slemke
-
Posts
741 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
3
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Downloads
Store
Posts posted by slemke
-
-
9 hours ago, Rick73 said:
Additional information from The Detroit News article.
Maverick hybrid up 252% over last year.
F-150 hybrid up 36%.
“Although F-Series trucks were down 3.8% year-over-year, sales of the electric F-150 Lightning rose 113% to a record monthly and year-to-date high. The F-150 Hybrid's sales were up 36%. Together, they made up a quarter of F-150 sales.”
F150 Hybrid sales still need to pick up the pace to meet Ford’s 2x target for ‘24. The ‘23s have a ~$1900 discount on the hybrid option, making it virtually no cost compared to the 3.5eb. Same with the ‘24. Propower has been made standard on the upper trims.
Not sure if the pricing on Ford’s build and price website is accurate, but it was cheaper to get a hybrid with 7.2kw propower than it was a 5.0 with locking differential the last time I looked.
-
My guess for Flat Rock is an s650 version of the Mustang GT500.
-
33 minutes ago, AGR said:
Only 5000 miles between reactor swaps. Oil changes are half as often now.
-
9 hours ago, rperez817 said:
For sure jpd80. Jim Hackett's design thinking was a major contributor to that "change in the way Ford develops vehicles", and why Bronco & Maverick as well as F-150 Lightning & Mustang Mach-E appeal to customers based on product merit rather than on massive sales incentives.
Might not be “massive “ but Ford is trying to close out ‘23 Lightning with $7500 incentives on xlt and lariat. Inventory of pro and platinum must be under control as those were excluded.
-
1 hour ago, silvrsvt said:
Well depends on what you consider radical...but your more or less saying the same thing...
And I'm guessing Ford is trying for a 1986 Taurus styling reach here too.
From the pictures posted and not doing well in focus groups, more like a 1996 Taurus styling.
I don’t remember how the ‘86 did in research clinics, but I do recall analysts being surprised at how well it did in the market. Maybe it would be more popular than we think. Put me down as it will be a failure based on the profile akirby posted.
-
1 hour ago, fuzzymoomoo said:
It’s never going to pass a vote so I don’t know why I’m even talking about it. The only way we get a new contract at this point is if it’s forced onto us by a third party.Ah, now your arbitration makes sense. A contract forced onto the membership by an arbitrator.
One analyst was claiming the end is near and the strike at KTP was to sell the contract to members. The union leadership needed to show they did enough to get the best deal. You seem unconvinced the tactic will work.
-
28 minutes ago, jpd80 said:
If as you say the IRS tracks the sale and the purchaser, they will already know if the buyer’s income
or combined income meets the requirements without any need for returning money.
One thought on give back situation,Does that tax credit have to be used completely in that tax year or is some or all of able to be carried forward
to successive tax years like the government has done in the past for Ford and GM tax credits?
The IRS doesn’t know because the tax year isn’t over when the purchase is made. Buy an eligible vehicle in January and neither the current or previous tax year income is known. It still comes down to filing at the end of the tax year whether you are eligible for the credit or not. The credit cannot be carried over to another year.
Details here: https://www.irs.gov/credits-deductions/credits-for-new-clean-vehicles-purchased-in-2023-or-after
The thought is getting the money upfront will lead to additional sales as consumers don’t need to pay or finance the full amount and get refunded later. Not sure what prevents someone from attesting they are eligible to get a $7500 loan from the IRS and paying it back when filing or quarterly payments.
-
1
-
-
Ford moved a bunch of Mach Es in August, but it looks like sales are still trailing the production increase as there is a 4 month supply at the current rate. Let’s see if the sales continue to improve. What happened to lightning sales? Plant down for retooling?
Ford also disclosed a $270M charge for Explorer/Aviator cameras, so maybe they have a solution worked out and we’ll start to see Aviator and Explorer sales pick up.
-
10 hours ago, akirby said:
Just like the people complaining about big SUVs and pollution while they’re driving 20 yr old cars that actually put out far more pollution than a new expedition.Or the people driving an edge complaining about expedition drivers saying they don’t need a vehicle that big. Well then why aren’t you driving a fiesta?
Lots of do what I say not as I do.
Careful with the generalization about 20 yr old cars. The 2004 Focus was available as a Pzev. If kept in good condition, it’s probably polluting less than the Expedition. In general, though, you are correct.
-
1
-
-
15 hours ago, akirby said:
That’s easy to say, but what exactly does Ford need to “revamp” on the Coyote 5.0L? It seems to be maxed out on technology and power. It can easily be tweaked here and there and stay perfectly competitive without spending huge bucks and resources. Remember they just came out with a HO diesel engine for Super Duty.And the only reason for an I6 is if it gives them huge dividends in lower production costs. From a market perspective it’s just not needed.
Not saying they don’t need to make improvements here and there but they don’t really need brand new engines or transmissions.
Well, the fuel economy is abysmal with the Coyote in the Mustang. It didn’t get the cylinder deactivation that the f150 has. I know it is aimed at performance, but the dark horse gets hit with an added gas guzzler tax. Atkinson cycle or variable valve timing that eliminates the throttle like some manufacturers would help. Biggest gain would be from some sort of electrification.
The ecoboost engines are starting to lag the competition. The standard output hurricane matches/exceeds the 3.0 nano. The HO version is in a different league. The 1.5l i3 is nothing to write home about for nvh, output, or fuel economy. Maybe it will get replaced by a 3 cylinder version of the Mustang’s 2.3L as one of the car magazines alluded to.
I never said they needed new engines or transmissions. They need to keep the current lineup competitive. Class leading would be better and should be the goal. If a new engine is needed to consolidate engine families and reduce costs, seems like a win to me. But, they probably should expand their hybrid and PHEV options or at least fix the supply constraints on the current ones.
I wouldn’t call the HO 6.7 diesel new either. It’s an improvement of the 6.7 that allows for an added premium to be charged. It fits the sort of improvements I envision across the lineup. Likewise, the 6.8l gas is a stretch being all new, as it is a shorter stroke 7.3.
-
18 minutes ago, akirby said:
They have all the platforms and IC powertrains they need including HEV and PHEV. All they need to do is tweak them occasionally.That’s the thing, they need to keep them fresh or they will loose any competitive edge and it will be like the late ‘90s early 2000’s with falling sales and profits. GM is spending money to revamp their V8 truck engines. Stellantis is continuing to roll out the hurricane I6. The list goes on. Ford needs to keep pace. We will see this fall what Ford does with the updated F150.
-
13 hours ago, Rangers09 said:
I'm aware the vehicle can be charged using a standard 110V outlet, which is what we use at home. None are available at our condo, as I have walked the entire parking garage during a previous visit. They don't recommend using an extension cord, as I would need over 300', due to voltage loss.
That’s unfortunate. Usually there are a couple outlets around somewhere for maintenance. But like I said, might be difficult to access which seems to be your case. And I wouldn’t put it past Ford to save some money and not include the mobile charger as that was done on the Mach e.
-
12 hours ago, Rangers09 said:
I'll suggest it isn't only applicable to trucks, as we now have about 1 month experience with DW's PHEV Escape and based on current technology and charger availability the hybrid is the perfect solution. We are currently on a 2.5 week trip, with no access to a charging station at our condo. I have looked for charging stations as we drive around town, but haven't seen one in a week.
The PHEV is working even better than I expected, using electric around the city and when on the motorway/highway using EV Charge. During a 20 mile highway trip yesterday, it put about 40% charge back into the battery, so we can continue using electric around the city.
If this was a BEV, it would already be dead at the side of the road, or we would be looking for a Ford dealer with charging station, and sitting waiting while it charges.
Did Ford remove the mobile power cord? You should be able to plug it into a standard outlet and let it charge overnight. No need for a charging station, but might still be hard to find an accessible outlet.
-
1
-
-
13 minutes ago, akirby said:
You missed the question. Why is it better on emissions?Updated architecture. The 2.3 is a newer design that was developed for more stringent emissions standards. Why revamp an existing v6 when an I 4 designed to support multiple cylinder configurations can be used? By using the i4 and adding cylinders Ford could drop supporting an architecture and streamline any future development along with reduced cost to build. Hopefully it would allow more flexibility in switching between i3, i4, and i6 if they were all on the same architecture. At least, that was one of the reasons Mercedes gave for switching to an i6. It could be manufactured along with their now high volume 4 cyl. I think the v6 was a 90 degree design based on a v8 for manufacturing reasons. Then Mercedes switched to a 60 degree design before switching again to a i6. With more 4 and 6 cylinder engines being sold, it made sense to group them together.
Ford will do whatever they think will be the most cost effective. That might be to keep 2 v6 architectures around as long as the cost to update for changing emissions is low or they’ll switch to an i6 gambling that the cost to update multiple architectures will exceed the cost of new tooling. We’ll see what happens soon enough.
-
15 hours ago, T-dubz said:
Interesting. Maverick is a good choice for a street truck, but it seems like it should have a boost in power to go along with the suspension changes. Maybe they will offer a performance tune on the 2.0?
this seems like a good candidate to have body colored bumpers too.Or electrification. That seems to be the latest thing…performance hybrids.
-
An I-6 is perceived to be superior to a v-6 ( the old 90 degree v-6s are partially responsible for this as they aren’t inherently balanced like a 60 degree v-6) while costing less to produce. Mercedes replaced their v6 with an I-6 to align with 4 cyl manufacturing. Mercedes also eliminated many mechanically driven accessories and replaced them with electric versions.
I could see Ford introducing an I-6 based on the new Mustang 2.3 when it comes time to upgrade the 3.3 and 3.5l cyclones for tighter emissions standards. No sense engineering multiple solutions if it can be avoided. In the end, I think it will be Coyote, Godzilla, and 2.3L ecoboost derivatives for gas engines.
-
On 6/30/2023 at 9:57 AM, HotRunrGuy said:
Gotcha! Today is my first day of retirement, so the days of having to deal with (In)Human Resources are now behind me,,,,,
HRG
Congrats. But for some of my retired co-workers that was just the beginning of dealing with HR…at least those that had a company pension or retirement health benefits.
-
7 hours ago, Flying68 said:
Federal tax withholdings on lump sum bonuses are 25%. This may or may not be higher or lower than an individuals normal withholding (everyone is different). They do this to make it easier to withhold, rather than using the tables or formulas based on frequency of payment which could result in an absurdly large withholding. The 25% is basically the middle of the tax bracket and like @HotRunrGuy said, when you file your taxes, the lump sum bonus is part of your total income and calculates the same, so really the 25% just affects how much you get back or have to pay, but it isn't taxed at a different rate.
TL:DR Tax rates and withholding rate are not the same.
It was reduced to 22% as part of the 2018 tax bill. It aligns with the marginal tax rate for singles with ~45k to ~95k or married couples making ~90k to ~190k. State income tax is often similar in how it is withheld. You’re correct that it is a middle tax bracket…the momma bear bracket. Too high for some, too low for others, and just right for some.
For a single Ford worker making the $32/hr Farley quoted, the bonus withholding would be at the marginal rate. For a married single income person, it would be too much. But, you’re free to adjust the withholding amount at any time on a W-4. The online calculator may even breakout expected bonuses from salary to provide a better estimate of what should be withheld from each paycheck to compensate for the bonus withholding.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, rperez817 said:
That's correct. Ford said the following in its 1Q 2023 financials press release.
This is a temporary blip. Once the production constraints ease, Model e division should return to its role as the chief source of sales growth at Ford Motor Company overall.
That’s what I thought until I saw the gross stock table that listed 9500 Mach E in stock. Was there a stop sale for a recall? Doesn’t make sense to have that much gross stock while claiming a production shutdown to expand capacity lowered deliveries. Also, the price was cut twice. I’m presuming in response to Tesla’s price cuts on the model y. But, if demand was strong, I’d expect inventory to be lower considering the shutdown and no price cuts.
-
On 4/21/2023 at 11:41 AM, silvrsvt said:
Can use it as a clothes hanger for people who live off the grid
Not a bad idea for camping, either. Hang the wet gear over the rails to dry.
I was thinking they could be used as a frame for a fabric topper.
-
9 hours ago, ice-capades said:
This morning's gas prices in Hamden, CT (New Haven)
- $3.59 Regular (Cash) @ Gulf
- $3.75 Regular (Cash) @ Citgo
CT is still phasing back in the $0.25 state tax that was waived last year. Full tax will be restored by June.
Those stations seem to be less than a block apart and have some wild price deviations. What’s the story?
I filled up at a Harris Teeter (Kroger affiliated) on Thursday for $3.59. I had fuel points to use so that reduced the cost. Otherwise, I’d fill up next door at Costco.
-
9 hours ago, Rick73 said:
Context of the report, based on Edmund’s data, was that many buyers were finding new cars out of reach, some settling for used.
Regarding Tesla higher costs possibly affecting their sales, the following comparison shows that even the simplest Model 3 is more expensive to own than many conventional ICE options. While energy costs (electricity versus gasoline) favors the Tesla BEV, overall cost is still higher, primarily due to initial cost.
Teslas are considered entry luxury and be compared with entry level BMWs and Mercedes. Your chart shows the model3 compares favorably. Personal observations from my area does reflect the shift from entry luxury cars to Tesla. It will be interesting to see if Tesla can keep that perception alive as cost are reduced or if it becomes mainstream and needs to compete against civics and corollas. Tesla reduced the price of the model 3 again as the new government incentives were cut in half on it. It is going to make it very hard for newcomers to break into the segment now that Tesla is well established, has volume and lower costs. Very similar to Toyota.
-
1
-
-
I think the intent of the question was to ask whether Ford’s BEVs use a heat pump or air blown over resistors. The resistive pads may not have much of an advantage over a heat pump. Based on a quick google search, neither the Mach e or lightning uses a heat pump.
-
1
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, AM222 said:
Interesting, same stroke as the 2.5 Duratec.
Are there clear shots of the new engine and did Ford call it an all-new engine/architecture?
From motor trend:
MPC 2.3-Liter EcoBoost I-4”,
It may be tough to tell by studying the Mustang's spec sheet, but this 2.3-liter EcoBoost I-4 engine is entirely new, save for a few fasteners. One of its big emissions enablers is fitment of both port- and direct-injection, with the latter's pressure bumped to 5,000 psi. Another is internally plumbed exhaust-gas recirculation, which can be managed far more precisely than metering exhaust gasses back in through external lines. One interesting feature on this longitudinal application of the engine is an integrated airbox, which ships from the engine factory attached in front of the front-end accessory drive unit. Mounting it so close to the intake manifold minimizes losses.
SEE ALL 71 PHOTOSAt the 2024 Mustang's launch, Ed Krenz, chief functional engineer, Ford Performance, assured us there will be no backsliding on performance or fuel consumption and that the team prioritized drivability and fun performance over advertisable peak numbers (which today are 310-330 hp, 350 lb-ft, and 22-25 EPA combined mpg—the new figures are forthcoming). Oh, and that MPC stands for Modular Power Cylinder, which refers to the combustion chamber shape, valve and injector orientation, piston dome, etc., all of which get engineered and optimized once and applied to a family of engines (in this case, inline three- and four-cylinders). Well, guess what? Ed was right. Official power figures were released just ahead of the 2022 holiday season, and the new 2.3-liter I-4 EcoBoost makes 315 hp and 350 lb-ft, meaning it gets the old model's maximum torque output standard and generates an extra 5 hp.
-
1
-
Unique Hybrid Set-Up in the New 2024 Lincoln Nautilus
in Ford Motor Company Discussion Forum
Posted
Aviator Grand Touring PHEV is 70kw. The hybrid battery in the F150 is limited to 35kw. Ford would need to increase the power output of the hybrid battery to use a more powerful motor.