2000 Ford F-150 Xl on 2040-cars

Auto blog

MotorWeek remembers pre-EcoBoost Ford with the Thunderbird TurboCoupe

Sometimes it feels great to embrace nostalgia for a trip down memory lane, and MotorWeek indulges that occasional desire with its regular Retro Review series. This time, the long-lived show goes back to the '80s to check out two of the top performance vehicles in the Ford lineup at the time – the 1987 Thunderbird TurboCoupe and Mustang GT. Both models had just received thorough refreshes after several years on the market. Long before an EcoBoost badge ever met its models, Ford made early forays into experimenting with turbocharging on vehicles like the T-Bird TurboCoupe. Based on MotorWeek's assessment, the company was on the right track. The boosted 2.3-liter four-cylinder was apparently a bit coarse but offered 190 horsepower with little turbo lag, compared to 155 hp the year before. The Mustang GT is likely the more-fondly remembered of these performance Fords today and provides an interesting point of comparison against the TurboCoupe. MotorWeek found some faults with the 'Stang, though. While it was quick for the time with a sprint to 60 mph in 6.5 seconds, the 'car was described as "a nose-heavy beast" for its handling. And for a look at Ford's future in turbocharging – the GT will have an EcoBoost powerplant – check out our Related Video:

Motor Trend pits Camaro 1LE vs Mustang with Performance Pack, surprises ensue

With the 2015 Ford Mustang firmly on the scene, the inevitable comparisons with its arch rival, the 2015 Chevrolet Camaro are just starting to trickle out. Over the next several months, you're likely to be inundated by every outlet's muscle car comparison, whether it be the turbocharged Ford against the V6 Chevy, a V8-powered convertible comparo or what we have here, a competition between each vehicle's performance upgrade.
Motor Trend has pitted the Camaro SS 1LE against a Mustang with the GT Performance Pack for a comprehensive series of comparisons on the test stage, street and finally, at Willow Springs with ace Randy Pobst behind the wheel. As per usual, we aren't about to spoil this one for you.
So, hit the play button, have a look and then let us know what you think in Comments.

Aluminum lightweighting does, in fact, save fuel

When the best-selling US truck sheds the equivalent weight of three football fullbacks by shifting to aluminum, folks start paying attention. Oak Ridge National Laboratory took a closer look at whether the reduced fuel consumption from a lighter aluminum body makes up for the fact that producing aluminum is far more energy intensive than steel. And the results of the study are pretty encouraging. In a nutshell, the energy needed to produce a vehicle's raw materials accounts for about 10 percent of a typical vehicle's carbon footprint during its total lifecycle, and that number is up from six percent because of advancements in fuel economy (fuel use is down to about 68 percent of total emissions from about 75 percent). Still, even with that higher material-extraction share, the fuel-efficiency gains from aluminum compared to steel will offset the additional vehicle-extraction energy in just 12,000 miles of driving, according to the study. That means that, from an environmental standpoint, aluminum vehicles are playing with the house's money after just one year on the road. Aluminum-sheet construction got topical real quickly earlier this year when Ford said the 2015 F-150 pickup truck would go to a 93-percent aluminum body construction. In addition to aluminum being less corrosive than steel, that change caused the F-150 to shed 700 pounds from its curb weight. And it looks like the Explorer and Expedition SUVs may go on an aluminum diet next. Take a look at SAE International's synopsis of the Oak Ridge Lab's study below. Life Cycle Energy and Environmental Assessment of Aluminum-Intensive Vehicle Design Advanced lightweight materials are increasingly being incorporated into new vehicle designs by automakers to enhance performance and assist in complying with increasing requirements of corporate average fuel economy standards. To assess the primary energy and carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) implications of vehicle designs utilizing these materials, this study examines the potential life cycle impacts of two lightweight material alternative vehicle designs, i.e., steel and aluminum of a typical passenger vehicle operated today in North America. LCA for three common alternative lightweight vehicle designs are evaluated: current production ("Baseline"), an advanced high strength steel and aluminum design ("LWSV"), and an aluminum-intensive design (AIV).