https://i.imgur.com/IQcMQDM.jpg
What you have to look forward to.
Printable View
https://i.imgur.com/IQcMQDM.jpg
What you have to look forward to.
Lol. Travesty they call that pos a stang
I like the Mach E. I dont care what name they put on it.
Still does not represent the Mustang. They could've gave it any other name. Not a fan!
It may not be a Mustang by your definition, but it is according to Ford Motor Company. This technology will be in the 2 door coupe soon. The introduction of the Mach E will make it easier for the masses to digest. Hybrid drive will be in the Mustang at some point. Its simply the evolution of automobiles. Luckily for those that are not fond of things to come, you can still enjoy what you got.Quote:
Originally Posted by draggin50
Sorry, hit edit to your post on accident. Was going to say they should have called it a Galaxy, that would have made more sense.Quote:
Originally Posted by Walter
Its possible that this move is a segway to easily merge new technology with an iconic name. People get over things they do not agree with quickly, it happens time and time again. Ford is the first to merge new technology with an american icon, in a mass production sense. All others will follow.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick93coupe
Well stated.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick93coupe
This is the same marketing tactic however as the people who bought the company name and logo "Bell and Howell" and now use that familiar name to peddle Chinese crap to the public. It's merely name recognition sales tactics. Bell and Howell was once a highly known company for mail inserting equipment, and audio visual equipment for the office industry. The last of their business mail inserting solutions division was bought out and the company liquidated by a competitor. People today who are older recognize the name Bell and Howell and associate it with a quality product...though it is not. Likewise here the younger generation who can afford one will buy it and feel like they have a "muscle car" while at the same time "saving the planet" its a win win for Ford if it works and the whimpy Gen Y Gen Z mediocrity minded conforming socialists of our future can afford one. What am I thinking? Afford one? Hell they will simply tell the government to give them one.
And you will be the old fossil out there making passes with other cars with half the HP running faster times but all still on fossil fuels. I do not see the industry flipping that soon. Maybe in your great grandchild's generation. The power grid needed for such a drastic change does not exist to support the concept and will be very costly regardless of which fuel route chosen to generate the power needed to support that type of paradigm shift. Electric cars area novelty to make the tree hugger and the leftist elite feel good about themselves when they buy one and will remain as such for a long time. Will a time come that this technology actually can exist in the same manner that the gas powered vehicle is today? Maybe. But much has to change in the line of generated power before this will happen IMHO. As well technology needs to advance so that a battery driven car that can travel 350 miles on a charge can be refueled in a few minutes (3-5min) not 20 minutes plus. It will take acceptance of Nuclear powered electricity production to make this happen I believe. Wind and solar will never be more than a supplemental source. Nuclear is the cleanest most energy efficient form of power known to man, and one of the safest when handled correctly. France thrives on nuclear power. We do not hear of issues with that form of electrical generation from them do we? And I would never consider the French by any stretch engineering genius'. Water power requires flooding land and is not as efficient as one would believe. While it works it is not the go to alternative from what I have learned though I once thought it could be.Quote:
Originally Posted by Walter
The infrastructure you describe is needed to accommodate the masses. The current infrastructure would accommodate me today. I can have a fast Tesla by end of day today. I could have the performance version of the Mach-E as soon as its available. I dont need all that is described above for me to accept the technology now. I have already accepted it. I like performance and new technology. Most are slow to accept changes of any sort, and thats fine. They way the electric car situation sits does not accommodate you, but it will still march on.
Didnt Farrah Fawcett drive a Mustang II?
California and Massachusetts have both passed legislation to ban sale of new combustion engines by the year 2035. That is hardly in my great grand childrens time. I'm sure there will be more and more states that jump on board in the next couple years. Like it or not it is going to happen.
She drove the Cobra II model. YesQuote:
Originally Posted by Maximus
When the time comes I will own an electric vehicle. I still think there is quite a bit advancements that can be done with the gas motor as most energy turns into heat and not motion. Regenerative devices, higher compression and running motors leaner with gearing will be helpful. Maybe they will come up with a battery replacement charging stations sometime or way to charge more rapidly. Right now gas/Hybrid to me makes sense for distance travel for now.
Okay, and your car is red in your avatar. So what? So while rich elites in California and Mass may have passed legislation so they can feel better about their otherwise frivolous lifestyles this is no sign others will follow. I lived in California for 7 years. If the rich whacks of LA and SF had their way we would all be walking or riding public transportation by now....except for the elites. They would still be driving gas guzzling SUV's, riding in limos, flying around in their gulf stream jets and racing their exotic cars that all burn on fossil fuels. They will own electric but only because it makes them feel justified. The upper elites and the ruling class don't even want a small business person like you to have anything as nice as they. These people resent that you own a BMW if they knew you did at your income level and status. You are not entitled in their eyes. You are not cut from their cloth. They want your support, they wish to redistribute your wealth such as it is - in their eyes - but they don't want you in their click.Quote:
Originally Posted by mustangboy
So again no. The nation will not see this happen for another 50 years even if it catches on. But I don't care. I won't be here, I am done with caring.
Writes novel, but doesn't care. LOL
I agree. I'm on the inside watching this change occur. Hybrid is the only thing that makes sense today. Electric car's batteries manufacturing is a nightmare of pollution and no one is even contemplating disposing of the batteries that wear out, and they wear out quickly. Lithium is very rare and as these idiots legislate battery powered vehicles, the demand will outweigh the supply. Afghanistan has one of the richest supplies of Lithium, but good luck getting it. I don't like what I'm seeing so far and the next 4 years are going to do a lot of damage to our future income, health care and energy costs. The science isn't there yet for us to abandon internal combustion engines just yet. Tesla is going thru a lot of batteries due to their charging and discharging strategies, last time I heard, so this is far from over yet. Jmho. Electric isn't the answer to the concern, it's a temp band aid. .Quote:
Originally Posted by redfirepearlgt
Let me zoom out to clarify my stance on the matter. I simply like the performance aspect of the technology. More so the aftermarket versus OEM products. Cascadia power system, AEM electronics, traction control, dual motor attached to a Reid case Powerglide... That is available right now. That would be slick in a clean fox coupe.
Im not concerned with political views, infrastructure, whale saving, rich people etc. Performance, just performance.
LOL Craig
B-I-N-G-OOOOOOOOOOOOOOH! spells BINGO.Quote:
Originally Posted by NXcoupe
- - - Updated - - -
You won't get goose bumps from the cam lope or the exhaust note! lol!Quote:
Originally Posted by Walter
I just flashed back to pre puberty remembering and wondering why my dick got hard at age 12ish when I saw her. DAMN! She is still one of the finest looking creatures God ever created. I put her right up there with Jane Russell, Marilyn Monroe, Sophia Loren, Ingrid Bergman, and Grace Kelly. I'll mention Megan Fox to add a modern day name to the list.Quote:
Originally Posted by Maximus
Not to mention california cant generate enough electricity right now to keep hospitals lit up. How are they also going to charge 100 million electric cars that need 50 amp+ connectivity on top of current usage. I know that the infrastructure can be built, but right now they cant even fix supply?!?..... They will probably come up with a genius plan to run diesel generators at charging stations to keep up the demand.Quote:
Originally Posted by NXcoupe
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Hemp shoes and man-bun will be mandatory in CA by 2023.Quote:
Originally Posted by S281SC
How are we going to power all these chargers? Coal powerplants? Wind turbines that require oil and frequent oil changes and also kills birds? Nuclear?
Hydrogen. LOLQuote:
Originally Posted by draggin50
^^^ H2's byproduct when being burned is H2O. Back in the early 80's scientists were fooling around with seeing if they could find a way to split H20, burn the H2, capture the water vapor, then split again in a form of perpetual motion. It was called Hydrolysis if I recall correctly. Big article on it I read in the very first year of DISCOVER magazine. But as with many things like this, the cost and energy top split the H20 molecule took more energy than it produced when rebonded back into water vapor when the H2 was burned. Great idea, just not practical. I always hoped that other ideas of working with H2 after that would have caught on. Sadly people were so convinced that H2 was too dangerous to work with because of the Hindenburg incident. What they weren't aware is that H2 was not the big issue in that incident. It was early on in too high a concentration level to explode. It did burn but the accelerant that caused the airship to burn so quickly was the aluminum powder in the paint on the material covering the frame in which the H2 was held. All combustible gases have a high and low concentration level in which they will ignite with air. Some ranges are smaller than others. Below that range it will not ignite at all, above the range it may burn but will nor explode. High enough concentration level and it may not even burn. H2 has an LEL of 5% by volume and a UEL of 17%.
LOLQuote:
Originally Posted by redfirepearlgt