92merc

Back end doesn't do it for me. Has too much of a Porsche 928 vibe going on. Not a good thing IMHO.

On my 2013 Escape, HVAC controls are both physical and on screen. In the pictures, I didn't see a shot that shows lower down on the console. Maybe there are still physical controls below the vents. On the F150, Ford wanted both physical and touch screen controls. On the Mach-E, they went all touch. Just trying to see which way they went.

I wondered the same thing. Oshkosh hasn't said if they are going on their own platform. With the increased number of units being needed, makes me wonder if Oshkosh can go with a cutaway E Transit platform. Would make the most sense to me.

Can't tell from the spy shots. But I see the moved the vents up to under the screen. Can't see any HVAC manual controls. So those are either lower, or built into the screen now.

Now if only they could build more Mavericks....

You should try getting in the Vanderhall Carmel GTS I tried a week ago. Duck under roof, climb over door edge. Plop your arse down into the seat. Once in, I was fine. Oh, I want that vehicle. Good thing I didn't test drive it.

Since Ford just trademarked the Lightning names for both Maverick and Ranger, maybe the Thunder names will be used for hybrid models? Or PHEV hybrids?

Only reason I can see having 4G on my vehicles is for over the air updates. Which isn't available on those vehicles anyway.

When the vehicles are available, Ford needs a commercial with AC/DC Thunderstruck playing.

I do seriously wish you good luck, no sarcasm intended. I've seen the Telluride/Palisade. They are good looking units. Interior quality is very good. If it wasn't for their engine issues, I'd rate their overall quality very well. Similar brand issues crop up in my motorcycle world. Harley is better, Indian is better! My motto is "ride what you love". Doesn't matter the brand.

If you've been following this forum, and Bronco forum, you'd see the issue was related to a bad batch of valves. We're talking 50 known people on the Bronco forum. Probably double that out in the wild. A bunch of them complained to NHTSA. From this forum's calculations, it's less than .1% failure rate, and only on the V6, not the I4. From what I've seen on the Kia/Hyundia engines lately, the failure rate is much higher. It might take 30k miles to happen. But the numbers are supposedly in the 25% of engines failing within the first 30k miles on the Telluride/Palisade. So I hope you don't mind your vehicle being at the dealer for a few weeks waiting on a new engine.

Hope your Telluride engine doesn't blow up. I've been seeing video's of Telluride and Palisade engines self destructing.

Sorry, I respectfully disagree. 1967 F100 was the best looking. But I could settle for the Eluminator. ?

The article claimed the grille opening was raised.

Well, it wasn't last either.

Overall, it's an improvement. But I think the light bar is a distraction from the bigger changes. IF Ford did an update to the interior, I'd probably pick it over a Bronco Sport. If not, it would be a toss up for me.

I look at it the opposite direction. Why the F does Chevy need to sell the Bolt so low? I just can't believe they're making any money on it. With battery and chip shortages, it's a waste of good resources for little to no profit. If GM thinks the Bolt battery issue has damaged the model to the point of where it can't sell, then axe it. Re-allocate the chips and batteries to somewhere GM can actually make some profit.

Why oh why isn't this called the Buick Electra??

Well, not desired. But we can call it the "new normal". Chip shortages and not enough batteries being made...

That's personally what I'm hoping for in a Ranger. My 2003 F150 is like 260HP? I don't tow, I just need a box to throw crap in once in a while. I think my F150 is rated for 7k lbs or so. A hybrid Ranger would do all that, get better mileage, and be easier to park. All while I can keep a body on frame style truck. I like the Maverick but need AWD, would like a hybrid, and tow a bit more than the Maverick can handle.

I think at some point, Ford will want to have a high end EV half ton. Having it look the same as the regular EV F150, won't help sales. For a brief period, it wouldn't surprise me to have an EV based on the F150 like it is now. And a new edition based on the new platform.

By the same token, if Ford is changing plans frequently, they are being fluid and responsive changing to the new situations. Supply availability changed, Ford moves a vehicle to new plant. Once planned platform doesn't have the advantages predicted, can it. What will matter is the product that Ford actually ends up pushing out. With the good reviews of Lightning, Mach-E upping the game for Ford quality, I think Ford is moving in the right direction. Now it's a matter of, if they can maintain.

Since Ford went with the Lightning name on the electric F150, I'll make the supposition that the Thunderbird will be electric. Since Thunder goes with Lightning. That's based solely on what the hair on my ass is currently telling me.

I think that was a brain fart. SVT is probably what was meant.

Personally, I'd like to see Ford do something different. Something unique enough that it doesn't compete with Mustang, or the Corvette. Thunderbird was good at doing it's own thing. Just my personal opinion...