I disagree, but respect your opposing opinion.  I personally won’t buy any turbocharged vehicle to save a gallon of fuel a week when compared to a larger engine.  It’s not just with Ranger, it’s all vehicles.  I understand manufacturers may not have an option to offer a larger-displacement NA engine, and that’s OK too.  There are always other choices.

Good point, I wouldn’t want to either.  However, I’ve been discussing 200 HP, not 92 or 94 HP, or in my case 98 HP.  That was made clear multiple times.  If a few people can’t tell the difference, it’s not worth my time to debate any part of this issue.   Engine and transmission technologies have improved significantly since our sub-100-HP 4-cylinder and 5-speed Rangers from 30+ years ago.  Some here seem to only accept one new engine technology, and I’m not one of them. 

And Ford would sell close to zero of the lower-power engine to retail purchasers. Maybe some fleet orders but that would be it.

Ordered my Lariat Ultimate F350 DRW today, hoping for a reasonable build date. !!

The writing has been on the wall in China for a while now. With vehicles all becoming software defined, there is just no way car companies can continue to sell the same vehicles in China as they do the rest of the world. In order to deploy software in China, foreign companies have to have the system and data hosted in China and you have to provide the source code to the Ministry of Stealing Industry and Technology.    This is why Ford gave up a few years ago and switched to using Baidu's operating system in China. And why VW is going to use Xpeng's software.    And also why Google and Amazon Cloud are not in China.

Everyone just assumes that Tesla will just keep on growing but will it too hit a certain market depth and just level off. The two door cyber taxi seemed to have a rather underwhelming response from supporters and investors, the only thing that really buoyed stock price was third quarter profits.

Ask yourself, why did Ford cut back its MEB supply agreement with VW  and not sign up to VW and its public request for North American companies to sign up for VW based EVs………answer: too expensive /all profit for VW only.

Good pick up silversvt, looks like VW is doing similar to Toyota in China and simply outsourcing vehicles from Chinese Xpeng and BYD respectively, a quiet capitulation while both sell the idea of Chinese based vehicles built in low cost locations like Spain and Mexico?

That remains ot be seen but at the moment, let’s just assume that Dearborn is not happy with the autonomous decision making coming out of Ford Europe and lately everything they touch, they screw up.   The Euro bosses were to home market centric and then offer their designs to North America and ROW while resisting any sort of changes that suit regional conditions. All of that stops now as Farley now want a global approach to Ford Europe designs. Regardless of what’s said publicly, they need to evolve Escape/Kuga with a much better styling package - Focus buyers didn’t migrate to it and sales went backwards awfully. Ford needs to regroup before it loses even more sales in Europe.   The significance of Ford Otosan controlling Puma production cannot be understated, Ford Europe jealously controlled this for its own markets, stopping Euro 5 versions    I don’t have a lot of faith in next Gen Ecosport of Aussie market, it’s more down market than what buyers in that market expect and coming up against good Asian competition  could make it hard to sell……a lower price point may help but that’s not the Ford way..   Interesting thought, if European regulations get too tough to sell passenger vehicles then why should Ford Europe even bother? But in saying that, ROW needs a much  more reliable closer supplier, India or Thailand could provide that in spades. All that needed is another “Valencia” C2 flexible plant producing a variety of products under the one shop.  QED

You won’t change is mind he is fixated on efficiency to the point that it makes zero sense to do the things suggested