Last year for V8 2024 (and Mach-E discussion) via Ford Performance conference call

[IronG]

LOL.......

Funny you should mention that. My daughter who just moved to Myrtle Beach went to register her Honda hybrid. South Carolina has a $60 use fee for hybrids and $100 for EV's (both for two years). The reason......because the state want hybrid and EV users to pay their fair share of the gas tax used for road maintenance. Since hybrids and EV's use less or no gas the state came up with the ludicrous fee. I wonder how many other states do this.

Not sure, but 60 and 100 for two years is way too low. The States and Fed are getting billions in taxes off of gasoline. I am not surprised they are low or non existent as it would severely handicap hybrids and EV's. Like other taxes, they will increase gradually over time where people will complain about it. I would gladly pay 100 every two years rather than the ~33 cents per gallon I pay now.

Sponsored

 

[nrc]

The average price of an automobile in the US in 2019 is $37K. Cars that used to be in the $20K-25k range are now $30K-$35K. There will be affordable EV's under the average range within the next few years. And that is not even taking into account Federal and State tax breaks.

The tax breaks are going to necessarily dry up. The carrot is being replaced by the stick. The handouts will end and some states are already starting to add taxes to account for the fact that EVs aren't paying fuel taxes.

The truth is that whether consumers believe in ManBearPig or not, relatively few of them are willing to sacrifice anything in their own transportation choices in order to appease him. Ford and other manufacturers aren't building these things because they've seen the truth and the light of ManBearPig. They're being forced to build them by a church of true believers consisting of ten states comprising less than %20 of the the US population. If you're going to sell cars in the these states at all you must sacrifice to ManBearPig. You must build ZEVs at a rate that is completely unjustified by consumer interest and then you have to convince consumers that they want them.

Manufacturers are developing completely new platforms and very expensive new technologies for which the market does not yet exist. They're having to eat the cost and build them in numbers that they may not be able to sell profitably. That's why all the auto manufacturers now profess to truly, deeply believe in ManBearPig and the urgent need for you, yes you, and you, and you, and you to buy these things right now to save our planet.

This is a big part of the reason Ford was willing to trash the Mustang name with this hail mary mom van. More EVs are going to be built than anyone wants to buy right now and the companies left standing when the music stops are going to eat billions in development costs and billions in regulatory fines if they want keep selling in those ten states.

 

[Norm Peterson]

The point that is trying to be made here is that an EV does not have to replicate that....

Nor should it. For example, fake ICE sounds coming from an EV should attract the same sort of scorn that playing a musclecar-at-the-dragstrip sound track from a 1.5-liter Honda would today.

An EV provides sensations (not really sounds obviously) in the form of massive accelerations (sometimes even brutal in the case of the new roadster). So the point is, EVs should not have to replicate the same sounds and sensations as a V8, they shine in other areas that people really need to experience to understand...

First off, this massive acceleration is the kool-aid intended to get enthusiasts on board. Get people all starry-eyed over the easy-to-compare numbers so they forget everything else. Unfortunately, that approach seems to be working far too well.

What are these other areas, and what if they don't appeal to everybody? I'm honestly curious about exactly what other aspects of driving would be more appealing in an EV than in an ICE car.


Norm

 

[Norm Peterson]

Surprise. Predictions and estimations are not that accurate.... Doesn't mean the science behind it is false....

Just incomplete and not fully thought out. Ripe for use in a world where scaremongering is an accepted tactic for lots of things, regardless of how good the original science might have been conducted.


Norm

 

[shogun32]

I'm honestly curious about exactly what other aspects of driving would be more appealing in an EV than in an ICE car.

aside from smelling my own farts (or the bag of fresh manure in the frunk) it's getting high off my own righteous smug? (I'm channeling South Park season 10 episode 2)

Listening to the 12 speaker audio at modest volume instead of having to drown out the anguished cries of dinosaurs souls being ushered to a fiery death.

The other would be knowing that the price for a '67 camaro black panther would be 5000 instead of 65,000 since gasoline would be outlawed and no vehicles would be allowed to be owned that couldn't pass 50mg/liter in C02 emissions without buying the carbon indulgence (it is a religion after all) of $10,000/mg.
(watching Mecum Auction Chicago day 3)

 

[stangman638]

there is no green new deal, will never happen, the fact it was mentioned shows someone at Ford is a demented libtard. ... /closethread

 

[Silver Bullitt]

That website quotes articles from 30 to 80 years ago. Hardly relevant today. And largely tilted to the "there is no problem" side.

If you really want to know the effects of global warming go somewhere that the people are really being hurt by it. I was in Alaska last year and believe me when I tell you they, the Alaskan people, understand the problem and they knowingly admit it exists. Up there it's not a political issue it is one of surviving. The heat this past spring and summer is like nothing they have ever experienced. The effects of that heat have been devastating to the Permafrost.

We down here in the lower 48 can argue that all of this is made up political BS. Ask the people who are living it. You will hear the real story.

I believe the author includes those articles to note how "scientists" (and I use that term loosely because true science does do good things for us) have been screaming "the sky is falling" for quite some time every time data starts to trend in a different direction.

As several here have said more than once, it's not that we don't agree that the earth cools and warms in cycles, but it's the natural evolution of the planet. It was doing it long before we got here, it's doing it now, and it will be doing it long after we are gone. And, any human that thinks they can change that is fooling themselves.

Many of these "climate science gurus" select and even manipulate data to support their predictions to justify their own existence and agendas. And, I doubt many of the Alaskans you spoke with were here in the 1930's and 1940's when the last warming cycle was present.

You and a few others here can believe what you want. But, if you want to tackle a man made problem that we CAN solve, stop drinking bottled water. We ARE polluting our planet with all this plastic that wasn't even a thing 25 years ago.

 

[Norm Peterson]

You literally have no F*cking idea how these climate models and mathematical models work do you? It absolutely does not mean the science is false. It means they missed a variable or overestimated the strength of another....

To many people, that does make it wrong. Errors of omission are still errors, and we have no way of knowing today whether what we've been overlooking or flat-out missing is negligible or highly significant.

This is a comment on the process, not on the science itself or on any of the known numbers.


Norm

 

[Silver Bullitt]

It really pays to read all the way to the bottom.
In the Antarctic, sea ice is in the midst of its sharp seasonal decline. It is currently tracking near 2017 levels, the record low year for minimum extent. November extent was 14.89 million square kilometers (5.75 million square miles), which is 1.01 million square kilometers (390,000 square miles) below the 1981 to 2010 average. It is the second lowest November extent in the satellite record, about 670,000 square kilometers (259,000 square miles) above November 2016.

Yes, and it also pays to know that 1981 was just after a several decade long cooling period that subsided circa 1979, which ironically is the date that the so called "experts" started using in their current global warming data models. Can you start to see what just might be going on here?

 

[EcoVert]

nrc said
The tax breaks are going to necessarily dry up. The carrot is being replaced by the stick.

https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/IF11017.pdf

Federal EV Tax Credit Phase Out Tracker By Automaker

https://evadoption.com/ev-sales/federal-ev-tax-credit-phase-out-tracker-by-automaker/

Electric vehicle sales plummet in Ontario after rebate cancellation

https://globalnews.ca/news/6298949/electric-vehicle-sales-down-ontario/

 

[EcoVert]

Electric vehicle sales plummet in Ontario after rebate cancellation

The only way I would buy a $50k plus EV is with the tax credit with out it I'll stay with my Mustang and Ranger.

 

[zackmd1]

If the predictions are inaccurate that means the mathematical models are incorrect. Scientists need to be open to evidence that either proves or disproves their theories. And global warming is a theory - not a fact.

The difference between "the sky is falling" and a big nothing burger is in the mathematical models and their accuracy.

If you understand my point you will realize that I don't want to get rid of V8s or spend trillions on "science" if the predictions aren't accurate.

Until we get predictions that actually come true I don't believe that the models are correct.

Don't treat this climate stuff like it's a religion you have faith in despite having no evidence. Treat it like a science experiment. Are we getting the results we think we should be getting? Not so far.

So we need to be careful here.... The way I see it, there are two sections to climate change. There is the section about the predictions and what occurs as a result of climate change which we can absolutely debate about due to the nature of inaccurate climate models and the massive amount of variables that play into them. I have no problem debating this topic.

The second part is the EVIDENCE for climate change. This includes data taken from ice cores and various other sources that fairly accurately tell us about Earth's past climate. That data really can't be argued.... That data is also what tells us that Earth is experiencing a MASSIVE increase in the RATE of warming unlike anything within the last millennium. A reason for that is us. It's asinine to argue that climate change is not real and that we are not at least A CAUSE for it.

 

[zackmd1]

First off, this massive acceleration is the kool-aid intended to get enthusiasts on board. Get people all starry-eyed over the easy-to-compare numbers so they forget everything else. Unfortunately, that approach seems to be working far too well.

What are these other areas, and what if they don't appeal to everybody? I'm honestly curious about exactly what other aspects of driving would be more appealing in an EV than in an ICE car.

I am going to ask again because I have forgotten your previous answer.... Have you ever truly experienced an EV like a Tesla? The acceleration is real.... The INSTANT power is real. It is not "kool-aid" and points directly to my comment about having to actually experience one to understand it. Other benefits include true variable AWD, greatly improved handling and weight distribution, much better packaging (you can now make a mid engine sports car look without the mid engine engineering and platform, etc...) It frees up design to do things that currently were not possible (within budget).

 

[shogun32]

Have you ever truly experienced an EV like a Tesla? The acceleration is real.... The INSTANT power is real.

Even if my GT takes 16 seconds to get to 60mph and the Tesla can do it in 4, I will still row my 6 speed and listen to that glorious engine sound and revel in the clouds of C02 spewing out the tailpipe knowing I'm saving the planet by producing an abundance of plant food. You could give me a Tesla 3 for free and I would drive my #3 screw driver thru the battery pack (or fire some 9mm rounds into it) and take a sawzall to the wiring and set it on fire to burn to a pile of ash before I'd consider driving it.

That's the amount of utter contempt I have for Tesla Musk the man, his company, and the brazen scientific fraud that is AGW "science" and the rank hypocrisy of the political actors likewise involved.

 

[zackmd1]

Even if my GT takes 16 seconds to get to 60mph and the Tesla can do it in 4, I will still row my 6 speed and listen to that glorious engine sound and revel in the clouds of C02 spewing out the tailpipe knowing I'm saving the planet by producing an abundance of plant food. You could give me a Tesla 3 for free and I would drive my #3 screw driver thru the battery pack (or fire some 9mm rounds into it) and take a sawzall to the wiring and set it on fire to burn to a pile of ash before I'd consider driving it.

That's the amount of utter contempt I have for Tesla the man, his company, and the brazen scientific fraud that is the AGW "science" and the rank hypocrisy of the political actors likewise involved.

Sponsored