1975 Ford Bronco Custom Topless And Doorless =>$7000 on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Man has surgery to remove T-Bird turn signal that's been in his arm for 51 years

In 1963, real estate agent Arthur Lampitt was driving a new Ford Thunderbird near East Peoria, Illinois on his way to an appointment when he collided head-on with a truck. A massive accident that was so bad that it was originally reported as a fatal crash, Lampitt suffered a broken hip and that became the focus of doctors' efforts. In fact, no one noticed the fact that the turn-signal stalk had been broken off the steering column and had lodged itself in Lampitt's arm. Fast-forward to around ten years ago, when Lampitt set off a courthouse metal detector because of a "slender object, about the size of a pencil" in his arm. Despite that unnerving discovery, the doctor who examined Lampitt said that since it didn't hurt, he needn't worry about it. This year, however, it did start hurting and the affected arm started to bulge. Lampitt decided to have the issue seen to, and suspected it might have something to do with his 1963 accident. When he looked through photos of the wreck taken by a friend, he noticed the turn-signal stalk of the Thunderbird missing and figured that was the culprit. After a 45-minute outpatient surgery, the surgeon verified it: a slim, slightly bent and corroded, seven-inch metal cylinder with a trumpeted end. The surgeon said a protective pocket had formed around it, which is why it could remain in Lampitt's arm so long, but it was still unusual - "We see all kinds of foreign objects like nails or pellets, but usually not this large." Lampitt, who is expected to make a full recovery, says he might make a keychain out of it, once he's done just holding it. News Source: St. Louis Post-DispatchImage Credit: Jesse Bogan, St. Louis Post-DispatchTip: Jon Auto News Ford Coupe accident wreck ford thunderbird turn signal

All eyes on Detroit as automakers prepare for slow, careful reopening of plants

DETROIT — The U.S. factories that make Fords, Chevys and Jeeps are coming back to life this week as workers install new safety equipment and wake up machines ahead of the high-stakes restart the Detroit automakers plan to launch on Monday. Ford, General Motors and Fiat Chrysler Automobiles all plan to reopen North American factories on May 18. The reopening of the U.S. auto sector will be a closely watched test of whether workers across a range of industries can return to factories in large numbers without a resurgence of COVID-19 infections. How well the automakers do will be significant for the U.S. economy, as nearly 1 million workers are employed in the sector. Executives at Ford and GM said separately this week the companies have not recorded any cases of COVID-19 transmission in plants outside the United States since adopting new safety protocols. Those procedures include mandatory face masks, separation of workers on assembly lines, frequent cleaning of work areas and requirements that workers pass through temperature monitors and report any symptoms before entering a plant. The Detroit Three have taken unprecedented steps to share information about coronavirus safety practices and develop a common set of workplace standards for their restarts, working with the United Auto Workers union, executives said. "We thought it was critical that we did it together," Ford manufacturing and labor chief Gary Johnson told Reuters. "We've never done this as an industry." The Detroit automakers will restart U.S. plants without regular testing of workers, because they do not have access to sufficient testing capacity, executives and UAW officials said. They will test workers who report COVID-19 symptoms or have fevers discovered by temperature scanners installed at factory entrances. "We have to continue to push for this testing," United Auto Workers union Vice President Cindy Estrada told Reuters on Wednesday. "Unless we have testing weekly to keep sick people out of the plant there is always a risk." Adopting new safety practices is just part of the work the companies must do to reopen after an extraordinary shutdown that has lasted two months.   Wave zero At Ford, workers going in to ready factories are part of what Chief Operating Officer Jim Farley calls "wave zero." The work of wave zero employees "is really important for success of the startup," he said in an interview.

Ford made three big mistakes in calculating MPG for 2013 C-Max Hybrid

It's been a rough time for the official fuel economy figures for the Ford C-Max Hybrid. When the car was released in 2012, Ford made a huge deal about how it would beat the Toyota Prius V, which was rated at 42 combined miles per gallon, 44 city and 40 highway. The Ford? 47 mpg across the board. How did Ford come to this place, where its Prius-beater turned into an also-ran? Well, after hearing customer complaints and issuing a software update in mid-2013, then discovering a real problem with the numbers last fall and then making a big announcement last week that the fuel economy ratings of six different 2013 and 2014 model year vehicles would need to be lowered, the C-Max Hybrid has ended up at 40 combined, 42 city and 37 highway. In other words, the Prius trumps it, as daily drivers of those two vehicles have known for a long time. The changes will not only affect the window sticker, but also the effect that the C-Max Hybrid (and the five other Ford vehicles that had their fuel economy figures lowered last week) have on Ford's compliance with greenhouse gas and CAFE rules for model year 2013 and 2014. How did Ford come to this place, where its Prius-beater turned into an also-ran? There are two technical answers to that question, which we've got below, as well as some context for how Ford's mistakes will play out in the bigger world of green vehicles. Let's start with Ford's second error, which is easy to do since we documented it in detail last year (the first, needing to do a software update, was also covered). The basic gist is that Ford used the general label rule (completely legally) to test the Fusion Hybrid and use those numbers to figure out how efficient the C-Max Hybrid is. That turned out to be a mistake, since the two vehicles are different enough that their numbers were not comparable, despite having the same engine, transmission and test weight, as the rules require. You can read more details here. Ford's Said Deep admitted that the TRLHP issue is completely separate from the general label error from last year. Now let's move on to last week's announcement. What's interesting is that the new recalculation of the MPG numbers – downward, of course – was caused by a completely separate issue, something called the Total Road Load Horsepower (TRLHP). Ford's Said Deep admitted to AutoblogGreen that the TRLHP issue had nothing to do with the general label error from last year.