1961 Ford F-100 Sport Stepside on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Hennessey Ford GT sets 267.6-MPH record at Texas Mile [w/videos]

The record-setting Hennessey-powered camouflage Ford GT we showed you at this time last year headed back to the Texas Mile and managed to bring home yet another record. As you may recollect, last year saw Mark Heidraker's machine sprint to a record 257.7 mph thanks to propulsion from its twin-turbo 5.7-liter V8. The big mill sucks down race gas, and this year the creation pulled off a 267.6-mph run over the weekend. That feat set a new record for the event. Something tells us neither Heidraker nor Hennessey are done squeezing more thrust from this machine.
This particular Ford GT has already gone through a number of permutations. Hennessey started by tweaking the factory supercharger set up before abandoning the blower in favor of two turbos. Since then, the crew has poked and prodded it to coerce as much grunt as possible out of the car. We expect Hennessey will probably come out with a video of the record-setting run shortly, but in the meantime, you can see a couple of videos of the car's runs in Texas below (one of which actually captures the record run). Enjoy.

Ford Mustang outsold Audi TT and Porsche 911 in Germany

Despite being the antithesis of the cars Germany is known for, the new Ford Mustang was the best selling sports car in the land of schnitzel and beer last month by a whisker. The Mustang beat out the Audi TT by 780 units to 708, and it beat Germany's best known performance car, the Porsche 911, 780 to 752. That makes some sense, right? The Mustang has to be cheaper than those competitors, right? Not really. Both the EcoBoost and V8-powered Mustang have higher starting prices than the equivalent TT. The 2.3-liter, EcoBoost-powered Mustang starts at 38,000 euros (around $43,300 at today's rates), while the front-drive Audi TT starts at 35,950 euros (about $41,000). The V8-powered Mustang GT, meanwhile, starts at 43,000 euros (about $49,000), which is just 2,550 euros more than the Quattro-equipped TT. When 310 horsepower or 435 hp can be had for just a couple thousand more than 220 hp, it's easy to understand the Mustang's success. The 911, of course, is a lot more expensive than the Mustang. You can buy two Mustang GTs for the price of a single Carrera. But Ford also managed to beat out the Porsche's smaller siblings, the Boxster and Cayman twins, which sold a combined 642 vehicles. Again, the pony car is significantly cheaper, but that doesn't do much to lessen the impact of the Mustang's victory. If you're in Germany and are concerned about this American invasion, you shouldn't be (yet). The TT is Germany's best-selling sports car from January through March, with 2,299 to the Ford's 1,823. Porsche is breathing down the pony car's neck, too, with 1,811 units in 2016. It'll be interesting to see if Ford's successful March carries on into the rest of 2016. Related Video:

Ward's calls out Ford's EcoBoost engines for their crummy fuel economy

With a name like EcoBoost, one might expect Ford's line of turbocharged engines to be somewhat, um, economical. In other words, replacing displacement with a turbocharger is supposed to deliver better fuel economy. Based on the experience time and time again of multiple Autoblog editors, your author included, this is simply not the case. Now, Ward's is calling out the cruddy efficiency numbers of Ford's EcoBoost line of engines. The column dresses down not just the new 2.7-liter V6 of the 2015 F-150, but also the 2.3-liter of the Mustang, the 1.5-liter from the Fusion and the 3.2-liter PowerStroke diesel found in the Transit, while also explaining why just one Ford engine was named to Ward's 10 Best Engines list. In its testing of all four engines, Ward's editors never came even remotely close to matching the 2.7's claimed 26 miles per gallon (for two-wheel-drive models), with the truck's computer indicating between 17.6 and 19 mpg over a 250-odd-mile run. Calculating the fuel economy manually revealed an even more depressing 15.6 miles per gallon. Criticisms with the 2.3-liter four-cylinder focused on its strange soundtrack, although it was business as usual with the 1.5-liter and 3.2 diesel, with Ward's criticizing the fuel economy of both engines. The 1.5, which Ward's claims is sold as a hybrid alternative, failed to get over 30 miles per gallon, while the five-cylinder turbodiesel's figures couldn't stand up against FCA's 3.0-liter EcoDiesel. The entire column really is worth a read, especially if you were disappointed in Ward's decision to only salute Ford's three-cylinder EcoBoost while shunning the rest of the company's new turbocharged mills.