Search results

Actually the 'lugging about a battery' bit isn't quite correct. When the battery is 'empty' on a PHEV there is still retained charge to provide full power if required and the vehicle runs as a full hybrid until recharged. Running as a full hybrid will still be much more economical than an ICE...

So ICE cars should only have a 1 gallon fuel tank? Honda E I suggested has a 150 mile range perfect for city work Your point is?

No idea what you are on about

??????

That was not my point and you know it. EV's (with ranges from 150 miles to 450 miles) are more suitable than PHEVs or ICE for city driving full stop. No mandates needed. Honda E is a perfect example of a city EV with low range, not a 'golf cart' as you describe it.

Of course. But a simple battery EV needs far less complex transmission system compared to a PHEV.

All EV's have a 50 mile range. Why carry an engine or anything else when you don't need it. A PHEV has it's place for some users but for most an EV is a better option

Because it isn't for a lot of people. Average journey in the US is little more than the UK at around 8 miles. Most people live in cities (obviously) and for them the EV is perfect.

But you are saying that people who buy EV's are fools or stupid. Not much point in having a 'discussion' with somebody with that attitude, you have made your position clear. Lucky you are so smart :clap:

For all those shouting at the sky about EV's and how they will never work there are 10x that number of people buying them, using them, and finding out they are actually really quite good. Bertha Benz was ridiculed collecting her ligroin and this is no different

The mandate as you refer to it isn't disappearing in Europe. This is a Ford Europe decision.

As Ford have stated that all of their vehicles will be capable of zero emissions running by 2026 in Europe, we will either get a hybrid Mustang or no Mustang!

It took Tesla 10 years to make a profit. It takes 3 or 4 years to bring a car to market. Your 2 year suggestion is way out. The legacy car makers do have the advantage of existing sales / profit to use for R&D compared to start-ups, but that is just how it works

??????

I am well aware how 'self driving' is a misnomer currently - also the SAE definitions. I do not think SAE 3 to 5 are a good idea.

Of course they did. Ford themselves explained that it is because the company loss is caused by future R&D projects and development costs for EV's. Not sure why that is a surprise? If you enter new markets you inevitably have costs before you sell a single product. Most people understand this who...

Odd indeed as it is so clearly based on the S550 digital dash where the gear shows all the time

R&D costs money before you sell a single product. Ford is making money on every car it sells (they are not stupid) and those sales chip away at the R&D costs over time. If you get it right then you make a profit overall by the time you stop making the car, if you don't you lose money on that...

Many of these self driving features are a dead end in reality. Adaptive cruise works well, Intelligent cruise doesn't work reliably or safely. Going a step further than intelligent cruise is a folly.

I'm no fan of self driving, but sued for what exactly? 'False advertising'? How does a recall (and Tesla are not unique to recalls) indicate false advertising? most the fault is the moron at the wheel who deliberately chose to cleanse the gene pool in support of laziness What does this mean?