Ford F100 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.

UAW warns automakers: Restarting U.S. plants is 'too soon and too risky'

WASHINGTON/WARREN, Mich. — The head of the United Auto Workers union on Thursday said it was "too soon and too risky" to reopen auto plants and Michigan's economy in early May, citing insufficient scientific data and coronavirus testing to assure workplaces are safe. The warning from UAW President Rory Gamble on Thursday afternoon came as General Motors Co , Ford Motor Co and Toyota Motor Corp took new steps toward reopening North American vehicle manufacturing operations in an environment where consumer demand is uncertain and worker safety paramount. The union has said that 24 of its members have died from Covid-19, though it was unclear whether they might have become infected in the workplace. Unionized Detroit automakers and non-union German and Asian automakers have been preparing to restart U.S. vehicle making operations by early May. Companies have shifted reopening dates amid uncertainty about government stay-at-home orders. Gamble's statement appeared to derail plans by the Detroit Three to start bringing UAW workers back to vehicle manufacturing jobs on May 4. The longer the automakers cannot produce profitable U.S.-made trucks and sport utility vehicles, the longer they burn cash. The UAW leader's statement was also aimed at Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, who has come under pressure from conservative groups and President Donald Trump to ease coronavirus stay-at-home restrictions. "At this point in time, the UAW does not believe the scientific data is conclusive that it is safe to have our members back in the workplace. We have not done enough testing to really understand the threat our members face," Gamble said. "We strongly suggest to our companies in all sectors that an early May date is too soon and too risky to our members, their families and their communities." Gamble said the union was "happy with the auto companiesÂ’ response and cooperation on working through the health and safety protocols we will need in the workplace when it is appropriate to restart." Earlier Thursday, GM began notifying front line managers to come back to work next week to get trained on new safety protocols designed to prevent the spread of the novel coronavirus as workers return to plants.

FIA introduces 'Hypercar Concept' for World Endurance Championship

One of the most common jabs at hypercars is the question, "Where can you drive them to their potential?" Imagine the answer being: to the checkered flag in the 24 Hours of Le Mans. We're not there yet, but the FIA World Motor Sport Council took a step closer to the possibility during its second annual meeting in Manila, the Philippines. One of three initiatives the WSMC announced for the 2020 World Endurance Championship was "Freedom of design for brands based on a 'Hypercar' concept." This "Hypercar concept" would replace LMP1 as the premier class in the WEC. The dream, of course, would be seeing racing versions of the AMG Project One, Aston Martin Valkyrie AMR Pro, Bugatti Chiron, Koenigsegg Regera, McLaren Senna GTR, Pagani Huara BC, and the rest of the gang trading paint and carbon fiber through Dunlop in a heinously expensive version of "Buy on Sunday, sell on Monday." The reality is that we don't have all the details yet on the set of regulations called "GTP," but the FIA wants race cars more closely tied to road cars, albeit with the performance level of today's LMP1 cars. Exterior design freedom would shelter internals designed to reduce costs, the FIA planning to mandate less complex hybrid systems and allow the purchase of spec systems. One of the FIA's primary goals is lowering LMP1 budgets to a quarter of their present levels. Audi and Porsche budgets exceeded $200 million, while Toyota - the only factory LMP1 entry this year and next - is assumed to have a budget hovering around $100 million. Reports indicated that Aston Martin, Ferrari, Ford, McLaren, and Toyota sat in on the development of the proposed class. If the FIA can get costs down to around $25 million, that would compare running a top IndyCar team and have to be hugely appealing to the assembled carmakers. The initiative represents another cycle of the roughly once-a-decade reboot of sports car racing to counter power or cost concerns. The FIA shut down Group 5 Special Production Sports Car class in 1982 to halt worrying power hikes, and introduced Group C. In 1993, Group C came to an ignoble end over costs; manufacturers were spending $15 million on a season, back when that was real money and not one-fifth of a Ferrari 250 GTO. Then came the BPR Global GT Series that morphed into the FIA GT Championship, which would see the last not-really-a-road car take overall Le Mans victory in 1998, the Porsche 911 GT1. That era would be most aligned with a future hypercar class.