|
Autoblog linkquote:When the 2011 Ford F-150 arrives this Fall, it will reportedly get an all-new powertrain lineup. Ford already officially confirmed several months ago that the light-duty pickups would be getting the first rear-wheel drive application of the 3.5-liter Ecoboost V6. The transaxles in the current Ecoboost applications are torque-limited, so when the twin turbocharged and direct injected V6 lands in the truck, it could produce as much as 400 horsepower and 400 pound-feet of torque.
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2010 05:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 21:24 |
|
|
Crustashio posted:Mercedes really has come a long way with their looks, considering the w203 sportcoupe. I actually liked the look of that model! Of course, I went on the mbworld.org forum to research it, and it seemed like every other thread was detailing an electrical failure of some kind... Speaking of pickups though, the Mahindra website says that their trucks are arriving Fall this year. I wonder, it seems like they were supposed to come out more than a year ago.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2010 09:24
|
|
|
Left Ventricle posted:I gotta wonder about the Ecoboost and the new 5.0 though... Which one will be the top spec engine?
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2010 12:43
|
|
|
grover posted:Ecoboost is more about mileage than power, but given CAFE, it's the way we're going whether we like it or not. I'm just impressed the new crop of direct-injected turbocharged engines are able to offer such large gains in efficiency without giving up more power than they are. It's amazing that there's still efficiencies to be gained that weren't realized decades ago! At least this time around they're just trading cost for emissions instead of cost AND power like they did in the 80s. The efficiency of DI has been known about for a long time, it just hasn't been economical to implement it in gas engines or effectively mate it with forced induction until the early 90s.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2010 16:23
|
|
|
Muffinpox posted:The efficiency of DI has been known about for a long time, it just hasn't been economical to implement it in gas engines or effectively mate it with forced induction until the early 90s.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2010 17:27
|
|
|
Kill-9 posted:P.S. One of those articles introduced me to a new phrase: 'Soft-Roaders' WTF? Exactly what it sounds like, AWD or 4x4 vehicles that are only good for light off-roading. They can handle a bit of soft sand and mild trails, but you wouldn't take them mudding or rock climbing. Unfortunately they're mostly used as minivan replacements that never see a fleck of mud in their lives, then when it snows the owners call in all pissed because they don't know how to work the 4x4 and the hubs are all seized from never being used.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2010 20:46
|
|
|
This is really good news for Team O'Neil: http://jalopnik.com/5590246/ford-gives-43-fiestas-to-rally-school-wants-you-to-hoon-them Their fleet of Mk2 Golfs and Jettas has become more and more expensive to maintain. To get a brand new batch of Fiestas makes the school cheaper to operate and thus easier for students to afford. I had asked the instructors when I was there what would happen in the long run, and they were looking at last-gen Hyundai Accents. Assuming the Fiesta does reasonably well in the US, they should have cheap parts for years to come. I dunno who put 2 and 2 together, but they should be commended.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2010 16:28
|
|
|
Good on Ford for that. It's a much better treatment for the Fiesta Movement cars than crushing them (though I hope Ford is keeping at least one of the remaining 57 for their museum/warehouse). I do have vacation time I haven't spent yet..
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2010 16:44
|
|
|
grover posted:Well, it's still not all that economical to implement, but CAFE has forced the manufacturers' hand in the matter. I wouldn't call the making vehicles for the most absurdly horsepower-hungry market a forced hand at all. I find that I can't get a decent torquey engine in a small truck without having some sort of deficit, like being huge (tacoma), ancient and with no small engine (ranger), or being a Nissan. I don't get the BUY OLDER viewpoint when its what most people would buy who want a fleet truck, its gotta be the margins. You can't charge $3500 for a diesel which involves expensive emissions testing and applied costs on a $17,000 pickup truck. You could probably do it with a middle sized (realistic) truck with a v6 diesel, but it'd still be a limited market. There aren't many buyers for tiny cheap trucks with comparatively expensive engine, there aren't many buyers for a hardcore high-articulation high-ratio US-diesel offroad vehicle with miles of ground clearance for cheap (those just buy Jeeps which still are awful cars in every regard besides axle articulation and swaybar disconnect switches but now are a version of a 1997 Range Rover inside), nor anything that people seem to want. Its Americanisms as much as bad management, high emissions regulations play a lesser part, but all 3 point towards we not getting the other world market cars. It took the Internet to realize that GM/Ford made decent cars elsewhere, but we're not running a multi-national corporation in mom's basement so therefore we are a bit more adaptable.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2010 16:49
|
|
|
GM is bringing out a new brand in China. Should ave called it Pontiac.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2010 20:21
|
|
|
hahaha, even the name is a ripoff. BMW is called Bao Ma in China, which means...Precious Horse, more literally.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2010 00:27
|
|
|
Crustashio posted:Mercedes really has come a long way with their looks, considering the w203 sportcoupe. See, I actually owned one, drove it for six years and 100K miles and never had a problem with it during all the time. I also really liked the design, although I will say it looked much better in the cobalt blue that I had. On the other hand, I completely don't get the new design, especially the E-class. It's like they were sitting around a table and going: Guy 1: We've been doing those round lights for so long now, we need to do something new, something edgy! Guy 2: Edgy, edgy... I know! Square lights are edgy! We will keep the split lights but make them square! Then again, the SC was the only Mercedes I liked at that time anyways; I am probably completely out of their target market at this point.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2010 21:40
|
|
|
I know it's been mentioned before, but I really want a Toyota FT-86. They should be rolling off the assembly line in 2012, right around the time I graduate from college and get a real job. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UebLu0-wg54 It's a rear-wheel drive coupe, and should make about 200hp for the base model.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2010 20:18
|
|
|
Lazareth posted:I know it's been mentioned before, but I really want a Toyota FT-86. They should be rolling off the assembly line in 2012, right around the time I graduate from college and get a real job.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2010 21:10
|
|
|
Hog Obituary posted:Because it's being tested and they haven't officially released images of the car yet. They don't want you to know exactly what the car is going to look like ahead of the marketing/press release, but they still need to test it in the wild. I think this part is what's mainly being pointed out as not mattering anymore. With all the websites that pretty much exist for the sole purpose of posting spy shots of new vehicles (or other products for that matter) it just seems stupid that companies keep spending so much on hiding their test mules when everyone's going to know pretty much everything anyways. It doesn't seem like they gain anything, more that it's just the marketing department trying to act like they still have a purpose in having a big "reveal" event. If it's that done, just loving show it already!
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2010 21:52
|
|
|
Well, it does and it doesn't. A test mule, likely as not, doesn't have the "final" version of whatever bodywork is being hidden, and I think manufacturers want to prevent incorrect images getting out as much as anything else.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2010 16:23
|
|
|
Audi A7 Sportback revealed today. This is Audi's answer to the CLS, Panamera.. basically 2+2 luxury. Imagine a cross between an A5 and an A8. I'm at work, so I can't post any pics..
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2010 12:13
|
|
|
Hermansen posted:Audi A7 Sportback revealed today. This is Audi's answer to the CLS, Panamera.. basically 2+2 luxury. Found some pictures at http://www.autoblog.com/2010/07/26/2011-audi-a7-sportback-shows-its-shapely-rump-in-munich/
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2010 12:49
|
|
|
Why do all Audi look exactly the same ? All the other brands manage to make their models distinctive enough that you don't need to have a look at the bagde to see what it is.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2010 14:06
|
|
|
I like Audi's unified brand image a lot, actually. And that A7 looks roughly fourteen thousand times better than the 5GT, but is that even a true competitor?
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2010 14:17
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:And that A7 looks roughly fourteen thousand times better than the 5GT That's not really a feat, considering that the 5GT is a giant turd on wheels. Is there anything worse in the same price range ?
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2010 14:26
|
|
|
Spatule posted:That's not really a feat, considering that the 5GT is a giant turd on wheels. Is there anything worse in the same price range ? Yeah, the X6. I'm just trying to think of segment similar vehicles. I guess it'll compete with the Panamera and the CLS as well, but the Panamera has a look only a mother could love and the CLS is really staid looking. I'd imagine/hope that the A7 will beat the Panamera on price. edit: Speaking of the BMW uggo twins, my dealer tells me that they haven't moved many of either, but they're a little hopeful on the 5GT once it comes out with AWD (since this is New England). I think they've moved about three X6s and five 5GTs YTD, and I'm in a volume location.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2010 14:30
|
|
|
Spatule posted:That's not really a feat, considering that the 5GT is a giant turd on wheels. Is there anything worse in the same price range ? Crossposting from the hot car chicks thread... Slothophile posted:The new BMW 'Gran Coupe' which should apparently be available in 2012...    Which looks roughly a million times better than the A7 
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2010 14:42
|
|
|
Can't really compare concept to production. BMW'll gently caress it up.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2010 14:48
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:Can't really compare concept to production. BMW'll gently caress it up. There isn't anything wild about it that they couldn't put into production, it might have more solidly attached mirrors and normal door handles but that's about it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2010 15:07
|
|
|
People said exactly the same thing about the XF concept and look where it ended up. The XF is still good looking but it's not in the same realm as the concept.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2010 16:37
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:People said exactly the same thing about the XF concept and look where it ended up. The XF is still good looking but it's not in the same realm as the concept. The main change on the XF was the lights which had to be changed to fit regulations, they also changed the mirrors and reduced the wheel flare at the back, partly because the concept had huge wheels. The BMW could go into production without body shape changes. It's been designed much more as a production ready concept.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2010 17:33
|
|
|
I'm not getting the reasoning behind making that Gran Coupe or whatever. I mean, the 6 series is basically a 5 minus the rear doors. So why would you take the 6 and put the rear doors back on? Isn't it then just a 5 with a different roofline?
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2010 21:45
|
|
|
Left Ventricle posted:I'm not getting the reasoning behind making that Gran Coupe or whatever. I mean, the 6 series is basically a 5 minus the rear doors. So why would you take the 6 and put the rear doors back on? Isn't it then just a 5 with a different roofline? It's a CLS competitor. ie a swoopy looking saloon for people that need 4 doors but will pay more money to get something a bit less common and more stylish. Also the 6 series is a 2+2 coupe/roadster. It competes with stuff like the SL and A5.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2010 21:51
|
|
|
MINI has officially announced that they are partnering with Prodrive to enter the WRC. Cars are also being made available for private teams. The best part is that they are using the 4 door Countryman, which means that the Mini purists and historians will be forced to love a car that they have hated up to this point. http://www.motoringfile.com/2010/07/27/its-official-mini-is-going-rally-racing-in-the-wrc/ 
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2010 04:14
|
|
|
I can't help but think that it's lucky that the WRC regs are being downgraded to S2000+. Should make it easier for BMW and Prodrive to develop the car.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2010 08:32
|
|
|
The 918 just got green lit.... gently caress yes.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2010 11:47
|
|
|
Slothophile posted:The 918 just got green lit.... Now I get to look forward to never owning one and only once seeing one in passing. But youtube is good enough, right? Right? 
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2010 12:00
|
|
|
I look at the picture for that car and the first thing I notice is for all that money and all that styling, you still don't get xenon projectors in your headlights. Guess they had to save money somewhere with those rims.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2010 14:31
|
|
|
Pricing for the Chevy Volt has been released, for the sum of $41,000 you can own GM's first electric car with all the teething issues to go with it! http://www.insideline.com/chevrolet/volt/2011/2011-chevrolet-volt-priced-at-41000-orders-start-now.html quote:GM on Tuesday said the 2011 Chevrolet Volt will be priced at $41,000, including a $720 destination charge, when it arrives in select launch markets later this year. That is $8,220 more than the 2011 Nissan Leaf electric car — even though GM insists that the Volt is "in a class by itself."
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2010 14:44
|
|
|
The lease term is 350/mo 36 months, 2500 down plus associated fees due at signing. That seems like a much better proposition on a totally new design, provided you get in under the mileage limit. And after tax credits and everything I think the net is around $33500... which is basically where everyone expected the net to be. Yawn.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2010 14:53
|
|
|
Naky posted:I look at the picture for that car and the first thing I notice is for all that money and all that styling, you still don't get xenon projectors in your headlights. Guess they had to save money somewhere with those rims. LED headlights bro. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2010 15:55
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:The lease term is 350/mo 36 months, 2500 down plus associated fees due at signing. That seems like a much better proposition on a totally new design, provided you get in under the mileage limit. Irony is it's a car that only makes fiscal sense if you are racking up a shitload of miles.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2010 16:29
|
|
|
IOwnCalculus posted:Irony is it's a car that only makes fiscal sense if you are racking up a shitload of miles. Oh yeah, the lease is clearly for people who are willing to pay a premium to have it because it's cool and neat.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2010 16:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 21:24 |
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:Oh yeah, the lease is clearly for people who are willing to pay a premium to have it because it's cool and neat. How will I be an annoyingly smug human being about my mileage at the pumps  edit: NEVERMIND, it comes with an engine thank loving god. Muffinpox fucked around with this message at 17:28 on Jul 29, 2010 |
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2010 16:36
|
|