OKTB today..?

[ajmartineau]

OKTC... "OK to Communicate" is what I'm looking for. Ok Ford, let us know why there's a delay. Don't be that guy. It's been long enough for you to have a strategy on how to release this information without hurting sales more than remaining silent.

Sponsored

 

[agoldman]

Ford has said that they will make special arrangements to deliver at least some cars before the end of the year so that they can honor their promise of deliveries "starting in late 2020". As we get closer to Christmas, the cost of those special transportation arrangements goes up. But even if the OKTB happens the day after Christmas, they can spend money to send a car transport truck directly from the factory to a dealer to make the deadline. There just won't be very many of those.

What's the point? So three people can have cars and they can say they delivered in 2020 on schedule. Not buying it. "Honor their promise" gets some leeway in the middle of Covid.

 

[Kamuelaflyer]

OKTC... "OK to Communicate" is what I'm looking for. Ok Ford, let us know why there's a delay. Don't be that guy. It's been long enough for you to have a strategy on how to release this information without hurting sales more than remaining silent.

OKTB is an internal window relating to quality control. There would be very few people outside of this forum who would even have a clue that such a thing existed. There's no need to be telling us they installed the wrong sun-visor in 100 cars or that 203 cars have a software issue that takes a couple of hours per car to upload a corrected software package, reboot, and test. Or whatever the issue is. Having that information will only cause needless angst among some folks and won't result in a single MME being delivered even 1 minute sooner.

And whatever the issue is, that information is proprietary to Ford.

 

[kdryden99]

Let them take their time. Its a 100% brand new car. At this point hold them until the new year and hit the ground running at that point. For me I was already expecting the march april delivery to be a june july delivery and this delay is pretty much confirming that unless covid continues to prolong the delay in Mexico and the U.S.

 

[janitorjim]

more time the larger down payment they get from me. plus the better chance to test drive a actual production version cause I have no problem cancelling my order if my first impression is bad

 

[engnrng]

No, not even close. "Below average" is not "terrible", it's just below the average of other vehicles. And it's only referring to predicted reliability. Doesn't say a thing about the myriad of other aspects that combine to make something a great or 'terrible' vehicle.

It's simply one slice. For all we know they'll say all the other aspects are great once they're able to drive one.

OK, so it will have "below average" reliability, sure, I always recommend to my family and friends to buy "below average" cars, they are just fine. /S My point is that someone who reads that CR article, then sees the claim from their web site that they are providing an "expert" determination of "below average" reliability, will rationally conclude that they should wait a few years before considering a Ford Mach -E. You are making a distinction in wording, more people make a buy/no-buy decision based on claimed expertise from CR. Yes, this is another rant. I have had to fight misinformation and/or vague conclusions and negative implications from CR regarding hybrids and EV's for over 15 years. If all they had said was, "We don't know enough yet." I would not be posting this. Instead, they are saying, "We are experts in reliability and this vehicle IS below average." Using "expert" implies that weight of credibility.

 

[generaltso]

What's the point? So three people can have cars and they can say they delivered in 2020 on schedule. Not buying it. "Honor their promise" gets some leeway in the middle of Covid.

Yes, that’s exactly the point. If they don’t deliver any in 2020, there will be news about how they missed their planned launch time. Deliver at least one and they didn’t miss the “deliveries starting in late 2020” promise. It may be a technicality, but it will allow them to continue saying that they have met or exceeded all targets. That’s probably worth the cost of special delivery of at least one car to at least one dealer.

 

[TheVirtualTim]

Of the three important launches for Ford this Fall, Mach E seems to be the only one at risk of missing the company's target.

The all new Bronco Sport was Job 1 in Mexico on 10/26 and vehicles are already shipped and at dealers and in customers driveways with the first sales recorded in Nov.

The mostly new 2021 F-150 was Job 1 at Dearborn on 10/12 and Kansas City on 11/9 and also are shipped and at dealers and customer driveways.

Mach E is still waiting for OKTB as far as we know.

If only it were being built in Dearborn... that plant is about 15 minutes from my house (that would REALLY shorten the delivery timeline!)

That plant does public tours via The Henry Ford (although not currently allowing public tours at the moment): https://www.thehenryford.org/visit/ford-rouge-factory-tour/
Living in Dearborn and having worked in/with the auto industry for a fair percentage of my career, I never bothered to take the tour. But a friend up visiting from Dallas *really* wanted to see the plant (he's a car guy and had never watched cars being built before). They do a really nice job of the tour.

 

[dbsb3233]

Of the three important launches for Ford this Fall, Mach E seems to be the only one at risk of missing the company's target.

The all new Bronco Sport was Job 1 in Mexico on 10/26 and vehicles are already shipped and at dealers and in customers driveways with the first sales recorded in Nov.

The mostly new 2021 F-150 was Job 1 at Dearborn on 10/12 and Kansas City on 11/9 and also are shipped and at dealers and customer driveways.

Mach E is still waiting for OKTB as far as we know.

But they weren't all expected to launch at the exact same time. Can't really compare them against each other when they had different targets. Especially when COVID reshuffled things.

Nov 23 has been the target OKTB date ever since the COVID restart. We're only 10 days past that target. I'd give it a lot more time than that before declaring any significant delay. So far we're well within a normal leeway window.

 

[dbsb3233]

OK, so it will have "below average" reliability, sure, I always recommend to my family and friends to buy "below average" cars, they are just fine. /S My point is that someone who reads that CR article, then sees the claim from their web site that they are providing an "expert" determination of "below average" reliability, will rationally conclude that they should wait a few years before considering a Ford Mach -E. You are making a distinction in wording, more people make a buy/no-buy decision based on claimed expertise from CR. Yes, this is another rant. I have had to fight misinformation and/or vague conclusions and negative implications from CR regarding hybrids and EV's for over 15 years. If all they had said was, "We don't know enough yet." I would not be posting this. Instead, they are saying, "We are experts in reliability and this vehicle IS below average." Using "expert" implies that weight of credibility.

I'm no fan of CR, but I think it's an overreaction to look at just ONE of their many car rating criteria and suggest that ruins the whole car for most potential buyers. I betcha if you look at the multiple criteria CR rates cars on, MANY very popular models have at least one area that they get a below-average rating on. I don't have a subscription so I can't look anything up, but I have seen some of their ratings before. Most vehicles have at least one area with a weaker mark.

And the biggest guesswork area is always "reliability". It's far more useful for used cars, but not much for new cars. As I said above, by the time reliability starts showing up as an issue, the model is probably at least 4-5 years old by then. And by then, the manufacturer has likely redesigned or refreshed the model for new ones anyway. It's pretty useless for new cars.

But, their point about models that have more features that are unproven is likely sound. There is likely a higher chance of there being issues than there is on models with more tested and proven features. That's just common sense.

But I'm not too concerned about that. 1st year models are always more likely to have bugs. That's always been the case. OTA capability should be able to fix a lot of those bugs remotely, reducing the number of times we have to take it in for service.

 

[SnBGC]

Building EVs is hard. I think VW, GM, Nissan and Tesla will tell you the same thing. This EV has some very high expectations and so far Ford has met or exceeded each one. Sometimes by a little, sometimes by a lot.

The OKTB process is probably one of those things where they hold themselves and their partners accountable and won't send it to market until it meets their very high expectations. I can do business with a company that thinks like that. I will wait until Ford says it's right.

I am looking forward to the day when shipping starts. That will be exciting.

 

[krafty81]

Ford took a beating in a recent Consumer Reports article. They are giving the Mach-E a bad rating, even before testing the car!!!

So Ford wants it to be right. I am giving them the time they need on this one....

Here is that article:

https://www.consumerreports.org/hybrids-evs/reliability-problems-plague-newer-electric-cars/

Jim

I think the article is fair. First year models of ICE or EVs will usually have more issues. I think most of us understand that and are willing to deal with it to get our hands on a cool car. My first year Escape (2013) had no issues except for the crappy MFT. CR punished Ford for years over that system.

 

[JCHLi]

OK, so it will have "below average" reliability, sure, I always recommend to my family and friends to buy "below average" cars, they are just fine. /S My point is that someone who reads that CR article, then sees the claim from their web site that they are providing an "expert" determination of "below average" reliability, will rationally conclude that they should wait a few years before considering a Ford Mach -E. You are making a distinction in wording, more people make a buy/no-buy decision based on claimed expertise from CR. Yes, this is another rant. I have had to fight misinformation and/or vague conclusions and negative implications from CR regarding hybrids and EV's for over 15 years. If all they had said was, "We don't know enough yet." I would not be posting this. Instead, they are saying, "We are experts in reliability and this vehicle IS below average." Using "expert" implies that weight of credibility.

In my opinion, giving a car a reliability rating of "below average" is like giving a student a "D" before class starts based on the "expert" opinion that they are going to struggle.

I understand that there is a desire to forecast future reliability (although the success of forecasting is highly suspect in my opinion), but it should have at least a minimal amount of factual basis. In this case, a new vehicle with no background other then who builds it, where it is built and the fact that it's an EV doesn't seem sufficient to give out a "below average" grade. They could just as well give it an "incomplete", starting that there just isn't enough data yet to give a grade. They could still inform consumers about the general risks of reliability when buying a new model line vehicle.

 

[dbsb3233]

I think the article is fair. First year models of ICE or EVs will usually have more issues. I think most of us understand that and are willing to deal with it to get our hands on a cool car. My first year Escape (2013) had no issues except for the crappy MFT. CR punished Ford for years over that system.

That's exactly us too. We have two first-year 2013 Escapes, and had two first-year 2001 Escapes before that. All 4 have been great. A few minor things but overall reliability was great. Probably the most dependable vehicles we've owned in 40+ years of owning vehicles.

 

[machefan]

I think the article is fair. First year models of ICE or EVs will usually have more issues. I think most of us understand that and are willing to deal with it to get our hands on a cool car. My first year Escape (2013) had no issues except for the crappy MFT. CR punished Ford for years over that system.

Problem is that should be the main focus of the article, not a way to bash the MACH-E or EV's in general. CR is calling out that they have given the MACH-E a below reliability rating because it's in it's first year. They really are just saying anything in its first year should be avoided. I agree with this too, but in this case I wanted the first edition and I need a car now. So with the said I am going to take that risk and enjoy one cool toy.

Anyway, who wants a Tesla, cool people like me don't - kidding, nothing wrong with them, but in my neck of the woods everyone has one, but no one has a MACH-E yet.

Sponsored