Ford Explorer Limited Navigation Dual Moonroof 4wd on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Consumer Reports criticizes small turbo engines for misleading performance, fuel economy claims [w/video]

Consumer Reports has taken aim at at small-displacement, forced-induction engines, saying the powerplants don't manage to deliver on automaker fuel economy claims. Manufacturers have long held that smaller, turbocharged engines pack all power of their larger displacement cousins with significantly better fuel economy, but the research organization says that despite scoring high EPA economy numbers, the engines are no better than conventional drivetrains in both categories. Jake Fisher, director of automotive testing for Consumer Reports, says the forced induction options "are often slower and less fuel efficient than larger four and six-cylinder engines."
Specifically, CR calls out the new Ford Fusion equipped with the automaker's Ecoboost 1.6-liter four-cylinder engine. The institute's researchers found the engine, which is a $795 option over the base 2.5-liter four-cylinder, fails to match competitors in acceleration and served up 25 miles per gallon in testing, putting the sedan dead last among other midsize options.
The Chevrolet Cruze, Hyundai Sonata Turbo and Ford Escape 2.0T all got dinged for the same troubles, though Consumer Reports has found the turbo 2.0-liter four-cylinder in the BMW 328i does deliver on its promises. You can check out the full press release below. You can also read the full study on the Consumer Reports site, or scroll down for a short video recap.

Full-size trucks are the best and worst vehicles in America

You don’t need me to tell you that Americans love pickup trucks. And the bigger the truck, the more likely it seems to be seen as an object of desire. Monthly and yearly sales charts are something of a broken record; track one is the Ford F-Series, followed by the Chevy Silverado, RamÂ’s line of haulers, and somewhere not far down the line, the GMC Sierra. The big Japanese players fall in place a bit further below — not that thereÂ’s anything wrong with a hundred thousand Toyota Tundra sales — and one-size-smaller trucks like the Toyota Tacoma, Ford Ranger and Chevy Colorado have proven awfully popular, too. Along with their sales numbers, the average cost of new trucks has similarly been on the rise. Now, I donÂ’t pretend to have the right to tell people what they should or shouldnÂ’t buy with their own money. But I just canÂ’t wrap my head around why a growing number of Americans are choosing to spend huge sums of money on super luxurious pickup trucks. Let me first say I do understand the appeal. People like nice things, after all. I know I do. I myself am willing to spend way more than the average American on all sorts of discretionary things, from wine and liquor to cameras and lenses. IÂ’ve even spent my own money on vehicles that I donÂ’t need but want anyway. A certain vintage VW camper van certainly qualifies. I also currently own a big, inefficient SUV with a 454-cubic-inch big block V8. So if your answer to the question IÂ’m posing here is that youÂ’re willing to pay the better part of a hundred grand on a chromed-out and leather-lined pickup simply because you want to, then by all means — not that you need my permission — go buy one. The part I donÂ’t understand is this: Why wouldn't you, as a rational person, rather split your garage in half? On one side would sit a nice car that is quiet, rides and handles equally well and gets above average fuel mileage. Maybe it has a few hundred gasoline-fueled horsepower, or heck, maybe itÂ’s electric. On the other side (or even outside) is parked a decent pickup truck. One that can tow 10,000 pounds, haul something near a ton in the bed, and has all the goodies most Americans want in their cars, like cruise control, power windows and locks, keyless entry, and a decent infotainment screen.

Ford nets $924M in first quarter

Where General Motors' first-quarter 2015 financials showed growth in many major metrics, Ford's newly released numbers had falling figures in most of the vital categories. The automaker's Q1 revenue shrank to $33.9 billion, down $2 billion, and net income fell to $924 million, a $65-million drop. However, pre-tax profits increased slightly to $1.4 billion, $24 million more than in the same period in 2014, and operating margin rose to 3.6 percent, up 0.2 percent. Despite the less-than-stellar numbers, the Blue Oval thinks 2015 should be positive for the company. "The first quarter was a good start to a year in which our results will grow progressively stronger as the new products we have been launching start to pay off," CEO Mark Fields said in the financial announcement. The automaker has 15 vehicles to launch globally this year, and only three of them are already out. By the end of 2015, Ford predicts pre-tax profits of between $8.5 billion and $9.5 billion. In terms of vehicle sales, Ford slipped by 21,000 to a total of 1.568 million worldwide in the first quarter. North American sales dropped to 678,000, which was 39,000 less than last year, and pre-tax profits fell to $1.34 billion, a $160-million fall. The company explained the reductions on this continent as linked to the launches of the latest F-150 and Edge. In other major markets, European wholesales grew to 376,000 vehicles, a 9,000-car boost from last year. Pre-tax results there increased by $9 million, but the area still showed an overall loss of $185 million. In the Asia Pacific region, Ford moved 16,000 more units than in Q1 2014 to reach 366,000. However, due in part to preparing for new vehicles, the company only made $103 million there, a $188-million drop. The automaker released all of these figures as part of a PDF, which you can download here. Related Video: