Connect with us
ford ford

News

Ford’s top brass sit down with Sandy Munro to discuss the F-150 Lightning

The manufacturing technology in the Rouge Electric Vehicle Center is just as innovative as the F-150 Lightning. It is the first Ford plant without traditional in-floor conveyor lines and instead uses robotic Autonomous Guided Vehicles to move F-150 Lightning trucks from workstation to station in the plant. Due to high demand, the current model year is no longer available for retail order. Contact your dealer for more information.

Published

on

Ford CEO Jim Farley and other company executives were interviewed by Sandy Munro earlier this week, highlighting the work done on the F-150 Lightning, its defining features, as well as Ford’s future more generally.

Sandy Munro of Munro Associates runs a YouTube channel where he and his team dive into different models of vehicles and analyze their dependability, durability, and overall engineering design work. However, Sandy and fellow Munro associate Cory Steuben got to sit down with top leaders from Ford, which included Farley, Linda Zhang, who was the Chief Engineer of the all-electric pickup, and Doug Field, the automaker’s Chief Officer of EVs. Mainly focusing on the F-150 Lightning but also talking about the brand’s future and competitors, the interview culminated as Sandy asked the executive team about possible vertical integration within their manufacturing process, possible partnerships with Tesla, and a possible switch to the Tesla connector as the US default.

The video starts with Sandy getting the keys to his new F-150 Lightning, kindly delivered in person by Jim Farley and the team. However, Sandy quickly moves to ask about the truck and its design.

While Sandy was quick to praise the EV drivetrain and the durability of design, foremost thought the interview; the executive team focused on accessory features instead. Doug Field specifically sees the onboard generator, the large frunk, and the bi-directional power (the feature that allows the truck to power the home during a blackout) as the top reasons consumers have flocked to the new truck. Farley continues by noting that, while he didn’t expect the vehicle’s features to be such a crowd pleaser, he believes that they are the reason consumers aren’t asking “why an EV,” but “why not!”

Advertisement

The rest of the interview generally focuses on the market and the Ford brand. The biggest question is the thought of exponential growth in the EV market. Sandy notes explicitly that the US market had recently reached a 5% market share of EVs, what he calls a “tipping point” in the market. Jim responds positively, noting that he is excited about the chance to expand so quickly, expanding older plants such as “The Rouge” and constructing new plants like their new facility in Tennessee to meet demand. Further, he notes he isn’t worried about the brand’s ability to meet demand.

Another big question on the mind of Sandy (and many others who are interested in EVs) is the question of a partnership with Tesla, as well as the executives’ thoughts on the recent proposal to make the Tesla connector the new US standard. “We consider everything,” Doug responds tritely. The team responds to a Tesla partnership, saying that Ford would need a powerful motivating idea to consider abandoning their independence and partnering with another maker, Tesla or otherwise. However, none of the team concretely answered Sandy’s question about standardizing the Tesla Connector.

The group next addresses the possibility of increased verticle integration within their manufacturing. Software, batteries, and powertrain parts were essential parts where they stated the brand would likely continue to pursue verticle integration, going as far as to call other battery makers such as CATL “competitors.” However, Farley notes that he would not compromise the user experience in efforts of verticle integration.

Sandy concludes by lamenting the lack of the $20-$25,000 EV. He mentions that the in-demand Maverick is an excellent example of a vehicle that shows affordable vehicles can still do well and prove profitable for brands like Ford. Doug responds conservatively that, while they see the segment as “very important for global competitiveness,” difficulties remain in acquiring affordable powertrain parts and batteries. And while LFP batteries may offer an avenue into that market, Ford is still in the process of “considering other options.”

Advertisement

Sandy’s interview shows that Ford remains quite dedicated to pursuing EV tech and why they remain ahead of previous rivals such as GM and the Chrysler family of brands. Farley is thinking ahead of many of these other legacy brands, and despite the hurdles that come with that status (cough cough dealerships cough cough), they are positioning themselves well to succeed. Ford’s sales and stock price seem to reflect this.

What do you think of the article? Do you have any comments, questions, or concerns? Shoot me an email at william@teslarati.com. You can also reach me on Twitter @WilliamWritin. If you have news tips, email us at tips@teslarati.com!

Advertisement

Will is an auto enthusiast, a gear head, and an EV enthusiast above all. From racing, to industry data, to the most advanced EV tech on earth, he now covers it at Teslarati.

Advertisement
Comments

News

Tesla Model Y prices just went up for the first time in two years

Published

on

Credit: Tesla Asia | X

Tesla just raised Model Y prices for the first time in two years, with the largest increase being $1,000.

The move signals shifting dynamics in the competitive electric vehicle market as the company continues to work on balancing demand, profitability, and accessibility.

The new pricing affects premium trims while leaving entry-level options unchanged. The Model Y Premium Rear-Wheel Drive (RWD) now starts at $45,990, a $1,000 increase.

The Model Y Premium All-Wheel Drive (AWD)—previously referred to in the post as simply “Model Y AWD”—rises to $49,990, also up $1,000. The top-tier Model Y Performance sees a more modest $500 bump, bringing its starting price to $57,990.

Advertisement

Base models remain untouched to preserve affordability. The entry-level Model Y RWD holds steady at $39,990, and the base Model Y AWD stays at $41,990. This selective approach keeps the crossover accessible for budget-conscious buyers while extracting more revenue from higher-margin configurations.

Advertisement

After years of aggressive price cuts to stimulate volume amid slowing EV adoption and rising competition from rivals like BYD, Ford, and GM, Tesla appears confident in underlying demand. Recent lineup refreshes for the 2026 Model Y, including refreshed styling and efficiency gains, have helped maintain its status as America’s best-selling EV.

By protecting base prices, Tesla avoids alienating price-sensitive customers while improving margins on the more popular variants.

Tesla Model Y ownership review after six months: What I love and what I don’t

For consumers, the changes are relatively modest—under 3% on affected trims—and still position the Model Y competitively against gas-powered SUVs in the same class. Federal tax credits and potential state incentives may further offset costs for eligible buyers.

Advertisement

This marks a subtle but notable shift from the deep discounting era that defined much of 2024 and 2025. As the EV market matures into 2026, Tesla’s pricing strategy will be closely watched for clues about production ramps, new variants like the rumored longer-wheelbase Model Y, and broader profitability goals.

In short, today’s adjustment reflects a company that remains dominant yet pragmatic—willing to test higher pricing where demand supports it. It is unlikely to deter consumers from choosing other options.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Elon Musk explains why he cannot be fired from SpaceX

Published

on

Credit: SpaceX

Elon Musk cannot be fired from SpaceX, and there’s a reason for that.

In a blunt post on X on Friday, Elon Musk confirmed plans to structurally shield his leadership at SpaceX, ensuring he cannot be fired while tying a potential trillion-dollar compensation package to the company’s long-term goal of establishing a self-sustaining colony on Mars.

The revelation stems from a Financial Times report detailing SpaceX’s intention to restructure its governance and compensation framework. The moves are designed to protect Musk’s control and align his incentives with the company’s founding mission rather than short-term financial pressures. Musk’s reply left no ambiguity:

“Yes, I need to make sure SpaceX stays focused on making life multiplanetary and extending consciousness to the stars, not pandering to someone’s bullshit quarterly earnings bonus!”

He added that success in this “absurdly difficult goal” would generate value “many orders of magnitude more than the economy of Earth,” though he cautioned that the journey will not be smooth. “Don’t expect entirely smooth sailing along the way,” Musk wrote.

Advertisement

The strategy reflects Musk’s deep concerns about how public-market expectations could derail SpaceX’s core objective. Founded in 2002, SpaceX has repeatedly stated its purpose is to reduce the cost of space travel and ultimately make humanity a multiplanetary species.

Unlike Tesla, which went public in 2010 and has faced repeated battles over Musk’s compensation and board influence, SpaceX remains privately held. Musk has long resisted taking the rocket company public precisely to avoid the quarterly earnings treadmill that forces most CEOs to prioritize short-term stock performance over ambitious, high-risk projects.

By embedding protections against his removal and linking any outsized pay package to verifiable milestones—such as a functioning Mars colony—SpaceX aims to insulate its leadership from activist investors or board members who might demand faster profits or safer bets.

SpaceX Board has set a Mars bonus for Elon Musk

Advertisement

Musk has referenced past experiences, including his ouster from OpenAI and shareholder lawsuits at Tesla, as cautionary tales. In those cases, he argued, external pressures risked diluting the original vision.

Critics may view the arrangement as excessive, especially given Musk’s already substantial voting power and wealth. Supporters, however, argue it is a necessary safeguard for a company pursuing goals measured in decades rather than quarters. Achieving a Mars colony would require sustained investment in Starship development, orbital refueling, life-support systems, and in-situ resource utilization—technologies that may deliver no immediate financial return.

Musk’s post underscores a broader philosophical point: true breakthrough innovation often demands tolerance for volatility and a willingness to ignore conventional business wisdom. As SpaceX prepares for increasingly ambitious Starship test flights and eventual crewed missions, the new governance structure signals that the company’s North Star remains unchanged—humanity’s expansion beyond Earth.

Whether the trillion-dollar package materializes depends on execution, but Musk’s message is clear: SpaceX exists to reach the stars, not to chase the next earnings beat. For investors or employees who share that vision, the protections are not a perk—they are a prerequisite for success.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Tesla discloses two Robotaxi crashes to NHTSA

Newly unredacted data filed with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) reveals the two incidents. 

Published

on

Tesla has disclosed information on two low-speed crashes that occurred in Austin with its Robotaxi platform. These incidents occurred with teleoperators steering the vehicle, and there were no passengers in the car at the time they happened.

Newly unredacted data filed with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) reveals the two incidents.

The first crash took place in July 2025, shortly after Tesla launched its nascent Robotaxi network in Austin. The ADS reportedly struggled to move forward while stopped on a street. A teleoperator assumed control, gradually accelerating and turning left toward the roadside. The vehicle then mounted the curb and struck a metal fence.

In the second incident, in January 2026, the ADS was traveling straight when the safety monitor requested navigation support. The teleoperator took over from a stop, continued forward, and collided with a temporary construction barricade at approximately 9 mph, scraping the front-left fender and tire.

Advertisement

Tesla Robotaxi service in Austin achieves monumental new accomplishment

Tesla has previously told lawmakers that teleoperators are authorized to pilot vehicles remotely—but only at speeds below 10 mph, as the only maneuvers they were approved to perform were repositioning in awkward areas.

“This capability enables Tesla to promptly move a vehicle that may be in a compromising position, thereby mitigating the need to wait for a first responder or Tesla field representative to manually recover the vehicle,” the company stated in filings earlier this year.

Before this week, Tesla redacted the NHTSA reports, but they decided to reveal all 17 Robotaxi incidents recorded since the launch in Austin last Summer. Most of the other crashes involved the Tesla being struck by other road users and were not caused by the self-driving suite itself.

Advertisement

There were other incidents, including two additional self-caused accidents involving the ADS clipping side mirrors on parked cars. In September 2025, one Robotaxi struck a dog that darted into the roadway (the dog escaped unharmed), while another made an unprotected left turn into a parking lot and hit a metal chain.

Although Waymo and Zoox have reported more total crashes, Tesla operates at a far smaller scale. The cautious pace reflects the company’s broader safety concerns; it has been very slow with the Robotaxi rollout to ensure the suite is ready for operation.

Last month, CEO Elon Musk acknowledged that “making sure things are completely safe” remains the primary bottleneck to expanding the network, describing the company’s approach as “very cautious.”

The unredacted filings arrive amid heightened regulatory scrutiny of autonomous vehicles. NHTSA recently closed a separate probe into Tesla’s Full Self-Driving software repeatedly striking parking-lot obstacles such as bollards and chains—a problem that also prompted a recall at Waymo last year.

Advertisement

Tesla Robotaxi has been a widely successful program in its early days of operation, and the transparency Tesla brings here is greatly appreciated. Incidents will happen, of course, but the honesty gives customers and regulators a sense of where Tesla is in terms of developing its self-driving and fully autonomous ride-hailing suite.

Continue Reading