Production Delay Extended...

[detansinn]

Well, my original date of 2/6, which got bumped to 2/13, then 2/20, is now showing 3/21. They added a month this time, not a week.

Go online and check your status.

Sponsored

 

[ctuan13]

You have to wonder if the earliest built lightnings will be “better quality” when you read
“ it will take time “to ensure they are back to building high-quality cells and to deliver them to the Lightning production line.“


It almost reads like the first run of SK batteries was top notch and now they are cutting corners due to ramping up production. The first 2022s without features missing and lack of widespread battery issues initially (except hoovies garage) as well as the lower price point now make me feel that the earliest adopters really lucked out compared to the current one .

Feels like a rare occurrence where the beta testers and bleeding edge adopters wound up with the best possible scenario.

Yeah, it'll definitely be interesting to see if this is actually true...

 

[detansinn]

Given an additional month for a vehicle that has already sitting at my local port for weeks, I am calling it — Ford is replacing the batteries in all of the trucks that are currently being held. That’s what’s happening here. SK made changes and Ford isn’t going to risk a customer Lightning fire. , yes, but for the best.

 

[detansinn]

The legacy tracker is now showing an even more pessimistic range.

 

[luebri]

You have to wonder if the earliest built lightnings will be “better quality” when you read
“ it will take time “to ensure they are back to building high-quality cells and to deliver them to the Lightning production line.“


It almost reads like the first run of SK batteries was top notch and now they are cutting corners due to ramping up production. The first 2022s without features missing and lack of widespread battery issues initially (except hoovies garage) as well as the lower price point now make me feel that the earliest adopters really lucked out compared to the current one .

Feels like a rare occurrence where the beta testers and bleeding edge adopters wound up with the best possible scenario.

The problem with this theory is they really haven’t “ramped up” production all that much yet. The big ramp is in September 2023. I haven’t looked at the week by week numbers in a while but I thought the most trucks built per week were in August ‘22 (around 900) and they actually slowed down later in 2022.

 

[TaxmanHog]

I haven’t looked at the week by week numbers in a while but I thought the most trucks built per week were in August ‘22 (around 900) and they actually slowed down later in 2022.

My data link

The recent weeks are questionable, ex 2/6, 2/13 & 2/20 previously scheduled by delayed, need to be built when production reopens 3/6, 3/13 & 3/20

Then subsequent weeks where no VIN's have been scheduled will be reassigned to later weeks 3/27 onward....

 

[detansinn]

My data link

The recent weeks are questionable, ex 2/6, 2/13 & 2/20 previously scheduled by delayed, need to be built when production reopens 3/6, 3/13 & 3/20

Then subsequent weeks where no VIN's have been scheduled will be reassigned to later weeks 3/27 onward....

I just see this sheet and think about the number of Lightnings currently sitting in Dearborn, and in transit, that are all going to require some kind of remediation prior to delivery to address the battery issue.

 

[TaxmanHog]

I just see this sheet and think about the number of Lightnings currently sitting in Dearborn, and in transit, that are all going to require some kind of remediation prior to delivery to address the battery issue.

Hopefully a 50/50 or 70/30 new production to revision split in resources, but who knows for certain how many already built trucks are impacted.

 

[detansinn]

Hopefully a 50/50 or 70/30 new production to revision split in resources, but who knows for certain how many already built trucks are impacted.

I suspect that it’s all of them, because this hold is devastating $-wise. Whatever SK did with their process, Ford isn’t going to risk a Bolt situation. Any truck released now is going to have a battery produced under the manufacturing process revisions.

I’d be looking for a 100/0 split in resources to address the customers with trucks already produced, but being held. If customers with later production dates get their trucks earlier than those that have been held, that’s not right.

My order was confirmed back in early October. If Ford meets this new timeline, it will have been six months from Order to Delivery. While the cause of the delay is reasonable, Ford needs to make it right those of us with trucks already produced and being held in transit.

 

[luebri]

Me reading the tea leaves from the Ford public comments there must be some point of delineation that makes Ford confident, based on use, that previously manufactured trucks are not affected.

“ We have no reason to believe F-150 Lightnings already in customers’ hands are affected by this issue. We monitor vehicle data to help ensure our vehicles are performing as expected in the field”

Based on the comment it must either be successful charges or just normal use with no affect on the retrievable battery data over cellular that makes them feel the battery is not potentially at risk from the identified manufacturing issue. In short whatever could go wrong would show itself immediately without need to physically analyze the hardware.

All this said, my guess is they release the vast vast majority of the in transit vehicles without physically touching the battery hardware in any matter.

If this were not the case I do not know how they could honestly be confident in use trucks are not susceptible to the issue.

 

[TaxmanHog]

I’d be looking for a 100/0 split in resources to address the customers with trucks already produced, but being held

No for two reasons,

1. there are many trucks on local storage hold that are missing secondary parts which might have a perfectly good battery, once they get what is missing loadem up on the rail car.

2. they need to get the line rolling even at a reduced pace and work backwards out of the revision work, they've done this on the production stoppage last year.

 

[luebri]

No for two reasons,

1. there are many trucks on local storage hold that are missing secondary parts which might have a perfectly good battery, once they get what is missing loadem up on the rail car.

2. they need to get the line rolling even at a reduced pace and work backwards out of the revision work, they've done this on the production stoppage last year.

3. Assembly line personnel are trained to do one 45 to 90 second task over and over and over. They are not by any means qualified service technicians. There is literally nothing the typical assembly line personnel can do to help with the on hold trucks so they might as well be putting their efforts to making new trucks.

 

[detansinn]

It all comes down to how quickly they can address the issue for the trucks are currently being held in transit. If we get to May/June and my truck is still sitting at the Port of Wilmington, about an hour from my house, with later production dates already delivered to customers, I will probably be driving an R1T.

When the Felicity Ace sunk, Porsche made producing those replacement cars a priority and provided detailed communications to customers and impacted dealers. When there were supply chain issues during the pandemic, both Porsche and BMW had messages up in there trackers giving customers reasons for various delays.

Ford has been remarkably useless on customer communications here. There's no indication in the tracker as to what's going on and why dates keep moving. I haven't received a single email from Ford on this issue. We're all left waiting for the press/blogs to report on something and read into the tea leaves as to what's going on. "Please contact your dealer for updates".

Heck, if the truck actually shows up at the end of March, as suggested by the new date, I will be happy. That being said, I'll be happier if they beat it.

I'm not giving up yet, but it would be nice for Ford to act as if there are customers behind all of these orders being held up and delayed.

 

[luebri]

My truck took 2 months to get from Michigan to Wisconsin and there were no “holds” on mine at the time. Plenty of other vehicles built after mine got delivered way prior to mine. The communication was absolutely nothing. I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but I would be absolutely shocked if you get any special reaction or communication regarding “on hold” trucks. Ford is truly incompetent regarding transparent customer communication.

As I stated above your best bet, is they simply lift the hold and there’s nothing they need to physically do. If they do need to physically touch in transit vehicles, it will be a long long process and many soon to be assembled trucks will likely be delivered prior to the currently “on hold” vehicles.

 

[metroshot]

Anyone remember the late summer of 2022 when Ford quietly replaced a number of half drive spline motors in '22 Lightnings held in MI and at rail depots that were attended to by mobile Ford techs ?

That replacement caused a month to 2 months of delay.

So not unusual Ford is going to take their time....

Sponsored