2002 Ford E150 on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Ford finds flex-fuel engine design plays big role in emissions output

How bad is ethanol for your engine? There's been a lot of debate on this issue as the US considers upping the biofuel content in the national gasoline supply from 10 percent (E10) to 15 percent (E15). The ethanol industry and some scientists say higher ethanol blends show no "meaningful differences" in new engines while the oil industry says ethanol creates health risks. Researchers working at the Ford Research and Innovation Center decided to take a closer look at how a wide range of gas-ethanol blends - E0, E10, E20, E30, E40, E55 and E80 - affected the emissions coming out of a flex-fuel 2006 Mercury Grand Marquis. To see the full report, printed in the journal Environmental Science & Technology, requires payment, but there is an abstract and Green Car Congress has some more details. The gist is that, "with increasing ethanol content in the fuel, the tailpipe emissions of ethanol, acetaldehyde, formaldehyde, methane, and ammonia increased." At least NOx and NMHC emissions decreased. The researchers say that the effects are due to the fuel and "are expected for all FFVs," but that the way that a manufacturer calibrates the engine will affect NOx, THC, and NMOG emissions. It's this last bit that's important, since the researchers found, "Higher ethanol content in gasoline affects several fundamental fuel properties that can impact emissions. ... These changes can have positive or negative effects that can depend on engine design, hardware, and control strategy. In addition to direct emissions impacts, higher ethanol content fuel can also provide more efficient combustion and overall engine operation under part-load conditions and under knock-limited higher-load conditions." So, as we head towards more ethanol in our fuel supply (maybe), manufacturers are going to need to learn how to burn it most efficiently.

For EV drivers, realities may dampen the electric elation

The Atlantic, a decades-old monthly journal well-regarded for its intelligent essays on international news, American politics and cultural happenings, recently turned its attention to the car world. A piece that ran in The Atlantic in October examined the excesses of the GMC Hummer EV for compromising safety. And now in its latest edition, the magazine ran a compelling story about the challenges of driving an electric vehicle and how those experiences “mythologize the car as the great equalizer.” Titled “The Inconvenient Truth About Electric Vehicles,” the story addresses the economics of EVs, the stresses related to range anxiety, the social effects of owning an electric car — as in, affording one — and the overarching need for places to recharge that car. Basically, author Andrew Moseman says that EV life isn't so rosy: “On the eve of the long-promised electric-vehicle revolution, the myth is due for an update. Americans who take the plunge and buy their first EV will find a lot to love Â… they may also find that electric-vehicle ownership upends notions about driving, cost, and freedom, including how much car your money can buy. "No one spends an extra $5,000 to get a bigger gas tank in a Honda Civic, but with an EV, economic status is suddenly more connected to how much of the world you get to see — and how stressed out or annoyed youÂ’ll feel along the way.” Moseman charts how a basic Ford F-150 Lightning electric truck might start at $55,000, but an extended-range battery, which stretches the distance on a charge from 230 miles to 320, “raises the cost to at least $80,000. The trend holds true with all-electric brands such as Tesla, Rivian, and Lucid, and for many electric offerings from legacy automakers. The bigger battery option can add a four- or five-figure bump to an already accelerating sticker price.” As for the charging issue, the author details his anxiety driving a Telsa in Death Valley, with no charging stations in sight. “For those who never leave the comfort of the city, these concerns sound negligible," he says. "But so many of us want our cars to do everything, go everywhere, ferry us to the boundless life we imagine (or the one weÂ’re promised in car commercials),” he writes. His conclusions may raise some hackles among those of us who value automotive independence — not to mention fun — over practicalities.

Ford recalls more than 550,000 trucks and SUVs for various safety issues

Ford announced safety recalls for its current F-150 pickup along with several Ford and Lincoln crossovers early Wednesday. The recalls cover more than 550,000 vehicles and address various safety defects, ranging from a fire hazard to potential loss of braking power.  The most far-reaching of the recalls covers approximately 550,000 examples of the 2015-2018 Ford Edge and 2016-2018 Lincoln MKX, which may have been assembled with defective front brake jounce hoses (also commonly referred to as "flex lines"). These hoses run from fixed points on the chassis to the individual front brake calipers. Defective hoses could potentially rupture, allowing brake fluid to leak and resulting in a loss of braking function. Ford will replace the components in question with revised parts.  The next-largest recall is for roughly 3,000 2020 Lincoln Corsair crossovers. The affected models may have been assembled without proper clearance between their rear suspension springs and toe link brackets. The components could potentially make contact, wearing down the protective coating on the rear coil springs, allowing corrosion to occur over time. This corrosion could eventually lead to a failure of the spring. If this happens while the vehicle is being driven, it could result in a sudden change to the vehicle's handling characteristics, and the spring fragments could potentially cause further damage to the car or surrounding traffic.  Ford says owners will be notified that their Corsairs need to be inspected; if there is not adequate clearance between the rear suspension components, Ford's service technicians will remove material from the toe link bracket to allow for operation without contact.  The final (and by far the smallest) recall is for the 2020 F-150. Some units may have left the factory with the incorrect retention nut on the hot lead to the starter motor. Ford says it can cause increased heat generation or electrical arcing, which could potentially result in a fire. Ford says this issue is limited to just a few hundred examples sold in the United States. Dealers will inspect the vehicles and replace the nut if necessary.