2012 Ford F150 Xlt on 2040-cars

Auto blog

From CrabWalks at dawn to post-testing sushi: An inside look at Autoblog’s Tech of the Year Award

TROY, Mich. — On a chilly fall morning, Senior Editor John Snyder rolled into a sleepy suburban park tucked away next to a cemetery a few miles north of Detroit. Driving diagonally — CrabWalking — in the GMC Hummer EV, he made quite the entrance as he maneuvered across the parking lot to the bemusement of Autoblog editors and a few curious park-goers up for their early morning runs.  Snyder got everyoneÂ’s attention, and as we evaluate the latest wave of technologies transforming the automotive industry, pizazz matters. We added "wow factor" to our criteria for the 2022 Autoblog Technology of the Year Award, in keeping with the times. The HummerÂ’s CrabWalk feature might have won, had wowness been the only criteria, but we also scored the technologies on significance and how well they work.  As it was, the Hummer finished a competitive second this year, behind FordÂ’s Onboard Scales and Smart Hitch, which make towing and hauling easier for modern truck owners. The Genesis GV60Â’s Biometrics was within striking distance in third place, bringing the facial recognition and fingerprint tech commonly used in phones to your car. For more on FordÂ’s win — its second straight Autoblog Technology of the Year Award — read Road Test Editor Zac PalmerÂ’s complete recap. Many have asked: Why do Tech of the Year? For Autoblog, itÂ’s been a point of pride for nearly a decade. In the early days it was a way to differentiate ourselves from print magazines, some of which have been giving out car of the year awards since the early days of the Cold War. With Tech of the Year, we seek to highlight the ways experiencing a vehicle is changing. It was true in 2013 and resonates even more as we head into 2023. Cars and transportation have changed more in the past decade than in arguably the previous four. At its most basic experience, driving a 1985 Buick LeSabre with a decent radio and comfy interior was not all that different from driving a 2005 Buick Lacrosse. Just a few years later, many cars had touchscreens, the internet and some means of driver assistance. Ford joins Tesla as the only two-time winner of Tech of the Year. The Blue Oval captured the award last year for its Pro Power Onboard generator. Tesla won in 2014 for its Supercharger network, and the Model S won in 2016, when we briefly gave out a “technology car” of the year award, in addition to honoring a particular feature.

Ford's EV Consumer Satisfaction Survey | Autoblog Minute

Ford commissioned a survey of 10,000 electric vehicle owners, posing the following question: What would will you buy next? Ford Hybrid Autoblog Minute Videos Original Video

EPA says fuel economy test for hybrids is accurate

The EPA says it stands behind its fuel economy test for hybrid vehicles following controversy about the testing process after Ford C-Max Hybrid customers and automotive journalists alike struggled to achieve 47 miles per gallon, the advertised mpg number, Automotive News reports. Ford responded to the issue almost two weeks ago by claiming that a 1970s-era EPA general label rule was responsible for the inaccurate mileage numbers, rerating the C-Max Hybrid's mpg numbers and offering customers rebates. Ford later said it didn't overstate the C-Max Hybrid's fuel economy and that it was surprised by the low numbers.
Ford technically didn't do anything wrong because it was following the general label rule, but agency regulator Christopher Grundler says the automaker was exploiting a loophole when it came up with the hybrid C-Max numbers, and that the testing process remains accurate. The general label rule allows vehicles that use the same engine and transmission and are in the same weight class to share fuel economy numbers, but it doesn't take into account other factors such as aerodynamic efficiency, which affects hybrids more drastically than non-hybrid vehicles. Ford originally used the Fusion Hybrid economy figures for the C-Max Hybrid and claimed the engineers didn't realize that its aerodynamic efficiency would affect fuel economy as much as it did.