state batteries with twice the range, smaller, lighter and faster charging rates. When you consider the current negatives of EV's it is range, weight, and charging speed. So, any auto company that can build an EV that is lighter and goes twice as far as their competitors is going to have the market advantage.

Ironically, the current hottest selling ( and short supply) vehicles are hybrids, plug in or w/o plug in. Toyota was the first company to introduce a hybrid vehicle, 2000 Prius and now every auto manufacture offers hybrids. ( At the time of the Prius introduction, it was "poo poo'd" by the industry, but not anymore. )

Right now, if you wanted to buy a new hybridFord Maverick ,Escape, or Toyota Hybrid, in some cases you cannot even place an order and if you can it is a 1 year delivery wait time. There are cases were a used Hybrid is commanding prices over new MSRP! I recently visited a Ford dealer that was selling used Hybrid Mavericks at $8k over MSRP! Yikes . .

Ford has a problem. They made a commitment to EVs, but chose the wrong battery technology and the amount of investment and time needed to catch up and compete is a problem. They invested billions, put cannot quickly change direction. Other competitors that waited, (like Toyota) are well into the development cycle and it looks like they will have the battery technology advantage. It takes 3 to 5 years to bring a new vehicle to market and Toyota is at least 1 to 2 years ahead of Ford. Add a UAW strike and new contract that will drive prices up, and for Ford, GM & Chrysler it is the perfect storm. I have seen comments lately that EVs are too expensive. Well, have you priced a new or used hybrid car or pickup lately?


My prediction is, the US auto companies will be scrambling for the next 2 to 3 years, as Toyota gets even bigger. The big 3 in the US will struggle to be profitable and they will shorten new product development cycle times, or die.

Short term, the market will buy hybrids from whom ever and whenever it can. New technology plug in hybrids will be hot items. Current plug in Hybrid range is barely 50 miles, but with the new solid batteries it should jump to about 100 and that will drive more enthusiasm.

Future new EVs will have double the range but first mover advantage goes to the Japanese, not the US manufactures. I suspect most of the new EV startups will fail, they have no backup ability to quicly build hybrid vehicles. Within a couple of years, the market could be dominated by plug in Hybrids and solid state battery EVs. Any car manufacture that does not have these options in their product line is going to suffer.

The "game is afoot" we shall see what happens next . . . . . . ?

I agree with most of your analysis, BUT, I'm having difficulty believing Toyota and it's partner, Idemitsu, can bring the solid state technology to market quickly without some hiccups. They are only now building a pilot plant for the production of the lithium sulfide. The chemistry of making lithium sulfide is no trivial matter although they do have patents on the process. Remember this is the company that was betting on hydrogen technology as the future for ev's. Regardless, I am sure they will make plenty of money on hybrids in the interim and Toyota has deep pockets of cash. JMO

Sponsored