Bad Vibes: Ford Takes on Tesla After 'Morgue' Comment

Steph Willems
by Steph Willems

Who doesn’t love a battle between automakers? Personally, I find the upper-crust sniping between Rolls-Royce and Lagonda both charming and hilarious, but the fun ramps up when the fight involves builders of more accessible products.

In a Wall Street Journal article published late Wednesday, Tesla CEO Elon Musk copped to sleeping under his desk near his Fremont assembly plant’s body shop, part of an all-out effort to reach a lofty (and delayed) June 30th production target. Some of the plant’s assembly work has moved into a large outdoor tent. Old-fashioned manpower has been called in to help crank out vehicles. This, from an automaker that not long ago expressed worry that wind resistance might slow down the pace of its futuristic automated assembly line.

Musk admitted he’s made some mistakes. There’s a tent, after all. But that didn’t stop him from telling the reporter, “I think there’s a good vibe—I think the energy is good; go to Ford, it looks like a morgue.”

Ford was quick to respond.

From Ford Motor Company’s vice-president of communications came this gem:

No doubt the vibe is funky in that “makeshift tent,” but it’s not bad either across the street at the plant where a high quality, high-tech F-150 rolls off the line every 53 seconds like clockwork. Come check it out @elonmusk https://t.co/1KoEZIyf0D

— Mark Truby (@mtruby) June 28, 2018

Not to be outdone by Truby’s jab, Ford’s North American product communications manager, Mike Levine, took note of how Tesla seems to prefer Ford vehicles for its service arm.

Tesla will send a *Ford* service truck to your office. FTFY. https://t.co/meVqjzbTfl

— Mike Levine (@mrlevine) June 28, 2018

Found Tesla’s pickup truck. https://t.co/AeTkUeFpaw

— Mike Levine (@mrlevine) June 28, 2018

All eyes are on Tesla as the automaker strives to meet its self-imposed production target of 5,000 Model 3 sedans per week by the end of the month. Only when this occurs, Musk claims, will the company be able to throw new variants into the production mix. Among them, dual-motor and performance sedans, as well as the long-awaited $35,000 base model.

Reaching this target on time, and getting pricier versions of the Model 3 into production ASAP, is key to Musk’s plan to reverse Tesla’s negative cash flow by the end of the year. The automaker’s share value might depend on it.

[Image: Ford Motor Company]

Steph Willems
Steph Willems

More by Steph Willems

Comments
Join the conversation
3 of 53 comments
  • Ilkhan Ilkhan on Jun 30, 2018

    Doesn't matter. Detroit dies the day Tesla unveils their pickup, unless Ford/GM figure it out beforehand. Ford and GM live on profits on their trucks and SUVs, and any decent sized sales drop will do a number on them.

    • JimZ JimZ on Jun 30, 2018

      With what assembly facilities? Ford uses three assembly plants to build the F-Series. Right now Tesla can't even match the weekly volume of one of them.

  • Carroll Prescott Carroll Prescott on Jul 02, 2018

    I wouldn't buy a Tesla because of the people who buy them - these fools are just like Honduh and Toyoduh buyers - all superior and they think they've discovered sliced cheese. Sadly all they've done is to over pay for a product which is worse for the environment over its entire manufacture and service life compared to a comparably sized fossil fuel product. And no, a Model 3, is not comparable to a BMW. It barely is comparable to a lowly and ugly Toyoduh Corolla.

  • FreedMike If Dodge were smart - and I don't think they are - they'd spend their money refreshing and reworking the Durango (which I think is entering model year 3,221), versus going down the same "stuff 'em full of motor and give 'em cool new paint options" path. That's the approach they used with the Charger and Challenger, and both those models are dead. The Durango is still a strong product in a strong market; why not keep it fresher?
  • Bill Wade I was driving a new Subaru a few weeks ago on I-10 near Tucson and it suddenly decided to slam on the brakes from a tumbleweed blowing across the highway. I just about had a heart attack while it nearly threw my mom through the windshield and dumped our grocery bags all over the place. It seems like a bad idea to me, the tech isn't ready.
  • FreedMike I don't get the business case for these plug-in hybrid Jeep off roaders. They're a LOT more expensive (almost fourteen grand for the four-door Wrangler) and still get lousy MPG. They're certainly quick, but the last thing the Wrangler - one of the most obtuse-handling vehicles you can buy - needs is MOOOAAAARRRR POWER. In my neck of the woods, where off-road vehicles are big, the only 4Xe models I see of the wrangler wear fleet (rental) plates. What's the point? Wrangler sales have taken a massive plunge the last few years - why doesn't Jeep focus on affordability and value versus tech that only a very small part of its' buyer base would appreciate?
  • Bill Wade I think about my dealer who was clueless about uConnect updates and still can't fix station presets disappearing and the manufacturers want me to trust them and their dealers to address any self driving concerns when they can't fix a simple radio?Right.
  • FreedMike I don't think they work very well, so yeah...I'm afraid of them. And as many have pointed out, human drivers tend to be so bad that they are also worthy of being feared; that's true, but if that's the case, why add one more layer of bad drivers into the mix?
Next