Trader 10

How about negotiating a deal to trade the EV for a nice ICE vehicle that doesn’t force you to waste half a day charging every time you want to get 150 miles down the road?

I wonder how much of the rapid draw down of ‘19 stocks was due to the large price increases on the ‘20.

I see. It’ll be interesting to see how well it works in the F150.

You don’t think the hybrid systems will be virtually identical on both vehicles?

If a Bronco hybrid isn’t any more efficient than the Explorer hybrid, I don’t see much reason to offer it.

Yes. I’m referring to the “Fusion Active Width” vs “C2 wide chassis” bzcat mentioned.

I would think a Fusion “replacement” would be on the same chassis as the NG Edge. The current Fusion is just 1 inch narrower than the Edge.

I don’t think there’s much chance it will be priced between Focus and Escape. Ford is all in on premium pricing. I’m betting it will be priced just less than Edge, but not by much.

I really don’t care about the performance or fuel economy when a vehicle’s limitations make a trip across the state and back a two day affair. I’m sure at some point EV’s will have sufficient range and charging speed to make them mainstream vehicles but they aren’t close yet. Until that happens EV’s are just expensive, limited purpose transportation.

Let’s hope like hell they make it look nothing like the Escape.

And none of them with the limited range and long “fueling” issues your electric vehicle has.

It didn’t for Saturn. I don’t think it would work unless the competition went that way.

Only if you ignore the higher purchase price of EV’s vs. ICE.

True, but the 300 mile range (or whatever the rating turns out to be) is only under ideal conditions and will drop sharply during cold weather, pushing costs considerably higher.

You’ve forgotten about the chassis, transmission, suspension, and air conditioning issues that have been highlighted in stories from nearly every automotive site?

A lot of the Explorer issues sound to me to be due to the new CD6 platform and not assembly. Seems as if Ford may have needed another few months to sort out problems before production began.

Well it certainly is now, as evidenced by your supplied link. And of course, the graph and verbiage you see immediately upon opening the link is a common ploy used by climate “scientists” - make conclusions on apples to oranges comparisons. In this particular case trying to compare temperatures from as far back as the 19th century with recent readings when temperature locations have changed, and thermometer accuracy has changed. Of course 97% of climate change “scientists” will insist that climate change is due to man -its what they do and how they get paid. Funding dries up if they decide otherwise. It’s the branch of “science” that draws almost exclusively those who are out to save the planet. Calling them “scientists” is a bit misleading. Charlatan would be a better term. You’re right - it is science - bad science.

You’re right, the 2.7 would be great but is it really necessary when the 2.3 runs 0 to 60 in 4.5? That’s amazing for a 4 cylinder. It would demolish any V-8 Mustangs prior to the OHC 5.0.

“97% of climate scientists” cranking out report after report funded by the green movement.

There is no proof that the vast majority of “scientists” believe that man is contributing to climate change. The climate has always been and will always be changing. The only constant is change. Your funded by the oil industry comment is comical as we are bombarded daily by “scientific”studies with pre-ordained results paid for by the green movement and governments. They far exceed anything put out by the oil industry.

The vehicles Californians are buying and the amount of miles they're driving them would suggest you don’t know what you’re talking about.

Yes, but those investment totals are just a fraction of what Rivian will need to successfully bring a vehicle to market. I’m guessing they haven’t been made yet (at least all of dollars) but will occur over a period of years depending on Rivian’s progress forward.

I can’t imagine the USPS taking a chance on a new vehicle from a start-up. Rivian may become a successful company but they may be bankrupt in a few years.

You don’t even have to mention “prototype”. That’s all Rivian has. In this case, a drawing of what they think a prototype would look like.

Hybrid model (available next spring) reviews coming Thursday. AutoWeek mentioned it’s the model to buy.