akirby

Fixed the headline.

They've saved tens of millions more than they've lost. And a week or two of production can easily be made up.

It can happen once in a blue moon.... 😎

But I think that's the new maverick cuv - aka escape replacement. That's why I said one size smaller.

It is possible but I don't think it's likely. I think everyone understands the negative consequences of the higher targets and footprint tiering and have given up on pushing 100% EVs for the near future. I also think the market will continue to reward hybrids and higher fuel economy and EVs without government intervention.

I don't expect a fiesta or focus sedan but I could see a slightly smaller suv or hatchback at some point. It won't be a priority over other vehicles and a lot will depend on factory capacity. I'm just saying it's an option now whereas before it was not. That was based on UEV bringing lower platform cost and the old CAFE rules. It was the only fiscally viable option at that point. With ICE getting cost reductions it opens the possibility of new ICE options in that space,

It is the unadjusted city and highway combined so 54 mpg cafe is closer to 37 mpg window sticker. But you guys are still missing the point. Under the old footprint sliding scale a small car had a much higher target that was very difficult to obtain at a reasonable price. A RAV4 target is way lower than a Fiesta and easier to meet. But they realized that consumers need larger vehicles and trucks and they couldn't hold them to the same standard thus the footprint scale. The unintended consequences is that once the target for small cars became too difficult to meet the mfrs just stopped making them. Lowering the standards to 2015 levels makes it far easier to meet the standard and ALLOWS mfrs the OPTION to bring back vehicles that are smaller and cheaper than their current lineup. Not $19k but definitely in the $20ks. Wife's aunt just bought a Buick Envista suv for $26k.

How do you build an affordable Fiesta sized vehicle that gets 56 mpg? Or a Focus that gets 50 mpg? Even with hybrid powertrains that's hard to do and expensive. But hitting 35-40 mpg is doable. That's the change.

So why were consumers buying small cars in 2015 when CAFE was close to 36%? This doesn't incentivize buying small cars it stops penalizing mfrs from building them. Low costs and higher mpg is plenty of incentive for customers.

I'm not talking about fiestas - I'm talking about a focus hatchback. There is still a sizeable market for companies with low costs that can make money at lower prices. Widespread low cost EV adoption is still years if not decades away. Under CAFE the mfrs could not afford to even try to make small cars because the CAFE targets were so much higher than larger vehicles. This simply makes them feasible again and at least a few mfrs will take advantage.

What the liberals continue to ignore is that the higher targets made cheap small cars untenable and pushed mfrs to bigger more expensive suvs and trucks. Good intentions but completely out of touch with reality and common sense. No mfr is going backwards on fuel economy and we will see more smaller cheaper vehicles.

Current Ford 6.7L is already 500/1200.

You're right. A modern Jeep would literally run circles around a willys jeep on and off road, literally and figuratively.

Front Rear cab, Rear tailgate left front, left rear right front, right rear underbody front, underbody rear not sure what additional cameras would be used for

Different pads will help a lot.

19 views, 11 cameras including 2 underbody. Way too many when only 3 or 4 will actually get used.

The 6.8 seemed like it was only designed to make a cheaper base version and upsell the 7.3. I'm guessing they didn't have enough sales to keep it.

Taycan was a flop. They killed their most affordable sports cars boxster and cayman. Their EV replacements aren't here yet and who knows if they'll even sell. They jacked up prices on 911s. China market crashed. Tariffs on US imports.

Rear Camera View Rear Top-Down View Rear Side View Hitch View Front Camera View Front Top-Down View Front Side View Cabin Glance View Bed View Front Underbody Camera Rear Underbody Camera Rear Trailer View with Trailer Angle Indicator Rear Side View with Trailer Biasing Picture-in-Picture Side View Transparent Trailer View Inside Trailer View Surround View Turn Signal Activated View Rear Camera Mirror

A few more would be nice but 19 seems like overkill

310 hp (231 kW; 314 PS) at 5500 rpm, 320–350 lb⋅ft (434–475 N⋅m) at 3000 rpm, 9.5:1 compression ratio 2015–2023 Ford Mustang EcoBoost (S550) 330 hp (246 kW; 335 PS) at 6000 rpm, 350 lb⋅ft (475 N⋅m) at 3000 rpm, 9.37:1 compression ratio 2020–2023 Ford Mustang EcoBoost Performance Package[63] 350 hp (261 kW; 355 PS) at 6000 rpm, 350 lb⋅ft (475 N⋅m) at 3200 rpm 2016–2018 Ford Focus RS[64][65][66] 2016–2017 Zenos E10 R[67] 2017–present Elemental RP1[68] 325–405 hp (242–302 kW; 330–411 PS) at 6000 rpm, 317–369 lb⋅ft (430–500 N⋅m) at 3200 rpm 2019–present VUHL 05 RR[69][70][71] 395 hp (295 kW; 400 PS) at 6200 rpm, 369 lb⋅ft (500 N⋅m) at 3000-3500 rpm 2017–present Dallara Stradale[72] 493 hp (368 kW; 500 PS), 516 lb⋅ft (700 N⋅m) 2021–present Dallara Stradale EXP[73]

I assume the larger pistons deliver more torque but can't rev as high as the ecoboost 2.7 V6 with smaller pistons. Not a bad tradeoff for a truck engine.

So the 5.7 has 402/428 while Ford's lowly 5.0 has 400/410 with less displacement. And they have 5.0 versions with 480 and 500hp in the mustang. Not impressed. And the 6.6 seems totally unnecessary in a half ton (as would the ford 6.8) and just seems to be for bragging rights.

I was going by the original article that said IF they offer the new one in Canyorado so they weren't sure. But 405 is way more hp than 350 and claiming something is the most powerful except for this other one is the epitome of stupid reporting.

Fake news! They haven't confirmed whether Canyorado gets the new 2.7L and even with it Ranger Raptor still has more power (that's the exception). Clickbait.