2005 Ford Excursion Eddie Bauer 8pass Diesel Dvd 65k Mi Texas Direct Auto on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Jaguar design boss admits X-Type was a mistake

History has a way of repeating itself, especially in the auto industry. When Jaguar was owned by Ford, the British brand attempted to field a competitor for the BMW 3 Series, called the X-Type. Based on the bones of a Ford Mondeo, it aped the styling of Jaguar's flagship model, the XJ, while borrowing liberally from the Ford parts bin. That was 2001.
Now, in 2013, Jaguar is planning a new 3 Series challenger based on the platform previewed by the C-X17 Concept, while Ford is attempting to take the latest Mondeo upmarket. The moves have both brands recognizing where, why, and how the X-Type failed. "It didn't look mature or powerful or anything. It was just a car," Jaguar's current head of advanced design, Julian Thomson, told PistonHeads. Basing the X-Type on a front-drive car while giving it styling that was meant for a rear-driver lead to proportions that "were plainly wrong," Thomson told PH. Ford's European head of quality, Gunnar Herrmann, added that the X-Type was "a fake Jaguar, because every piece I touch is Ford."
For what it's worth, the X-Type's successor in the segment will sport rear-drive, with plenty of input from Ian Callum. Thomson described the new model, which would challenge the 3 Series as having, "Big wheels right to the ends of the car, low bonnet, short overhangs, very low cabins." Sounds good to us.

Lexus tops JD Power Vehicle Dependability Study again, Buick bests Toyota

It shouldn't surprise anyone, but Lexus has once again taken the top spot in JD Power's Vehicle Dependability Study. That'd be the Japanese luxury brand's fourth straight year at the top of table. The big news, though, is the rise of Buick. General Motor's near-premium brand beat out Toyota to take second place, with 110 problems per 100 vehicles compared to Toyota's 111 problems. Lexus owners only reported 89 problems per 100 vehicles. Besides Buick's three-position jump, Scion enjoyed a major improvement, jumping 13 positions from 2014. Ram and Mitsubishi made big gains, as well, moving up 11 and 10 positions, respectively. In terms of individual segments, GM and Toyota both excelled, taking home seven segment awards each. The study wasn't good news for all involved, though. A number of popular automakers finished below the industry average of 147 problems per 100 vehicles, including Subaru, (157PP100), Volkswagen (165PP100), Ford/Hyundai (188PP100 each) and Mini (193PP100). The biggest losers (by a tremendous margin, we might add) were Land Rover and Fiat, recording 258 and 273 problems per 100 vehicles. The next closest brand was Jeep, with 197PP100. While the Vehicle Dependability Study uses the same measurement system as the Initial Quality Survey, the two metrics analyze very different things. The VDS looks at problems experienced by original owners of model year 2012 vehicles over the past 12 months, while the oft-quoted IQS focuses on problems in the first 90 days of new-vehicle ownership. Like the IQS, though, the VDS has a rather broad definition of what a problem is. Because of that, a low score from JD Power is no guarantee of extreme unreliability, so much as just poor design. In this most recent study, the two most reported problems focused on Bluetooth connectivity and the voice-command systems. The former leaves plenty of room for user error due to poor design (particularly true of the Bluetooth systems on the low-scoring Fords, Volkswagens and Subarus), while the second is something JD Power has already confirmed as being universally terrible. That makes means that while these studies are important, they shouldn't be taken as gospel when it comes to automotive reliability. News Source: JD PowerImage Credit: Copyright 2015 Jeremy Korzeniewski / AOL Buick Fiat Ford GM Hyundai Jeep Land Rover Lexus MINI Mitsubishi RAM Scion Subaru Toyota Volkswagen Auto Repair Ownership study

Ford earnings take a dive on investment, slowing sales; workers get $6,900 in profit sharing

Ford Motor Company's pre-tax profits for 2014 took a beating, falling to $6.3 billion, a $2.3-billion drop from 2013, while overall revenues fell from $139.4 billion to $135.8 billion. Net income for 2014, meanwhile, plunged 56 percent, from $7.18 billion to $3.19 billion. Yeah, those aren't great numbers. While Ford's figures are largely down across the board, some of the weaker numbers aren't too difficult to explain away. The company launched 24 vehicles across the globe in 2014, including some of its biggest and most important volume models, like the 2015 F-150, as well as iconic offerings like the new Mustang. The result of this is both increased investment as well as a drop in total sales – US market numbers were down 164,000 units compared to 2013. Recall claims and high warranty costs also did a number on the Blue Oval. "2014 was a solid yet challenging year for Ford - with our investments and a record number of new products launched around the world positioning us for strong growth this year and beyond," Ford CEO Mark Fields said in a statement. Ford's 50,180 UAW workers in the United States will receive profit-sharing checks of $6,900. In some markets, Ford's fortunes were impacted by outside factors. Europe, for example, recorded more sales (up 70,000 units) and higher revenues (up $2.2 billion), but still reported a $443-million pre-tax loss. Blame was placed on the crumbling Russian economy, which has suffered from sanctions and slumping oil prices. Despite its troubles last year, the company still seems bullish on 2015. Ford's pre-tax outlook remains unchanged, as the company expects to make anywhere from $8.5 to $9.5 billion on the back of higher revenue from the company's automotive operations. We expect strong growth and improved financial performance in 2015 driven by our investments in new products and capacity," Ford CFO Bob Shanks said of the company's future.