2003 Ford Escape Xls Sport Utility 4-door 3.0l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

NHTSA upgrades Ford floor mat unintended acceleration probe

According to a Bloomberg report, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has upgraded an investigation into complaints of unintended acceleration lodged against Ford vehicles. The investigation began in June of 2010 when just three complaints had been received and it only concerned the Ford Fusion and Mercury Milan, but this was at a time when the phrase "unintended acceleration" made grown men go pale. With 49 additional complaints received since then, the investigation has been reclassified as an engineering analysis - the last phase before a recall - and it has been expanded to include the Lincoln MKZ, making for a total of "around 480,000" units affected between the three sedans from the 2008 to 2010 model years.
The ostensible cause is that floor mats are trapping the accelerator pedal, but according to a Ford statement at the time, the entrapment is due to owners placing the optional all-weather floor mats, or aftermarket floor mats, on top of the car's standard floor mats. NHTSA has backed up that assessment, pinning the blame on "unsecured or double stacked floor mats."
On the face of it, it would appear that NHTSA has upgraded the status not because of Ford's error, but owner error, and Ford has stated publicly that it is "disappointed" in NHTSA's move. On top of NHTSA still being skittish after that other unintended acceleration debacle, it could be seen to be taking its time investigating all of the variables: it's reported that Ford changed its accelerator pedal design in 2010, a "heel blocker" in the floorpan has been considered a potential culprit in how the floor mats could be trapping the pedal, some drivers have said the floor mats weren't anywhere near the pedal, and according to a report in the LA Times, in "a letter sent by Ford to NHTSA in August 2010, the automaker said it found three injuries and one fatality that 'may have resulted from the alleged defect.'"

Ford applies to trademark term 'Lincoln eGlide'

There's an epilogue to Ford's recent announcement that it's giving up on a battery-electric Lincoln co-developed with Rivian. The MachEClub forum discovered that just a week ago, Ford applied with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to trademark the term "Lincoln eGlide." The goods and services category details use for "Motor vehicles, namely, passenger automobiles, sport utility vehicles, electric vehicles and structural parts and fittings; electric vehicles, namely, passenger automobiles, sport utility vehicles, and structural parts and fittings." Living in an age where a small "e" is shorthand for "electric," and Ford having specified electric vehicles in the patent, the go-to guess is that this is for an electric vehicle. The inclusion of non-electric motor vehicles injects a little fuzziness. Tesla's trademark on the Model S specifies "electric automobiles" only, whereas Rivian's trademark for the R1T seeks coverage for "land vehicles" and just about every part found in or on a land vehicle.   Since Ford must have known about the end of the Rivian effort when it applied for the trademark, we suppose Lincoln has got some kind of eGlide coming no matter what. Lincoln refers to the theme of its latest cabin designs, as in the Aviator and Corsair, "Quiet Flight," and the road-scanning adaptive suspension on the Lincoln Aviator is called "Air Glide," neither term being trademarked. This leads our suspicions to eGlide becoming a vehicle component that could potentially serve a model with any powertrain, not necessarily battery-electric only, and eGlide won't be the name of the Lincoln EV that Ford says is still on the way. Another clue is that Ford included the word "Lincoln" in the term. Trademarked vehicle names such as Aviator and Corsair don't include the make, but services for vehicles do, such as the trademarks for Lincoln Connect and Lincoln Co-Pilot 360. We'll admit that a little bit of hope informs this line of thinking as well. Ford having done Lincoln the fabulous service of giving Lincolns terrific names, we'd be aghast if the Corsair and Navigator had to share showroom space with an eGlide. We've no choice but to wait for a retail product to provide answers. In the meantime, if we could just get to the bottom of this "Fastor Charge" trademark, and what's this bit about "Vandemonium?"   Related Video:        

BMW, Hyundai score big in JD Power's first Tech Experience Index

While automakers are quick to brag about winning a JD Power Initial Quality Study award, the reality, as we've pointed out before, is that these ratings are somewhat misleading, since IQS doesn't necessarily distinguish genuine quality issues. JD Power's new Tech Experience Index aims to solve that problem. The new metric takes the same 90-day approach as IQS but focuses exclusively on technology – collision protection, comfort and convenience, driving assistance, entertainment and connectivity, navigation, and smartphone mirroring. It splits the industry up into just seven segments, based loosely on size, which is why the Chevrolet Camaro is in the same division (mid-size) as Kia Sorento and the Mercedes-Benz GLE-Class is in the same segment as the Hyundai Genesis (mid-size premium). It makes for some screwy bedfellows, to be sure. Still, splitting tech experience away from initial quality should allow customers to make more informed and intelligent decisions when buying new vehicles. In the inaugural study, respondents listed BMW and Hyundai as the big winners, with two segment awards – the 2 Series for small premium and the 4 Series for compact premium, and the Genesis for mid-size premium and Tucson for small segment. The Chevrolet Camaro (midsize), Kia Forte (compact), and Nissan Maxima (large) scored individual wins. Ford also had a surprising hit with the Lincoln MKC, which ranked third in the compact premium segment behind the 4 Series and Lexus IS. This is a coup for the Blue Oval, whose woeful MyFord Touch systems made the brand a victim of the IQS' flaws in the early 2010s. But Ford and other automakers might not want to celebrate just yet. According to JD Power, there's still a lot of room for improvement – navigation systems were the lowest-rated piece of tech in the study. Instead, customers repeatedly saluted collision-avoidance and safety systems, giving the category the best marks of the study and listing blind-spot monitoring and backup cameras as two must-have features – 96 percent of respondents said they wanted those two systems in their next vehicle. But this isn't really a surprise. Implementation of safety systems from brand to brand is similar, and they don't require any input from users, unlike navigation and infotainment systems which are frustratingly deep.