Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 08/16/2019 in all areas

  1. I'm waiting for official numbers on the range. I'm hoping it will be higher than 18 mi. Porsche Cayenne plugin has 27 mi and in general, 18 mi is just not very useful. Even for driving in-town during the day, where I live, I would easily hit 20 mi or more. I know that there is also a 100hp bump in power etc, but if Lincoln is providing plugin capability, it should be something usable, otherwise, why bother with buying chargers etc and pluggin the car in. I don't expect anything amazing, but for the price, I was hoping for more than 18 mi. There are a lot of other brands to choose from and convenience of having a decent range would move me away from BMW or Mercedes or even Lexus towards Lincoln. But if it's basically just a gimmick ( I suspect in real world driving 18 mi range would be more like 14 - just guessing), it may not be enough to attract buyers from other brands. I still like the looks of the car and looking forward to a test drive.
    2 points
  2. Please Ford, do NOT put a pony or Mustang badge on this "electric SUV". It has NOTHING to do with what Mustang stands for and shares zero DNA. Does 55 years of heritage mean nothing? I understand they dropped the Mach 1 name due to backlash from Mustang fans, and it'll now be called Mach E. Well, Ford, you can still expect an even bigger backlash if you put a pony on its nose or call it a Mustang. If this Electric SUV is any good, it'd be a success without having to rely on Mustang for any added "cool factor".
    2 points
  3. Yes, that matters. And I am glad it tops in that category. But this is not an abstract concern. I am in the market and the Aviator is a top contender. However, for the family suv I care more about reducing my carbon footprint. I am replacing an Explorer Platinum which at 365 hp is plenty. I suspect the 400 hp base Aviator would be even more "plenty". So for me the GT is about the "green" side. I am willing to pay $15k+ over the base for that - not the extra hp per se.
    2 points
  4. Hmmm. I have a 2013 Ford Fusion Energi PHEV that gets 21 miles all electric. I put gas in it once a year. When I realized that Ford was not going to improve the Energi I bought a 2016 Tesla that gets 270 miles on a charge. I also have 10 kW of PV solar panels on the roof of my house. Since September 2013 they have produced 69,000 kWh. For the record I hate SUVs and trucks.
    2 points
  5. As John Davis said in the TFL review it wasn’t meant to be for efficiency; no one is paying $70K to save money on fuel.
    2 points
  6. And yet a Bronco based on existing architecture and powertrain takes how long?
    1 point
  7. Doing some brand extensions is good, but you don't want to get carried away like Oldsmobile did back in the day when they put Cutlass as a prefix on everything below the 88. That dilated the brand and ruined it in the end.
    1 point
  8. Every time a wagon is available but doesn’t sell well all you hear are excuses. It’s too expensive. No advertising. Poor styling. If people wanted wagons they’d be selling better and there would be more options. People prefer crossovers. There is a small market for wagons but they need to share a lot with crossovers to make them viable and they need unique styling and/or features to make them more viable. E.g a Fusion wagon won’t cut it.
    1 point
  9. rmc523 is correct. Sadly, even if automakers introduced new wagons for the U.S. market and put forth a big marketing push for them, consumers would probably still ignore them for the most part. These consumers don't care about automotive styling. That's why they choose crossovers (which are all either boring or ugly to look at) rather than a much nicer looking wagon/estate/shooting brake in the first place. The comment from Ford designer Andrew Bazinski can be summed up as "automotive designers prefer vehicles that look good like wagons and wish that automakers brought wagons back, but consumers in the U.S. simply don't care".
    1 point
  10. That would give Ford all sorts of opportunities to trumpet the new vehicle's roots. For example, Ford could say that in 1964, the practical Falcon was used as the basis for the Mustang, which influenced the development of sporty cars both here and overseas (Toyota Celica, for example). Now, over 50 years later, we have come full circle, as the Mustang's heritage and strong brand name are serving as the basis for a new generation of practical vehicles designed to address concerns regarding our future. Or something...
    1 point
  11. I suspect you may be right, but every vehicle has comprises unless cost is not a factor. Let’s wait and see what the official number is before casting stones. If they could have jacked up the range without it being at the expense of the power and other capabilities, and not driving up the cost substantially, I suspect they would have done so. I’m sure we will know soon what the real deal is. For the record, I would put myself in the camp you mention above, but I would not be willing to sacrifice power for economy.
    1 point
  12. All this back and forth about mileage. Reality is, I believe 30 miles+ is what is needed for the average commute. You add in AC, Heat, that 28 speaker Revel cranking, massaging seats etc and it is going to reduce the mileage. Then, add in 10 degrees outside during the winter times and that will reduce it. If I was designing this and looking at real world numbers, I'd want a solid 60 minutes of pure electric driving. That's 1 hour on the highway, 2 hours on the neighborhood back roads. My commute is 31 minutes which consists of 18 minutes on back roads to get to the highway and another 13 or so minutes on the highway to get into the city. Ideally if I was paying for the GT, I'd want to get there so I can plug in enough to get home. To be able to say you can travel 45-60 minutes without using a drop of gas is really where this should be. Otherwise, sure you can run to Target on electric but then you are running on gas to get home. I know people are saying this model is about performance but I really don't think it is. I don't see people hotrodding their Aviator around with the family. This isn't a single man's/woman's vehicle IMO. YMMV
    1 point
  13. Why not call it Falcon, a compact car based on Mustang......
    1 point
  14. Baby Bronco design started as a Bronco design that didn’t make the cut.
    1 point
  15. https://www.plugincars.com/cars Actually,18 miles is very competitive with other luxury performance plug in hybrids... while making substantially more power the most.
    1 point
  16. They are all still covered by the 7year/100k mile 14M01 program if clean title and not out on time or miles. Also still covered by 14M02 for the TCM for 10years/150k miles. The last couple I have done (out on miles) CRC offered a percentage towards the repair. But that is on a case by case basis.
    1 point
  17. Here's the deal: If Aviator PIH is a performance vehicle, then why offer it as a plug in hybrid? Why not offer it as a straight hybrid, if indeed the EV range is irrelevant? The fact that Lincoln is offering it as a PIH means that there is an expectation from consumers familiar with that approach that a certain EV range can be expected. 18 miles for EV range is inadequate in this day and age for a PIH vehicle. That range is certainly not a game changer, it's not really even competitive. No argument from me regarding Aviator as a performance vehicle. Its EV range as a PIH is not up to snuff.
    1 point
  18. I don't need to visit you in California to see million dollar homes. I can just walk a couple blocks away from my sons school on the North Shore of Lake Michigan. Yes, I see Teslas, Toyota/Lexus Hybrids, along with high end sports cars. The other thing I see in the same driveways are Lexus GX460s, Navigators, Yukons, Escalades, and other full size luxury SUV's. I hate to break it to you but not many people are going to fully give up their SUV's for a Prius. Perceived environmentally friendly folks but don't you dare take away their luxury gas guzzler. As a shareholder, I don't want Ford to go all in on electrics when they aren't profitable. I actually think their pragmatic approach seems to be the least risky. If you haven't noticed, electrics are a minuscule part of the automobile market at this point.
    1 point
  19. Why would you want to do this when you can get 700+ from a base coyote with an easy bolt on supercharger? Just to prove it can be done?
    1 point
  20. I see the Camaro in the front and the BMWness to the side flanks. Its the best looking Acura since the 2004 TL
    1 point
  21. Ford probably commissioned that Foxbody swap car for this year's SEMA show. If it is there, it will be a sign that the 7.3L will get aftermarket support.
    1 point
  22. My dream Aviator GT would ditch that wimpy battery altogether and replace it with a 1.21 Gigawatt Mr. Fusion ☢️
    1 point
  23. We went with the full bench in our reserve and with two kids in car seats its been awesome. My wife can jump in the back when the kids require attention while on the move and thats been a game changer.
    1 point
×
×
  • Create New...