2010 Ford Taurus Sho Sedan 4-door 3.5l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

EPA says fuel economy test for hybrids is accurate

The EPA says it stands behind its fuel economy test for hybrid vehicles following controversy about the testing process after Ford C-Max Hybrid customers and automotive journalists alike struggled to achieve 47 miles per gallon, the advertised mpg number, Automotive News reports. Ford responded to the issue almost two weeks ago by claiming that a 1970s-era EPA general label rule was responsible for the inaccurate mileage numbers, rerating the C-Max Hybrid's mpg numbers and offering customers rebates. Ford later said it didn't overstate the C-Max Hybrid's fuel economy and that it was surprised by the low numbers.
Ford technically didn't do anything wrong because it was following the general label rule, but agency regulator Christopher Grundler says the automaker was exploiting a loophole when it came up with the hybrid C-Max numbers, and that the testing process remains accurate. The general label rule allows vehicles that use the same engine and transmission and are in the same weight class to share fuel economy numbers, but it doesn't take into account other factors such as aerodynamic efficiency, which affects hybrids more drastically than non-hybrid vehicles. Ford originally used the Fusion Hybrid economy figures for the C-Max Hybrid and claimed the engineers didn't realize that its aerodynamic efficiency would affect fuel economy as much as it did.

Ford files trademark application for 'Model E'

In early December, Ford filed an application with the US Patent and Trademark Office for the name "Model E." Historically, Ford never produced a Model E, and while automakers are known to file for trademarks they never use, some have wondered if the application might be used for a concept car.
Based on other recent events, though, it could be a legal move. In 2000 Ford sued an online start-up called Model E over the similarity of that name to Ford's industry-shaping Model T, but the judge dismissed the case citing lack of proper grounds. In August 2013, Tesla applied for trademark registration for Model E, and at the time, Ford said it would review the application. Tesla actually made two applications for Model E, one for automobiles and structural parts therefore, the other for "providing maintenance and repair services for automobiles," and there are plenty of theories about what the name could be applied to.
The Published for Opposition date for Tesla's applications is December 31, 2013, after which anyone who thinks they'd be harmed by Tesla being granted the trademark gets 30 days to register their issues. This is just speculation, but Ford's application - which was filed for automobiles only - might be about protecting what it sees as unwelcome encroachment on the name Model T, protection it wasn't able to enforce before when the stakes were only online and much smaller.

How Ford plans to handle insurance and repair questions surrounding new aluminum-bodied F-150

Building a car out of aluminum has a number of benefits - the lighter weight allows the vehicle to be more agile, more fuel efficient, make better use of its power and be more resistant to dings and dents. The downside to the advanced construction, though, is that repairs are both challenging and expensive. That's troubling for the new, aluminum-bodied Ford F-150, because it's kind of made a name for itself as a rugged, durable work vehicle.
How will the legions of Ford buyers cope when it comes time to insure and repair their new trucks? Well, according to Ford, it's expecting a ten-percent jump in insurance costs for the aluminum-bodied F-150, although Ford's truck marketing manager, Doug Scott, was quick to point out that the F-150 is generally cheaper to insure than its competition from Ram and General Motors. "At the end of the day, that's sort of a wash," Scott told Automotive News at last week's Detroit Auto Show. "We've spent a lot of time and feel very comfortable that that's not going to be an inhibitor."
The other issue facing Ford is the distinct lack of body shops that have the training or equipment to repair aluminum-bodied vehicles. AN cites an estimate from the Automotive Service Association claiming that of the 30,000 independent body shops in the US, less than 10 percent are able to work on aluminum.