You're joking right? They may make one someday, but all they know how to do is stuff Hellcats in anything that will fit. While Ford has been planning for the future. It's a gutsy call on Ford's part, but may pay off handsomely.Why isnt there a Dodge "E-Charger" or a "E-Challenger"?
Yep, Ford has had the best selling pickup forever.The real game changer will be the F-150 Lightning. If it lives up to all the hype, Ram and Chevy will be playing catch-up for several years. GM at least has a plan, Ram because of very poor management opinions on electrics, is years behind GM. They will be the new steam engine companies still promoting the benefits of coal powered steam engines over diesel powered locomotives in the late 40s. None survived, even ones that converted later.
There were people posting here that were sure the Ecoboost engine would kill Ford's truck sales.Yep, Ford has had the best selling pickup forever.
Will they be able to keep that record going with the F-150 Lightning?
That will be the real test for Ford.
I'd like to see Stellantis offering both PHEV and EV versions of most of their vehicles. Even with range and infrastructure where it is today, the American 2-car family would get along just fine with an EV and PHEV - the EV for regular commuter duty, the PHEV for long trips. IMO the biggest holdup for EVs right now is purchase price, which probably is addressed by new battery tech you mentioned.I still believe until there is new battery tech and a solid recharging network, the best answer for most is a plug-in Hybrid and that should be very doable for Stellantis in the near term. That tech can be sold to the masses. Full electric power for all your around town errands, with gas engine for longer trips or extra power/sound. Those have to be close to release in all the larger vehicles I would think?
FCA was far behind on electrification. That was the other benefit of the merger because PSA was much further ahead.I still believe until there is new battery tech and a solid recharging network, the best answer for most is a plug-in Hybrid and that should be very doable for Stellantis in the near term. That tech can be sold to the masses. Full electric power for all your around town errands, with gas engine for longer trips or extra power/sound. Those have to be close to release in all the larger vehicles I would think?
You really aren't taking into account how Americans buy vehicles.I suspect most of the Mustang is based on Rivian’s advanced technology, but that just means Ford was smart enough to dive into the market at the right time - or they just assumed Bezos was smart and did what he did. Amazon agreed to buy 100,000 Rivian vans before Ford started their huge buy-in. Marchionne’s strategy was like Daimler’s—wait until the dust is settled and partner with someone. I'm not necessarily critical of that, since it's an awful lot cheaper and less risky, but it also means the company will be a marginal player ten years down the road. Government regulations or no government regulations, given that most people buy ordinary gasoline powered cars and use them to commute under 40 miles, I'd assume electric would be the norm eventually no matter what.
I agree and so does Toyota.You really aren't taking into account how Americans buy vehicles.
Most Europeans after '97 bought a subcompact hatch with a small Diesel engine. I would expect in Europe BEVs will become the norm.
In the US the same kind of buying behavior would give us a fleet that was 90% compact 4 cylinder cars. Instead we get a fleet that is 18% pickups, 22% conventional cars, 50% SUV/CUV, and 10% others (vans, minivans, sports cars).
From American buying habits you can be certain that PHEVs will become the norm in the US. People will want a car that has the capability to take a road trip in remote locations, even if they only use that capability a few times a year, or never.
Yup, hydrogen will be big in Class 6-8 trucks and such—and seagoing ships. Toyota is in the lead there. Hydrogen did not make much sense until wind turbine and solar costs plummeted; now we have grids with overcapacity in renewables (which are relatively inexpensive). It makes sense to me that one would build double the wind and solar one needs in a particular grid, and then use them to create hydrogen fuel when they are not needed to keep things going. Right now the main thing they do to counter fluctuations in power demand is they keep nuclear, coal, etc going, and shut off the turbines, because it's easy. Instead, they could keep the turbines on and (a) fluctuate output of nat-gas plants, which is easy on the more modern designs, and (b) generate hydrogen with the extra, varying demand instead of varying capacity.Another source out there is hydrogen. Not sure where it's going, but it leaves lithium in the dust in power density.