Captainp4
-
Posts
902 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Downloads
Store
Posts posted by Captainp4
-
-
On 12/4/2023 at 4:48 PM, akirby said:
Echo chambers and confirmation bias abound on social media.On 12/4/2023 at 10:24 PM, silvrsvt said:But this coming from random people that aren't even interested in cars (as far as I can tell)
The amount of made up BS you see about EVs in comment sections is enough to drive you insane (also see it from a select few on this forum). It's really bizarre, can never tell if they actually believe the crap they're saying or if they're trolling. You also see in it year specific truck groups on fb, there's people out there that think their dentside or OBS truck can tow better than a new superduty. Don't get me wrong, I have a driveway full of old Ford trucks that I love tinkering with and customizing (3 dentsides, 3 OBS trucks) I just like the way they look and the quirks that go with them and they could do it in a pinch, but the work trailer is hooked up to the 2010 superduty lol. Also have an order in for the awd cybertruck because I'm sick of emission era diesels and want out of regens and don't even want to start with the piss tank, so there's that too. I don't get why car propulsion is politicized. I mean, it was fun to make fun of a prius because they were lame, but what's not to like about the BEVs of today? They do everything better except range with a trailer and charge time.-
1
-
-
34 minutes ago, jpd80 said:
Solid state battery tech is like getting a man on the moon to the automotive industry but then I started thinking of the wider consequence for all battery situations - it will be a massive change.
I'm ready for some solid state powered lawn equipment, I have the baddest of the bad battery backpack blower - it's adequate for blowing off grass clippings on our normal lawn routes during the cutting season, but can't hold a candle to even entry level 2 stroke commercial ones. I'd love a light weight and powerful one for leaf cleanup season instead of carrying around this 80cc 2 stroke that is louder than my open header 16:1 compression 460 racetruck ?-
3
-
-
On 11/21/2023 at 8:16 AM, HotRunrGuy said:
Last time I was there, NJ did not allow self-service refueling. If that is still the case, I wonder if they require charging stations to be manned?
HRG
Last time I was there, with my dad in my 6.0 diesel, we thought ALL fueling couldn't be done by yourself... we sat for probably 20 minutes waiting for one of the employees to fill up my 6.0 before one of them came over and told us that they don't do diesel and we had to fill it ourselves ? We were just trying to follow the rules, but I guess we weren't informed enough lol -
On 11/12/2023 at 2:52 PM, akirby said:
Don’t tell me someone who would have otherwise bought a F150 is going to go buy a Ram because they don’t think Mach-E should be called Mustang. And a Mustang enthusiast will bitch about it but will still buy a mustang.
It makes no sense to get mad about a name. How many people bitching about recycling names know that the Explorer and Ranger were just trim lines on the dentside pickups before they became their own models? It'd be like me saying I'm not buying a new superduty because there used to be an F-Superduty in the OBS days! (was what they called the f450 before they all became superduty). I did think the Maverick name on a pickup was a little odd at first, but it does kind of make sense. Mustang Mach-E made sense to me after I read about the sub-brand thing, hoping they fill that out some more in the coming years to make it make more sense to the average consumer though. But either way, whether I like a name of a car or not it's not affecting my next purchase decision.
16 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:A lot of people are fickle. I'll try not to get too political here, but case in point, back when Ford maybe the rainbow raptor, so many comments were talking about how they drive a Ford, but wouldn't buy a new one. Are some of those people lying? Probably, but not all of them. If something so minor could sway purchasing decisions, I could understand how messing with naming conventions, and in some people's minds, history, could turn some buyers off.
I personally see great potential with the mustang, and bronco becoming sub-brands, and using that name on other products. My biggest criticism is almost that they didn't do enough with it. They made it sound like there were other bronco models, like a bronco EV or pickup in development, or other mustang models beyond the mach-e and s650. Then overnight, it seemed like they just killed that idea. Many of us expected things like a "Shelby" mach-e, or mustang sedans, and haven't gotten any of that. Just another case of great ideas from Ford that end up going nowhere.
A lot of people say a lot of stupid things in comment sections on the internet and just like to be perpetually offended by something, they usually forget about it after they read the headline, comment, and then don't read the article.-
1
-
1
-
-
17 hours ago, Deanh said:
If its specifcicationsare any good theres not much competition at all....only issue would be servicing......
Usually not much to service on a BEV -
Have been seeing the Rivian Amazon vans around here more often, have seen quite a few of the R1T too. Out of any of the "other" BEV startups, I think Rivian is the one that will make it. As someone that bought on the IPO I hope so lol
-
8 hours ago, akirby said:
Stop arguing about subjective statements and just post the math.For a specific vehicle wind resistance is a function speed squared. Therefore the coefficient is
900 at 30 mph
1600 at 40 mph
2500 at 50 mph
3600 at 60 mph
4900 at 70 mph
6400 at 80 mph
8100 at 90 mph
For a sleek car with a low cd and small frontal area the actual difference will be minimal up to 70 mph but much higher for a truck with a higher cd and much bigger frontal area.
I was all ready to sound smart about remembering cod from physics, you ruined my fun ?-
2
-
-
To me, the Benz interior looks like it's trying too hard to be "luxury" and just looks busy/cluttered - regardless of materials used.
And fwiw, I don't necessarily consider Tesla luxury either (even though I argued earlier that many do), but I do like the simplicity of them.
Either way, it's all personal preference and I bet the manufacturers don't care who considers what what as long as they're selling cars and making money.-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, twintornados said:
Just because it costs more than an Acura, Infiniti or Lincoln does not make it a luxury vehicle.
You might not consider it one, but most people/publications do. It just depends if you consider tech features luxury or premium materials luxury. If it's the tech, it's a no brainer that it is luxury. If it's premium materials then it can be argued that it isn't. It's probably on par with a Lincoln for material/nvh/traditional luxury metrics though. Obviously far ahead of everyone else on the tech end.-
1
-
1
-
-
40 minutes ago, silvrsvt said:
It is and it isn't....all depends. I've actually seen more Rivians on the road then I've seen Lightnings in my area.
Same here, I've seen 2 Rivians, pretty decent numbers of Mach-E's.. haven't seen a Lightning yet. Very possible it just blends in with all the other F150s and there are some around, but not a substantial enough change to catch my eye. -
Time and data, lots and lots of data, are what will make these systems work. Sprinkle in some AI and they'll get there eventually. I wonder if the automakers will license the Tesla software the way they caved on the charging standard or stick with their own systems? Good to see Ford making some progress on it though.
-
1
-
-
19 hours ago, akirby said:
I predicted a plateau and we’re pretty close but I think it’s mainly about pricing right now. Drop prices $10k - $20k and sales will accelerate again. You’re just not going to get huge sales volume from $60k+ vehicles.
Price would help, but I think with F and many others it's a product issue. While the ones they have out are great first efforts and come close, they still, in general, don't match comparable Teslas, cost more, and don't have access to the super charging network. Obviously most of this will change in the next few years, but the current BEV product is mostly "you almost had it" and I think it's starting to show. -
12 hours ago, 7Mary3 said:
EPA and CARB are going to make it increasingly difficult and expensive to get diesels certified (particularly to meet NOX standards) starting in 2025.
What else can they do to meet standards? They already have dpf and def. More aggressive approaches to that or more extra stuff?? -
On 9/15/2023 at 12:26 PM, NLPRacing said:
They could take a F150 SuperCrew PowerBoost with a 6.5' bed, and sterling rear axle with either 7 or 8 lug wheels and sell that as an F200 with a 15,000-pound towing capacity. There are a lot of F250's pulling travel trailers & fifth wheels that are under 15,000 pounds, but that are too big for F150's.
This might fit perfectly for my lawn business. Tow a 26ft enclosed with a 2010 F250 because it's right on the edge of what a F150 can do and I don't trust pushing the limits for every day use. Superduty with a diesel way more comfortable than a 150 would be with the load, but it does around 200 miles a week on mostly local route, it's probably a little overkill. Have been waiting for a BEV that can do it, but a hybrid "f200" might be the sweet spot for what I need. Please don't bring back the 7 lug wheels though, just do the 8 lol-
1
-
-
As I understand it, Tesla employees get stock in the company as part of their compensation. I'd take that over anything a union can offer. Not that I'd want to be paid in stocks as a F employee, but TSLA is a pretty good one.
-
25 minutes ago, fuzzymoomoo said:
In body and stamping it’s that way but in final it’s pretty much all manual. It’s not necessarily the skill, it’s the physicality of the jobs people struggle with.
Assuming final is putting the last plastic pieces on that just clip in when you push them? -
7 minutes ago, silvrsvt said:
Its a lot of repetitive motion on the assembly line and not as much button pushing as you make it out to be.
I know limited production engines are more hands on with less automation, which would require more skill.
So the people on the line tightening lugnuts with a machine that lifts the tire and tightens all the lugnuts at the same time are making the same money as the guy hand building a predator/trinity/whatever? -
On 9/18/2023 at 2:57 PM, akirby said:
8 years might be too long but zero is stupid. It means a person can walk in off the street and do the job just as well as someone who’s been there for 20 years. If that’s the case why do I need to keep older employees?
Honestly, how skilled is a production line spot? I can't imagine it taking more than a month to learn almost all of the positions. They're all pretty much automated, aren't they? Unless I'm grossly wrong about how a production line works, I just see people pushing buttons on pretty much automated machines and watching them do the lifting and fastening for them. I don't see how you can be more skilled or more efficient (and therefore worth more) if you're limited by the line speed anyway. Really don't understand how a line worker can be worth so much an hour, not trying to insult anyone here that is one. I need a day in the life of video to see what's so hard about it. -
Honest question, what's to stop Ford or any of the others from hiring someone that wants to work instead of complain at the union plants? Are they required by law to hire union workers?
-
RETURN OF THE 7 LUG F150HD and then F250LD !! ???
-
2
-
-
23 hours ago, akirby said:
Are you sure about that? I remember a 6.6L Trans Am only putting out only 189 hp in the mid to late 70s. Everything from 75 to the 90s was pretty anemic. The move to more and more power and efficiency didn’t really start in earnest until the turn of the century.
That's what I was thinking.. you were really doing something if you had 200-240hp from the early 70s up until the mid 90s for GM (LS1, ~315hp in the F-body and vette I believe), took Ford a little longer to get the modular above 300 (05 mustang I think was 300) aside from limited production 4v versions. Not that it helped GM any sales wise having more power, but.. almost everything was anemic for a couple of decades after 72/3. One thing a lot of people don't realize though is the switch between SAE net and gross at the same time as the emissions crack downs, so the power losses appeared worse than they were if using the same hp rating system, and the lowering of compression ratios on almost everything with the loss of leaded gas. Was a lot going on at the same time contributing to sharp drop in HP numbers. -
On 8/31/2023 at 9:33 PM, DeluxeStang said:
Weight doesn't matter as much in a truck, but it always matters period. Weight is the enemy to literally everything on a car, so as an engineer, you want to save as much weight as possible. A hundred pounds isn't the end of the world, but it's certainly not good.
Is it really worth investing millions of dollars into reengineering the 7.3 for performance applications when the 5.0 is right there? Especially considering there's nothing the 7.3 can do that the 5.0 can't do better, cheaper, and more reliably.
Any performance discussion revolving around the 6.8 or 7.3 is immediately irrelevant when some engineer says "But 5.0". It's the best engine ford's ever had, whereas the 6.8/7.3 are just meh, very average all around.
Never said it was worth it or made sense, just pointing out that a performance tune on a 7.3 isn't hard at all and it can easily make way more power than a 5.0 n/a. Emissions certification and all the testing probably wouldn't pay off with relatively low volume, I understand that. The 6.2 didn't end up being worth putting in the F150 when sales numbers came back and the ecoboost killed it. That said, calling it a heavy duty/slow revving/slug/whatever else was said just doesn't make sense if you know anything about building engines.
On 9/1/2023 at 3:50 PM, mackinaw said:No, it doesn't, but the 1960's hot-rodder in me would love to bolt a set of high-flow cylinder heads on that 445 cubic inch engine (not going to cal it 7/3L), put in a hot cam, as well as a nice pair of headers. Shades of 1967!
The thing these guys are ignoring is that the stock godzilla heads already flow slightly better than the coyote and are a mild port job away from flowing 100cfm more. It is an absolute powerhouse waiting to be unleashed by Ford if they ever choose to (very unlikely we'll see it in anything besides the superduty) or the aftermarket.
On 9/1/2023 at 10:19 PM, silvrsvt said:You do realize that was almost 60 years ago too, right? LOTS has changed in that time.
Not much as far as making power goes, it's always been about air flow. More air in and out means more power. EFI has made tuning immensely easier and allows for better emissions control and pushing the limits of the tune and still being safe (all my old carb stuff is holley sniper EFI, not as good as sequential multiport, but still better than a carb for most uses). But the basics are the same. -
21 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:
Yeah, an it also revs like a slug and weighs the truck down.
I'm seeing 430-460lbs for coyote and around 540 for godzilla. ~100lbs is nothing in a pickup.
It may rev like a slug in a superduty turning a heavy duty transmission and with a "tune" meant to produce low end torque for towing, but again, it's a cam/intake swap away from snapping harder than a yote. -
12 hours ago, akirby said:
7.3 - 430/4754th Gen 5.0 (dark horse mustang) - 500/418
In a performance vehicle (as opposed to towing) the 5.0 should be way better.
You know I meant in truck trim (even said that). It makes 400/410 in an F150, less than the even more safely tuned and derated 250/350 7.3.
It's a cam and intake swap away from WAY more than the 500/418 dark horse.
I'm all for the dohc engines and love the tech, and even agree the 5.0/5.2 makes more sense for something like this, but let's not act like the 7.3 couldn't be an absolute power house with VERY little work. a Brief google says the godzilla heads flow better stock for stock compared to coyote and have more room to grow with porting. The 7.3 is literally being choked by the cam and intake choice to make low end grunt for truck duty.
New Jersey to Require 35% Electric Vehicle Sales by 2026
in E.V. Central
Posted
At the risk of sounding even more like an Elon fanboi, twitter/x seems to be the spot for up to date news with community notes and live discourse/fact checking. Can't stand clickbait headlines and network news talking heads any more.
For one of the other comments, I lean conservative/libertarian and don't like .gov regulations as much as the next guy, but the "mandates" were purely reactionary to try to take some credit for where the market was already going imo. Also a gearhead and they can pry my ICE V8 toys from my cold dead hands and all that, but I still think the BEV tech is super cool. I just don't get why people can't separate the politics from some pretty damn cool technology, even with it's growing pains and current limitations.