Search results

I agree Car and Driver ain't what it used to be, but "fake news"??

Yep it does that too, mostly in lower gears (1st, 2nd, maybe 3rd). This indicates to me that the algorithm is complex, taking into account varying circumstances. In faster sweepers it re-engages as you turn in, pulling the front end through the turn...you know just like a rally car or a...

I have noticed that in the middle gears (so in my manual 3 & 4th, maybe 5th) when going in a straight line for a bit with light/steady speed throttle (maybe, 8, 10, 12 seconds) the computer will disengage the front axle. Then, as you turn, it will re-engage the front axle, but only if you turn...

Assuming that really is a flow chart from the patent, it looks like the headline is accurate. Certainly looks legit: https://www.thedrive.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/20240239352.pdf

Tailpipes are clean because of the earlier progressive environmental/societal movement. Not sure what you mean, no one is dying on any ASS dung heap :wink: It's just a comment box, so as easily as someone wags their moral finger at anyone for rejecting ASS and (more importantly) what's...

Oh good, then you understand what I am talking about around engine efficiency, mpg, etc.. Modern engines are so very darn clean. When I travel to El Paso the air is bad, largely because the Mexican people don't share our concerns about air pollution. If I could remove the carbon monoxide, it...

@adam1991 is right. This is a conflict (disagreement) of visions of "The Good" as Plato put it. It is not "anti-social" to reject the policy goals (and more to the point, the morality behind it) of the modern environmental movement (or at least part of it - most of it really) and consequences...

In reality less power does not = better economy, it is the opposite: more power, almost always gained through thermodynamic efficiency gains, = better fuel economy. Undersizing engines hurts fuel economy almost as much as oversizing them. Modern cars are fuel efficient enough. Carbon dioxide...

Well I don't know about "dumb" :unsure:, but maybe I should have had a choice for off-road only use. Let's include those folks under the "< 10% of the time..." choice...and for folks who only trailer their Bronco's to the trails and are never on road, they are just SOL as far as this poll is...

Does a real 27 mpg in your vehicle - think about what it weighs, it's frontal area, its Cd - make any sense to you, based on physics/known engineering principles? Even under ideal conditions (almost all the time of the trip spent in one of the overdrive gears, 49-61 mph over the whole distance...

Your the one who said words matter. "They" (by this I suppose you are meaning the political/consumer coalition against ASS and other unneeded "incentives" :wink: ) are using the more accurate, descriptive word "mandate" because, well it is in reality more accurate. I suppose you can say I am...

Baloney. When the incentive is "do this and if you don't then it will cost $millions and $millions in direct or indirect consequences of not meeting best possible fleet average targets" then that is a mandate, because the corporations are never going to leave that kind of money on the table -...

It is a "mandate", in that the EPA issues fleet mileage credits for implementing it, and the manufactures have to play along given market conditions because if you don't, the $cost$ is too high.

That's what I meant - think of it in miles. Even if you off-road just about everyday (I do), the vast majority of your miles are still on road. I suppose there are a handful of us who are exceptions - living on ranches in the middle of no where...

I'm in 4A (aka "Subaru mode") almost all the time now. With a Ford Performance tune, a manual, and the fact that I don't drive like I'm retired I got tired of spinning my rear inside tire pulling out into traffic with anything more than 'light' throttle application. On the "jeep trails" in my...

I hope that is exactly the result. Plenty of other areas of the Bronco that could use a bit of over-engineering and robustness. I hope they take the wasted $ they have sunk into this unneeded system and put it to good use...

Your 2 door base model (i.e. lowest in GVW, unusually low {for a Bronco} unsprung and rotational mass with small wheels/tires) is optimal, particularly that it has no mods (such as roof racks) that significantly degrade an already poor Cd measurement (relative to most other vehicles). You don't...

My suspicion is that the extra ethanol would have a small positive effect , allowing the computer to advance the timing a bit further then the octane rating suggests (vs. 87 E10/E5), thus allowing a touch more thermodynamic efficiency (and resulting power). I have no direct data around E88 to...

This is vs. 91 or 93 (no E85 mixed)?

Assuming @GA2Dr local premium gas is really 93 (apparently in some local situations it can be overrated) he won't gain any power by mixing in E85 because the (relatively mild) Ford Performance tune can not take advantage. He can confirm this by adding the gauge "Lrnd_Knk_Mod" to his ProCal...