Yes, and in some cases the hybrid can provide additional power similar to turbo engine.  When looking at newest Honda Civic it was interesting they replaced 1.5T with 2.0 hybrid as top option.  The base engine remains 2.0L naturally aspirated coupled to CVT.   What I like best is that a few manufacturers are offering 2.5L NA 4-cylinder engines with approximately 200 HP and 200 lb-ft as standard on compact and or mid-size vehicles.  For those buyers who can’t justify hybrids it may be a good choice.   To your point, perhaps Ford offering a 2.5L in base 2WD Rangers could add sales if they can get close to 200 HP.  That may not seem like much (or enough), but for many years Rangers did fine with much less power.  IMO Ford could use a more budget-minded powertrain for Ranger.

Originally the Cyclone was a Comet. In 1968, Cyclone became its own nameplate.  My brother had a 1968 Cyclone.  White fastback with red accents.  Forgot the engine, but a sharp looking car.

Wasn’t the Cyclone a Comet?  Not sure.  I recall hearing or reading of Comet Cyclone GT which was based on Fairlane and had 390 engine.

Nah, Lincoln Products don't share sheet metal with Ford products like Acura does on their lower end products and the TLX and Accord have the same greenhouse, just the trim is blacked out on the TLX vs the Accord.   

Its more Lincoln. 

its almost like its Mercury LOL

Marauder and Caliente.......definitely.  Cyclone could work too.  

I was staying with Merc's SUV and van names. Marauder or Caliente could work, Comet, Meteor Bobcat not so much.

This is why hybrids are generally the best all around option and strike the best balance between fuel economy, and longevity. Ford's 2.5 hybrid system has been around for decades, and it's super reliable. Part of the reason is the engine itself isn't a stressed at all, not for fuel economy, and not for power. Ford can leave the quite archaic 2.5 duratec unchanged, and just rely on hybridization to improve performance and fuel economy rather than straining the engine to do so.    I wouldn't have bought a maverick if it didn't already come with the well proven 2.5 that was the selling point. It's not just a hybrid, but a virtually unkillable one. 

Exactly like my previous example of broken bolt costing too much to fix, owners don’t need a good or valid reason at all to avoid a brand or manufacturer.  In my opinion manufacturers should think ahead on what they are designing today that could alienate buyers in the future due to high unexpected ownership costs.   Start-stop as an example is not well liked by many to begin with, and if associated repairs end up costing more than it saves on gas, I can see an owner feeling they were mislead by the manufacturer.  I think most owners don’t care about EPA or CAFE goals that manufacturers must meet as much as their own wallets.   Honestly, I have noticed a trend lately towards greater numbers of simpler powertrains being offered even though they may not squeeze every bit of MPG out of each gallon of gas.  Simpler engines also help lower initial vehicle price, which some buyers want badly.  With gas so cheap and minor repairs so expensive, it doesn’t take much of a failure or repair to offset a year’s worth of gas savings.