Top 6 most anticipated cars of 2014

[Looneybomber]

According to autotrader, http://www.autotrader.com/research/arti ... f-2014.jsp

They point out the mustang and F-150, which I am excited about too.


Speaking of sophistication, the 2015 lineup will be the first to employ an independent rear suspension across the board...Under the hood, the first 4-cylinder engine in decades will debut: a 2.3-liter turbo with 300-plus horsepower and unprecedented fuel economy. Happily, the current Mustang GT's fantastic 5.0-liter Coyote V8 lives on, probably with a modest bump over the current output of 420 hp and 390 lb-ft of torque. Like the current car, the new Mustang will also offer a base V6 that pumps out around 300 hp.

The thought of a 2.3L brings back a nauseous memory of 80’s mustangs. But, 300hp is more than what the 90’s GT’s made and nearly the same as the Cobras. Combine that with 34 MPG and that could be a fantastic daily driver!


Although the details have not yet been confirmed, Bloomberg and others are reporting that the new truck's body panels will consist largely of aluminum, which is considerably lighter than steel. When Ford unveiled the Atlas concept -- a thinly disguised F-150 design study -- at last year's Detroit Auto Show, there was talk of a 750-pound weight reduction compared to the current F-150.

Put a small diesel in this truck (3.0L I6?) and you could get pretty decent MPG numbers. I guess their 3.7L ecoboost could work, but I'd rather see a torquey little diesel.

[themadscientist]

The Golf and the truck, yes, the rest, F no!

[the converted]

You seen the leak pics on the 'vette Z06? Yeah, that!

[Loki]

Ford does not have a 3.7L EcoBoost, maybe you're thinking of the 3.5 from the Taurus SHO/Explorer Sport? Either way, the F-150 should be seeing neat little torquey engine in the future to help push MPG numbers even higher, but I don't think that'll happen at program launch. Ford marketing seems very skiddish about diesels in North America for some reason. They're on offer on a lot of platforms in Europe...might come down to just how cheap gas actually is in the US.

The EcoBoost Mustang should be a fun daily driver and offer great mileage and power. I wish I could go into more detail, but I think it'll do quite well for itself I'm pretty pumped for NAIAS. Should be a great show with lots and lots of reveals (and possibly a new Supra). Just not looking forward to the redonculous crowds.

[MinisterofDOOM]

Put a small diesel in this truck (3.0L I6?) and you could get pretty decent MPG numbers. I guess their 3.7L ecoboost could work, but I'd rather see a torquey little diesel.

Generally expected engine choices include a 2.3 liter Ecoboost option, the N/A 3.7 V6, the Ecoboost 3.5 V6, and the 5.0 Coyote V8. As soon as Ecoboost starts offering real-world fuel economy that's not vastly worse than a V8, I'll get excited about the broadened options. Until then, my Ecoboost hate burns just as passionately as ever. That goes for Mustang, too. I particularly find Ford's pricing structure for boosted powerplants baffling. I don't give a s*** WHICH MPG-obsessed universe you live in. A 300hp 4 is NOT an upgrade over a 350hp V6. It should not be an added-cost option.

I've always been a pretty passionate VW-hater (to be clear, I view water-cooled VW and air-cooled VW as different companies, and they might as well be as far as product strategy goes). The golf is particularly high on my spite-list. The stereotypical douchebag owner doesn't help the matter, but the car itself is still baffling to me. However, I can't deny that early models had a certain charisma. Newer ones lack that entirely. I could not possibly be any less excited about the Golf R. I think I'd rather read a Corolla review, to be honest. At least the Corolla isn't trying to convince us it's still the hottest hatch on the block. (Golf, meet Ford. And Mazda. They're the new kids in town. They stole your clubhouse and invited your girlfriend up there for some quality time.)

The K900 is a big deal. I'm kind of surprised it's seeing such a negative-to-blah reception around the internet. The Genesis was a big deal and everyone talked about it. The K900 is the Genesis we should have had from the start: Nicer-looking (aside from thoes Toyotalike oversized bug-eye headlight housings), hopefully more sporty, and less generic. It's a big damn deal. This is Kia. A brand still generally regarded as down-market. Doing what Acura has been failing at for decades, what Honda doesn't dare, what Toyota doesn't understand, what Nissan's too busy pushing CVTs and brand distinction to do, and what no other non-luxury brand save Chevrolet has any interest in trying. Who the Hell would buy an RLX when you can get a K900 for less, with a better warranty and ACTUAL STYLING??? Oh, and not wrong-wheel-drive.

I really don't give a damn about the F150, aside from a hope that the styling will undo what the facelift of the current model did. But it won't. It'll further it. Ford's too busy trying to make the F150 a status symbol instead of building a better truck. Exactly the opposite of what GM is doing. Sadly, everyone's praising Ford and booing GM. I think that Atlas concept is hideous, and the new Silverado is quite classy and clean. So I'm clearly not the market that Ford is shooting for. (Read: I don't call people "bro" or wear flat brimmed hats or feel the need to lift the 4x4 I only ever drive to Hollister so people will be sure to notice how "hard" I am.) I'm okay with that. But I'm still not feeling remotely anticipatory in regards to the new F150.

[Loki]

Put a small diesel in this truck (3.0L I6?) and you could get pretty decent MPG numbers. I guess their 3.7L ecoboost could work, but I'd rather see a torquey little diesel.

Generally expected engine choices include a 2.3 liter Ecoboost option, the N/A 3.7 V6, the Ecoboost 3.5 V6, and the 5.0 Coyote V8.

You got it half right

As soon as Ecoboost starts offering real-world fuel economy that's not vastly worse than a V8, I'll get excited about the broadened options. Until then, my Ecoboost hate burns just as passionately as ever. That goes for Mustang, too. I particularly find Ford's pricing structure for boosted powerplants baffling. I don't give a s*** WHICH MPG-obsessed universe you live in. A 300hp 4 is NOT an upgrade over a 350hp V6. It should not be an added-cost option.

In what world does the 3.7 NA make 350 horsepower??? The EcoBoost I4 in the Mustang WILL make better power and torque than the 3.7 V6.

[Jesda]

GM's latest pickups are outstanding. Durable, stout, conservatively styled, and nicely appointed.

Rams offer the nicest interiors, however, with top-spec versions rivaling or exceeding luxury sedans with soft leather, smooth rides, tomb-like quietness, and slick switchgear, but GM hit the sweet spot by balancing capability, safety, efficiency, and cost.

Ford's half-tons feel jiggly and wobbly. They've been that way since the late 90s.


Strangely, Ford's strengths are now in passenger cars rather than trucks, but the F-series will continue to sell like hotcakes because they're significantly cheaper for fleet managers to purchase.

[Rogue One]

...Ford's half-tons feel jiggly and wobbly. They've been that way since the late 90s.

Strangely, Ford's strengths are now in passenger cars rather than trucks, but the F-series will continue to sell like hotcakes because they're significantly cheaper for fleet managers to purchase.

Forbes.com 2015 Ford F-150

The highly anticipated aluminum-intensive full-size pickup from Dearborn makes its world debut amid rumors of as much as 800 pounds of weight reduction, at least on some prototypes. Ford promises its hardened-steel constituents that the alloy parts will be as tough or tougher than the metal they replace—only lighter. Regardless, going to the more expensive aluminum is a big step for Ford, but one that the automaker feels is necessary to meet imminent (2016) and future (2025) fuel economy standards. Weight reductions are expected to boost the F-150’s overall fuel efficiency by 5 miles per gallon compared to the current truck. For the turbocharged 3.7-liter V6, that’d mean 22 mpg city and 28 mpg highway.

Our Take: Don’t bother kicking the tires—you’ll just want to tap the fender on this one.

[Loki]

Got to see the new F-150 in person yesterday afternoon, looks pretty good I think. Styling isn't radically different, biggest change is obviously the aluminum body and bed. Also the first use of Ford's new 2.7L twin-turbo V6, which should be good for around 300-325 HP and ft-lbs. I don't know the hard numbers on how much weight it lost, hopefully it's the 700 lbs that's been rumored.

[Bubba1]

Got to see the new F-150 in person yesterday afternoon, looks pretty good I think. Styling isn't radically different, biggest change is obviously the aluminum body and bed. Also the first use of Ford's new 2.7L twin-turbo V6, which should be good for around 300-325 HP and ft-lbs. I don't know the hard numbers on how much weight it lost, hopefully it's the 700 lbs that's been rumored.

I don't think people fully comprehend the "weight" savings by going to an aluminum body. If your aluminum bodied F150 has a fender bender, your wallet is also going to be much lighter as well the owners personal body weight as their bowels will spontaneously unload its contents once they learn how dang expensive aluminum body work repairs are.

[Looneybomber]

I don't think people fully comprehend the "weight" savings by going to an aluminum body. If your aluminum bodied F150 has a fender bender, your wallet is also going to be much lighter as well the owners personal body weight as their bowels will spontaneously unload its contents once they learn how dang expensive aluminum body work repairs are.

It'll be about $500. That's my deductable.

[Bubba1]

It'll be about $500. That's my deductable.

Right, which also means to expect your insurance premiums go up if you happen to buy one, because the insurance companies are probably not gonna smile, bend over, say "thank you sir may I have another..." and absorb that extra cost.

[Looneybomber]

Well ins companies will have to do their normal cost/risk analysis; likely hood of an accident and avg cost per event. That said, a '12 Focus will cost me more per month to insure than an '03 911, '05 Jag XK, or '06 Maserati Coupe. Those were just a couple cars I called about to insure a few months back.

[Bubba1]

Well ins companies will have to do their normal cost/risk analysis; likely hood of an accident and avg cost per event. That said, a '12 Focus will cost me more per month to insure than an '03 911, '05 Jag XK, or '06 Maserati Coupe. Those were just a couple cars I called about to insure a few months back.

I believe how insurance companies determine rates is more complicated than that. For giggles, you might want to check what other new aluminum bodied autoss for iunsurance rates. . I have a suspicion you might be surprised that it might be considerably more than a 11 yr old Porsche..

[MinisterofDOOM]

In what world does the 3.7 NA make 350 horsepower??? The EcoBoost I4 in the Mustang WILL make better power and torque than the 3.7 V6.

Two answers:
1: My brain combined the Ecoboost 6 and N/A Duratec and that post came out. I was referring to not wanting to pay more for the turbo four when the turbo six is an option. However, because you asked:
2: In this world, the one we live in. Specifically, the world where Nissan and GM are making performance V6s. LFX 3.6 makes 323hp. VQ37VHR makes 330hp. Both N/A. And the LFX even has a sweet torque curve to boot. Just because Ford is determinedly farting around with obsolete tech from the mid-90s (that was already sub-par in its heyday) doesn't mean the rest of the world can't do things right. 350 is a very realistic goal for an N/A V6, especially a 3.7. If Ford would join the rest of the world in the 21st century, they could do it, too. Ecoboost is a turd because the Duratec 6 is a turd. It's a million miles better than the Cologne motor, but it still has no business in 2014 model performance cars.