Flying68

Moving to BEV for Class 1 (Ranger, Canyorado, Tacoma, etc..) and even 2A (F-150, Sierrado 1500, Ram 1500, Tundra) should be doable. Moving to BEV for commercial delivery vehicles / box trucks and vans should also be doable (lower range requirements, fixed duty cycle). Moving to BEV for class 2B, Class 3, and higher trucks that do a lot of towing, high load demand work, or run PTO equipment will be more problematic because the energy density is not there for batteries yet and may not be for another 10 years.

Disappointed that they aren't offering a hybrid version. A 7.3 or 6.8 mated to an electric motor would provided diesel like torque with the benefits of gas, plus add the killer feature of the powerboost onboard power system, which would be awesome for campers and smaller rv's when boondocking. Put in a large enough battery that would provide the needed capacity to pull up the mountains and you have a great daily driver that would easily handle the rigors of towing a 10k lb trailer.

Nice. My Dad's Bullitt has a blend date 4 days later, strangely the VIN though is a lower number though. His was an order though, not stock, plus has the magne-ride. Also has a few more miles on it. He used to use it as his daily until he got his Continental, now he drives that or the F-250 mostly. Although he did pick up a '79 Ranchero that he was driving a bit this summer.

So is the dealer filling them with nitrogen, because I highly doubt the factory would. Also most nitrogen filled tires aren't 100% pure nitrogen, close, but I doubt they are getting 100% pure. The main benefit is that it is dry and doesn't leak as much, so if you have a dryer filter on a home air compressor, you are probably better off. Or you can do like most people and just check the tires every month or watch the pressure monitor. Here is what the experts at Tirerack say: SHOULD I USE NITROGEN IN MY TIRES?

I think it also needs to be pointed out that the southwest (Colorado, Utah, New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada, California) cool substantially at night due to low humidity levels, so electrical demand for to run A/C units falls dramatically from the loads experienced in the afternoon until the sun goes down. This is unlike the rest of the country where humidity levels keep temperatures high well past sunset and the only reduction in electrical demand for A/C is due to office buildings being empty. With that said, the southwest has much more capacity at night for BEV charging, but already suffers for over-capacity demand during the day. It has always been that way because the generation capacity never kept pace with population growth which has been a much bigger contributor to peak power demand than BEV's. So basically, adding BEV's will increase demand, but only marginally during the day and during peak times. Population growth and increasing use / need for A/C is a much bigger driver that is straining capacity in the desert southwest.

My one time buying on x-plan, the dealer charged me the normal doc fee allowed in Kansas, then sent me a check for the difference between it and the plan allowance about 2 weeks later. They told me that was their procedure, so that the paperwork the state gets shows the same fee.

I would like to know who this average customer is. Based on the fact that people are paying enormous ADM's to get a vehicle off the lot or paying near MSRP for USED vehicles, I think the "average" customer is able to afford a lot more than you think. YOU may not be willing to pay that much, but it doesn't mean that the average customer isn't.

Between my sisters Escape with the 2.0 at 240hp/270lbft and my wifes MkC with the 2.3 at 285hp/305lbft, the MkC is much more responsive to the throttle. I don't know how anyone could say that their isn't a difference. I guess if all you do is baby it around the city or do nothing but drive the highway at constant speed, you won't know the difference, but I sure do.

Not that we have any plans to replace our MkC with a Corsair anytime soon, but that definitely takes the Corsair off the list. I think it just means it will be a Mach-E for us or whatever they give Lincoln. Sadly I think it might be a while before they actually get a Lincoln BEV, which is a shame because a Mach-E in Lincoln trim with a redesigned front facia and the better Lincoln interior would kill in that market space.

Was a "special order." So I wonder if they scammed the original buyer out of it or if that buyer backed out.

@Footballfan Just so we are clear, this is what is called a Mark-to-Market adjustment. It is an accounting procedure that was implemented post Enron to properly value assets in each reporting period. Ford, by all accounts, had a $500 million cash investment in Rivian in 2019. I have seen other reports of ~$900mm invested in Q1 '21, but it isn't clear if that is cash or a combination of cash and technology/ip transfer. That investment translated into a fixed % of Rivian common stock, ~102mm shares. Once that happened, Ford was first forced to mark that asset at the end of Q4 '21, which at the time was way high (when I should have sold). Due to initial investor lockup agreements, they weren't allowed to sell and thus could not profit from that investment. By the end of Q1 '22, Rivian stock had cratered and Ford was forced to revalue that asset, resulting in a non-cash accounting loss. Ford has since sold off some of their holdings to recoup the cash investment, but continues to hold the majority of there stock. Their stake is now below 10% ownership in Rivian. They have sold a total of ~15mm shares and hold ~87mm shares. The first sale of 8mm shares netted ~$214mm and the second sale of 7mm netted ~$188mm. So they have recouped ~$402mm of the $500mm initial cash investment and still hold 87mm shares, which at todays price is ~$2,848mm, which is well above their total investment amount. By any method of accounting their investment is one of the best that they have ever made.

What Rivian investment disaster? They more than recouped the cash investment they had when they sold part of the stake after the lockup ended.

Dumb bill. Any business that wants to provide a free charger can simply show 0 on the bill. How can the state prove that the cost wasn't absorbed by the business or wrapped up into marketing costs.

Are these "free" public chargers government (state) owned or are they utility owned, or private NGO owned? Makes a big difference. Even cities usually have some power to provide free services even if there is a competing for profit company providing the service, e.g. trash. Service stations should be installing their own if for no other reason to drive traffic to their convenience stores.

The biggest complaint of independent reviewers is that the loop openings on Ford hitches are too small and set back too far. This makes it hard to attach chain and breakaway clips. For instance, I just got back from vacation using a 2019 F250 pulling a TT. In order to get the safety chains clipped, I had to come in from an angle so that the hitch loop would actually fit through the clip on the chain hook. Basically the base of the loop is too thick and the bottom of the opening is too high compared to other hitches. Here is a picture of the bottom of a SD receiver I found (15,000 lb rating). Compare to a Ram 2500 receiver (rating unknown): GM's (20,000 lb rated) is similar to Ram in design: The Ram and GM designs are much, much easier to attach clips to.

TFL Truck quotes the same price near the end of the review.

Actually the Lightning they own is a Lariet with the extended range battery. And $0.45 per kW/h is ridiculous, but those charge stations and the power drops to supply them aren't cheap either, so someone has to pay for them.

1. Did you have a reservation? 2. When did you make your reservation? 3. How many other Broncos were ordered from the dealership you ordered from? Did those before you have reservations? 4. What options did you order? All of those items will affect when your particular build will get built. My dad ordered a Black Diamond 4D MIC top from a small dealer in December. He added then dropped the tow package. Dealer estimated it would be August / September at the earliest. Now we are pretty sure it will push until MY23, and possibly to calendar year 23. Go peruse Bronco6G and you will find plenty of day 1 and day 2 reservation holders that are still waiting that ordered before you did. Maybe you should change your screen name to Veruca Salt.

I must be a super user. I average around 19,000 miles per year, at 19 mpg, that would be 1,000 gallons, but in reality I am getting closer to 18 combined mpg. That is just my vehicle. The problem is that there isn't a viable replacement for a full size BOF SUV as a BEV yet. Maybe in 3 to 4 years when my Expy is ready for replacing. But by then if they have a hybrid, I might go with that.

My vision of the future and the way Ford should go is to turn its franchised dealers into commission sales centers. Ford sets the price and the dealer gets a fixed commission on each model based on the final price. The dealer is also provided with floor models at 0 cost for customers to test drive, examine options, and just plain touch and feel. This would happen every 3 to 6 months or so. Dealer would determine what the option mix is on the floor models based on what they think buyers in that area value. After the new floor model arrives, the dealer can sell the floor model as a used vehicle and keep the proceeds. The allocation system would disappear for customer orders. Basically it would be a first in, first delivered system (as much as possible, supply chain and all), and therefore it would no longer matter how many orders a dealer had or if it was their mother's brother's cousin's nephew ordering it, all orders are equal with only the time mattering. Ordering could be done online or in person at the dealer. In any case the dealer would not be floor planning any new vehicle. Every order that is made would require a deposit, dependent on the price as ordered. The pricing would be locked in at the time of order and that would reflected on the window sticker. As production gets back to normal levels and as capacity allows (customer orders less than capacity), dealers would have the option to stock up to a 30 day supply of vehicles to allow for immediate sales for those people that can't wait (i.e. accidents/thefts). Pricing of all new vehicles would be fixed, without addon's or markups. Any extra packages would be optional. Document fee's would be limited to the lower of $300 or that maximum that each state allows. Ford would incentivize dealers by paying monthly bonuses for high customer satisfaction ratings. Rebates would go away, as Ford would be able to dynamically adjust pricing or put things "On Sale" to help move inventory. This kind of system would be more transparent to the end customer.

I should add Edge wasn't even the first in that market segment. When we bought our Murano in 06, the only thing close was the Taurus X (or whatever it was called then), which we weren't touching.

My sister has a 2014 Escape Titanium. It is a good vehicle, especially with the 2.0 ecoboost. It is also worse in every respect in terms of styling when compared to the 1st gen Escape sport 4wd that she had. I think the best looking one was the 2nd gen. She is getting a Bronco, whenever it comes in. The CRV and the Rav4 have that segment covered and dominated. Bronco Sport brings something different to the table, the Escape doesn't.

Low speeds on lots of off road trails with a lot of stop and go due to obstacles. Rock crawler folks like traditional manuals, but with really low gearing, hence the crawler gear in the manual Bronco. DCT's aren't geared that low and the constant slow speed start-stop is hard on the clutches in DCT's and even more so in CVT's. TFL has had issues with Subaru's with CVT's and some small SUV's with DCT's on simple off-road trails when they have done testing. I think for desert running at high speed or rally running, a DCT would be fine, and probably preferable.

Slipping clutches is not good for low speed rock crawling, torque converter is much more durable for that. A standard manual with an actual clutch pedal is fine as you can control the amount of slip, but I think most DCT's have a hard time with slipping and in low traction environments from reviews and tests I have seen. They are better than CVT's, but it isn't hard to be better than a CVT off road.

Commodity products have little to no margin for profit. Profit is purely off of how cheaply you can make the minimum acceptable product. Buyers are brand agnostic on commodity products. Ford will move that class of vehicle (small to midsize cuv) to EV's where there is more room right now for product differentiation. The ICE cross-over segment will have to be designed for particular lifestyles in order to break out of being a commodity item.