Worst part is its not the first time Ford has done something like this.  They really need to throw out that mentality bad.  Granted this was how many years ago but it seems to keep happening.  Pinto, EcoBoost Coolant Leak issues, Explorer Exhaust leak issues, 5.4 Spark plug issues, to a far lesser extent the cheap plastic panel on the 02-05 Explorer/Mountaineer/Aviator where all of them are cracked by now because they went cheap instead of using a stronger material.  There are a ton of examples.  You'd think with all the warranty claims they would tread more lightly on these things but they sometimes throw caution to the wind and let their reputation take a serious hit.

Maybe I'm just looking at it from more of an engineering perspective as someone who has a lot of engineers in my family, but I just don't understand when companies do this.    Like you have to know when you're making a product that's unreliable, or unsafe, that it's gonna cost you a lot of money in the long run in the form of recalls and settling class action lawsuits. Then you factor in the reputational damage, and it just blows my mind that business leaders will disregard all of that to save a buck. Do it right the first time, so you don't have to dig your way out of trouble down the road. 

This honestly seems like the best thing to do. I’ve always thought we needed the Everest in the USA, but it didn’t make much sense for ford to have both it and the Bronco. By making it a Lincoln, they get a Land Cruiser competitor for cheap and don’t have to reengineer the Bronco for a fixed roof. 

Volkswagen to Rename ID.4 as ID. Tiguan in New Naming Structure    

the 19.2KW L2 charger is EU only.  I.E. 3 phase 240v Common Outside of North America

More Details on GM's Plans for the next Bolt GM Quietly Plots A Family Of Low-Cost EVs After New Bolt | Carscoops    

The Threat Posed to the U.S. Auto Industry by Chinese Imports Remains - Alliance for American Manufacturing    

The Firewall Against Chinese Cars Is Cracking - The Atlantic    

How about both?

Wet clutch had more torque capacity.  The dry clutch was fine with lower power engines.  The 2.0L exceeded the design limit and the engineers knew it and  raised the issue but mgt told them to STFU and do it anyway.