Bryan1

Consequences will never be the same. https://youtu.be/EbPcSKCqKLc

Last week, we published new Bronco prototype images, but not without consequence. [cut] While we were successful in bringing you the information we received quickly, this video (seen above) and its corresponding post on TFLcar.com didn’t come without consequence. Shortly after we published the news, we received notice from a Ford spokesperson that we had been summarily disinvited from the official reveal for the 2021 Ford Bronco and the 2021 Ford F-150. https://www.tfltruck.com/2020/06/ford-uninvited-tfl-from-the-upcoming-2021-ford-f-150-bronco-reveals-heres-how-it-hurts-all-of-us-call-to-action/

Nope. He was asking about the second gen, ie 2017 and up, not first gen.

George Carlin on The Environment https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EjmtSkl53h4

First, it was "global cooling."

If only it worked that way. Congress ceded its legislative powers to federal agencies and lets the agencies write the regulations for the laws they pass. I learned that on the Mark Levin show. I guess you haven't been listening. Trump is President and this is his EPA. A comment on another article states CA can have a waiver and that person provided the following info: CA may be granted a waiver if they meet the following criteria: According to the Clean Air Act Section 209 – State Standards, EPA shall grant a waiver unless it finds that California: was arbitrary and capricious in its finding that its standards are in the aggregate at least as protective of public health and welfare as applicable federal standards; does not need such standards to meet compelling and extraordinary conditions; or has proposed standards not consistent with Section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act. The Operative word here is “MAY” be given a waiver, which which is NOT Mandatory. A Great first step to fix this hellhole.

I don't know. I was expected there to be a multi-page response and there were only 3 comments. TFL Truck has 139 comments on it. Maybe people aren't into discussion boards as much as they used to be. As an aside I haven't visited f150online in over a year and I used to post there regularly.

60/40 probably because the handle and logo are in the center.

Surprised this only has 3 responses. The trolls on putc have talked about it more and there isn't even an article on it yet.

Yep. Fake News! The T(Lies)AC who originally broke that story retracted it last week. The wheel DOES NOT have to come off.

Best looking truck? Still the F-150 King Ranch IMO. https://youtu.be/NoN-qmHSgUU

Related story: President Trump threatens to cut all GM subsidies after Lordstown announcement Excerpt: GM (GM) stock declined more than 3% and fell to session lows on the comments. Trump's threat came a day after GM announced plans to cut 14,000 jobs and shut five facilities in North America including the plant in Lordstown, Ohio, dealing a blow to the president's promise to help auto workers. GM said the moves are designed to prepare the company for a future of driverless and electric vehicles. GM is also responding to a consumer shift away from sedans in favor of trucks and SUVs. White House economic adviser Larry Kudlow said at Tuesday's White House press briefing that he met with Barra on Monday to talk about the layoffs. "It's a great disappointment, obviously," he said. Kudlow said the Trump administration will be looking into subsidies for "electric cars and others." He did not specify how much GM receives in federal subsidies. "The U.S. saved General Motors, and this is the THANKS we get! Trump tweeted. GM did not respond to a request for comment. link: https://fox8.com/2018/11/27/president-trump-threatens-to-cut-all-gm-subsidies-after-lordstown-announcement/

Donald J. Trump‏Verified account @realDonaldTrump 6h6 hours ago More Very disappointed with General Motors and their CEO, Mary Barra, for closing plants in Ohio, Michigan and Maryland. Nothing being closed in Mexico & China. The U.S. saved General Motors, and this is the THANKS we get! We are now looking at cutting all @GM subsidies, including.... Donald J. Trump‏Verified account @realDonaldTrump 6h6 hours ago More ....for electric cars. General Motors made a big China bet years ago when they built plants there (and in Mexico) - don’t think that bet is going to pay off. I am here to protect America’s Workers!

From Car & Driver: "we did not have the opportunity to evaluate the 2.7T when saddled with a payload in the Silverado's bed or when towing a trailer, it proved more than a match for a 2019 Ram 1500 with the standard 305-hp 3.6-liter eTorque V-6 that Chevy had on hand for comparison drives." --------------- They and other outlets haven't hauled and towed with it yet. And of course Chevy is going to rig the test with their optional engine against a base engine from Ford when the optional 2.7T from Ford is also available. REPLY

https://twitter.com/mrlevine/status/1064514168173338624 "Don't look at the label," said Herrick. "We're as good or better than them in every step."

PHOENIX — When you make big investments in a pickup to improve fuel economy — think Ford's aluminum-body F-150 or the mild-hybrid system on Ram's 1500 — you expect significant results. So how does General Motors explain shifting to a four-cylinder turbo for its redesigned full-size pickups and getting little gain in combined EPA fuel economy ratings over the previous generation's V-6? As a work in progress. link: http://www.autonews.com/article/20181119/OEM06/181119749/gm-chevy-silverado-mpg-4-cylinder-engine

Update (May 11th, 2018): We heard back from Ford with an update to the issue we encountered. The truck you see here is a pre-production unit. Ford inspected the truck, identified the calibration issue, and said the calibration will be fixed when first production trucks start shipping to dealers within the next several weeks (end of May or in June 2018). When asked, Ford did not provide specifics of the calibration issue. However, the company said that all customer trucks will have this issue corrected. ---------- Is Ford even testing these trucks enough? This is the second Ford that TFL got that was bad. It was a pre-production, but it was released to the press for testing and was supposed to be ready to go and production is weeks away. Not buying the pre-production excuse. Looks terrible for Ford specially after the first gen EcoBoost issues when that truck was supposed to have been torture tested.

I was at my local RAM DEALER and the salesman said they got about 20 of the new Ram in stock and they have not sold one yet! They hype the hell out of the e torque and it’s not available.

Ram sort of ruined the looks of the previous model and now they are left only with the reputation of the Hemi which has the same mpg as the previous gen. Everything else is a new gimmick like mild hybrids that truck buyers don’t want, or a known negative like the legendary unreliability of Chrysler and Fiat products.

- Already Posted -

Didn't really care for him, when the early Ford Raptor frames were bending several years ago, he put all blame on the owners. Nice. But on the 2013s, Ford addresssed the isssue and reinforced the frames.

Comment from Alex Luft. Alex Luft says: May 1, 2018 at 11:12 am Not sure how the fact that analysts now have less data to work with is a good thing, or how it will help GM’s objective of preventing swings in share price. That makes no sense. What should have been done is quite the opposite: continue to provide monthly sales results, but explain the results better/with more detail. They’re taking the easy and lazy way out… much like with their products, such as offering sub-par features and options on the Silverado, canceling cars like the Sonic and Impala that have a lot of potential as redesigned models, and offering generally mediocre products across the board. That’s the bear perspective, anyway.

Last month, General Motors announced that it will no longer report its sales results on a monthly basis. The Detroit-based automaker will share sales data on a quarterly basis instead. The move breaks an auto industry tradition that has lasted longer than similar changes in sales reporting in the technology and retailing, along with other sectors. Let’s explore what’s behind GM’s decision. GM insists that a mere thirty days is too short a time frame to determine trends related to sales, demand, and supply in the automotive industry. Like other publicly-traded firms, the automaker already reports its financial results on a quarterly basis, rather than monthly. “Thirty days is not enough time to separate real sales trends from short-term fluctuations in a very dynamic, highly competitive market,” Kurt McNeil, GM’s U.S. vice president for sales operations, said in a statement. “Reporting sales quarterly better aligns with our business, and the quality of information will make it easier to see how the business is performing.” As any amateur statistician will tell you, however, more (accurate) information – not less – is key to trend and pattern derivation. But we’ll save that topic for another time. For now, we’ll conclude that GM wants to control the flow of sales-related information for its own benefit. Read more: http://gmauthority.com/blog/2018/04/the-real-reasons-behind-gms-switch-to-quarterly-sales-reporting/#ixzz5EV0JjVqp

Hopefully they will make it more rust proof and last. My 05 F-150 frame has been rotting through and I'm hearing Ford may have used some defective cheap Chinese steel like Toyota had in their frames. Will have to make another repair to it and then dump it.

Chevys are longest lasting when they are up on blocks on their owner's front lawns still registered or used as a flower garden.