Ford unveils UEV platform with 48‑volt electrical architecture and gigacastings to cut EV costs

Ford announced a focused industrial pivot: a common platform it calls the Universal Electric Vehicle (UEV), designed around a higher-voltage electrical backbone and large structural castings to drive down unit costs. The program carries a designated funding envelope of $5 billion through 2027 and targets a retail price near $30,000 for a compact electric pickup slated for 2027.

Central to the technical shift is adoption of a 48‑volt electrical architecture, which routes more load through the high-voltage battery and reduces reliance on conventional 12‑volt systems via electronic control units. Ford links this change to lower wiring mass — the new truck’s harness will be about 4,000 feet shorter and roughly 22 pounds lighter than earlier EV generations — improving packaging and reducing material cost.

The design also compresses parts and assembly steps: Ford forecasts approximately 20% fewer parts, 25% fewer fasteners, a 40% reduction in dock-to-dock workstations and around 15% faster assembly time compared with current processes. Those system-level optimizations are intended to shrink production and labor overhead per vehicle, directly addressing battery-driven cost premiums that have kept many EVs unprofitable.

Ford is pairing electrical simplification with high‑pressure die casting, or gigacasting, to substitute dozens of stamped components with a handful of cast structural pieces. The company says the new pickup will use just two major front and rear structural castings versus many dozens of traditional parts, and that its aluminum castings are over 27% lighter than comparable items on a benchmark vehicle.

To balance near-term demand volatility and preserve factory throughput, Ford has been repurposing some cell and pack capacity toward stationary energy storage products and other non-vehicle markets. Management has disclosed substantial plant-level adaptations in recent periods — roughly $10 billion already spent with about $2 billion of additional investment planned — allowing the company to monetise cell output in grid, commercial and residential installations while vehicle demand normalises.

Executives say the stationary-storage pathway complements the UEV strategy: energy products create nearer-term revenue and keep supplier lines engaged even as Ford bets on parts consolidation and electrical simplification to lower per-vehicle costs. Industry precedents — notably growth in dedicated energy businesses that have deployed storage in the mid‑40s gigawatt‑hours for large competitors — give OEMs a commercial template for converting cells to stationary use without abandoning long-term vehicle ambitions.

The timing reflects market pressure: U.S. EV share peaked near 10.3% of new-vehicle sales ahead of incentive changes, then slid toward an estimated 5.8% by the fourth quarter. Those demand swings prompted earlier adjustments at Ford, including a $19.5 billion write-down, even as management commits targeted capital to the UEV strategy.

Operationally, the program bets that combining fewer parts, lighter castings and a streamlined electrical plan will lower total cost of ownership and enable price parity with gas models. If realized, those gains would reduce the breakeven battery and materials cost per vehicle and expand addressable consumer segments.

Risks remain: supply-chain adaptation to large castings, upfront capital for new tooling, ECU integration complexity and real-world durability of the higher-voltage accessory bus. The stationary-storage pivot also faces its own headwinds — price pressure on large-format systems and policy shifts — but it provides an industrial hedge that can preserve utilisation and margin while the UEV program scales.

Strategically, Ford’s approach concentrates on manufacturability and parts consolidation rather than feature differentiation, signaling a shift toward cost leadership within mainstream EV segments. The company positions the UEV as a platform that can scale globally and absorb competitive pressure from both incumbent EV makers and low-cost entrants, while the battery-to-storage pathway smooths short-term volatility in cell demand.