I don't buy vehicles as an investment, but I don't want to get washed on one either. Losing money on a new car is an inevitability, but the degree is to which you lose is a choice. Take for example, a new BMW 7 series vs. a Tacoma.
I think they realized that every package outside of base sasquatch was super low value, so rather than providing value with the other packages, they decreased the value on the base sasquatch. Good job Ford.
If you were to spec a base sasquatch and a big bend sasquatch with little to no options....what value is the big bend adding for that extra 5k? A plastic grill that costs exactly as much to manufacture as the base grill? The alloys you don't get because you specified the sasquatch package...
I just wanted a black diamond with a stick and mid package. Honestly, the mid package is the minimum set of items needed to bring it into the 2010s. I don't like the idea of shelling out 50k for a badlands otherwise you're stuck with an OJ povert spec Bronco with 90s tech if you want a manual...
Ford's decision making truly flabbergasts me. Both with how half baked the build and price is, and their choices in the options department. It's like the insane are running the asylum over there.
I dislike it. For one, the silhouette is remarkably similar to the 370z, giving off more of a refresh vibe than all new design. Secondly, the high belt line and wonky proportions make it a caricature of the 240. It lacks the e type/2000gt/240z elegance.
I think a base badlands with the 4cyl and manual will still be appreciably different, where the wildtrack and first editions are "warthog but inferior and not much cheaper"
I'm reminded of the zhp package on 2003-2005 bmw 3 series. Nowadays, a clean zhp is north of 20 grand used, while a non-zhp is less than 10k. If the spec speaks to enthusiasts, it will hold value contrary to what the math might suggest.
Well, they cite technical reasons for not making the sasquatch available on the manual. This is likely a gearing issue. They can't really use that, or cost as an excuse with the 33s.
I understand that there may be issues with the MT and 35s, but since they've developed the mt for the badlands with 33s, why not just slightly water down the sasquatch package for the manual transmission and offer the badlands suspension, 33s, and front/rear lockers? This would require no...
I think Toyota engines last because they design it once, and then sell it for 20 years.
The parallel, for example, would be released the Bronco with the modular 4.6 that was in the crown vic from the late 90s onwards. No one would doubt the Bronco's reliability.
That mod 4.6 and Toyota's 4.0...
Here is a pretty cool port injection setup for the 2.3 ecoboost:
Anything after the throttle body requires a check valve of some sort, you don't want intake manifold vacuum to siphon water out of the injectors, I wonder how they deal with that.
I had a water/meth setup on my GTI, but eventually moved to full e85. Water/meth is rare nowadays, as people have abandoned it for e85 for its superior performance. I've always been hesitant to run a tune so on the edge that you are reliant on the water/meth setup to prevent detonation. If...
I think I'll stick with the 2.3 even though I'm not happy about the carbon issues. I'll throw on a catch can, and maybe water/meth. I just want the manual transmission, so I'll stick to whatever engine they give me.
I just don't want to drop the coin on a Shimano 10 speed and the 2.7 purely...
Oil vapors on modern engines, from the crankcase and valve cover are sent back through the air intake. This essentially injects oil into the intake, and intake valves. In a traditional port injection setup, you wash away the oil, before it cokes on the intake valve. The DI only engines will...