78mpg and comes with a MT option? sign me up.
Printable View
78mpg and comes with a MT option? sign me up.
Imperial gallon and very lax UK MPG test which has no connection to real world MPGQuote:
Originally Posted by cat in january
Probably British gallons? which are ~0.8 litres bigger. That'd be only place in Europe, although less and less often now, that would use mpgs as a measurement.Quote:
Originally Posted by east or bust
Edit: Steve beat me to it.
Yes, imperial gallon. Also UK MPG test, like Japan test, is akin to hypermiling. Some Japan and UK MPG ratings are double of US rating for identical car.Quote:
Originally Posted by PNWbrit
Steve you still have a new Imprezza?
Thoughts?
We sold it (2012 Impreza) to a bud when we decided to go from 3 vehicles (2 cars, 1 pickup) to 2 (1 car + 1 pickup). The Impreza is running fine last I heard
No worries I thought I remembered you'd got a very recent one, recently.Quote:
Originally Posted by GeezerSteve
On her shopping list.
Hey brit, my niece just did the small car/SUV thing and she’s slightly on the spectrum, super analytical, and she ended up with a Forrester, because of all the deals right now and she could play one dealer off another.
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
There, I FifyQuote:
Originally Posted by skaredshtles
Not sure she wants a Forester but we'll probably look at the deals on imprezza and or a certified used one.Quote:
Originally Posted by plugboots
Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
Thanks for the correction on the mpg. Still sounds like Ford has some real gas sippers over there.
Ford lost a shitload of fleet business with that horrendous 6.0 powerstroke fiasco too.Quote:
Originally Posted by nickwm21
fucking up...it's painful to see, being as how Ford still employs a lot of union workers in my struggling state.
Exact MPG aside, you make a good point and a big piece of the answer is Corporate Average Fuel Economy. This article is from 2012, and I'm sure it's a moving target now, but regulations only the writers read tend to be significant in these matters:Quote:
Originally Posted by cat in january
Notable that the Mustang has a pretty CAFE-friendly footprint compared to their other cars. Skinny tires pushed out to the fender lips and a smaller engine might be Ford's new economy car.Quote:
In 2006, CAFE altered the formula for its 2011 fuel economy targets, by calculating a vehicle’s “footprint”, which is the vehicle’s wheelbase multiplied by its wheel track. The footprint is expressed in square feet, and calculating this value is probably the most transparent part of the regulations. Fuel economy targets are a function of a vehicle’s footprint; the smaller the footprint, the tougher the standards are. A car such as the Honda Fit, with its footprint of 40 square feet, has to achieve 61 mpg CAFE, or 43 mpg IRL by 2025 to comply with regulations. At the opposite end of the spectrum, a full-size truck like the Ford F-150, with a footprint of 75 square feet, only needs to hit 30 mpg CAFE, or 23 mpg IRL, by the same timeframe.
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/201...tation-wagons/
Trump is rolling back fuel economy and environmental regulations. Ford is the first car (...sorry, automobile...) company responding.
Get ready for the return of the Super Hummer Canyonero Widestance.
Sure, but after all the work they put into writing these regulations (Ford and GM's lobbyists, I mean) what do you think the odds are they scrap the stupidest parts? My money's on the footprint part surviving and the mileage numbers getting halved. Of course, if this is a one-time opportunity they should probably get creative and add another 2000 pages, too while they're at it.Quote:
Originally Posted by reckless toboggan
Oh, I think the US automakers showed how little they know about the manufacturing, marketing, and sales of motor vehicles in the late 60's and 70's when the Japanese makers and the oil shock caught them with their pants down--clearly less than the average tgr dentist. No reason to think they're any smarter today.Quote:
Originally Posted by skaredshtles
CPO is the way to go IMHO. While new cars are more reliable than they've ever been there are some things that can be disastrously expensive when they go wrong. Something simple like I had a slow oil leak coming form the bottom of the timing chain cover on my 2013 BRZ and when I got tired of the smoke coming out from under the hood when I'd stop at a traffic light I brought it in. The leak was so slow it didn't even register as low oil after 4k miles but the smoke... To fix it was a 5 hour job and the warranty labor was listed at $625 :eek: Over the winter I started getting a crazy moan when turning the steering wheel quickly at low speeds like in a parking lot so Subaru replaced the steering column and steering wheel after 3 separate visits to the dealer. Parts cost was well in excess of $1k and labor was some silly amount but I was only $50 out of pocket for the deductible. Now the car is almost at 100k so I'm tying to flesh out any other issues that would be covered under the Gold CPO plan so they get taken care of before the coverage runs out. FWIW they also usually hook me up with a loaner car for $15 if it's going to be there overnight.Quote:
Originally Posted by PNWbrit
Yup. Especially when companies, in an effort to impress shareholders, are zooming in on quarterly profits. It's not that they weren't selling the vehicles they're axing. It's that those vehicles weren't making as much profit as their SUVs and trucks. Does this decision make sense for the balance sheet short term? Absolutely. Is it wise long term? That remains to be seen, but I'd put my money on "No." Ford is no Mercedes-Benz or BMW marquee that can get away with only expensive vehicles. This now means that even the lowest priced vehicle on a freaking Ford lot would be out of reach even for me. In my opinion, this will do nothing but hurt the brand in the long run once people are all tapped out buying expensive trucks (which are absurdly expensive these days) and SUVs. Our economy hits a bump in the road or gas goes up, Ford is SCREWED.Quote:
Originally Posted by old goat
This crowd is not a normal car buying crowd. Who the hell cares about ford cars. It’s a smart business move. They just released the ecosport which is a glorified hatchback. Call it what you will, but they are getting rid of low to the ground hatch backs and sedans and putting people into slightly higher sedans and hatchbacks. There is really no mpg hit either.
No one wants 6 speed manual awd diesel wagons. Despite the hand wringing here. A Ford Escape is a glorified fusion sedan with a bubble over the trunk deck.
They even come in hybrid versions for the inevitable gas spike.
Yes the horror is people like cars that are easier to drive and get in to. Most people sit in traffic all day and are not worried about running the tail of the dragon while shifting.
As for fleets, I rent almost weekly and it seems most of all rentals are crossovers already with maybe the occasional Camry or Malibu thrown in.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I drive by a Ford dealer every single day to pick up my son and they've had the same 2 Focus RS's and 3 Mustang GT's sitting out front since last fall. Meanwhile, they seem to have several different Raptors out front every day. I also see Raptors almost daily driving around town. Kinda gives an insight into what Americans are buying these days when they want speed.
Eliminating these models will put Ford's cheapest vehicle somewhere around $20k.Quote:
Michael Martinez
Verified account
@MikeMartinez_AN
Follow Follow @MikeMartinez_AN
More
Here’s when Ford will end production of its cars:
-May 2018: Focus
-March 2019: Taurus
-May 2019: Fiesta
Fusion will stick around for at least a couple more years. Focus Active will be imported from China starting in mid-2019.
2:46 PM - 26 Apr 2018
If commuting is the main goal of the car, a Mazda 3 might be a good option. I'm 1.5 years into my Mazda 3 commuting experience, and I love it. Averaging 34mpg with 50/50 highway/city driving and it's a fun car to drive.Quote:
Originally Posted by PNWbrit
Especially with some good rubber on it! I remember once I used up the factory tires on my Mazda 3, I switched over to some proper higher performance tires and it was a game changer. Could take a cloverleaf at Mach 10. Really demonstrated just how fantastic the suspension actually was on that little car. Car wasn't fast, but really fun with the MT. Bought that car brand new and gave me nearly 200,000 trouble free miles and engine still ran like new when I sold it. So practical with the hatch, great looking, and fun to zip around town with. Not the best highway cruiser (which is why I bought an old Deville later on), but would happily get another. Solid little city car for sure. I'm hearing good things about the little Mazda 2 as well. Anybody here driven one before? I think it might share the platform with the Fiesta, but I'm not 100% sure.Quote:
Originally Posted by SorryBro
I think this is wrong. Ford has been the savviest US automaker, by far, in recent years. The resurgence of the brand was due to their observing the market (during the last gas crisis one could argue) and building people and purpose based cars -- which is what was in demand at the time (look at how the Japanese makers got a foothold in the US. Toyota Corolla, Honda Civic).Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinFromSA
Ford is again watching the market. Crossovers are the present and the future. Easier to get into, higher up / better visibility, typically safer, same mileage (i mean heck. same engines as sedans). So if the Crossover replaces the sedan market, they can double down on trucks. This will lead to better driving and better mileage trucks. How is this not obvious?
Ford is doing the same thing they did 15 years ago that TGR praises: theyre watching the market, investing in technology and purpose-built cars, and selling what consumers want.
if you're pissed personally because they killed your favorite car, i get that 100%. be upset. but don't be surprised and don't act like Ford is going into the shitter because of it
The beauty of disagreeing with Ford is you don't have to buy one.
There's plenty of cars on the road. Ford makes ugly shit cars and bomber trucks, I could have made that call.
No shit. This is to replace a car that since new has had (very nearly) three warranty replacement clutch packs and countless software "fixes". Ford told me just yesterday that they are going buy the vehicle back from me.Quote:
Originally Posted by gravitylover
Yeah I'd thought of one of those I know they get rave reviews. The Focus has really struggled at times during the winter in our foothills neighborhood and very steep driveway. The Imprezza would be useful for that.Quote:
Originally Posted by SorryBro
^^^ And one thing that bugs me about most new cars is the overly-integrated nav/entertainment/HVAC. That stuff is a lot harder to replace or upgrade as the car gets older, or if the screen dies. When stuff like Android Auto or Apple Carplay comes out, the older nav systems are pretty bad in comparison.
Hopefully my next car will be available with a simple double-DIN size radio, with separate non-integrated HVAC controls, so I can install whatever aftermarket nav/stereo that I want -- and upgrade or replace it easily years later.
I hate this shit. Turning the heater down requires multiple buttons across multiple screens instead of turning a knob.Quote:
Originally Posted by El Chupacabra
What is your current double DIN Apple Carplay Android Auto head unit of choice? I'm considering the swap.Quote:
Originally Posted by El Chupacabra
http://hanabi.autoweek.com/sites/default/files/styles/gen-1200-675/public/black-and-orange-gt-on-road-2.jpg?itok=bhjI1J3t[/IMG]
https://automanager.blob.core.window...5b739_1024.jpg
Doesn't that GT350 have big problems with it shutting down to limp mode on the track?
The new Mustangs are nice looking cars though.
I'd just look around and see what features are available and what kind of deals are out there. I don't have any strong preferences. Pioneer head units have always been pretty satisfactory.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sirshredalot
Interesting take on Ford's reason for cutting out the cars. Did not realize crossovers count as light trucks in fuel economy calcs
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/comp...id=mailsignout
Quote:
Originally Posted by plugboots
Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums
I'm not a marketing maven, but I have to wonder if this is one of those classic corporate maneuvers that makes sense short-term and is foolish long-term. It's well known that cheap-ish entry-level cars are built and sold at very tight margins, if not at or below cost. However, selling lots of inexpensive cars brings young consumers (who will later buy nicer cars) to the brand, makes the brand ubiquitous, and justifies a robust dealer network. Or that's how certain very profitable Japanese companies have played it, anyway.
I just bought a 2009 (Ford-era) Volvo in part to avoid all the crappy dash technology that is on everything now. Simple tactile controls, no integration other than Bluetooth, and no touchscreen. Perfect.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dantheman
And as a former Ford employee, I don’t see their decision as short-sighted. Dumping low-margin, high failure, less safe cars that are made outside the US to keep costs in check seems wise.
ThisQuote:
Originally Posted by iceman
Good read, and I feel that those CAFE standards ARE at the root of this decision for sure. It's why they gave us the Explorer to begin with all those years ago. It's why GM loved things like the H1/H2...until gas shot up (hahahaha). It's why automakers pushed all the giant SUVs they have over the years. OF COURSE demand is up when they're marketing the ever living hell out of these things, which coincidentally are pretty profitable to begin with, made even more profitable by lower penalties due to CAFE.Quote:
Originally Posted by evdog
Pretty much whatever happens in US commerce is driven by Baby Boomers. I think there are a lot of them who aren't having to commute to work anymore, so fuck fuel economy, and want a big squishy 4x4 with 4 doors like a big old stupid sedan and a teeny tiny short bed with a hard cover just like the trunk of a big old stupid sedan. Except with 4wd so they can go up and down their icy mcmansion driveway.
This thing, which has become by far the most popular vehicle where I live....
https://icdn8.digitaltrends.com/imag...33-c.jpg?ver=1
https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/17...g?v=1515867271
http://st.motortrend.com/uploads/sit...around|660:440
.....is not a pickup truck. It's a big stupid car.
https://cdn1.mecum.com/auctions/da09...?1378255537000
http://www.grayflannelsuit.net/blog/...-1970_ad-3.jpg
http://images.dsscars.com/dealerpics...22.jpg?preset=
I bet whoever designed those Eagle 4x4 cars back in the day is shitting a pile of bricks watching this happen....same with whoever masterminded those older Grand Cherokees that were supposed to be all luxurious for the banker with a muddy road to mcmansiontown I guess. Ahead of their time.