2001 Ford Expedition Xlt Sport Utility 4-door 4.6l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

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.

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:        

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.