silvrsvt

LOL But your comparing MPG to CO2, which is what the article is about 😛 And don't forget that MPG doesn't linearly get better either as it goes up.

Did I ever say that? The only point I was addressing is that they aren't as clean as they are made out to be because people aren't using them properly, so at that point what is actually the point of it? Manufactures are building P/HEVs because they need to make CO2 requirements due to government, but customers are not using them properly to get that benefit and what it defaults to isn't a major improvement over ICE in the same product.

but apparently the data is stating they are not.

The issue is that laboratory testing needs to be done at a fixed constant, which why there is a difference. EPA Vs. WLTP EV Range Ratings: Here’s Why They’re Different Not to mention that EPA Fuel Economy tests are off themselves, I can get almost 20 MPG with my Bronco without trying with local driving, which is bit better then the city rating for it. On the high way I'm lucky to get 20 MPG, because its a brick LOL What it boils down to is EPA Fuel Economy/range and WLTP ratings are a baseline, not a guarantee

Looking at the source article, ICE had about 20% variance from laboratory testing (which was expected by them), but PHEVs where significantly worse then their testing, which was deducted down to them not being plugged in all the time. What it ultimately boils down to is that PHEVs don't really offer a huge improvement in CO2 emissions unless they are plugged in all the time, which was the primary reason why they are being implemented. Then add in the fact that larger vehicle hybrids offer almost no improvement over a smaller gas engine (ie F-150) in CO2 emissions either

Your images are broken

The reason it is selling so well is that its getting subvented interest rates....even at 84 months, its 1/2 of a "good" rate from a Credit union.

But there isn't millions of P/HEV being sold yet and its "only" 25% improvement...when other tech out there offers a larger improvement.

But here is the thing-the latest study didn't even factor in HEVs...only PHEVs. And using CO2 as the metric to compare to (which the article is using as a measurement), you do not see a huge improvement going to a hybrid vs fuel efficient ICE route vs PHEV. Not to mention using MPGs as a measurement sucks because as it gets higher, the less return your going to see. http://www.mpgillusion.com/p/what-is-mpg-illusion.html#:~:text=The Cause of the Illusion&text=By necessity%2C MPG has a,10%2C000 miles divided by MPG. Using the Escape as the example since it comes in 3 different flavors that applicable to this conversation Its a 1.2 metric ton difference between ICE and Hybrid and 4.42 vs PHEV using US EPA testing.

Maybe before you shoot your mouth off, how about checking the actual source data that the article got its information from: First Commission report on real-world CO2 emissions of cars and vans using data from on-board fuel consumption monitoring devices PDF: https://climate.ec.europa.eu/document/download/b644dafe-1385-4b56-98d9-21e7e9f3601b_en?filename=report.pdf This was published about three weeks ago

https://electrek.co/2024/03/25/yet-another-study-shows-plug-in-hybrids-arent-as-clean-as-we-thought/

Yet another study shows plug-in hybrids aren’t as clean as we thought I know this is has been a bone of contention, but it appears people aren't plugging them enough....

But there is the thing-there is no placating people like this...come out with more efficient vehicles and they'll find something else to bitch about Ford and GMs first priory is make their shareholders happy by building products people want to buy and large trucks are the most popular segment that can sell at a profitable margin for them.

They are also aren't immune to the other factors at play that are hurting other companies to-like high interest rates and high pricing. The 3/Y might be "affordable" but you can get a more capable Gas or even hybrid powered CUV for less.

I just think its gotten to the point with vehicle performance that it doesn't quite matter anymore. An Escape with the 2L Ecoboost or even an Equinox (drove my mother in laws this weekend) have a perfectly acceptable performance level to drive every day. This isn't the 1980s were it took cars minutes to drive the quarter mile lol. My Bronco has plenty of power and I don't miss the tuned 3.5L ecoboost I had my SHO the vast majority of the time.

https://www.cnbc.com/2024/04/02/tesla-tsla-q1-2024-vehicle-delivery-and-production-numbers.html

I have a 10 year old laptop but my desktop is only a year and half. I replace it every 5 years or so. I need a new laptop, but I gotta pay for a new fridge and Stove now 😛

How old is your phone though?

I used to switch between them and stopped about 14 years ago...just wasn't worth it. My Apple stuff just works and it does what I need it to do.

Yeah they'd be lucky to sell 500 of them a year too. A Mustang style car isn't on the radar of a luxury car buyer, esp. Lincolns demographics. This isn't the 1980s anymore. The Caddy XLR (built on the corvette platform) sold a whopping 13K units over 8 YEARS.

The vast majority of cars on the market can recharge from 0 to 80% in about 30-45 minutes, but given peoples driving habits (refilling at 1/4 of a tank or so), you wouldn't be down to zero 99% of the time anyways. Some more info different recharging rates of cars on the market now https://www.caranddriver.com/news/g46011090/fastest-slowest-ev-charging-times-tested/ Keep in mind that is fast charging and if you charging at home, the speed doesn't matter because the car is just sitting there anyways.

My Focus and SHO still buffeted with the windows cracked or the sunroof being open.

Guessing its the Buick version of the Trax.

From what a friend was telling me, its pretty terrible looking in person-its too narrow and upright.

I'm figuring this goes no where...its not a true monopoly like Bell or ATT back in the day where there was no choice what so ever.