I genuinely wonder what it’s like to live in your head. Hydrogen is relatively easy to refine, you can get it from water. The only difficult part is transporting it, but pressurized gasses can already be transported just fine. It’s easy to retrofit regular filling stations to accept hydrogen. They already do in California. Meanwhile your BEV is charged with fossil fuels still.
If it was so easy, it would be something that would already be getting done on a large scale. Meanwhile, it costs more to fuel a car with hydrogen than with gasoline. Also, there is the impact of transporting the hydrogen, and fossil fuels aren't the only means of electricity generation.
Yes, but because of pretty much the trends that its competitors follow. Basically following Cherokee's evolution (although it got super bland once the 5th gen released, unlike the Cherokee which lost a lot spirit as soon as the 2000s rolled up). As for the DBX, it's.... meh. The front unfortunately reminds me of the 2020 Escape, plus the unnecessarily wider grille that gives the new DBS a run for it's money. The rear has the Vantage taillights, which I always found very awkward and feel like it needs more (and especially with a crossover, where you need something popping for the rear and front to really stand out) . But the design isn't as bad as the Escape, it feels a lot bubbly and has some actually neat touches. Also, it does have a nifty interior that isn't overhauled by big infotainments or weird ass button arrangements. Not really, but they do look more similar than they had any right to anyways. With the FCA-PSA merger confirmed, there is likely a chance an rebodied 500 might end up in Opel/Vauxhall's line up though.
I still don't really see much of a connection to Ford. I guess there's something you see that I don't. I don't know if that's actually going to happen, because according to Wikipedia about the Adam. Sounds to me like they'll put less focus on small city cars and more on SUVs, so I don't know where an actual rebadged, redesigned 500 would fit in with their plan.
TBF, you don't have to transport the hydrogen. It's quite easy to produce it locally. But hydrogen storage is currently not great. Still, potential for battery/hydrogen hybridisation is pretty high.
I wouldn't exactly trust what Wikipedia is saying (and remember, pre-FCA-PSA merger so there are more possibilities now with another big corporation that can improve FCA to levels that they had yet to obtain prior to it). But this is just my speculation, no word on whether they will be able to fit in a new supermini or an Adam successor. Then again, the merger is still relatively new so any new cross-brand cars wouldn't happen from the span of the official day of the merger 'till today anyways. Also, just use rebodied if we're talking about chassis-sharing, because it's basically a different design body-wise. It technically isn't a rebadge either if the whole design is anew for a different brand, rather than a simple badge switch.
Well, considering I couldn't find any sources to backup the statement on Opel putting more focus into their SUVs, there is a possibility of it not being true.
I mean from a line-up standpoint, it is kinda true but there's also nothing stating that they will continue to stick to that mentality, as they also still have cars like Corsa, Astra, Zafira living on alongside said crossovers.
Because it has two turbos, throw enough money at parts and tuning on any car and you can beat a stock muscle car. Better for the environment is debatable. Also V6s rarely sound good, I6s are where it's at. EE made a video explaining how more manufacturers are going with I6s because there are fewer V8 options to whack 2 cylinders off of and more I4s to add 2 cylinders to. A silver lining in the cloud of I4 base models.
i6 can be more efficient than V6 too, half the number of camshafts and dropping the drive system for them reduces the friction losses. But of course makes a long engine that's quite hard to package versus the more cube like v8, V6 and even turbocharged i4
I ran a new 2020 Explorer until the brakes overheated. Turbo i4 in an explorer is all kinds of lame but it moves decently. The sound is my biggest issue with the 2.3 EcoBoost. I don't want to hear a muffled i4 in a large SUV. You can hear a sort of grinding/howling noise during braking that gets worse as the brakes get hot. Pads were smoking by the end of it. 2:35 for the most in focus pull and clear sound of the unhappy brake pads.
Ford fucked up when they didn’t put the 3.3L V6 from the F-150 in them as base. That silly little turbo food blender belongs hooked to a hybrid powertrain. The 3.3 makes 295hp/265lb-ft, the turbo blender 9000 makes 280hp/310lb-ft. They made the exact same mistake with this as they did with the Ranger. The 3.3L is a good, strong N/A motor with decent fuel economy. It should be the base power plant, with the more efficient 4 banger hooked to a hybrid system as an option. The base price of the Explorer would easily be about $3k-4k less.
The problem is the tax on vehicle is based on displacement, not fuel economy. To get the same power rating of the 3.3V6, the 2.3I4 need to be tuned aggressively. In the (economy) 3.3L you de-tune the engine lower the cam profile, increase the compression ratio and increase the AFR to lean. In the (gas-guzzling) 2.3L I4 you hook a big turbo, the compression ratio have to be decreased to prevent knocking, which reduce the combustion efficiency, and the enrich of the air-fuel mixture to get more power at the cost of lower economy. The result is the 2.3L is less efficient and more turbo laggy than the 3.3L NA engine.
