Drew Dowdell

Of course, being the "king" it has to drink premium just to get the same observed fuel economy. I take a 3+ mpg hit when I fuel an Expedition with regular. I expect that's the same with the F-150. And even at today's low gas prices, the Chevy is cheaper per mile to fuel. I'm not the only one unconvinced by the claimed fuel economy of the Fords. Automotive News: Edmunds could only get the EPA rated fuel economy of 23 mpg highway from the 2.7 Ecoboost (and that's the new gen engine remember) when going down hill, with a strong tail wind, and keeping the speed strictly at 65mph or below: I usually beat EPA highway in nearly every vehicle I drive, but given the results by others in this field, I guess I should be happy that I simply matched the EPA rating of the Expedition EL... even though it took premium fuel to do it and the EPA's rating is based on regular. In Suburbans, I meet or beat the EPA rating every time. So yeah, I have reason to remain skeptical of the virtues of Ecoboost in these big trucks. I do believe turbocharged DI engines have their place, but so far, that place is in vehicles of significantly lower mass.

Let's not get carried away here... all of that "added lightness" and a V6 Turbo gets it a mere 1 extra MPG on the highway and the same mpg city compared to a 6.2 liter. (comparing a Platinum to a Denali of the same drive config, cab, and bed size) Huh? So simply mentioning the mpg advantage (as well as the performance correction) right after someone else claimed the GMC 'gave the boots to the Ford V6'.....somehow required a qualification on your part? You never felt the need to qualify or correct the 'boot' remark? Why is that? That seems like the a better placement of your suggestion to 'not get carried away on.' Yes... because after spending how many billions on a new body material, and how many millions on building and marketing Ecoboost, a 1mpg increase in highway economy over the traditional setup isn't "amazing". Imagine if Toyota had spend billions to build and market the Prius as fantastic and amazing new technology, then after all of that, it got 1 mpg better on the highway than the Camry. We're told that the Ecoboost offers a great advantage in towing too? It's 1.4 seconds behind the V8 when towing the same weight. That's one-mississippi, two mississ..... behind. And even then, I don't know where MT got those fuel economy numbers, but they say the V8 in a steel body gets better city, highway, and combined fuel economy over the turbo-V6 in an aluminum body? In another comparison test where Car and Driver compared the Chevrolet Silverado High Country 6.2 and F-150 Platinum 3.5EB - their powertrain and chassis scores are basically even, observed MPG is identical (though the Ford is taking premium fuel verses the Chevy's regular).... and in that comparison, another stat shows up. The aluminum body, V6 Ford is only 81 lbs lighter than the steel body, V8 Chevy. They also give the "Fun to Drive" crown to the Chevy. For all of that money and time spent on the new technology at Ford, I am not amazed. Not even a little bit. Now, I like the F-150, I think it's a great truck... I just don't think it's "amazing" compared to its closest competition given all of the money they spent to get there.

Let's not get carried away here... all of that "added lightness" and a V6 Turbo gets it a mere 1 extra MPG on the highway and the same mpg city compared to a 6.2 liter. (comparing a Platinum to a Denali of the same drive config, cab, and bed size) Although, apparently MT sees different specs than I see on the respective brand websites:

Let's not get carried away here... all of that "added lightness" and a V6 Turbo gets it a mere 1 extra MPG on the highway and the same mpg city compared to a 6.2 liter. (comparing a Platinum to a Denali of the same drive config, cab, and bed size)

Flexibility.

Move on..

Never mind mind the fact that his excuse is based of the assumption that gas prices will always be low, when they surely will not be this low always. What will the excuse be when gas goes up again? While they won't always be low, they will stay relatively low for the next 3 to 5 years. China's growth is scaling back and lots of new oil production came online in North America. Saudi Arabia is in crisis mode, pumping as much as they can to keep the lights on because the price per barrel is so low. So, he's most likely right that prices will stay low.... still... a bunch of people buying trucks that take premium that they are uninformed about is a potential customer relations issue.

Has Tesla Sunk Itself With the Model X? http://www.caranddriver.com/columns/has-tesla-sunk-itself-with-the-model-x-column He has some valid points. Elon's ego may be the biggest single danger to Tesla.

You're hooked up to the local Taco Bell? Lots of wind propellant coming out of there, *whew* In some parts of the country, you can select which company provides the power to your house. I selected a wind generation company that is half a cent per KWh cheaper than the default coal generation and I'm guaranteed that fixed price for 2 years.

So if 50 miles of electric driving means buying gas 4 times a year. Couldn't a 150 mile range mean never needing gas? If I had a short commute, which I actually do, I would rather have a pure electric car and never need gas. If the goal is zero emissions, no trips to the gas station, then a pure EV is the end game. The people who only fill up 4 times a year only do so because the gas engine runs from time to time to keep things moving and make sure fresh gasoline cycles through. Gas starts to go bad after 6 months or so. Aside from the programming to cycle the engine, there is no technical reason those people couldn't go an entire year without filling up with gas.

I've never really had the interior room issues you keep seeing. The Passat has great interior room, but the interior quality isn't there. It starts at $22,4 and feels it... even if you buy the $32k model.

Cadillac already has average transaction prices above BMW and Audi... so it's not like they have that far to go.

I'm told that the D6 platform can support FWD/AWD/RWD.

Which is a noble cause in its own right. And cleaner air tho. Especially for cyclists because we breath the $hit that comes out of tailpipes. Well I don't like the exterior as much as I thought I would, but a Canadian (good guy too! hint: finger lickin' chicken little) reviewer said the dashboard was made of peanut butter. So I became jelly that he was driving it. We frequently have air quality issues in my city due to the geography here.

Well, I can say this - I *really* love the new Sierra and Silverado face. I was lukewarm to the '15s as they were handsome, but didn't move the line forward enough for me. To my eyes, the new GM trucks make the GM 2015s and the competitors look quite obsolete... the Ram and Tundra most of all. It's the first time in recent memory that I can remember liking both the GMC and the Chevrolet full size truck models of the same year. I tended to flip from one to the other.

I like the idea of using fewer fossil fuels. I'm interested in the Volt for that reason... plus I have a wind energy supplier for my house electric.

Is there another round of platform weight loss for next year then? Always looking to reduce, but why, does it need it? It was the implication from your post that the addition of 10-speeds and "added lightness" would contribute to further improvements in the F-150's performance. If there isn't any significant additional weight loss coming, then it can't help performance over the current model now can it?

Is there another round of platform weight loss for next year then?

They sold 73,00 Cadillacs in China in 2014 and the XTS was half of that total while Buick sold 66k in just the Enclave line (US Built)... so yeah, Buick with 919k in sales would get priority. Cadillacs are also a substantial step up in price over Buick there. That said, I fully support a Riviera returning to the lineup.... I just think a bigger sedan is needed.

The key to the Volt that you can't seem to see is that many people with commutes shorter than the Volt's EV range will only need to fill up their car with gasoline every 3 to 4 months (the Volt forums are littered with these people). Yet at the same time, it still has as unlimited a range as any gasoline powered vehicle, so it addresses the range issue that Ocn always brings up. During my trips in the old Volt, I did far better than the advertised average, even on a nearly depleted battery, I was doing over 70 mpg between here and Breezewood.

"should" and "is" are two very different things... and people who fill up their trucks with regular and see a marked performance drop are just being set up for disappointment no matter how much you try to prep them

You keep forgetting the biggest name - China. The needs of Buick China come first... and then if they sell another 10,000 a year in the US it is just gravy. Opel and Holden are both short a large RWD sedan at the moment, so I wouldn't be surprised to see any Buick sedan shared with them as well. Buick sold nearly 4 times as many Buicks in China (919,582) as they did in the US (228,963) in 2014, and their Chinese sales grew faster (13.5%) than US sales (11.4%). Buick North America gets what Buick China needs... not the other way around.

Ford and GM (and any manufacturer) just wants to sell what people want to buy. That's why BMW has been introducing a new Ultimate Driving Niche every year and Mercedes has been doing The Best, or another Niche for years now. I mean, do we really need a GLE Coupe and 3-Series AMC Eagle GT?

yeah, because there would be no product differentiation between an Omega Buick and Omega Cadillac.... just like there is no difference between an Impala and Lacrosse now.... I can't even tell them apart!!