Sherminator98

Is the Toyota more aerodynamic/smaller frontal area then the Nautilus though? That would account for why it does better at higher speeds MPG wise then the Nautilus. A larger/heaver vehicle would also suffer around town due to needing more power/torque to move it from a stop then a smaller vehicle.

Going by the interior (the C2 style arm rest/center console) it will be roughly the same size as an Escape or Edge...I'm assuming it will be ever so slightly smaller then a 4 door Bronco-in the 185 inch range.

The vast majority of utility companies are regulated by state governments.

and there isn’t a viable alternative to it outside of using an EREV setup. ECVT won’t meet the requirements for towing heavy loads.

But you’re completely glossing over the fact that a eCVT won’t work in heavy duty towing applications that a F-150 would be required to do. The small electric motor is due to limitations of it being inside the R10 transmission. At that point you’re just better going the EREV route.

People don't like change, but at the same time if you have a major ICE powertrain failure, it will cost you around 11K to get it fixed, going by a thread I've seen on Bronco6G with a Bronco Engine.

Your not because if you went with an Atkinson style setup in a larger/more powerful engine, your power losses are going to be greater and not be evened out by adding a hybrid motor to help. Then add in additional weight etc and its more or less a lost cause. That is why Ford was marketing the hybrid in the F-150 as a power adder/power generation, not an increase in MPGs.

How many batteries actually need to be replaced in say the first 10 years of ownership?

But at the same time, LFPs are good enough for most use cases...seems like people come up with an excuse just not to buy something because it does something slightly differently.

Seems to be a bit of willful ignorance going on here that he is completely ignoring: The 2.0L made 160 horsepower at 6,500 RPM and 146 pound-feet of torque in non-ecoboost form 2.5L 168 horsepower and 170 lb-ft of torque in non-hybrid form 2.5L Hybrid is rated at 192 horsepower and 155 pound-feet of torque combined with the hybrid motor. The engine alone 162 HP The 1.5L Ecoboost makes 181HP and 190 ft lbs 2.0L Ecoboost makes 250 horsepower and 280 lb-ft of torque The 3.0L V6 made 240HP and 231 ft of torque The whole point of the Ecoboost engines where to downsize from a V6 and a larger I4 to packages that give you more power and equal or better MPGs vs their larger counterparts. The power numbers from the 2.5L are from 15 years ago, so there is a decent amount of loss from going to an Atkinson cycle given possible improvements in the power output of the engine over time. Like you said a NA 1.5L would be lucky to hit 100-120HP and a hybrid setup would maybe add another 30-40HP if you where lucky,

I wonder how this will translate into long term sales...they could be new customers say from Tesla, which hasn't had much new in the marketplace, so people are willing to try new things. The overall feel for EVs is that it seems like overall in the industry that demand is softening for them, but I don't have the numbers for that but I'm sure we'll have a better picture once the tax rebates go away.

Looks like we should be seeing this soon https://www.bronco6g.com/forum/threads/bronco-hybrid-electric-sneak-peek-reveal-china.118328/#post-2582489 Also looks like imports of the regular Bronco got stopped back a few months ago due the tariffs, but not sure if that has changed since then.

We don't know that is case or not. Shit happens sometimes.

They where supposed to build a bunch of wind farms off the coast of NJ, but they got all killed off, but the most important issue was financing...they couldn't do it at the rates we have now vs what was around 5-10 years ago.

That is part of the problem with using more standardized powertrains...larger amount of vehicles using it mean more recalls.

IMO the front end is the weakest part and generally its just a Fox body plumped up a bit. It really isn't all that different from the Fox of the era I can see them maybe sharping the lines up on the current Mustang to give them more a creased look vs being rounded out.

Auto manufactures don't care what you think, they have/had to meet CAFE requirements. Your wants and needs aren't want the auto industry needs to do.

This was making the rounds on social media recently I like the flanks of it, but the in upper photo it looks like it has a green house of a EXP and not a 1985+ Mustang

Well the notice is showing up in my Fordpass App now also and Carfax send me an email about it. Now to just wait and see when they get the repair for it.

The Escape had the 2.0l Ecoboost and the Bronco Sport she has now has the 1.5L Ecoboost. Performance accelerating from say 10-60 MPH is roughly the same. It is slightly slower at higher speeds.

Crap....I've been noticing that my Bronco has been running ever so slightly rough in the hot weather we've been having...this would explain that. And I fall into that range.

I liked the 2015 redesign and the 2018 went backwards IMO. I like the S650, it looks far better in person then in photos.

The 2.0L ecoboost is only in the top end Bronco Sport Badlands trim also.

But that was the whole point of the Skunkworks team-relying on legacy suppliers like they've been doing for 50+ years that don't have the skills for EVs is part of the problem. But anyways I believe your last line.

Given all the headlines Ford has gotten, has it really hurt their business? Not saying it hasn't, but nor is it all gloom and doom like say Nissan, who seems to be circling the drain at this point.