peakdecline

Mazda has increased their discounting pretty significantly.

The majority of sedans are sharing a platform with a crossover these days. And I'm pretty sure they've said their UEV platform can accommodate a car. I'm fairly confident that Ford knows they'll need a sedan again some day. But I also agree with their assessment that current sales issues are not caused by the lack of one.

There's no capacity at the plant that assembles the Ranger and Bronco. Which is where in the US an Everest would have to be built, as the Everest is on that platform. Importing the Everest significantly raises the costs to Ford. This means either eliminating a large portion of the profit margin or selling it at a price similar to Toyota's 4Runner. Which eliminates your idea of coming in at a lower price than the Bronco.

Gen Z doesn't buy new cars. Even if Ford does want to eventually target Gen Z... that's 15+ years away before they're a significant new car buying base.

I'd rather a Land Cruiser, frankly. They're far more readily available. You can actually get a discount on them. The 2.4L Turbo Hybrid is a more reliable powertrain than the GX550's 3.4L Turbo. And the GX550 isn't all that more luxurious... at least not nearly enough to justify the massive cost premium you'd have to pay.

So, basically all the surfaces your arms and legs bang into were left untouched or close to it. Whatever. I guess its neat they're putting the 3.0L EB into something that's not a Raptor.

Porsche. Ferrari. There's other strong fan groups for other models. Say Wranglers, Mustangs, Mopar guys, etc. but I wouldn't say any of them take it as seriously as the two above.

The Ranger interior, including the Raptor, is simply awful. Lots of posters always frame the RR as being this "bargain" but I don't agree. Yes, you're getting an awesome engine and a decent suspension setup but man... that interior is peak cost cutting. And I have a lot of build quality complaints with my Bronco. But the Bronco interior feels roomier. Its significantly better laid out. The infotainment setup is far, far better (horizontal vs vertical screen). It has buttons for all the controls you need (SO much RR controls are two/three steps buried in the touchscreen). Like... I get why people like the trucks. I do. But at the same time its clear as day why they're priced the way they are.

Requiring 91 octane probably plays a role. But I think people are in a bit of denial about the long term potential reliability impact. You're basically taking what is stock a 5-year/60K mile powertrain warranty and replacing it with a 3-year/36K mile warranty. And also eliminating your ability to obtain any factory-backed extended warranty as well.

Sounds like $2000-$4000 off should be fairly attainable at this point. RR pricing seems pretty regional though.

Prefer a quieter cabin isn't a "sporty" preference. That's a comfort/luxury preference. And I am very tired of assuming reliability based on theoretical stuff. Specifically the Honda V6 has had some notable recent issues reported.

Audit your environment and switch to open source alternatives if you find something. But do not respond to Oracle. You have no requirement to do so. They've been doing this for a bit now. They want you to tattle on yourself because then they'd actually have something to act on. But don't give them anything unless your legal team forces you.

Its funny you think this is unique to IT. But more... it just sounds like some of you need to move up or down the stack and stop dealing with end users all the time.

The ZF 8-speed is the best automatic transmission on the market, this is widely acknowledged. There's no better one available. As your own posts show the fix was a TCM flash.

Then this also means the issue was resolved a decade ago.

I've never been particularly in love with the vertical screen setup in the Rams, personally. I owned a 2024 Power Wagon and its just a lot of wasted space IMO. They need horizontal screen. Those are better for my two primary wants from a large screen. Better/more map shown and a larger view of the backup/360 camera system. On that note... Ram makes it way too difficult to get a truck spec'd with their 360 camera system. Depending on trim the package is rare (like a 1500 Rebel with the Advanced Safety Group) or its expensive (like the RHO requiring the $10K Level 2 package to get it). I'm never getting a vehicle without a 360 camera system personally after having it in the Bronco.

Yeah. I want something that's going to rival the Wrangler/Bronco for off-road capability but doesn't have the NVH issues they do.

Because you presented this as if it's a wide spread issue with possibly a recall or even just a TSB associated with it. Maybe some kind of NHTSA report. Instead what you're showing me is of hundreds of thousands of vehicles sold there's some people with issues. You could name literally any issue and model of car under the sun and do this. Even the best Toyotas ever have lemons and people complaining online.

This is a forum post of one person having an issue. This isn't nearly the epidemic you presented it as...

I've never heard of this. And I can't find anything on a search about it.

What transmission shifting issues? The Durango has used the ZF 8-speed since 2014.

The issue is the 2021+ uConnect 5 infotainment update. The earlier uConnect 4 infotainment was excellent and well sorted.

I'm hoping this isn't a Wrangler/Bronco style SUV. But rather a 4Runner/Land Cruiser style SUV.

So, the Tacoma is faster and significantly more fuel efficient. Show me a single data source that proved the Frontier is more reliable. You won't find it. You're doing the same silly thing. Assuming NA V6 will be more reliable but have zero proof to show this. If doesn't matter if you got to NHTSA complaint data and break it down on a issue to vehicle sold ratio. Or look at another data set like Consumer Reports. The 4th Gen Tacoma does better than the Frontier. I just find this entire thing exhausting. Assuming just because it had an NA V6 means it's more reliable is at best lazy thinking and at worst just factually incorrect.

Assuming engine reliability because its a "simple" design is just a tired trope at this point. GM's V8s are dead simple yet they're probably the least reliable engine you can purchase in a half-ton truck, far less reliable than their "complicated" and "overstressed" I4 2.7L turbo. You cannot assume or predict reliability based on the complexity of an engine or overall vehicle. There's been some interesting tear downs of the Frontier engine revealing some potential issues. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dM4XnULhRXU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dM4XnULhRXU) And further reality is the only mid-size truck slower than Frontier is a Gladiator, which is also an NA V6. Moreover, even outside of a drag race scenario its the day to day, stop and go traffic situations the NA V6 feels sluggish against the competition these days. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BjbC6M17kOk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BjbC6M17kOk) And it also doesn't win in real world MPG testing either. * **Toyota Tacoma:** 26.3 MPG * **Honda Ridgeline:** 26.4 MPG * **Ford Ranger:** 26.0 MPG * **Chevrolet Colorado:** 24.4 MPG * **Nissan Frontier:** 21.8 MPG * **Jeep Gladiator:** 19.7 MPG That's TFL's real world testing MPG for the midsize trucks. That's actually substantially worse than all of the I4 turbos. Only the unibody Ridgeline can hang with those trucks. This is the problem with people assuming all kinds of mystical powers of "muh NA V6" engines. There's no magic here. Just because its "simple" doesn't make it reliable or without flaws in the design. Just because its NA doesn't mean "real world MPG testing" will reveal it being some kind of magical fuel sipper. Its a dated engine design. In a dated truck platform. And that's a reason why Nissan is going to be replacing it with a next generation platform soon.

Neither does a typical distros repos. Such is life.

It sounds to me your MSP isn't prepared to configure and manage alternatives to UniFi. Therefore, if you're set on not-UniFi then you also need to to be finding an alternative MSP. Because sure a not-UniFi option may be a better fit for you but that's not going to matter if the party managing that system isn't prepared to do it. They would at best be learning on the fly with you as the guinea pig.

This is almost certainly going to be on the Nissan's next generation BOF vehicle. Which sounds like it'll be a V6 but I don't know. There's really nothing special about the Frontier's V6. If there's one problem the mid-size truck segment doesn't have its engine issues. They're all good on this including all the turbo 4s. A V6 feels underpowered in the segment these days. And that's now. In a next generation its definitely going to need hybrid assistance to keep up.

I'm from (central) Missouri. Everyone I know that isn't over 70 says soda. My grandma would have said "sodie-pop". My first run-in with the "pop" people was traveling east into Ohio where seemingly everyone called it pop.

The basically all of the GM EV lineup was a clean sheet design. Ford's F-150 Lightning as a "retrofit hack job" yet was constantly praised on release as being the most approachable because of it. It didn't fail because it was built around an originally ICE platform. And likewise Ford is still working on a EV-from-the-ground-up platform. Basically, I just think you're wrong on every level.

Ford and GM both invested tens of billions into going electric. Including making EV versions of their most popular models. And then the US political winds shifted and completely wiped out their investments. The EV transition clearly required immense subsidization from the government to make happen. China is proof. And crucially China went in even heavier with those subsidies, went at it for longer, went at it more consistently and wasn't subject to one election cycle completely wrecking it all. I don't give Detroit a pass on everything. There's clearly some level of greed and laziness happening here. But they basically had chance given what happened.

Two panels that stack up on each other but are still below a roof rack line? Seems like a cumbersome setup that tries to circumvent the Sky One-Touch of a Jeep. I do like the Sky One-Touch though, as a person who doesn't really love taking off the entire top.

The Frontier doesn't even get better MPG than the half-ton trucks. You have to go to a Maverick to actually get better MPG than a F-150.

A locking differential is hardly a cost to the OEM. Look at an F-150, basically every trim and version includes it by default at this point. And yeah dude I don't particularly find appearance packages interesting. There's basically no functional upgrades here.

Brother, Toyota literally set a Tacoma sales record last year and there's really no slow down on Tacoma sales.

Lol. They're still limiting the rear locking differential behind the Pro-4X. This is just marketing. Slapping some unaggressive ATs on a truck, and a aluminum skid plate mainly for looks, does not make an off-road truck.

No, it's not. The Wrangler once the wondering is solved (easy to do on earlier yearsand already solved on 2024+ models from factory) rides fine on the highway. This is classic Redditors repeating stuff they don't have actual experience with... The highway is not where the ride and handling differences are most evident.

2024+ Wranglers (and Gladiators) have improved steering characteristics. The 2024+ Wranglers do not wonder on the highway nearly as much as earlier ones. With that issue addressed general highway driving feel is absolutely fine. The GX550 is poorly damped in my experience with it, albeit brief. Now, IFS is going to always handle better than SFA. But you're really not going to expose this downside in general highway driving. Also lots of Rubicons, maybe even a majority, come standard with an All Terrain.

Tim Kuniskis comments about wanting to put IFS under this is certainly interesting. I've long thought at some point they were going to do both IFS and SFA on the Wrangler. Some seem to think its some kind of impossibility but multiple manufacturers already offer rear independent suspension SUVs on platforms shared with rear solid axle trucks (GM, Ford and Jeep themselves with the Wagoneers). Ultimately... IFS makes sense for 90% of the customers. They could absolutely get away with IFS on the majority of the lineup and then put a SFA under the Rubicon (and maybe Willys as the more affordable option). That's fine with me. And if they're wanting to do something high speed off-road oriented that isn't compromised, see Gladiator Mojave, it makes sense to do IFS.

I've repeatedly said this but I'll say it again. My Jeep Gladiator was considerably better built than my Bronco is... Far less rattles of the interior. Better material quality. Less wind noise. I also never had a part failure with my Gladiator. The Bronco's sway bar disconnect completely failed on me. And my passenger side headlight also died. All under 12K miles. With not even a fraction of the off-road abuse my Gladiator had experienced. I'd go back to a Gladiator immediately if the interior was just slightly wider. Hell I still might if they drop the 392 (or even the 5.7L) in it.

Do I really have to add every exception to a post like mine? Do I need to spell out "except for u/dakta and and u/vargemp and my 85 year old neighbor and Bob on the other side of town"? Shockingly used buyers don't influence how new cars are made.

There is simply no software engineering solution that ships a true "final" version of a product for a system that is on the "network." You would have to eliminate all the connected services on modern vehicles and consumers demand those services. OTA are a necessity. There's no avoiding it. This is not the same as shipping software that is extremely buggy or incomplete.

I was referencing this part of the person's comment: >And no one is cross shopping a Stellantis hybrid with a Honda, Toyota or even Ford. Honda and Toyota don't have hybrid compact trucks either. And the Santa Cruz didn't have a hybrid either. We were talking within the context of the Jeep Cherokee hybrid. The Jeep Cherokee Hybrid is absolutely being cross shopped against all its segment options.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDmoYJbpQjY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDmoYJbpQjY) Well quite a bit of beans spilled here. Wrangler Scrambler is a 2-door, sounds like it'll have a removable rear topper. Gladiator = Wrangler Gladiator (and Scrambler) are getting a new front end that seems to be inspired by some of the Jeep Easter Safari concepts they've shown. And more stuff in the video. Honestly I'm pretty excited about this news.

Well, the Challenger is dead. But even before that it was still 8"\~ longer than a Mustang or Camaro. And the current Charger 2-door is now 17"\~ longer than a Mustang. I see this is a chance to make a real sports car or something closer to it like the Mustang/Camaro. There's definitely a gap in the Dodge lineup for it now.

I'd personally find a Mustang or Camaro segment sports car more interesting. Less interest in something that starts north of $100K.

First, your claim was that it won't have a hybrid offering. This claim will almost certainly be false. Now you're trying to move the needle that somehow... it doesn't matter? There will be cross shopping. Absolutely against the American or Korean options. Probably even some people against the Japanese because ultimately Stellantis products tend to have very aggressive real world pricing. Also, I know you're referring to the DrivingSportsTV video... that's more of a demonstration of a poorly tuned traction management system in the hands of a poor driver (I will die on this hill, that guy manages to make triple locked trucks look like they're straggling for traction). This is a solvable issue. Ford doesn't even put the hybrid into the Maverick's off-road trim because the ultimately a eCVT isn't well suited for it. Why wouldn't Rampage take a similar strategy? Use the hybrid system for the on-road trims. Offer their 2.0L Turbo Hurricane in a Lobo and/or Tremor competitor trim levels. You know... its ok to just admit you forgot Stellantis offered this hybrid system that's perfectly suited to the Rampage's platform.

If this is arriving somewhere around 2029-2030 then I would strongly suspect a hybrid is coming. Stellantis has a hybrid drivetrain that would work on this platform just fine, it just debuted in the US market in the new Jeep Cherokee.

I would assume a Wrangler Scrambler SRT model is more equivalent to a Raptor. See how the reintroduced Ram 1500 TRX is an SRT as well. The Grand Cherokee is probably something akin to reintroducing a Trackhawk like version. And the Grand Wagoneer SRT likely a competitor to the Escalade V.

No manufacturer believes that's true and in reality its just not. They've stopped fining manufacturers. The regulations still exist and everyone knows are going to come roaring back the moment the administration changes. Hell I suspect we'll see the complexion of this change post November.