Lincoln plans electrified lineup (all models) by 2022

[silvrsvt]

I haven't paid someone to work on my cars for at least 15 years. Having some experience under my belt now, I'm really only scared of models that didn't sell in great numbers. Parts get difficult to find and sometimes the stealership end up being the only option. Case in point, I ended up having to make new bushing sleeves on a lathe so that I could use universal urethane bushings in the rear control arms of my wife's Lincoln LS because I wasn't about to spend $300/arm (x4 for the entire rear end) at the dealership.

 

Anything sold in great numbers is bound to be cheap to work on once it's 15 years old. By then the aftermarket has come up with robust cost effective solutions to factory shortcomings. I don't think electrics will be significantly different. The only questionable thing is the battery packs as there's no way to really make them cheap. But experience thus far is showing they don't need replacing nearly as often as initially feared. That said, I can rebuild an ICE for about 1/10 the cost of replacement lithium battery packs.

 

 

How many people keep cars 15 years? Even with 5-6-7 year car payments that's kind of crazy. Only expectation I have of a car is for it last about 150K without a major repair (transmission etc)...anything past that is a crap shoot and if say a transmission craps out, the car wouldn't be worth fixing for the most part due to the costs.

[Sevensecondsuv]

How many people keep cars 15 years

I typically don't buy until they're 15 years old. That way parts are cheap and known problematic issues/models/options are exposed and avoided. I currently own and maintain five old vehicles. I'd trust each and every one of them to drive across the country. I estimate I spend about $200/year/vehicle in parts. Also even an engine or trans can usually be fixed for less than $500 if you know what you're doing.

 

I understand buying new to get exactly what you want, and I've done it myself. But new or near-new cars are a giant waste of money. One can have reliable transportation for a small fraction of a new car lease or payment.

[rperez817]

I'm not sure why people are getting hung up about electric drivetrains and people not being able to work on them...uh I think Ford is going to train people how to fix them and I'm sure people said the same thing when the first ICE came into being.

 

In addition to Ford and other manufacturers helping their dealerships service hybrid cars, there are companies that help train and equip independent shops with everything they need about repairing and reconditioning them too. One is The Hybrid Shop. https://thehybridshop.com/dealer-opportunities/

 

Fifth Gear Automotive in Lewisville, Texas is a franchise partner for The Hybrid Shop. https://fifthgear.biz/services/

Edited September 11, 2017 by rperez817

[silvrsvt]

I typically don't buy until they're 15 years old. That way parts are cheap and known problematic issues/models/options are exposed and avoided. I currently own and maintain five old vehicles. I'd trust each and every one of them to drive across the country. I estimate I spend about $200/year/vehicle in parts. Also even an engine or trans can usually be fixed for less than $500 if you know what you're doing.

 

I understand buying new to get exactly what you want, and I've done it myself. But new or near-new cars are a giant waste of money. One can have reliable transportation for a small fraction of a new car lease or payment.

 

What about factoring in for time? I don't have the time to spend a whole weekend (or longer) working on a car or being without a car for that whole time.

 

If something is going to take me longer then a whole day to fix it, my "time" isn't worth it. I know most things can be done in an afternoon or so, but if it takes longer than that (most of the time), its not worth it.

[Sevensecondsuv]

Yep, everybody has to decide what their time is worth and what they want to spend it doing.

[Sevensecondsuv]

That said, I've got coworkers who spend more time sitting in the waiting room of a dealer service department than I do underneath two of my cars in a year. And that's not because their new car is a lemon. I really don't spend much time fixing mine. You've just got to be picky about what you buy. Certain powertrains from the 90s/early 00s are dang near indestructible. The 4.9L/ZF-5/BW1356/10.5 Sterling offered in the 89-97 F-250/350 comes to mind. This was a great vintage because you got the reliability of EFI, but things hadn't progressed enough to be detrimental yet. It wasn't too far into the 00s that computer optimization started sucking all the margin out of designs.

[fordmantpw]

 

What about factoring in for time? I don't have the time to spend a whole weekend (or longer) working on a car or being without a car for that whole time.

 

If something is going to take me longer then a whole day to fix it, my "time" isn't worth it. I know most things can be done in an afternoon or so, but if it takes longer than that (most of the time), its not worth it.

 

I'm with ya. Heck, I don't even change my own oil anymore. The hassles of buying the oil and filters, not to mention giving up my time, plus disposing of the old oil, the $35-40 it costs for an oil change in one of the cars is cheap. Plus, after 5, an oil change (which I usually reserve for my Super Duty) is free! All done at the Ford dealership, so they've got the service records too.

[jasonj80]

 

Sometimes change for the sake of change sucks...that happens a lot.

 

Pure electric cars are going to become more commonplace as time goes on...but to expect a wholesale change over to them in roughly the same time period that other electronic devices happened (Smart Phones, etc) is down right crazy. Its going to take at least 20 years or so before they make up at least 25% of the marketplace, because most people replace cars every 7-10 years. We won't be saying good bye to the ICE for at least another 30-40 years IMO.

We still have the Penny and Dollar Bill which cost us tens of million dollars a year to keep around, we haven't official switched to Metric system in public even though science is almost exclusively done in it. The vast majority of this country will not embrace change; it requires us to learn something and we don't like doing that. Very rarely is change just for change, there is almost always a very good reason for the change. You can even see it that all safety equipment or emission equipment is meet with huge opposition, even though they have made cars cleaner and safer.

 

The change will happen much faster on Hybrids/Electrics that people think. You can see it already with Europe and now China looking to mandate all vehicles sold are electric starting after a date, some which are just 15 years from now. 10 years after that they will say the others can't drive on the roads or be licensed, they will give scrap incentives for noncompliance vehicles. I fully expect California and other states that use their emission standards will adopt the same.

[Sevensecondsuv]

All of which is a huge inefficiency in economic terms. Gov't bans have proven time and again to be the most inefficient way to achieve an end. Much better to let the economy get there on its own. And we will WILL get there once it's actually cheaper to drive an electric car (despite the contrived studies claiming it's already cheaper). In practical terms, this means electric cars aren't really going anywhere until either A) the gov't mandated them, or B) engineers figure out how to make an affordable/profitable electric car with a 400 mile range that can be fully recharged in 5 minutes flat at a nationwide charging network as common/numerous as gas stations currently are.

 

And before you start lobbying for the govt option, remember a govt ban is the best way known to man to make people want the banned item.

[RichardJensen]

we haven't official switched to Metric system in public even though science is almost exclusively done in it

 

Is there any reason whatsoever to replace every mile marker in the country with a kilometer marker? Every single road sign? To say nothing of requiring 3000+ counties to start recording transactions in hectares/meters, when you're lucky to find adjacent counties in the same state that use the same software for record keeping (North Dakota does, but they used FEMA $$ to do that).

 

I mean, if you're going to go metric, go all-in, and if not, why bother?

[lfeg]

When a government picks winners and losers, everyone looses. For me, I like electrics, especially in urban and suburban driving. My first electric was built in 1975. Hybrids are the optimum right now, as there are some good ones on the market now. You get the easy refueling if an ICE vehicle with the bonus of regen and improved fuel economy. But for someone like me, range and availability of charging stations are the major issue with electrics now and in the foreseeable future. As a main vehicle I need one that can do 350 to 700 miles at a stretch in a day, and be able to be "refueled" in remote locations. And other than the control electronics (everything from inverters to brake blend controllers) the electric drivetrain is not all that mysterious.

[jpd80]

We also have to discriminate between what manufacturers develop as obligated by regulation and what consumers are asking for.

In the past, Tesla has built EVs for a very exclusive market, that is very different to developing a high volume mass produced

EV that suits compliance regulations or is desirable as an affordable EV to most buyers.

 

I think EVs will remain the plaything of the exclusive and high moral ground buyers... the rest of us will look on in amusement.

Ford and GM will use Electrification to delay the evaporation of their high profit products for as long as possible but apart form

that, I wouldn't get too excited about any claims of widespread electrification beyond basic hybrids. Even then, the glacial pace

that Ford has shown tells me they are not fully committed to grand scale electrification..or at least nit just yet.

Edited September 11, 2017 by jpd80

[jasonj80]

 

Is there any reason whatsoever to replace every mile marker in the country with a kilometer marker? Every single road sign? To say nothing of requiring 3000+ counties to start recording transactions in hectares/meters, when you're lucky to find adjacent counties in the same state that use the same software for record keeping (North Dakota does, but they used FEMA $$ to do that).

 

I mean, if you're going to go metric, go all-in, and if not, why bother?

We actually started to go all metric, signs were posted in both I-19 was metric. They could have done it when they changed the reflective level required for signs, as they needed to change every sign to the new requirements. You can do things over time. Road and property surveying as well as design is currently done in Metric then converted back. You have to start sometime, the issue is we were gonna start in the 70's, then the 80's, then the 90's.

[jasonj80]

All of which is a huge inefficiency in economic terms. Gov't bans have proven time and again to be the most inefficient way to achieve an end. Much better to let the economy get there on its own. And we will WILL get there once it's actually cheaper to drive an electric car (despite the contrived studies claiming it's already cheaper). In practical terms, this means electric cars aren't really going anywhere until either A) the gov't mandated them, or B) engineers figure out how to make an affordable/profitable electric car with a 400 mile range that can be fully recharged in 5 minutes flat at a nationwide charging network as common/numerous as gas stations currently are.

 

And before you start lobbying for the govt option, remember a govt ban is the best way known to man to make people want the banned item.

You can want it all you want, when they wont issue you a license plate for the car you won't be able to drive it. The Government mandated unleaded fuel, low sulfur diesel fuel, emission equipment, safety equipment, and higher mileage requirements. Cheaper isn't always better. The governments job is to also make sure that the country continues on for longer than the people that are currently in it are.

Edited September 12, 2017 by jasonj80

[LincolnLover]

Lol this thread sounds like a SNL skit.... I mean really, are you guys serious? There is simply no way the government can mandate electric vehicles within the next 10-15 years, they literally would cripple the economy in the blink of an eye. Especially if the liberals are kept out of control. Sorry to rain on your parade, but not going to happen...... My question would be to you all, if you want an electric luxury car so bad, why aren't you driving Tesla's in stead of Lincoln's? If I say RWD is better, and I prefer V8's, or at least not over tuned small V6's, I'm told to go buy a Cadillac. So, if electric is so much better, why isn't any of the supporters here driving an electric vehicle? Fully electric vehicles for the mass market are easily 15 years, maybe 25 years off. 2005 feels like yesterday, time flies, and no one is far enough along with a vehicle that has a large range and fast charge times for the same or less than gas/diesel, to be throwing around time frames within 10 years. Mark my words, there will not be a fully electric Lincoln within the decade. If there is, it will be half baked guaranteed, and flop like most of the Lincoln's that get thrown out to people without refining them. Also, why do we have to change everything? What is wrong with miles? My God, do people have nothing better to do than to want to change everything about this country? I'm not talking only automotive, I have a good sense of the views about many things just from most of these posts. Poor opinions, not many facts. That real truth is, we are admitting less carbon monoxide now, than in 1994. The planet is going through a natural phase. It's called evolution..... We as humans breathing admit more carbon monoxide everyday. Autos are a small percent, I think all these factories are the bigger concern. And not for the climate, but for smog and things relating to air quality. Where I live, I have plenty of green to support great air. Here's a fact, not opinion: higher co2 levels are promoting a rise in green growth of trees(which promote and create oxygen), plants/vegetation.

[LincolnLover]

This isn't North Korea, stop making it out to be that we have Clinton as president. The government is giving the consumer the freedom to choose. I'm fully 100% against government overreach, and it would be unconstitutional to deny an American citizen the right to drive a vehicle he chooses. It's a privilege to have a license to drive, but it is a right to choose your vehicle. Just like it's a privilege to have a concealed carry permit, but it's a right to bear arms.

Edited September 12, 2017 by LincolnLover

[LincolnLover]

Let's not forget who our Supreme Court is for maybe the next decade or so. They are constitutionalists.....

[RichardJensen]

That's enough politics for this thread.

[RichardJensen]

We actually started to go all metric, signs were posted in both

 

That's not 'all metric'. That's 'both'.

 

What are you gonna do? Replace every single sign twice?

 

Also, every measurement is in metric, as standard units are all defined in terms of their metric counterparts.

 

Me?

 

I say the metric system is barely more logical than the standard system.

 

Planck units FTW!

Edited September 12, 2017 by RichardJensen

[fordmantpw]

...and it would be unconstitutional to deny an American citizen the right to drive a vehicle he chooses.

 

You are absolutely incorrect. If I want to drive a new vehicle that pollutes more than allowed by federal law, then I cannot without breaking the law.

 

It is not unconstitutional to create laws for the betterment of society, which may include denying people the right to drive a vehicle that they want. That's what pollution laws are (though we can likely agree that some may be stricter than necessary).

 

EDIT: Sorry RJ, was writing this as you posted. Hopefully this isn't considered politics, but is more about educating the uneducated...

Edited September 12, 2017 by fordmantpw

[msm859]

All of which is a huge inefficiency in economic terms. Gov't bans have proven time and again to be the most inefficient way to achieve an end. Much better to let the economy get there on its own. And we will WILL get there once it's actually cheaper to drive an electric car (despite the contrived studies claiming it's already cheaper). In practical terms, this means electric cars aren't really going anywhere until either A) the gov't mandated them, or B) engineers figure out how to make an affordable/profitable electric car with a 400 mile range that can be fully recharged in 5 minutes flat at a nationwide charging network as common/numerous as gas stations currently are.

 

And before you start lobbying for the govt option, remember a govt ban is the best way known to man to make people want the banned item.

 

The government banned incandescent bulbs and it was the MOST efficient way to achieve an end. Saves everyone money and energy. Some would argue today that it's cheaper to drive an electric car. If you add up the cost of climate change we should probably be offering larger subsidies. Also, some are forgetting the real costs of driving ICE vehicles should include the costs of all the wars to insure free flow of oil - and the money spent fighting terrorists - who we also fund with oil sales. Perhaps we should add a tax on oil to pay for the real costs. I expect the next 5 years to be very transformative.

[jpd80]

I wonder how long before the power utilities are bought up by the oil companies....

 

 

Edited September 12, 2017 by jpd80

[silvrsvt]

 

The government banned incandescent bulbs and it was the MOST efficient way to achieve an end. Saves everyone money and energy. Some would argue today that it's cheaper to drive an electric car. If you add up the cost of climate change we should probably be offering larger subsidies. Also, some are forgetting the real costs of driving ICE vehicles should include the costs of all the wars to insure free flow of oil - and the money spent fighting terrorists - who we also fund with oil sales. Perhaps we should add a tax on oil to pay for the real costs. I expect the next 5 years to be very transformative.

 

 

There is a huge difference between a .99 cent incandescent to a CFL (where are pieces of shit) to an LED light bulb that costs about $5 bucks each vs a $30K+ car that takes 5-6-7 years to pay off for an average person.

 

Do keep in mind that Shale oil is a huge thing in the US now that didn't exist 15 years ago. We still need oil for other things (plastics for one...) so its not like its going to go away anytime soon.

 

There are going to be more options for electrification over the next 5 years but the market won't see a huge shift for another 10 years or so since most people started replacing their cars only in the past 2-3 years with the Great Recession finally coming to an end.

[lfeg]

The electrification the vast majority willseeover the next 10 to 12 years will be hybrids. That technology is faairly mature and quite robust today. 42 volt mild hybrids willnot add much cost, and with them start/stop is seamless, as the electric M/G gets the car rolling while the engine is starting. From that to plug in hybrids there is quite a range of options that are already in the toolbox.

[akirby]

Hybrids are a no-brainer whether you want little ICEs for max mpg or larger ICEs for more performance or plug-ins for extended electrical range. It's either significant mpg improvement or better performance for the same mpg for very little additional cost and no penalty in range or refueling time or options.

 

BEVs will continue to be a niche (but growing) until the cost gets closer to ICEs and they can be refueled faster (200 miles of range in 10 minutes would probably work).