Current F-150 model life extended; next-gen F-150 delayed until at least mid-2028

[RickBullotta]

Move or transform atoms, yet.
The labor/employment transformation won't be what people want, but those being lured into receiving a revenue share UBI structure won't have much of a choice. Having various levels based upon one's willingness to contribute where they're needed is a logical progression.

Never been a better time to learn a trade. Seriously.

Sponsored

 

[JExpedition07]

That’s what I have been telling my employees, they are safe and are in to earn a lot of money in the coming years. A lot of my friends from college are not. I went and got my degree but I don’t use it, those that do rely on the degree are in a world of trouble because AI can code, analyze deals, keep a balance sheet, do data entry, analyze the data better than humans can. What it can’t do, is awkwardly hoist up a 25 ton RTU or VRF system/ build a cooler & freezer assembly like we can. Lots of white collar jobs are going to be eliminated by AI. Millions.

If you get in now and own the trucks, own the tools, own the software, own the equipment….you should be secure to do business in the AI age and even have AI assist you. Establish now or it’ll be you vs AI not you and AI vs the world!!

 

[HammaMan]

Yeah, what's happening with govt restructuring is just the tip of the iceberg compared to what's coming. Not going to be many sitting around jobs left, unless it's in the cab of a vehicle/machine and even those days are numbered.

 

[RustyL]

Perhaps they will spend more time perfecting Sync 4 for future generations!?!?!

 

[RancidRacer]

So what is this group's opinion on how this gen15 delay affects our current generation 14 models on the used market?

 

[JCsTruck]

Obviously values of the generation 14 models will remain elevated until the newer generation is released.

 

[roadPilot]

Before retiring from F.M.C., my dad (licensed P.E. Mechanical Engineer) where he was a powerhouse engineer, he had an opportunity to go to Dearborn where he met an engineer who designed engines. He shared with my dad they already had the technology to build engines capable of 100 mpg, but the government would not allow it. I believe it to this day - after all how is it that 2021 F-150 with a 3.5 eco gets better mpg than an 2020 Explorer Sport with the same engine? I know they are not the exact same engine, but the F-150 weighs considerably more and had 35 more horsepower. Another example, a friend had an early 2000's Geo Prizm that got better mpg than a 15 year newer Carola? I'm no engineer myself, but things are not adding up.

Yea, Ford would rather lose $4.7 BILLION in 2023 and another $5.9 BILLION in 2024 on BEVs than build a more efficient ICE engine that they already have the technology for.

Sorry, ain't buying it.

For the record, my dad was a designer and engineer on several Ford V8 engines into the early 2000s.

 

[Pelican]

Yea, Ford would rather lose $4.7 BILLION in 2023 and another $5.9 BILLION in 2024 on BEVs than build a more efficient ICE engine that they already have the technology for.

Sorry, ain't buying it.

For the record, my dad was a designer and engineer on several Ford V8 engines into the early 2000s.

I'm not sure how to interpret "Sorry, ain't buying it", but my 34 years of working experience has taught me that many times the government dictates what is and is not manufactured as it always comes down to money. More efficient engines equates to less tax revenue from the workers employed in the oil ndustry all the way to the end user.

This is just my opinion.

 

[roadPilot]

I'm not sure how to interpret "Sorry, ain't buying it", but my 34 years of working experience has taught me that many times the government dictates what is and is not manufactured as it always comes down to money. More efficient engines equates to less tax revenue from the workers employed in the oil ndustry all the way to the end user.

This is just my opinion.

It means thier claims of 100 mpg vehicles being withheld are bullchit. If the government wanted the same revenue with a 100 mpg vehicle, they'd have switched to a tax based on miles driven instead of gallons purchased.

Nearly 40 years working for Ford and Chrysler and Tier 1 suppliers on this end.

 

[Pelican]

It means thier claims of 100 mpg vehicles being withheld are bullchit. If the government wanted the same revenue with a 100 mpg vehicle, they'd have switched to a tax based on miles driven instead of gallons purchased.

Nearly 40 years working for Ford and Chrysler and Tier 1 suppliers on this end.

While I appreciate iate your thoughts, I believe 100mpg is possible. It's not as simple as looking at gasoline taxes. IMO, its more about what it would do to the economy. There would be a significant loss of revenue due to the high paying jobs in the oil industry and trucking, not to mention the tax on company profits, dividiends, etc. I agree, there wpuld be little to no ta revenue lost at the pump. Again, it's much bigger than that.I'm willing to go out on a limb by saying it's about protecting phoney baloney jobs.

If a Prius is capable of 57mpg, then why not 100 mpg's? The Geo Prizm I mentioned previously averged 38 and sometimes more mpg's and that was 100% ice. I'm not buying into what others are thrying to sell me.

The same can be said for the paving industry. One of my clients does a lot of work for the asphalt paving industry. One of his customers has developed a formula for asphalt that will last 20+ years, but no government entity is interested because they are very well aware of the revenue generated from repaving roads.

IMO, I'm convinced the auto industry is light years of ahead of what's being produced. Unfortunately for us, the gocernemt has their grimy fingers in it pulling the levers just like in a hand pupit show.

 

[Snakebitten]

Heard these claims all the way back to the 60's.

It would take a worldwide conspiracy to stop any and every manufacturer on the planet from exposing their ability to build a vehicle that destroys the competition by a factor of 2 regarding fuel economy.

Unless of course it would be economically unprofitable or not practical to bring to market. A $100,000 Toyota Corolla wouldn't sell, is what I mean.

 

[HammaMan]

It's a function of aero drag, bearing friction, drivetrain loss, as well as tire resistance. EVs don't come with unusually narrow tires for nothing while focusing heavily on aero.

Tesla's model 3 is pretty much the most efficient vehicle on the road. Their talent pool is unmatched in the auto industry, or industry as whole sans spacex and anduril.

Can't wait to see their new manufacturing process for 'Q'.

 

[Forumlurker24]

Heard these claims all the way back to the 60's.

It would take a worldwide conspiracy to stop any and every manufacturer on the planet from exposing their ability to build a vehicle that destroys the competition by a factor of 2 regarding fuel economy.

Unless of course it would be economically unprofitable or not practical to bring to market. A $100,000 Toyota Corolla wouldn't sell, is what I mean.

To be entirely fair the lightbulb industry did something similar to this, although they directly benefit from people buying more bulbs than car companies from more gas

 

[HammaMan]

The US is the largest producer of petroleum on the planet as well as the largest crude/refined crude exporter. There's zero reason to artificially restrain ICE efficiency.

Yes, the lightbulb guys were some of the first to introduce engineered obsolescence but that's a tangent really to the discussion as it stands. There's still some shenanigans going on in LED bulb manufacturing as well. I have a cheap homedepot LED that's remained on 24/7 for 5 years now though. 43k+ hours and counting.

 

[Pelican]

Very good discussion and thoughts by all. It's enlightening to have these discussions with so many people from different backgrounds as we've seen so many different perspectives. Thanks

Sponsored