Jump to content

silvrsvt

Moderator
  • Posts

    24,441
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    107

Everything posted by silvrsvt

  1. I'm figuring this goes no where...its not a true monopoly like Bell or ATT back in the day where there was no choice what so ever.
  2. I've seen a handful of them around, but I see a ton of Mavericks in my area. I'm not sure Hyundai is really on a truck buyers radar.
  3. https://www.freep.com/story/money/cars/ford/2024/03/27/ford-rouge-electric-vehicle-center-dearborn-cuts/73117641007/
  4. Man the C pillar area of this car is just a hot mess
  5. maybe padding the price for when they have to use incentives to sell them?!
  6. My dad still has his 1998 Ranger...yeah its a bit on the rough side. I was slightly shocked when I got my Bronco (being my first BOF/truck based vehicle) at how refined it is vs the Ranger. It is just as nice (with in reason due to the top) as unibody vehicles in ride and handling.
  7. I never noticed my Fusion Hybrid being excessively loud during start up. I know that the direct injection engines like the Ecoboost can be "loud" due to the fuel pumps
  8. here is the problem: Typical 3L class V6 makes anywhere from say 300-400HP, lets lop off 20-25% of the power with an Atkinson cycle, so your down 75-100HP. The difference between the Otto cycle 2.5L and 2.0L I4 from Ford is about 175hp/172 (2.5) and 166hp/149 (2.0L) The Atkinson 2.5L drops to 156/136 (11% HP loss and 21% torque loss using the fusion hybrid as an example) but combined with the hybrid motor, it goes up to 191HP (apparently the motors don't count towards torque) So in the I4 hybrid, the hybrid motor can make up and add to the power loss that an atkinson cycle has. In a V6 application, using the Powerboost as an example, the motor in it is only good for 47HP, which means your still down a considerable amount of power. TLDR: Atkinson cycle V6s lose too much power to make them effective Hybrids in the sense that you'll see MPG savings like a I4 engine.
  9. from Wikipedia Its semantics, but its not an Atkinson engine-an Atkinson style of engine due to the intake.
  10. But you also lose about 20% or so of your overall power using an Atkinson style engine. Hybrid engines aren't pure Atkinson engines either. They only use part of the cycle. In the grand scheme of things people don't tow all the time (well in non fleet usage) so the light duty of just moving a truck will be appreated. Your max efficiency bias is showing again too.
  11. I just noticed the angled infotainment center screen...who thought having angled sides would be attractive ooof.
  12. I wouldn't use Stellantis a benchmark for doing anything 😛
  13. You don't think Ford has already spent the money for tooling? Given how the past couple of years have gone with getting anything, I'd assume that they have or already committed to getting tooling that will be showing up now or with in the next 6-12 months for the rebuild.
  14. I don't see Ford bringing the Chinese Edge to North America-why would they spend all the tooling that is going into the 3 Row EV, just not to use it then spend 100s of millions/Billions on more tooling to bring over a product that needs at least 10 years of production to recoup the costs? It would be far easier (and cheaper) to slow the timeline of the 3 Row another 6 months or so to see how the market is instead of knee jerk reactions to a product segment. If Ford feels like they need to keep making an Edge based product, wouldn't it be just far easier to keep the segment empty for a couple of years and when 2027 roles around, make louisville assembly plant the ICE C platform plant and retool Hermosillo or Cuautitlán Assembly for the smaller/affordable EV that is coming in couple of years? I'm guessing Cuautitlán Assembly has room to make more products in addition to the Mach E. EVs are still happening, just not as fast as some people expected
  15. https://www.thedrive.com/news/2025-ram-1500-high-output-i6-gets-worse-mpg-than-the-hemi-v8
  16. It doesn't work that way-EV motors have very high efficiency (80%+) vs ICE. ICE loses about 40-60% from drivetrain loss. Also notice that modern ICE products produce more power and still get decent gas mileage-there is no detuned versions of engines that get better MPG like they did 30-40 years ago. The issue is the power density of batteries vs gasoline.
  17. The Mach E is far better then the Teslas I've been in. Tesla interiors just scream bad looking ikea furniture.
  18. I dunno-does the upper grill actually have slots in it? It looks like a very generic two box CUV.
  19. The Navigator is tied to the F-150 and Expedition, which both are staying with gas engines well into next decade. There might be a range topper EV for Lincoln at some point, but I'm betting we don't see it till 2030 or so.
  20. I have this feeling its going to be like the Maverick hybrid at launch-the $25K model will be hard to get or only have something like 250 miles of range. The actual real deal will be priced like the Escape and have 325 miles or so of range. Or its actually $32K with a possible $7K tax break on it, which would make even more sense.
  21. https://insideevs.com/news/712417/ford-f150-lightning-high-mileage-battery-life/
  22. This brings up a couple questions: Where does this small EV CUV slot? Will it be a C sized platform to replace the Escape, or will it be a small C or B product like the Trailblazer/Trax and Bolt? Will the EV Pickup be smaller then the Maverick? Will it replace the Maverick? Where will this small EV be built? Mexico would be the most oblivious place, but does Maverick and Bronco Sport production get get torpedoed? I'm guessing the most obvious thing would be to add or replace Mach E production at its Mexican plant and move the Mach E to another plant? But that has its own problems. Not sure why they are targeting the ride share market (Uber/Lyft) either with this? Maybe that is a fancy way of saying they are making a sedan? LOL
×
×
  • Create New...