Slashdot Mirror
GM Sees a Market For $5/Day Dedicated In-Car Internet
An anonymous reader writes "$5 doesn't sound like much for a day of internet service in some contexts: it's less than you might pay for it in-flight, and less than a few espresso drinks if you're lured in by a coffee shop's Wi-Fi service. But not all internet service is created equal; would you pay $5 for a month of in-car internet service if it meant a 200-meg cap, which is (only) 'enough to stream more than 6.5 hours of music?' That's where a new dedicated Internet service from GM starts (also at the WSJ, paywalled), and it's $10 for drivers who aren't also OnStar subscribers. Probably a more likely option for the occasional road trip, though, is $5 per day service (no OnStar requirement) for 250MB of data. Why wouldn't someone just use a smartphone with a data plan, or a dedicated hotspot device? GM thinks they'll be drawn to 'a powerful antenna that's stronger than that of a smartphone, along with a Wi-Fi hotspot that operates without draining a mobile device's battery. That hotspot is on any time the car is on.'"
"GM thinks they'll be drawn to 'a powerful antenna that's stronger than that of a smartphone, along with a Wi-Fi hotspot that operates without draining a mobile device's battery. That hotspot is on any time the car is on.'
My car also has a 'powerful antenna' for my cellphone and my phone has a Wifi-hotspot and it also doesn't drain the mobile's battery because by cellphone is in its socket and powered by the car battery. I pay 5 bucks a month for unlimited usage already.
We should we pay twice?
would you pay $5 for a month of in-car internet service if it meant a 200-meg cap, which is (only) 'enough to stream more than 6.5 hours of music?
No, I would not.
would be "GM, go fuck yourself."
When everything was analogue, you needed a custom device for each service (phone, TV, fax, etc). In the digital era that way of thinking is as archaic as the dinosaur. I do not want an internet connection that might be slightly better than my current phone, only to be left in the dust in a couple of years. I want a system that allows me to add my phone's internet the car seamlessly.
Yes someone is monetizing my mobile internet; no that doesn't mean that I want everyone monetizing it over and over again.
with the coffee shop I still get the espresso drinks, so it is a win win.
Never answer an anonymous letter. - Yogi Berra
They could work with industry to produce a external antenna protocol for bluetooth - i.e. you tether your phone to the car and utilise the car's antenna for 3G/4G. In addition the phone could act as a hotspot for in car services and other phones in the vehicle. But hey they would be too useful. Instead, pay GM $5 for a proprietary solution instead.
I just don't see the cost working out. On top of that if you have the car for 10-20 years it's going to be the same as having an old 8 track. Car NAV systems don't seem to age well, I don't see this keeping up with the times. 5G will be out before too much longer.
Are there still cars with built in storage?
Ford included a whopping 10GB hard disk in their fanciest tech package 5 years ago. You can't get that now. Instead you get a USB port in the center console.
I've got a 64G low profile thumb drive plugged in with most of my music collection. Standard MP3s, no DRM issues. There are *other* issues -- the system has only so many slots to hold metadata, so if I add too many songs it will freak out and re-index the USB each time I start the car. But as long as I don't exceed some limit it behaves just fine.
For my purposes anyway, no storage and USB is far superior to built-in storage.
Ignorance killed the cat. Curiosity was framed.
The summary mentions both $5 a month and $5 month.
Glancing at the linked article, it sounds like you can subscribe for as little as $5 a month and get 200 MB for the month. As a non-subscription you can pay $5 for 250 MB for 1 day.
In both cases there are more expensive tiers offering more data.
For over a decade the Automotive industry has been trying to tie mobile Internet access into very rigid platforms that add to the cost of the vehicle. These systems are usually obsolete by the time they make it to market and are not easily upgradable in the field. With the wealth of cell phones and other in-car add-ins (tom tom etc.) The value of these auto industry developed systems becomes less and less important. Sure, there's a "bling" factor to them but don't forget that you'll want it updated to something else about as often as you upgrade your cell phone. That means that supporting things like BlueTooth and USB/iPhone connectivity and integration are where the industry should be, not trying to build out another island of isolated electronics.
Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
Last time I checked, I could already charge my phone in the car. So there goes the "battery drain" argument. And I can use the personal hotspot plan my phone already comes with. No thanks, GM.
For maps 200MB is a fair amount, usually you are driving around the same areas and maps are heavily cached (and all of the modern mapping frameworks for mobile devices are vector based so they can send a lot of data for just a little bandwidth).
In fact T-Mobile today gives you 200MB/month free if you buy a T-Mobile iPad.
However having a cap is very bad, because maps integrated into a car will be relied on, and if near the end of the month it suddenly shut down it could easily leave you stranded. Hopefully that just means after that they would charge you some extra fee.
Personally I don't mind just using my smartphone as the data source but not everyone can deal with things like that.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I've give you $200 to install it and exactly $0/month to add it to the existing 'bucket' of 3G/4G I'm already way overcharged for. Oh, and I'll never drive one of your products.
(My Subaru will soon be getting a Wilson 4G LTE setup w/external antenna)
I'm with everyone else pooh-pooing this misguided disservice. It's not for us.
But, GM is not floating this concept out of sheer ignorance. They already have hooks into a certain collection of consumers who don't know crap and subscribe to OnStar because operating a GPS themselves is too complicated. GM marketing executives are sitting in board rooms laughing at how much money they are still getting out of these subscriptions while cellphones would seem to have made OnStar obsolete. This internet package is just an added service fee they're trying to pile on top of these clueless subscribers.
A closer look would likely reveal that many of them are still subscribing to AOL at home.
$5 / month hosted VPS on linux = awesome!
What bugs me about this is that I imagine that anything built into the car that could use internet connectivity will be locked into using the GM $5/day network, even if the widget in question is gaining access via Wifi to the OnStar wifi network and will not allow you to choose your own wifi (mobile hotspot, tethered phone, municipal wifi, etc).
For some reason I see a bunch of greedy bastards putting internet-aware applications into the car and then trying to squeeze you for the internet to make them work.
What is this 1998? A dedicated hotspot in the car? I can buy a portable hotspot that works better and is cheaper for service PLUS has LTE so it will be faster. Oh and It's also on my same phone bill so I have one bill.
This is more proof that GM is a has-been company that only makes medicore low grade products and is hell bent on staying that way.
Hey GM, Want to be a leader again? Shot for the highest quality and offer a 10 year 150,000 mile warranty that covers EVERYTHING as standard on your cars. nobody buys GM junk because it falls apart after 5 years and is over 10 years behind everyone else.
I grew up as a UAW/Chevy family kid and I will not touch the garbage that GM makes. Been burned too many times by their low grade dog food that they sell. Only way I will come back is they start fessing up to their mistakes and give us bumper to bumper zero cost 10 year warranties that cover over 15K miles a year driven. Make it no risk to me and I'll look at GM again.
Honda got my last 3 car purchases because of the very low risk of ownership.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Hey GM, you know what car I'd like to buy? A brand new, 1992 Toyota Pickup (Hilux). Brand new. I'd prefer locks and windows that engage manually. I'd prefer that I wasn't beeped at incessantly if my seat belt is not clipped in or my lights are on. I'd also like to have physical switches that control heat, etc.
I do not want an internet plan.
I do not want an "infotainment" system.
I do not want cameras mounted all over.
I do not want a tailgate that automatically deploys for anything.
I do not want a steering wheel with buttons all over it.
I do not want a seat with buttons all over it.
I do not need a special box for my sunglasses or garage opener.
Okay, I know, I have a huge lawn that people keep walking on, but really, why is there NOBODY that sells basic vehicles that aren't loaded with all sorts of "safety features" that simply provide a safer way to do unsafe things while you drive? Hell, you can't even buy a light-duty pickup anymore (though they might still classify them as such). I am in a vehicle to move myself and optionally some other materials from point A to point B. I don't need to be entertained. I don't need a computer to tell me how to drive. I just want to go somewhere.
... and with that, I will return to my fruitless search looking for the guy who was smart enough to buy a warehouse full of 1992 Toyota pickups and keep them garaged for 20 years.
Someone flopped a steamer in the gene pool.
I have a Toyota Prius from the year before the Aux port was added (pisser). But, the one thing I really need, is a place to put the freaking phone. My solution is a phone case and some velcro tape on the center console (on the radio) and on the back of the phone. A few seconds to plugin the charger and stick the the phone to the console.
No stupid suction cup phone holders that don't stick properly or block visibility or don't fit the phone right so it falls out or whatever.\
It also works well when I want to use the golf app on my phone for scoring and range finding by sticking some velcro on my pull cart.
If it is good enough to put a man on the moon, it is good enough to hold my smart phone.
comparing everything to coffee?
"and less than a few espresso drinks"
or more expensive then a few, depending.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Verizon, tether no need for GM
"GM thinks they'll be drawn to 'a powerful antenna that's stronger than that of a smartphone, along with a Wi-Fi hotspot that operates without draining a mobile device's battery. That hotspot is on any time the car is on."
I actually use a 4g modem for my primary home internet. I have a cute little USB-powered fob that acts as a hotspot, and it has an external antenna port if you need a better signal.
And yes, I take it with me when I go on road-trips - I'd trade it in a heartbeat for "real" broadband at home, but portable does have its perks.
So what, exactly, does GM view as its market for this particular scam? People who need near-broadband speed in their cars, for some use that draws very little actual data (based on the caps mentioned), and have no clue how to use a MiFi/JetPack/etc 4g hotspot?
Too big to fail? More like too dumb to realize they've already died.
On top of that if you have the car for 10-20 years it's going to be the same as having an old 8 track.
This is not part of Detroit's marketing plan. No one owns a car for 10 or 20 years anymore, for the most part, they simply don't last that long. Want to own a car that long? Look to Europe, and maybe buy a Volvo.
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
Seriously, these companies are gutting themselves trying to figure out how to run up massive profit levels of 20, 50, 100% with enormous executive salaries/bonuses. And yet, here is Tesla who does not advertise ANYWHERE, and yet, they are backed up on sales. So, what do they do? They offer up the service equal to what Rolls Royce used to have, and solving all issues such as expensive batteries, and making long distance charging a none issue (either free, or if you want, you can rent a fully-charged battery that will carry you 2x as far).
GM, and other car companies like MB, Audi, Toyota, etc will never figure out what hit them until it is far too late.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Well, it makes sense for GM anyway. The cars with OnStar are already equipped with the expensive part (the cellular modem). It's what OnStar uses. OnStar users are already paying for their data line with their subscription, so that's covered as well (non-OnStar users pay a premium to use the hotspot). Just work out a deal with the cell provider, toss in a cheap WiFi component (that you will pay for in the price of the car) and presto! A virtually no cost added (again, for GM) revenue source. The user paid for the hardware and the service, the cell company paid for the infrastructure, GM's cut is pure profit. Even if it's only used once per 1,000,000 vehicles a day it doesn't matter to them.
I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.
Look to Europe, and maybe buy a Volvo.
Or to Japan. Toyotas last forever. There are still thousands of old Prizms on the streets. I drive one that's 19 years old and has been driven through almost every state including a trip from Maryland to Alaska and back!
Big whoop. I made that same trip in a Ford Maverick http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Maverick_(Americas), back when the Al-Can Highway was mostly gravel and aluminum cans and Circle, AK was as far North as you could go on a public road in the USA.
And then took that Ford to Maine. And Florida. And a few other distant trips trying to kill that zombie car. Except for certain outlier designs (including every car manufacturer from BMW to Honda), if you take care of your car it will provide basic transportation functions for a long time.
Some sort of standardized magnetic mount
QI Charging
Wifi Link or some standard to link to displays that can work on existing phones
Bluetooth, handsfree, audio, steering wheel controls, vehicle information
Some Wifi accessible storage
All potentially open standards.
Past that a Bluetooth GPS might be useful.
Lets face it phones update every couple years cars not so much. Pretty much a 1080p touchscreen and some bluetooth and let people with a clue deal with powering it.
No sir I dont like it.
Has GM seen a modern mobile device? Oh they are magical things indeed! Maps, GPS, instant messaging, email, music streaming, podcasts, MP3s, even streaming live TV and video, almost anywhere.
And with bluetooth, all of that can be streamed right into the car audio system. Or you can use an aux cable, truly the tail of the magic fairy.
The best part, all of that is included with my phone plan. As much as a I want. Oh sure there's a cap, but exceeding it by a huge margin still wouldn't hit this $150 a month rate, and that cost there would be for something only usable in the car. My magic mobile? Goes with me where I go, and if you will excuse me, I am going to go now, if you get my meaning. But I'll be online the whole time.
Magic times these are!
Sig for hire.
My daily driver is an 87 F-150 I6 4speed, slow but fuel efficient and can haul a heavy load (my work truck). My wife drives a 96 Explorer, her commute is less than 5 minutes between work and dropping kids off at school. We share a 97 Dodge neon for highway trips, gets 40 MPG with some mods and cheap on parts if your somewhat of a mechanic. Then there is the big work truck a 2006 Dodge 1 ton diesel hardly get used at all unless I need to use the big trailer. None of my vehicles have rust or any body damage, look nice and meet all emission regulations. Old vehicles are very much alive for 20 years if you treat them well and people like me enjoy swapping a motor or tranny on a Sunday afternoon.
"... No one owns a car for 10 or 20 years anymore..."
Each of my Hondas have done at least 10 years. My 1996 Acura is still quit healthy. My 1987 Shadow as well.
I suspect that no one who reads /. Is in the target demographic. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.
"... No one owns a car for 10 or 20 years anymore..."
Each of my Hondas have done at least 10 years. My 1996 Acura is still quite healthy. My 1987 Shadow as well.
I suspect that no one who reads /. Is in the target demographic. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.
People will pay because people are stupid. Meanwhile the internet in your car will also provide detailed tracking as to what you do, when you do it, and who you do it with. All of this information will be used to control you and keep you a happy consumer. Another advantage is the easy "DrivePay" system so you can pay tolls and mileage taxes very easy. In 3 years you won't be able to find a strip bar not named "The board room", "The office", "The convention center", or "The Dry Cleaners". Don't worry jealous partners, there's an app for that 6 months later for $4.99 on itunes or play store.
You are thinking of a Volvo from the 80ies. Current Volvos are Ford (think Ford Focus, not F150 Ford) and not very sturdy.
"$5 doesn't sound like much for a day of internet service in some contexts" - um, but it does in this one. Regardless of the cap, that's $150/month in addition to your home or other internet fees, assuming you drive once a day. Most people don't spend *that much time* in their vehicle, and there are laws to prevent drivers from say, watching media in many countries - so what's the urgent internet use that phones can't cover exactly? That warrants $5/day? The whole proposal is absurd to me.
My daily driver is an 87 F-150 I6 4speed, slow but fuel efficient
AHAHAHAHAHA
only an American would call 5 Liter 2 ton truck fuel efficient
My wife drives a 96 Explorer, her commute is less than 5 minutes
AHAHAHA, I bet your wife is pulling boats to work in her 2 ton truck too, right? No? Groceries? Do they weight 500KG? No ? oh ....
Who logs in to gdm? Not I, said the duck.
Is actually reading the article too much to ask on slashdot, or is it just customary now for the article submitter to blatantly lie to generate some click bait? Here are the actual rates per month for On star and non-On star subscribers.
200 MB $5 $10
1 GB $15 $20
3 GB $30 $30
5 GB $50 $50
Reading comprehension is too much to ask on slashdot these days!
I wouldn't pay for internet in the car. I wouldn't have internet in the car if it was free. There are times when I just want to be away from idiotic SPAM, endless trivia and other distractions, and one of those times is when I drive a car. In fact, I'd prefer if everybody else on the road also stayed away from unnecessary distractions and concentrated on driving safely.
The more forward thinking manufacturers are moving to smartphone mirroring and unlimited for-life data service anyway.
Toyota and Subaru both offer MirrorLink on their touch screen systems, so you just plug your phone in and use whatever app you prefer for navigation or music. Never gets out of data, uses your existing data plan, costs you nothing. The built-in sat nav unit is there too, with 8 years of updates promised, but you aren't stuck with it.
Nissan and Tesla offer unlimited mobile data services. Nissan only use it for sat nav data, Tesla lets you actually browse the web and stream audio. Tesla also uses Google maps with Garmin navigation, so you get constant updates. They also push software updates that way. No limit on how much you can use it, lasts the lifetime of the car.
It's the future, and I'm very hesitant to buy a car that doesn't have MirrorLink now. A Leaf or Tesla is about the only exception I'd make.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Fuck GM, and fuck our government for bailing them out.
With discounts, I can rent a whole car for $10 a day. Why the fuck would I spend this much for additional internet? Hell, I can already utilize my smart phone or iPad (3g) from the vehicle.
Just another day in Paradise
Idiots should keep their mouths shut so no one knows how stupid they are. An F-150 in a 1/2 ton truck, mine averages 20mpg. An Explorer is a 1/4 ton truck,and what do you suggest to drop three kids off at school, a Smart car? Let me guess an enviro nutjob like yourself believes in sending perfectly good vehicles to the wreckers because they are last years model and not cool enough. Who cares about the C02 emissions from the manufacture of new vehicles.
Car built-in stuff generally isn't worth it. Modern cars can easily last 20 years (my last one did). The inbuilt radio in that car is now positively archaic - FM/AM/LW with a tape player. The same thing will happen to in-car satnav systems, in-car wifi hotspots - within the car's useful life they will fall so far behind they may not even be usable (updates for that satnav? a hotspot that is what 9600 baud WAP over GSM is today when compared to 4G?)
Today all I want built into the car is an amplifier with some input standard that's going to last (for example Bluetooth, or even just a 3.5mm jack plug in). I'll supply my own satnav/music system/WiFi hotspot. I can keep updating them for trivial cost rather than to try to keep built-in car systems up to date at enormous cost.
Oolite: Elite-like game. For Mac, Linux and Windows
I think the parent meant a truck that *weighs* 2 tonnes, not a truck with a payload of 1/2 ton. Your F150 almost certainly weighs at least 2 tonnes, and so does the Ford Explorer. 20mpg is not considered efficient anywhere except in North America.
Oolite: Elite-like game. For Mac, Linux and Windows
Why do you need a half ton truck to drop 3 kids off at school? If you like driving trucks, fine. But don't make up nonsense justifications. You don't need that kind of tonnage just to haul children.
Unless they are gigantic, of course. Honestly the first image that popped into my mind when you made your post was that you had three children the size of gigantic granite boulders and you offload them like gravel. While "Like A Rock" is playing in the background.
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
Explorer weighs 2 tons my F150 weighs 2200 lb. And a full sized truck that gets 20mpg is good fuel economy for a work truck usually carring 1, 000 lb. Example of another full sized truck from 87 that has better fuel economy?
No, Ford sold off their interest in Volvo and it's now owned by Geely in China. The Ford-made Volvos are actually some of the best; they share parts with Mazdas and Fords, and all three brands seem to have benefited a lot from the cooperation. Before Ford came along, Volvos had a lot of reliability problems. Sure, they were safe in an accident, but that's not the same as reliability. The newest Volvos, while Chinese-owned (but made in Sweden or Belgium) have excellent reliability.
There are many, MANY hotspots available with external antenna ports, and running one off of a 5V in-car supply is trivial.
My Armada has a Netgear Unite Pro hotspot in it with a roof-mounted antenna. I just drilled the 3/8" hole in the roof for the antenna mount right above one of the overhead console boxes, and ran a 12V line to a 5V power supply. It took less than two hours to install, and works fantastically. Any time I need to take it with me I just grab it out of the console box.
yet another in car distraction, courteous of GM. Looks to me like a solution trying to find a problem. What, exactly, would one do with in-car internet? Catch up on the latest House of Cards episode while barrelling down the freeway at 70 mph? Fill in your fantasy football picks? While driving....in a car....possibly at high speed...certainly with a lot of distractions.
Do you think that maybe, just maybe, we could leave the internet behind until we're done driving? It's one thing to be surfing the web over a hot latte and another thing entirely to be doing it while piloting a 3000 lb. missile down the road. If you make a mistake at Starbuck's you spill your coffee. If you make a mistake in your car then maybe someone dies as a result of it.
Ford selling its interest and model development are two different things. Most of the current Volvo models are designed during the Ford reign and have many Ford components from body to engines. The reliability compared to Japanese (Toyota/Honda/Subaru) is abysmal.
With an '04 Alero and a '77 Cutlass Supreme in the garage, I must be "no one." :-|
20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
Really? None of the cars in my household are less than ten years old. Actually, come to that, we haven't even made a car payment in the last ten years.
The cars all work fine, though two of them are getting up toward 150K miles. We'll have to replace those in four or five years, probably.
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
I just got rid of my 16 year old Geo Prizm last year, it still ran well. If you take care of a car it will last many years.
I just don't see the cost working out. On top of that if you have the car for 10-20 years it's going to be the same as having an old 8 track. Car NAV systems don't seem to age well, I don't see this keeping up with the times. 5G will be out before too much longer.
This is how Detroit lost its shorts.
Because this is Slashdot.
www.wavefront-av.com
...along with a Wi-Fi hotspot that operates without draining a mobile device's battery.
Yeah, because I'd NEVER think to plug in my mobile device while in my car. How much do these idiots get paid?
Actually, it is. But even inside the center console, I feel safer with the low profile flash drive. The slot is on a ledge about halfway up the front of the compartment, so it's reasonably well protected, but I could still imagine dropping something on it or catching it as I put something in there.
Ignorance killed the cat. Curiosity was framed.
No, Volvo uses Volvo-designed engines.
"only an American would call 5 Liter 2 ton truck fuel efficient"
What part of l6 didn't you understand?
I've got better things to do tonight than die.
"No one owns a car for 10 or 20 years anymore, for the most part, they simply don't last that long"
They do if you don't buy junk.
I've got better things to do tonight than die.
Explorer weighs 2 tons my F150 weighs 2200 lb. And a full sized truck that gets 20mpg is good fuel economy for a work truck usually carring 1, 000 lb. Example of another full sized truck from 87 that has better fuel economy?
Dude. There is no way your F150 weighs 2200 lbs. My old 74 chevy weighed some 4500 lbs and only got about 12mpg (with a 7.4l v8). For comparison, my current 2009 toyota corolla has a curb weight of 2723 lbs. I could be wrong though, maybe ford makes their pickups out of cardboard ;) That 20mpg is quite respectable, but I assume that's highway mileage.
Which contain lot of components by Ford.
No, they don't. Citation or STFU.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki...
Lots of Volvos listed.
Where? I see a bunch of Volvos listed with some 4-cylinder engine. Volvo doesn't sell any cars with 4-cylinder engines in the US, only 5-cylinder and 6-cylinder engines. If some Europeans are having problems with their Volvos, I certainly haven't heard of it, nor am I likely to over here.
My S40's 5-cylinder is working just fine, thank you.
(Actually, I think Volvo just started selling some wagon this year in the US with a 4-cylinder option, but it's not listed here, and is a brand-new (and likely all-Volvo) engine.)
Volvo doesn't sell any cars with 4-cylinder engines in the US? Really?
Don't let the fact that it is called "T5" or "T6" fool you. Some of them have 4 cylinders despite the name, for instance:
http://www.volvocars.com/us/al... (this is a US site)
Of course if you compare their reliability with a typical American car, they are reliable. If you compare it with Japanese, they are not.
Anyway, the argument was that Volvo does not use Ford engines, but in fact they do use them in most of the current models. Also other parts of the current model range share stuff with Ford lineup. The Geely stuff will start coming later this year.
"only an American would call 5 Liter 2 ton truck fuel efficient"
What part of l6 didn't you understand?
What do You think it means? No, it doesnt lean 6 liters, it means inline 6 Ford 300
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F...
Even I know that, and I know shit about US tractor^^I mean family cars.
Who logs in to gdm? Not I, said the duck.
You really have no idea what you're talking about. "T5" is Volvo's nomenclature for their turbo 5-cylinder 2.5L engine. "T6" is a turbo V6 engine. No, they don't sell any 4-cylinder models here.
Well, i might not have an idea, but i can read. It is an amazing skill. If you bothered to click the link, you would see specs for current s60:
T5 Drive-E FWD
Starting at:
$33,300 MSRP
Engine Description 2.0 Liter, 4-Cylinder, Turbocharged, Direct-Injection
240 hp
T6 Drive-E FWD
Starting at:
$38,150 MSRP
2.0 Liter, 4-Cylinder, Supercharged & Turbocharged, Direct Injection
302 hp
Yes, there are a couple of 5 or 6 cylinder models as well, but you cannot say that ""T6" is a turbo V6 engine. No, they don't sell any 4-cylinder models here."
Very interesting; this is a new development. 302HP out of a 2L 4-cylinder engine is quite a feat.
Regardless, those aren't Ford engines by any stretch of the imagination. They ended their relationship with Ford quite some time ago.
As for Ford reliability, did you realize you're also saying that Mazdas are unreliable? The platform shared between the three shared a lot of parts between all three makers. And by most accounts, it's actually one of the most reliable Volvos ever made, and the Mazda3 (up until 2013) is generally considered very reliable as well.
Well. There were three arguments here. Lets backtrack to where it started.
Someone said that cars don't last 20 years with the exception of a Volvo perhaps. To which i replied that Volvos aren't very "sturdy" any more since they share the technology with Ford.
That got sidetracked with the arguments whether Volvo has used Ford engines (they have) and the number of cylinders in a Volvo. That being settled - I have had in my family and company different cars. During the warranty period we had to visit Ford's and Volvo's dealership several times. Ford even had some EZrust galvanic processing applied so that all the doors were replaced under warranty. With Honda and Subaru - not a single time, just scheduled service.
"5 Liter 2 ton truck"
That would be a 302(V8) , not an l6
I've got better things to do tonight than die.