Ford cancels Model e Dealer Program, letting all US retailers sell EVs

[dbsb3233]

If you want to break it down to most people.

Most people don’t drive more than 200 miles in a single day more than a couple times at most per year. Needing 500 miles of range isn’t an actual barrier for most people.

Most people could use the savings form gas from charging at home the 99.9% of the time and rent a vehicle for said road trip and end up in a better position.

Oh I agree that most people don't need 500 miles of range either. That's just what Mike was saying he wants.

While we'd all love 500 miles of range for a decent price and performance (and maybe that will be possible in the future), it's not today and doesn't look to be anywhere close for years. It would add a ton of cost and a ton of weight, making it prohibitive for most.

Maybe next decade. In the mean time, market share in the US will likely remain an ICE/hybrid majority until there's a quantum leap in battery energy density and cost.

Sponsored

 

[Sikkun]

Oh I agree that most people don't need 500 miles of range either. That's just what Mike was saying he wants.

While we'd all love 500 miles of range for a decent price and performance (and maybe that will be possible in the future), it's not today and doesn't look to be anywhere close for years. It would add a ton of cost and a ton of weight, making it prohibitive for most.

Maybe next decade. In the mean time, market share in the US will likely remain an ICE/hybrid majority until there's a quantum leap in battery energy density and cost.

Of course, I would take 500 mile range. I’d take 1,000 mile range.

I just think 200-300 mile is good enough for mass adoption, it’s also in the realm of the range of gas vehicles.

So the problem is more solved by adding DC fast chargers to every major interstate truck/travel center than doubling the range.

 

[Sikkun]

There are a lot of people who do not have the ability to charge at home. So if your preposition is correct, only those who have the ability to charge at home are able to handle the current range BEVs offer. Imagine needing to find an open DCFC every day, or every other day. What a horrible experience that would be. So take them out. They cannot be BEV owners and live a life worth living, IMO.

With DC fast charging barely being cheaper and often even being more expensive than gas.

Without forced government regulation or forced market change. BEV is going to be a tough to sell to those people.

Once you sold to people who thinks it’s better for the planet, or just think the tech is cool. How do you get someone to switch when it cost them more money? Even with 500 mile range.

 

[dbsb3233]

Of course, I would take 500 mile range. I’d take 1,000 mile range.

I just think 200-300 mile is good enough for mass adoption, it’s also in the realm of the range of gas vehicles.

So the problem is more solved by adding DC fast chargers to every major interstate truck/travel center than doubling the range.

More/better charging on road trips routes is certainly needed. Adding Superchargers to the mix sure helps, but it's still got a long way to go, especially since V2s are still the norm in so many states (esp. in western & central states).

But I wouldn't put 300 EV range and 300 ICE range in the same bucket, because there's so many key differences. Gas refuels to 100% in 3 minutes; EVs refuel to 80% in ~30 minutes. They also lose mileage at a faster rate at interstate speeds, and lose mileage for heating in cooler months. And as you mentioned, not enough DCFC coverage such that you often have to shorten a leg because the next DCFC is 70 miles further.

As a general rule, I'd apply a 1.5x factor when comparing ICE range to EV range (i.e. 300 really means a practical 200 in an EV).

 

[dbsb3233]

With DC fast charging barely being cheaper and often even being more expensive than gas.

Without forced government regulation or forced market change. BEV is going to be a tough to sell to those people.

Once you sold to people who thinks it’s better for the planet, or just think the tech is cool. How do you get someone to switch when it cost them more money? Even with 500 mile range.

We shouldn't.

(Be trying to get people without home charging into BEVs, I mean.)

 

[Sikkun]

More/better charging on road trips routes is certainly needed. Adding Superchargers to the mix sure helps, but it's still got a long way to go, especially since V2s are still the norm in so many states (esp. in western & central states).

But I wouldn't put 300 EV range and 300 ICE range in the same bucket, because there's so many key differences. Gas refuels to 100% in 3 minutes; EVs refuel to 80% in ~30 minutes. They also lose mileage at a faster rate at interstate speeds, and lose mileage for heating in cooler months. And as you mentioned, not enough DCFC coverage such that you often have to shorten a leg because the next DCFC is 70 miles further.

As a general rule, I'd apply a 1.5x factor when comparing ICE range to EV range (i.e. 300 really means a practical 200 in an EV).

I agree it’s not 1:1, though I have learned that apparently the amount of time I spend going to the bathroom, grabbing fast food, etc. Is longer than I would have guessed before getting the BEV.

Granted I can’t do the 400 mile run 0 stops, having to pee for multiple hours but not wanting to stop because I am trying to hit a new record…..but I’m getting too old for that.

 

[mkhuffman]

With DC fast charging barely being cheaper and often even being more expensive than gas.

Without forced government regulation or forced market change. BEV is going to be a tough to sell to those people.

Once you sold to people who thinks it’s better for the planet, or just think the tech is cool. How do you get someone to switch when it cost them more money? Even with 500 mile range.

Well, I am 100% against government regulations that force people to do things they don't want to do. What a horrible world to live in when government behaves like that.

Anyway, more range means less pain from DCFC stops. And I really do think BEVs are better in every way except 2:
1. Higher entry cost (which will be solved over time) and
2. Public refueling (the need to public charge can be reduced with longer range vehicles)

Regardless of the number of DCFC stations that are built, it will never be as convenient as public refueling of ICE vehicles, at least in my lifetime. That is why range is so important. Reducing the number of public charging stops is critical for mass acceptance. Again, IMO.

 

[migmig420]

I don't think I'd use GM as an example. It took GM 5 years just to get to the point Ford was at 3 years ago. Their Blazer and Equinox were sitting on the drawing board while thousands were buying actual MMEs.

And they're scaling back EV plans too.

https://www.automotivedive.com/news/gm-evs-abandons-plan-build-400000-mid-2024/697670/

Hyundia/Kia (really one company) are more global, where they have to target Asian and European markets more.

I’m not a GM fan but they have their platform figured out. They sold over 9k EVs last month and it doesn’t even seem like they are “trying”. Ford is still a year or more away at best. Again I love my Mach E. It’s been essentially perfect, but these moves from ford feel like they are playing to lose

 

[dbsb3233]

I agree it’s not 1:1, though I have learned that apparently the amount of time I spend going to the bathroom, grabbing fast food, etc. Is longer than I would have guessed before getting the BEV.

Granted I can’t do the 400 mile run 0 stops, having to pee for multiple hours but not wanting to stop because I am trying to hit a new record…..but I’m getting too old for that.

Same here. By the time we run into Walmart, use the bathroom, walk the store a bit to stretch legs, and get back to the car, it's almost done.

But at the same time, we're usually stopping to charge every 90-120 minutes, and I don't need to pee quite that often. Yet. ?

 

[dbsb3233]

I’m not a GM fan but they have their platform figured out. They sold over 9k EVs last month and it doesn’t even seem like they are “trying”. Ford is still a year or more away at best. Again I love my Mach E. It’s been essentially perfect, but these moves from ford feel like they are playing to lose

Yes and no. GM laid an egg with the initial Blazer EV launch. But it appears they got that mess worked out now.

 

[AKgrampy]

Well, I am 100% against government regulations that force people to do things they don't want to do. What a horrible world to live in when government behaves like that.

Anyway, more range means less pain from DCFC stops. And I really do think BEVs are better in every way except 2:
1. Higher entry cost (which will be solved over time) and
2. Public refueling (the need to public charge can be reduced with longer range vehicles)

Regardless of the number of DCFC stations that are built, it will never be as convenient as public refueling of ICE vehicles, at least in my lifetime. That is why range is so important. Reducing the number of public charging stops is critical for mass acceptance. Again, IMO.

I agree with your positions. When I lived in Greece they made it so you could only drive into Athens on every other weekend (even/odd plates) and after I left every other week. Could you imagine that kind a craziness in the US? However one issue that will not be solved with cheaper cars or longer range is lack of access to L2 charging. That will alway be a major issue as the price differential between home charging and DCFC can be so great and of course many (most?) apartment dwellers will not have access to L2.

 

[rad1234]

who would want to go to a Ford dealer to charge? No thanks. But in a hot market, dealers could return to price gauging I suppose. Not much of an issue at the moment.

who would want to go to a Ford dealer to charge? No thanks. But in a hot market, dealers could return to price gauging I suppose. Not much of an issue at the moment.

Just picked up my Mach E a week ago. The dealer said their only level 2 charger was six years old and broken. They were replacing it as we made the deal. The sales person drove it down the street and charged at a Chevy dealer.

As for charging at a dealership, about 15 miles south of us is another Ford dealership that has a couple level 3 chargers. They are at the corner of two major highways. Just walk across the street for fast food. But, yeah generally a dealership rates next to a dentist office as place I want to be.

 

[Just Lurking]

The problem is it won't make $0.01. It will lose $1 Billion. Or more likely $10 Billion.

I believe they can drive some costs down, but if they're selling a smaller, lower-priced car to get customers in the door, there's just not enough revenue to break even. They'll need to cut costs A LOT, and that will take a long time and a lot of hard work.

CEO Farley has stated multiple times (including on investor calls) that their "Gen 2" EV vehicles will be profitable within the first 12 months of release. We'll see whether they achieve this, but this is absolutely the expectation he's setting with investors.

Those emails wouldn't be so annoying if turning on automatic updates actually resulted in getting OTA updates.

(and the tip to be sure to turn on updates is laughable)

It's interesting that they keep making this request. Maybe there's a significant chunk of owners who have updates off for whatever reason? (Like those who disabled updates to that they wouldn't be forced to have the speedometer to the right.)

It is totally reasonable to wait for the technology to mature and energy density to improve to the point where everyone can afford a 500-mile range BEV.

IMO.

500 is pretty ambitious, and I'm doubtful that will ever become the norm. Google's AI claims the median ICE range is about 400 miles, and while the AI could be quite wrong, I am confident there are plenty of ICE vehicles with a lower than 500 mile range.

As a general rule, I'd apply a 1.5x factor when comparing ICE range to EV range (i.e. 300 really means a practical 200 in an EV).

I don't use exactly the same number but I agree with this in principle. I always discount EV range fairly significantly.

 

[Gloff]

Well, this must be pretty humiliating for the geniuses who rammed through this foolish program just a few months ago. Makes it obvious how little Ford understands its own market. At least they were smart enough to eventually figure out they were on the wrong track, and flexible enough to give it up and start over. So, I'll give them credit for that. But wow, they are looking very clueless these days. Like a deer in the headlights. They better get their act together soon if they want to survive as a major manufacturer for another century.

This program is not months old, it's years.

IMO, Ford should have fronted the cost or at least covered a large portion of the upgrades required for DCFC at the dealer locations. If they did that, they would have gotten a lot less blowback from the dealerships. By making the dealers front the total cost, it turned most dealers off from the program. Most of the rest of the standards were pretty mundane.

Anyway, more range means less pain from DCFC stops. And I really do think BEVs are better in every way except 2:
1. Higher entry cost (which will be solved over time) and
2. Public refueling (the need to public charge can be reduced with longer range vehicles)

Regardless of the number of DCFC stations that are built, it will never be as convenient as public refueling of ICE vehicles, at least in my lifetime. That is why range is so important. Reducing the number of public charging stops is critical for mass acceptance. Again, IMO.

I can't speak to your region of the US, but here in California, the DCFC I've had to use (admittedly, limited) has been fine. Does it take slightly longer than a gas stop? Sure, but I wouldn't say it's such an inconvenience that I lament the task. How many people are really travelling far enough to need more than one DCFC in a day. How many consumers are actually road tripping vs how many like the idea of road tripping, but don't actually do it?

I sell these bad boys for a living, and the biggest thing I noticed among guests that aren't actively shopping for an EV is that they still hold on to misconceptions that are either no longer an issue, or have been minimalized in today's market. Thinks like "they only go 100 miles", "you can't charge it anywhere", "they're way more expensive than a gas car", "I always have to worry about charging my car". Most people don't want to change, so they don't go searching for ways it can fit into their life like the early adopters do. I think there is more than one reason stopping "mass adoption". I think more, and more reliable, DCFC would certainly ease the anxiety that comes with DCFC infrastructure today. Certainly, gas cars ran in to the same issues in the 1910s until the infrastructure was there to support cars.

To your point about higher entry cost: It's actually cheaper to buy in some scenarios than the equivalent gas vehicle, even for vehicles that don't qualify for the tax credit. In those scenarios, it's difficult to explain to guests why a lease to buy works out to more savings. IMO, the IRA had a negative impact on EVs, as now people that were considering an EV stopped because of a lack of understanding of the rules/qualifications for both the vehicle an themselves.

 

[Snakebitten]

Just picked up my Mach E a week ago. The dealer said their only level 2 charger was six years old and broken. They were replacing it as we made the deal. The sales person drove it down the street and charged at a Chevy dealer.

As for charging at a dealership, about 15 miles south of us is another Ford dealership that has a couple level 3 chargers. They are at the corner of two major highways. Just walk across the street for fast food. But, yeah generally a dealership rates next to a dentist office as place I want to be.

2 Ford dealerships separated by just a few miles, and clearly different visions of the EV portion of their product line. I'd suggest they have apposing views of the now withdrawn mandates. Or at least not in alignment.
Not every dealership felt Ford, the manufacturer, was asking outlandish requirements.

Sponsored