Deanh Posted July 21, 2009 Share Posted July 21, 2009 I guess 230 HP would be pretty weak for an SVO, but I don't see an EB 3.7 when there'll probably be an EB 3.5 already in the same car. Also, I'm having a hard time trying to wrap my head around how a dealer would need to pay me salvage for my Crown Vic (I'm buying it back), but under CARS it's supposed to be destroyed. Could you explain? I"m looking at Fusions if I can get it rebated to about $15.5K under the Cars program if a car qualifies I beleive the 4500 comes from Govt....as for the 3.5 eco in the Stang...maybe, one things for sure they can go hog wild with a RWD and trans axle that can handle torque and HP UNLIKE the current AWD applications...apparently the 3.5 was seeing 500PLUS hp on the bench...how bout THEM apples Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted July 21, 2009 Share Posted July 21, 2009 Unless the new Explorer is on a serious diet, at 230 hp, 240 lbs torque, this will be a rather mild base engine for it. Much more suited for Escape and Fusion. I think its low ball estimate by Ford. Wasn't the orginal EB V6 underrated too? They said only 340HP or something? I'd say the final number comes in just under what the current 3.5L V6 is rated at...265HP And I'm hoping the Explorer comes in closer to the Taurus X in weight, but that might be hard to do with Category 2 tow rating. Then again they might market the I4 Ecoboost as just a people mover and tell people to get the 3.5L V6 and Ecoboost if they have to do towing, but you still have to have the "frame" designed to handle the weight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted July 21, 2009 Share Posted July 21, 2009 Also, I'm having a hard time trying to wrap my head around how a dealer would need to pay me salvage for my Crown Vic (I'm buying it back), but under CARS it's supposed to be destroyed. Could you explain? I"m looking at Fusions if I can get it rebated to about $15.5K Sounds like the dealer is doing some flaky shit Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fubbyo Posted July 21, 2009 Share Posted July 21, 2009 how bout THEM apples They smell like melted tires Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fubbyo Posted July 21, 2009 Share Posted July 21, 2009 Sounds like the dealer is doing some flaky shit Does the language of CARS say that all the components of the car need to be destroyed also? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomServo92 Posted July 21, 2009 Author Share Posted July 21, 2009 Does the language of CARS say that all the components of the car need to be destroyed also? According to the CARS web site, the law requires your car to be destroyed. I don't think you can buy it back or keep parts of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fubbyo Posted July 21, 2009 Share Posted July 21, 2009 According to the CARS web site, the law requires your car to be destroyed. I don't think you can buy it back or keep parts of it. I won't be. I'm buying it back from the insurance company, but the dealer assures me that they can pay me salvage for it which is approximately $2200. On top of that, it'll qualify for CARS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomServo92 Posted July 21, 2009 Author Share Posted July 21, 2009 I won't be. I'm buying it back from the insurance company, but the dealer assures me that they can pay me salvage for it which is approximately $2200. On top of that, it'll qualify for CARS. Then it won't qualify for CARS. I believe the dealer has to provide proof that it was destroyed. If they can't, then the government won't pay. At least that's my understanding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted July 21, 2009 Share Posted July 21, 2009 I won't be. I'm buying it back from the insurance company, but the dealer assures me that they can pay me salvage for it which is approximately $2200. On top of that, it'll qualify for CARS. you DON"T get both,it either up to $4500 OR trade in value, whichever is greater....you get 4500 you don't get a trade in amount...at least THAt is how it was explained to me....after all dealer wont keep a cars elegible vehicle, they can't, so why would they pay for something they cannot keep.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fubbyo Posted July 21, 2009 Share Posted July 21, 2009 Then it won't qualify for CARS. I believe the dealer has to provide proof that it was destroyed. If they can't, then the government won't pay. At least that's my understanding. Sounds like he really, really wants me to come onto the lot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fubbyo Posted July 21, 2009 Share Posted July 21, 2009 you DON"T get both,it either up to $4500 OR trade in value, whichever is greater....you get 4500 you don't get a trade in amount...at least THAt is how it was explained to me....after all dealer wont keep a cars elegible vehicle, they can't, so why would they pay for something they cannot keep.... That's what I'm looking for. That makes more sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomServo92 Posted July 21, 2009 Author Share Posted July 21, 2009 Sounds like he really, really wants me to come onto the lot. Or he doesn't understand how the CARS program works. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Extreme4x4 Posted July 21, 2009 Share Posted July 21, 2009 Thats ok, neither do most of the Congressmen/women who voted for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted July 21, 2009 Share Posted July 21, 2009 Thats ok, neither do most of the Congressmen/women who voted for it. snicker...isn't that an initiation/ swearing in requirement? and THE reason for the 5th amendment? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted July 21, 2009 Share Posted July 21, 2009 Thats ok, neither do most of the Congressmen/women who voted for it. Sad but true! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted July 21, 2009 Share Posted July 21, 2009 Sad but true! half of Congress does a dead on impersonation of Sergent Schultz in Hogans Heroes..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mackinaw Posted July 21, 2009 Share Posted July 21, 2009 QUOTE...will NOT be in an F-150.... Maybe a 4 cylinder eco-boost will show up in an F-150. Here's a direct quote from today's Automotive News, "Ford product chief Derrick Kuzak has said a four-cylinder has potential even in the F-150 truck." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted July 21, 2009 Share Posted July 21, 2009 Maybe a 4 cylinder eco-boost will show up in an F-150. Here's a direct quote from today's Automotive News, "Ford product chief Derrick Kuzak has said a four-cylinder has potential even in the F-150 truck." just don't see it...all to do with curb weight and inherrant inertia....Ranger maybe or their rumoured f100.........still, it may be my mental hurdle, in a truck i would prfer a larger engine working easy than a smaller engine working harder.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigbuck15 Posted July 21, 2009 Share Posted July 21, 2009 I bet this will be going in the lincoln concept c,if it makes it to production. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MY93SHO Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 just don't see it...all to do with curb weight and inherrant inertia....Ranger maybe or their rumoured f100.........still, it may be my mental hurdle, in a truck i would prfer a larger engine working easy than a smaller engine working harder.... It'll work just fine in the right application. The truck we use at the dealership to haul body parts to the rural body shops is a 2003 GMC regular cab,long box, 2wd, with a 4.3L V6. That truck will never haul anything close to it's capacity. It just needs to haul the hoods,fenders,bumper fascias, etc. They're not that heavy but they take up space. You don't need 400hp to haul a refrigerator 8 blocks to the customers home. Will it work in a 4x4 Crewcab? No. I don't think it's intended for that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ausrutherford Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 Considering it wasn't available for another division doing EB studies, I doubt it even exists....yet. Iv heard it from Wescoent and igor...its set for the Fusion SVT, Mustang, and f-150. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 Iv heard it from Wescoent and igor...its set for the Fusion SVT, Mustang, and f-150. How come those guys don't post here anymore? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ausrutherford Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 How come those guys don't post here anymore? I think igor went to college so that explains that...dont know about wescoent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noah Harbinger Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 (edited) Iv heard it from Wescoent and igor...its set for the Fusion SVT, Mustang, and f-150. To be fair, Igor said the 2010 Fusion would debut as the 2009 Fusion in 2008 and include a 4-cylinder EcoBoost at launch.... Among his more speculative articles: http://www.autosavant.com/2007/09/25/predi...he-2009-fusion/ The final two engines are the reason for excitement, however. Ford will offer two Twin Force engines, positioned as alternatives to both the four and the six cylinder engines while delivering excellent mileage. The smaller of the duo will deliver between 170-200 horsepower, and in preliminary testing, is approaching a fuel efficiency rating of 30 miles-per-gallon in the city and 40 miles-per-gallon on the highway. And while the final rating will likely be a bit shy of the nice numbers above, the Fusion with this engine will still deliver mileage in the compact-car territory. The displacement of this smaller Twin Force engine has not been revealed yet, but most likely will be a 1.6 or 1.8 liter. The larger of the Twin Force duo will be a version of the 2.5l four cylinder delivering over 260hp, and over 30 miles per gallon highway. Predicted for 2009 model year... http://www.autosavant.com/2007/09/25/ford-...plug-in-hybrid/ Something tells me he's not really in the loop for predictions.... I'd guess he might hear far-flung speculation, add a dash of enthusiasm, and turn it into near future "reality". Not altogether bad, but disheartening if you happen to be someone who reads it and gets excited by it, only to be disappointed in the end. Edited July 22, 2009 by Noah Harbinger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 Wescoent may have gotten dinged for posting here. Ford watches this forum a heckuva lot closer than they watch any other. Doesn't mean they pay attention to what they read here....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.