Jump to content
  • William Maley
    William Maley

    Fuel Economy Figures Come Out On CX-5 Diesel... And it Isn't So Good

      Not much of an improvement over the gas engine

    It seems like ages since Mazda announced plans to bring over a diesel engine. Many things have transpired since then with various delays and the Volkswagen diesel emission scandal. While the company said the diesel engine was still in the cards, we started to think it was as real as bigfoot or the loch ness monster. But the engine is one step closer to reality as the EPA has posted the fuel economy figures for the CX-5 diesel.

    For the front-wheel variant, the CX-5 diesel will return 28 City/31 Highway/29 Combined. All-wheel drive see a slight drop to 27/30/28. Major improvement over gas model, right? Not really. The FWD gas model does trail the diesel in the city by three, but there is only a one mpg difference in the highway and the combined figure is the same. The AWD gas model is pretty much the same story; three mpg difference in the city, two mpg difference on the highway, and the same figure for combined.

    It gets even worse if we compare it to the Chevrolet Equinox and GMC Terrain Diesel. In FWD guise, EPA figures stand at 28 City/39 Highway/32 Combined. AWD models return 28/38/32.

    We're guessing that new emissions equipment and harder testing likely affected CX-5 diesel's fuel economy figure. Mazda might sell the diesel engine as a performance upgrade - the 2.2L turbodiesel produces 170 horsepower and 310 pound-feet of torque. 

    No timeframe has been given on when the CX-5 diesel will finally go on sale.

    Source: EPA

    Edited by William Maley



    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    Holy sh*t that's bad. I would have expected Mazda to have gotten 40+highway on the FWD version. 

    This only makes me more curious as to what they'll return in the real world because diesels tend to do better than their ratings in passenger vehicles(not trucks made for work). 

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Unfortunately, few extra mpg are not going to compensate the higher cost of diesel.

    I wish Mazda would just cut the losses and not waste money and resources bringing the diesel to US.  

    • Upvote 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Time for Mazda to stop wasting R&D dollars on a dead animal. Diesel is dead and at those figures dead on arrival in this market. They would do much better to bring in a Plug-in Hybrid with this engine as a tuned generator for that and would get a much better MPG rating and probably sell. 

    This stupidity is what will kill Mazda.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Wait, 310 lb-ft of torque? That's probably also at a very low RPM.... that thing will feel fast

    That's more than just about all naturally aspirated V6es, and even more than the 2.3T Ecoboost in the Mustang.  

    Yes, this will be the performance option. That's the real story here.  Performance upgrade without a fuel economy penalty. 

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    3 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

    Wait, 310 lb-ft of torque? That's probably also at a very low RPM.... that thing will feel fast

    That's more than just about all naturally aspirated V6es, and even more than the 2.3T Ecoboost in the Mustang.  

    Yes, this will be the performance option. That's the real story here.  Performance upgrade without a fuel economy penalty. 

    Somehow I doubt it will be substantially faster than NA CX-5

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    Just now, ykX said:

    Somehow I doubt it will be substantially faster than NA CX-5

    Why? The current CX5 isn't all that fast.   But even still, it will feel faster.  It probably has more torque than any other crossover in the class, and even classes above it. 

    It is only 5 ft-lb less than then 2014 Suburban 5.3 V8 with a lot less bulk to haul around. 

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    45 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

    and even more than the 2.3T Ecoboost in the Mustang.  

    That is not correct, sir. The 2.3T in the Mustang makes 310hp and 350lb-ft. 

    The pre-refreshed 2.3T in the Mustang was 320lb-ft. 

    The 2.3T in the MKC(I know it's a more pricey class) puts down 305lb-ft, FWIW. 

    The numbers are significantly higher than the Terrain's 1.6T diesel making 137p and 240tq. That's slow as balls so hopefully this should be a lot better AND achieve pretty dang good fuel economy. 

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    performance upgrade, or actual towing ease?

    i think these are class 2 rated....nvm, 1 ton towing. but anyway... much easier towing.

    aren't the gm twins... using a smaller displacement and more gears?  can't compare apples to apples, but i understand, intended market and such.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    310 lb-ft is a lot, especially in this segment, so it should be the performance vehicle of the class but what will it cost?  It will probably have a 0-60 time in the high 6’s, we aren’t talking massive speed and I feel like that diesel will add $3,000 in cost.  Could have got better mpg with a mild hybrid system.

    Keep in mind the Mercedes GLK diesel had 369 lb-ft and did 0-60 in 7.4  or 7.2 seconds, it wasn’t really fast despite all the torque.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    29 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

    310 lb-ft is a lot, especially in this segment, so it should be the performance vehicle of the class but what will it cost?  It will probably have a 0-60 time in the high 6’s, we aren’t talking massive speed and I feel like that diesel will add $3,000 in cost.  Could have got better mpg with a mild hybrid system.

    Keep in mind the Mercedes GLK diesel had 369 lb-ft and did 0-60 in 7.4  or 7.2 seconds, it wasn’t really fast despite all the torque.

    Yet faster than most auto's that are in the 10 sec range. I think many will think it is fast. I just think it is too little too late for the added cost.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    12 hours ago, smk4565 said:

    310 lb-ft is a lot, especially in this segment, so it should be the performance vehicle of the class but what will it cost?  It will probably have a 0-60 time in the high 6’s, we aren’t talking massive speed and I feel like that diesel will add $3,000 in cost.  Could have got better mpg with a mild hybrid system.

    Keep in mind the Mercedes GLK diesel had 369 lb-ft and did 0-60 in 7.4  or 7.2 seconds, it wasn’t really fast despite all the torque.

    We've gotten a really distorted view of what is "fast" anymore. 7.3 seconds the old Impala SS  0-60 time and that is more than most people can even handle. 

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    15 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

    We've gotten a really distorted view of what is "fast" anymore. 7.3 seconds the old Impala SS  0-60 time and that is more than most people can even handle. 

    That is true, most of these small crossovers are in the 8-9 second range 0-60 so if the diesel CX-5 does it in 7 seconds it will seem fast compared to them.   But when a Camry V6 can do 0-60 in 5.8 seconds anything over 6 seems slow to me.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    On 8/10/2018 at 12:03 PM, smk4565 said:

    That is true, most of these small crossovers are in the 8-9 second range 0-60 so if the diesel CX-5 does it in 7 seconds it will seem fast compared to them.   But when a Camry V6 can do 0-60 in 5.8 seconds anything over 6 seems slow to me.

    Most Camrys aren't V6s... they're 2.5 liters or hybrids in the 7.9 second range. You always want to gravitate to the fastest version of a car when in reality most people buy the base engine. 

    But here's stat for you... the Pacifica Hybrid does 0-60 in 7.4 seconds and feels ridiculously fast for what it is. 

    • Like 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    34 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

    Most Camrys aren't V6s... they're 2.5 liters or hybrids in the 7.9 second range. You always want to gravitate to the fastest version of a car when in reality most people buy the base engine. 

    But here's stat for you... the Pacifica Hybrid does 0-60 in 7.4 seconds and feels ridiculously fast for what it is. 

    I find it interesting that we have gone from a society of people that were used to pretty much everything being a 12 to 15 seconds to 55 mph to a under 10 seconds but above 8 seconds is slow when in reality, auto's that can get to 60/65 in mid 7 seconds or less is very fast and more than enough for most people as the 5 seconds and below is scarry to allot of drivers.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    11 minutes ago, dfelt said:

    I find it interesting that we have gone from a society of people that were used to pretty much everything being a 12 to 15 seconds to 55 mph to a under 10 seconds but above 8 seconds is slow when in reality, auto's that can get to 60/65 in mid 7 seconds or less is very fast and more than enough for most people as the 5 seconds and below is scarry to allot of drivers.

    Yeah...back in the day I thought my 5.0 Mustang was quick at 0-60 in 6.2 seconds.  It was certainly quicker than other cars I had in the 80s-90s (Escort diesel, Bronco II, Mustang LX 2.3).

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    2 hours ago, Cubical-aka-Moltar said:

    Yeah...back in the day I thought my 5.0 Mustang was quick at 0-60 in 6.2 seconds.  It was certainly quicker than other cars I had in the 80s-90s (Escort diesel, Bronco II, Mustang LX 2.3).

    That escort diesel 0-60 was listed as "maybe", the Mustang 2.3 was measured with a sundial. 

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    1 minute ago, Drew Dowdell said:

    That escort diesel 0-60 was listed as "maybe", the Mustang 2.3 was measured with a sundial. 

    Yeah, both were slugs.   The Escort was a 5spd manual, the Mustang a 4spd manual, and the Bronco II a 5spd manual.    The GT is a 5spd manual.   A bit of trivia...my first 4 cars were '84, '86, '87 and '88 model years, and all Fords w/ manuals...

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites


    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Similar Content

    • By Drew Dowdell
      2019 Mazda CX-5 Signature
      Mazda is on a mission lately to make their products feel more premium. They have been tuning their vehicles to be quieter and more refined in order to give them an air that they are above their class. This second generation of the Mazda CX-5 debuted for the 2017 model year with a 2.5-liter naturally aspirated 4-cylinder producing 187 horsepower and 186 lb.-ft of torque.  For 2019, Mazda added the 2.5-liter turbocharged engine from the CX-9. On regular gas, the engine produces 227 horsepower and 310 lb.-ft of torque, but if you fill it up with 93 octane, the horsepower figure bumps up to 250.  Available only on the Grand Touring and Signature trims, the 2.5-T makes the CX-5 the compact crossover with the most available torque.  Mazda sent a CX-5 Signature for me to try for a week to see what I thought.
      There’s no replacement for displacement… maybe
      The biggest CX-5 news for 2019 is the engine options. There is the 2.5-T mentioned above and a 2.2-liter turbo diesel. Both are exciting entries into a relatively conservative segment.  The 2.5-T is the second-largest displacement engine available in the segment, behind the 3.2 liter V6 in the Jeep Cherokee.  This 4-cylinder puts out quite a bit more torque than the bigger V6, though the Jeep produces more horsepower (271 @ 6,500 rpm). Even among 4-cylinders, this is the largest displacement you can get, but none of those others offering 2.5 liters also offers a turbocharger. This engine is rated by the EPA to get 22 city / 27 highway.  I got about 24 mpg in mostly city driving. Zero to 60 is a claimed 6.2 seconds.
      Under normal driving, the engine is quiet and composed, with torque coming on quickly when called for. When the pedal is mashed at speed, the CX-5 leaps forward with minimal turbo lag and gives off a strong growl from under the hood. The only time you can really feel any lag in the turbo is if you are starting from a dead stop. Overall, you never feel without power at the tip of your toes and the sounds, and lack of sounds, from the engine room is quiet and refined.
      One area the CX-5 falls behind on is in the transmission department. Although the transmission offers smooth shift and is willing to downshift when called upon, a 6-speed automatic almost feels anachronistic in a time when all of its direct competition is sporting 8 or 9 speeds. I never thought there would come a day when 6-forward gears aren’t enough, but here we are. Adding 2 or 3 more gears to the CX-5 would further liven up the already sporty crossover and help keep the turbocharged engine firmly in the good places of its torque band.
      Ride: Al dente – Firm but tender
      If there is a brand that Mazda is looking to emulate here by being premium without the premium badge, it would likely be BMW.  The ride is firm, but not so harsh as to spill your latte. Steering is on the heavy side with precise control and great on-center feel.  Body roll is minimal. Pushing the CX-5 into corners is fun and the standard G-Vectoring Control Plus makes sure you stay planted where you intended to be.  The i-ACTIV all-wheel-drive mostly runs in front-wheel-drive mode until microscopic amounts of wheel slip are detected and then some torque is instantly transferred to the rear wheels.  Mazda programs the AWD system to always have at least a little bit of torque going to the rear in order for the transfer of torque to happen faster. 
      It’s what’s inside that matter most
      Inside the CX-5, the premium story continues. There is a distinct lack of cheap plastic even in places where they could probably get away with it. The dash and door panels are made of soft-touch material and there is a tasteful amount of chrome trim. Though the seats look black in pictures, they are actually a very dark brown that Mazda calls Caturra Brown Nappa leather. This leather is a feature of the Signature trim level and they are both heated and ventilated.  Rear passengers get heated outboard seats as well, controlled from inside the fold-down center armrest. Also, a feature of the Signature trim is the real wood dash inlay and ambient cabin lighting. The seats in the CX-5 are very comfortable with just the right combination of support and cushion. They would be most welcome companions on a long road trip. The rear seats are fairly flat and do not offer a lot of legroom.  There is no adjustment fore and aft.  Wind and tire noise has been kept to a minimum.
      There are 4 USB ports, two in the up front armrest and two in the rear armrest. Only one of them allows a connection to the infotainment system.  Oddly, the USB ports don’t seem to put out much juice as my phones were very slow to charge from them.
      The infotainment system is another area similar to BMW.  The unit is controlled by a large dial in the center console or touch screen controls. I found the touch aspect to be laggy and a long reach, so I found myself using the dial. Using the dial to navigate is simple enough, but the menus and layout of the screen could probably use a re-think.  Apple CarPlay and Android Auto are both here, for some reason only Apple CarPlay can be activated by touch. Operating either system is frustrating with the dial however, this is especially true for Android Auto which I found frustrating to use without touch screen functionality. At least, unlike BMW, Mazda doesn’t charge you an extra subscription fee to use them. Sound from the Bose speakers was clear, but not especially great.
      There was a time when people mostly bought crossovers for the utility of hauling lots of bulky stuff home from the store, however, these days are different. Now, crossovers are a fashion statement.  Still, the CX-5 has 59.6 cubic feet of space with the rear seats folded and 30.9 cubic feet with the seats up.  That is at the high end of mid-pack in the segment with the Honda CR-V being the leader, while the Toyota RAV-4, Chevy Equinox, and Ford Escape all have less. 
      Do you need a safe space? This may be it.
      The Mazda CX-5 Signature comes with a whole host of safety equipment and the center of it all is the heads-up display that keeps the driver informed.  Blind Spot Monitoring, Lane-Keep Assist, and Radar Cruise Control, all have status lights in the heads-up display.  I found the blind spot monitoring system to be especially helpful when I was backing out onto a busy street with limited visibility.  Radar Cruise control is one of my favorite systems of all and I feel it should be standard equipment on all cars. The CX-5 can even read speed limit and stop signs as you approach, changing and updating the local regulations in the heads up display.
      The Signature also comes with active headlights that turn when you turn to help see around corners. They helped me spot a deer on the side of the road I normally would not have seen.
      The Verdict
      The CX-5 Signature is the top of the CX-5 line, so naturally, the price is reflected in that. With an MSRP of $36,890 before any options, the CX-5 may seem pricey, but it comes with everything you could possibly want.  However, when you compare it to other small crossovers with similar equipment it actually ends up comparing favorably to others in its class. I priced out Jeep Cherokee Overland with the 2.0T and technology group and the MSRP is $41,685. A GMC Terrain Denali with all the same option boxes checked? $41,430.  A Honda CR-V can’t even be equipped like the CX-5 because there is no up-level engine option, yet it still rings up to $38,147.
      Overall, Mazda has produced a handsome, sporty, fun to drive crossover with enough utility to remain competitive. They’ve loaded it with safety equipment and kept the price in check. It is definitely worth a look.
       

      View full article
    • By Drew Dowdell
      2019 Mazda CX-5 Signature
      Mazda is on a mission lately to make their products feel more premium. They have been tuning their vehicles to be quieter and more refined in order to give them an air that they are above their class. This second generation of the Mazda CX-5 debuted for the 2017 model year with a 2.5-liter naturally aspirated 4-cylinder producing 187 horsepower and 186 lb.-ft of torque.  For 2019, Mazda added the 2.5-liter turbocharged engine from the CX-9. On regular gas, the engine produces 227 horsepower and 310 lb.-ft of torque, but if you fill it up with 93 octane, the horsepower figure bumps up to 250.  Available only on the Grand Touring and Signature trims, the 2.5-T makes the CX-5 the compact crossover with the most available torque.  Mazda sent a CX-5 Signature for me to try for a week to see what I thought.
      There’s no replacement for displacement… maybe
      The biggest CX-5 news for 2019 is the engine options. There is the 2.5-T mentioned above and a 2.2-liter turbo diesel. Both are exciting entries into a relatively conservative segment.  The 2.5-T is the second-largest displacement engine available in the segment, behind the 3.2 liter V6 in the Jeep Cherokee.  This 4-cylinder puts out quite a bit more torque than the bigger V6, though the Jeep produces more horsepower (271 @ 6,500 rpm). Even among 4-cylinders, this is the largest displacement you can get, but none of those others offering 2.5 liters also offers a turbocharger. This engine is rated by the EPA to get 22 city / 27 highway.  I got about 24 mpg in mostly city driving. Zero to 60 is a claimed 6.2 seconds.
      Under normal driving, the engine is quiet and composed, with torque coming on quickly when called for. When the pedal is mashed at speed, the CX-5 leaps forward with minimal turbo lag and gives off a strong growl from under the hood. The only time you can really feel any lag in the turbo is if you are starting from a dead stop. Overall, you never feel without power at the tip of your toes and the sounds, and lack of sounds, from the engine room is quiet and refined.
      One area the CX-5 falls behind on is in the transmission department. Although the transmission offers smooth shift and is willing to downshift when called upon, a 6-speed automatic almost feels anachronistic in a time when all of its direct competition is sporting 8 or 9 speeds. I never thought there would come a day when 6-forward gears aren’t enough, but here we are. Adding 2 or 3 more gears to the CX-5 would further liven up the already sporty crossover and help keep the turbocharged engine firmly in the good places of its torque band.
      Ride: Al dente – Firm but tender
      If there is a brand that Mazda is looking to emulate here by being premium without the premium badge, it would likely be BMW.  The ride is firm, but not so harsh as to spill your latte. Steering is on the heavy side with precise control and great on-center feel.  Body roll is minimal. Pushing the CX-5 into corners is fun and the standard G-Vectoring Control Plus makes sure you stay planted where you intended to be.  The i-ACTIV all-wheel-drive mostly runs in front-wheel-drive mode until microscopic amounts of wheel slip are detected and then some torque is instantly transferred to the rear wheels.  Mazda programs the AWD system to always have at least a little bit of torque going to the rear in order for the transfer of torque to happen faster. 
      It’s what’s inside that matter most
      Inside the CX-5, the premium story continues. There is a distinct lack of cheap plastic even in places where they could probably get away with it. The dash and door panels are made of soft-touch material and there is a tasteful amount of chrome trim. Though the seats look black in pictures, they are actually a very dark brown that Mazda calls Caturra Brown Nappa leather. This leather is a feature of the Signature trim level and they are both heated and ventilated.  Rear passengers get heated outboard seats as well, controlled from inside the fold-down center armrest. Also, a feature of the Signature trim is the real wood dash inlay and ambient cabin lighting. The seats in the CX-5 are very comfortable with just the right combination of support and cushion. They would be most welcome companions on a long road trip. The rear seats are fairly flat and do not offer a lot of legroom.  There is no adjustment fore and aft.  Wind and tire noise has been kept to a minimum.
      There are 4 USB ports, two in the up front armrest and two in the rear armrest. Only one of them allows a connection to the infotainment system.  Oddly, the USB ports don’t seem to put out much juice as my phones were very slow to charge from them.
      The infotainment system is another area similar to BMW.  The unit is controlled by a large dial in the center console or touch screen controls. I found the touch aspect to be laggy and a long reach, so I found myself using the dial. Using the dial to navigate is simple enough, but the menus and layout of the screen could probably use a re-think.  Apple CarPlay and Android Auto are both here, for some reason only Apple CarPlay can be activated by touch. Operating either system is frustrating with the dial however, this is especially true for Android Auto which I found frustrating to use without touch screen functionality. At least, unlike BMW, Mazda doesn’t charge you an extra subscription fee to use them. Sound from the Bose speakers was clear, but not especially great.
      There was a time when people mostly bought crossovers for the utility of hauling lots of bulky stuff home from the store, however, these days are different. Now, crossovers are a fashion statement.  Still, the CX-5 has 59.6 cubic feet of space with the rear seats folded and 30.9 cubic feet with the seats up.  That is at the high end of mid-pack in the segment with the Honda CR-V being the leader, while the Toyota RAV-4, Chevy Equinox, and Ford Escape all have less. 
      Do you need a safe space? This may be it.
      The Mazda CX-5 Signature comes with a whole host of safety equipment and the center of it all is the heads-up display that keeps the driver informed.  Blind Spot Monitoring, Lane-Keep Assist, and Radar Cruise Control, all have status lights in the heads-up display.  I found the blind spot monitoring system to be especially helpful when I was backing out onto a busy street with limited visibility.  Radar Cruise control is one of my favorite systems of all and I feel it should be standard equipment on all cars. The CX-5 can even read speed limit and stop signs as you approach, changing and updating the local regulations in the heads up display.
      The Signature also comes with active headlights that turn when you turn to help see around corners. They helped me spot a deer on the side of the road I normally would not have seen.
      The Verdict
      The CX-5 Signature is the top of the CX-5 line, so naturally, the price is reflected in that. With an MSRP of $36,890 before any options, the CX-5 may seem pricey, but it comes with everything you could possibly want.  However, when you compare it to other small crossovers with similar equipment it actually ends up comparing favorably to others in its class. I priced out Jeep Cherokee Overland with the 2.0T and technology group and the MSRP is $41,685. A GMC Terrain Denali with all the same option boxes checked? $41,430.  A Honda CR-V can’t even be equipped like the CX-5 because there is no up-level engine option, yet it still rings up to $38,147.
      Overall, Mazda has produced a handsome, sporty, fun to drive crossover with enough utility to remain competitive. They’ve loaded it with safety equipment and kept the price in check. It is definitely worth a look.
       
  • Posts

    • Absolutely. If you're committing to a full blown EV, you might as well commit to the proper charging setup. 
    • Exterior looks like a scaled down Maxima.
    • Los Angeles - Buick introduced the Buick Encore GX to the U.S. at the Los Angeles Auto Show. The Encore GX is Buick's 4th entry into the crossover segment and sits slightly above the Encore in size and price.  The Encore GX will come with a host of standard safety features such as:  Forward Collision Alert Automatic Emergency Braking Front Pedestrian Braking Lane Keep Assist with Lane Departure Warning Following Distance Indicator IntelliBeam headlamps with automatically-adjusting high/low beams Available safety features depending on trim level will include:  Rear Park Assist Rear Cross Traffic Alert Lane Change Alert with Side Blind Zone Alert Rear Camera Mirror, provides a wide, less obstructed rear view while parking and driving Hands-Free Power Liftgate with logo projection, one of only two vehicles within the compact SUV segment to offer this feature Adaptive Cruise Control – Camera (camera-based) Head-Up Display Automatic Parking Assist with Braking High Definition Surround Vision camera system The Encore will be powered either by a 1.2-liter Turbocharged or an up level 1.3-liter turbocharged engine.  In front wheel drive versions, both engines will send power to the wheels via a continuously variable transmission. All-wheel drive models get the 1.3-liter engine and a 9-speed automatic. AWD will also be driver selectable allowing for better traction or better fuel economy depending on driving conditions.  The top engine will produce an estimated 155-horspower and 174 lb.-ft of torque with a GM estimated 31 mpg highway rating.  The Buick Encore GX goes on sale early 2020 View full article
    • Yes, they need to at least offer a Level 2 station to the buyer. EV buyers are very finicky and some feel entitled to one and will want options, trust me working for Blink I've seen and heard some pretty extravagant requests from early EV adopters. They can offer a Ford branded OEM station like Cadillac did with Bosch. They won't want to give the station to and pay to have it installed for the customer like Caddy did for the first 5k buyers/lessee's, but it's not going to be expected like it is from a luxury brand like Cadillac or even Tesla. 
  • Social Stream

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. InvictaMan
      InvictaMan
      (61 years old)
  • Who's Online (See full list)

  • My Clubs

About us

CheersandGears.com - Founded 2001

We ♥ Cars

Get in touch

Follow us

Recent tweets

facebook

×
×
  • Create New...