rmc523

January 21

On 1/19/2024 at 5:05 PM, jpd80 said:

The more I read these threads, the more I become convinced that manufacturers like Ford

dont really know what the majority of vehicle buyers want these days and that’s because

theres so much choice.

Ford thought that Utilites would replace cars, they did but Ford decided to build only a few

types and wondered why everyone else was eating their lunch……

The RAV4 is no great shakes but it has done more to transition Toyota car buyers that any other brand.

The fact that Toyota openly admits that most Camry buyers will probably switch to RAV4 says a lot.

Maybe one day, Ford will get a clue about the millions of buyers who don’t even consider it anymore.

yup, ford’s plan was

1) eliminate cars

2) shift everyone to SUVs/crossovers

3) proceed to not update/keep updated the SUVs/crossovers in the lineup.

good plan lol

January 19

3 hours ago, fuzzymoomoo said:

So you do care a little bit then? Lol

Lol got me there. Nah, I've never purposely watched Nascar and never will. I don't need to watch cars go in circles for hours (I know there's more to it).

January 19

Hopefully they can start getting the parts they need for the increased production.

January 19

1 hour ago, Captainp4 said:

The charging for people living in apartments would probably be a big help here - usually not in favor of too much .gov intervention, but that one seems like it's going to take a very long time for older buildings to get updated - I imagine newer complexes would have this in mind already, but haven't heard anything either way. Some of the nicer places around here have garages you can also rent now. Not sure how that works - if it's an as needed thing or comes with the apartment .. or if they're equipped for 240 charging.

Newer complexes here are including some chargers, but not one for each unit like would be necessary.

January 19

17 hours ago, silvrsvt said:

They haven't sold them in 6 years...WTF are you talking about?

Just drop the shovel and move on

I think she's talking about the Golf R maybe?

17 hours ago, fuzzymoomoo said:

Not to mention the whole “Win on Sunday, Sell on Monday” thing hasn’t really been a thing since the 70s.

I could care less about Nascar.

January 19

Stellantis reveals STLA Large platform with EV and ICE support - Autoblog

Quote

Hot on the heels of a Jeep Wagoneer S teaser and photos of the prototype next-generation Dodge Charger (or Challenger), comes a reveal and details of what will likely underpin both of them: the STLA Large platform. It's one of multiple Stellantis flexible architectures that will be the basis of its upcoming electric cars, and apparently internal combustion ones, too.

Stellantis says the STLA Large platform will be for D- and E-segment cars, crossovers and SUVs. In other words, it will be for midsize and large vehicles. For reference, lengths supported will be from 187.6 to 201.8 inches, and width will range from 74.7 to 79.9 inches. It will be highly flexible, too, with Stellantis claiming significant amounts of adjustability in overhangs, wheelbase, suspension placement and powertrain arrangement.

The powertrain flexibility is quite impressive. Front-, rear- and all-wheel-drive layouts will be supported. Single- and dual-motor layouts will be on offer. Internal combustion will be available, too, either on its own or as a hybrid. Apparently engines can be fitted either longitudinally or transversely, too.

Battery packs with between 85 and 118 kWh of capacity will be offered, with Stellantis claiming that sedan-style vehicles could have a range of up to 500 miles. The packs will also be available in 400- and 800-volt designs. Stellantis noted also that the platform can "easily accept future energy storage technologies when they reach production readiness." This seems to hint that the company is looking at different battery chemistries and maybe even solid-state batteries that could be added more easily in the future. Furthermore, the platform is designed to handle impressive output. Stellantis says that some models on the platform will have 0-to-62 mph times in the 2-second range. Limited-slip differentials for improved power delivery and wheel-end disconnects for reduced mechanical drag are also on the table for this platform.

January 18

1 hour ago, akirby said:

Oh please. Comparing Autocross enthusiasts to NASCAR, NHRA, IMSA and LeMans racing enthusiasts is like comparing a canoe to an aircraft carrier.

A kayak modified to look like BB-63 USS Missouri cross post from /r/funny [unknown resolution] : r/WarshipPorn

January 18

31 minutes ago, DeluxeStang said:

The grille should definitely stay the same color as the normal gt, it's too much. But the wheels and color themselves aren't too bad imo.

I agree, the grille should've just gotten an accent of bronze - maybe a bronze surround, not the whole thing, it's too much.

January 17

3 hours ago, Captainp4 said:

Quick google says the Tesla one has a 10 year warranty, but batteries generally don't just completely fail at some point - they just don't hold as much juice. I haven't looked into it very thoroughly, the roof of my house isn't optimal for solar, but I'm putting up a pretty big garage in the next few months and plan to look into solar/battery storage after it's built to see if it's worth it to me. Sounds like it on the surface with both of us wanting to get into a BEV for our daily drivers in the next few years. There's tons of different options at different price points and capacities, like most anything else likely depends on use case and location if it makes sense or not.

Right, I wasn't implying it'd stop working completely - I was meaning more as it starts degrading.

January 16

https://fordauthority.com/2024/01/2024-ram-promaster-ev-debuts-as-all-new-ford-e-transit-rival/

The 2024 Ram ProMaster EV is targeted at last-mile delivery services, specifically, which is precisely where the E-Transit has thus far proven to be quite popular among commercial and government entities. As such, it’s equipped with a 110 kWh battery pack that gives it a mere 162 miles of range, and it can be charged using an onboard Level 2 charger capable of speeds up to 11 kW, or Level 3 DC fast-charging at speeds of up to 150 kW. Power comes from a single electric motor mounted on the front axle that generates 268 horsepower and 302 pound-feet of torque.

The 2024 Ram ProMaster EV utilizes the same architecture as its ICE-powered counterparts, and offers up the same 524 cubic feet of cargo volume since the battery pack is mounted underneath the middle portion of the floor. Customers can choose from one of two configurations – a delivery or cargo-focused model, though the latter version isn’t yet available to order. Eventually, Ram plans to offer the ProMaster EV in five different configurations with two roof heights, two cargo lengths, and two body styles.

January 16

1 hour ago, 92merc said:

"Tesla does is soooo much better. No one will ever beat Tesla at their game."

Sir.

January 16

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/news/gm-revving-back-cadillac-maker-reportedly-scraps-ultra-cruise-to-double-down-on-older-driver-assistance-system/ar-AA1n3lH3?ocid=entnewsntp&pc=U531&cvid=c3f1dfae121c4c2eb280d2dd2b941ce2&ei=22

General Motors Co (NYSE:GM) is reportedly discontinuing its Ultra Cruise system, a successor to its Super Cruise system, to refocus on the older generation of its driver assistance system.

What Happened: GM has plans to put a stop to its Ultra Cruise program, CNBC reported, citing two sources familiar with the matter.

The automaker will now refocus its efforts on the further development of Super Cruise instead of having two driver assistance systems, the report added.

Ultra Cruise was initially slated for a 2023 launch.

January 16

1 hour ago, Captainp4 said:

Solar, in theory, could provide all of our power with a relatively small area of coverage.. but it requires large amounts of battery storage and so far that is expensive and slow going, but there are companies making progress. Even if you don't pair it with solar it can help even out supply/demand. If I remember correctly from the last Tesla share holder update the megapack is the quickest growing part of the company right now. https://www.tesla.com/megapack This can also work with a number of different "mechanical batteries" that pump water or weight up when there's excess and then drain it back down when in need. Moving the storage to individual homes with powerall (or similar) or using the actual BEV to help store and manage power are also possibilities that are becoming more available, albeit still quite pricey and a hard sell for most because the payoff takes so long and it's so expensive. So many different companies building battery facilities and ramping production it's hard to imagine prices for all this stuff won't start to come down in the near future.

This comment makes me wonder the lifespan of these home battery packs - wouldn't they have the same issues with long term charging/depleting that vehicles, phones, etc. would have? The long term cost payoff has to make it worth buying the battery before it goes bad.

January 15

On 1/13/2024 at 3:25 PM, silvrsvt said:

Yeah that is one of the reasons why I bought Ford Stock. I could get A plan pricing but due to a falling out with my dad, I don't ask for it and he won't be around forever either.

I bought some too both to have it and for this purpose. I didn't realize it was going away for shareholders either.

Oh well - I'll still hold onto my stock - I have the dividends set to re-invest anyway.

January 15

Uh. No thanks.

I'm not driving a vehicle on a test drive like I'd drive normally - I'm trying to get a quick test of different features in a short period.

I also don't want/need an algorithm telling me what kind of vehicle I should be looking at lol.

January 12

Significant isn't the word I'd use - It sort of looks like the took the Charger's middle and slapped the Challenger's front and rear ends on.

I also don't understand then name "Charger Daytona" when they've had Charger as the 4-door for a long time now....

January 11

22 hours ago, Rick73 said:

Since Mach-E hasn’t succeeded Edge (at least to date AFAIK), I don’t understand your reply. Had Mach-E been smaller and not competed as directly with Edge, wouldn’t that have been more beneficial to Ford? I expect profitability on Edge is better than on Mach-E.

Anyway, it doesn’t matter since it was a hypothetical question in that Ford will likely continue to go after more expensive vehicles, including 3-row electric SUVs, and is very unlikely to pursue BEVs smaller than Mach-E for North America. We’ll know how it all works out soon enough. Thanks for your reply.

Many try to say that Mach E is a sort of Edge successor, and I disagree - it's being forced into that spot (at the moment) because Ford is dropping Edge. Obviously right this second Edge is still around, but I'm projecting forward.

5 hours ago, silvrsvt said:

Unpopular opinion-The Edge was replaced by the Bronco AND Mach E in the line up. Neither is a direct replacement, but both products have something that appeals to the demographics/buyer of an Edge.

You're not wrong, but IMO, neither product offers what Edge offers for those buyers. Mach E is too low, Bronco is too unrefined for that customer.

January 11

4 hours ago, T-dubz said:

Trax is doing really well at 44k for the quarter. Looks like it was only beat by the trucks and the equinox.

The new Trax is a good looking product!

January 10

44 minutes ago, Rick73 said:

Well, it should get interesting in that Tesla just today started taking orders for 2024 Model 3 Highland at same price. I thought some buyers may have delayed buying Model 3s waiting for upgrade, and if that’s the case, it may hurt Mach-E sales somewhat over next few months. Starting price for Model 3 is still +/- $40k.

There is speculation (fancy word for guessing) that Tesla’s new smaller car (Model 2) will be about 15% shorter, 30% lighter, and with about 25% smaller battery. Analyst estimate COGS about 37% lower, roughly half from size-related savings and other half on more-efficient assembly if I recall correctly. That’s how the analyst roughly projects $25k as a reasonable target. I think even at $30k a smaller Tesla could interest a lot of buyers. It would me.

I guess my question to you would be that if Mach-E had been made a little smaller, would Ford have loss any more per car, and would sales have been that much lower? Not suggesting Mach-E is wrong size, just questioning if smaller and lower-cost would have been any worse.

Given they're trying to force it as an Edge successor (when it isn't, IMO), yes.

January 10

13 hours ago, jpd80 said:

Maybe it’s time for a new Lincoln Mark LT based on the Lightning…..

So they can sell 5 a year haha.

January 10

On 1/8/2024 at 5:08 PM, joseodiaga4 said:

Agree but let's hope they start to change it!
The Chinese Nautilus already has AR and from what I have seen there is a digital rearview mirror too (although a dealer-installed option)

I did see our Nautilus at an auto show, and it looks really good!

But I don't think it gets those features.

January 10

8 hours ago, AM222 said:

Pretty much the situation between the Bronco Sport and the longer Escape. Very expensive vs expensive (by non-luxury brand standards).

A Maverick-equivalent SUV doesn't need to be a Maverick, Ford just needs a lower-priced C2-based model.
The Corolla Cross for example is an example of a lower-priced crossover SUV positioned in the smaller-end of the compact class. Unlike the Bronco Sport, which is positioned above the Escape, the Corolla Cross is positioned below the RAV4. Ford needs something like this.

The base Corolla Cross L costs $24,960 with destination charges, the LE variant below costs $27,290 with destination charges.
Standard engine is a 169hp 2.0-liter inline-4. The AWD 2.0-liter Hybrid version has a total system output of 196hp and starts at $29,745 with destination charges.

For comparison, the base Escape Active 1.5 EcoBoost FWD costs $31,635 with destination charges.

Many of us have wanted Puma to come over here to fill that smaller crossover vehicle gap. But it won't happen.

January 10

On 1/8/2024 at 4:51 PM, Rick73 said:

Maverick is a good example. ?

Agree success is partly due to value and low cost. I like the size and looks too. To your point, I don’t know if Ford manufactured an electric Maverick, to what extend it would affect Maverick sales. I think it’s a given cost would be higher than ICE or Hybrid variants, but I would guess that proportionally it wouldn’t be much worse than Lightning is to ICE/Hybrid F-150. That’s not saying much though because Lightning sales are a small fraction of total F-150. Also, Maverick sales are much fewer, so an electric variant would not have the numbers to absorb development costs as easily as Lightning.

For now I like hybrids over BEVs, and Maverick Hybrid is one of few Ford vehicles I would consider buying.

They've increased prices and made the hybrid no longer standard, likely because they weren't making enough on the hybrid.

On 1/8/2024 at 4:29 PM, Rick73 said:

I won’t discuss points out of context again.

It makes sense to build lower cost vehicles because if you build expensive ones very few people can or will buy them, not unless you drop price and lose even more money per vehicle. GM Hummer is a good example. What good was building a vehicle that most people can’t afford? And let’s also consider damage its excesses have done to electrification’s long-term goals.

Opposite happened with Tesla. When they came out with more-affordable Models 3 and Y, buyers overwhelmingly preferred them over Models S and X. One report stated lower-cost Models 3 and Y now account for 97% of their sales.

If a manufacturer can’t build vehicles at a profit that people can actually buy, whether large or small,, then maybe they shouldn’t build them at all (obviously unless they have no other choice in order to meet government mandates in order to stay in business).

Not sure how it's "out of context" when you literally say "the idea that manufacturers should plan on building what buyers want doesn’t resonate with me." . But ok....

The problem is that just about everyone aside from Tesla hasn't figured out how to make the BEVs profitable at "reasonable" prices yet, because they're working on getting their infrastructures up and running and improving battery tech.

Down the road (ideally sooner than later), sure, it'd be great to have smaller models at good prices. But right now for most manufacturers, that's not a thing, like it or not. Expecting companies to just charge low prices and lose money NOW just to get BEVs going doesn't make sense.

Naturally you're going to have a larger customer pool at a lower pricepoint - that applies to any product. It also doesn't help that the S and X haven't received meaningful design changes....ever.