1999 Ford F-250 7.2 Diesel 248,000 Miles With Snow Plow, Saltspreader 5th Wheel. on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Ford GT to be revived, Le Mans battle upcoming

Ford dominated the 24 Hours of Le Mans from 1966 to 1969, scoring four consecutive wins. Wouldn't it be great if the Blue Oval could go back to France for the 50th anniversary of that performance and show it can still compete in international endurance racing? Actually, the latest rumors indicate that could be exactly the case, and the car taking that checkered flag could be another revival of the Ford GT.
As the rumblings go, Ford wants to use a new supercar to take another crack at Le Mans, after considering some other possible alternatives. Substantiating these musings are reports that a Blue Oval rep was reportedly on hand for a recent meeting about 2016 GTE-Class rules, according to Road and Track. That would put the new GT in the same racing class as the Corvette, Ferrari 458 Italia, Porsche 911 and others.
It's not all about racing, though. If you win on Sunday, you want something to be able to sell on Monday. The revived GT is reportedly still a mid-engine supercar, but the exact engine is unclear. It's possible that it could even be shown or announced at the Detroit auto show in January, according to Motor Trend.

Ford recalls 9,900 vehicles across two campaigns

Ford is recalling a total of 9,885 vehicles in two campaigns. The Basics: In one recall, Ford will recall 9,017 examples of the 2013 Escape with build dates from January 11, 2012, to April 1, 2013, and the 2013-2014 Focus ST produced between May 3, 2012, and October 14, 2013. The Problem: Splices in the engine wiring harness might not have enough compression, and this can cause the manifold absolute pressure sensor to send incorrect signals to the powertrain control module. This issue could cause the engine to stall. Injuries/Deaths: None reported. The Fix: Dealers will replace the current crimped splices with new splices, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. If You Own One: The repair campaign will begin on January 4, 2016. More Information: Ford recalled the 2013 Escape and Focus ST in August 2014 for the same problem, and this is an expansion of that campaign, according to company spokesperson John Cangany to Autoblog. The Basics: In the smaller of the two campaigns, Ford will recall 868 examples of the 2013 Explorer, Explorer Police Utility, Taurus, Taurus Police Interceptor, Flex, Lincoln MKS, and MKT. The Problem: The fuel delivery module can crack, which would cause a fuel leak. Injuries/Deaths: None reported. The Fix: Dealers will replace the fuel delivery module. If You Own One: Owners should receive notice soon because NHTSA's report says the recall begins in December. More Information: According to Cangany, this recall is an expansion of a campaign from 2013 for these vehicles. RECALL Subject : Engine Wiring Splices may cause Stall Report Receipt Date: DEC 02, 2015 NHTSA Campaign Number: 15V813000 Component(s): ELECTRICAL SYSTEM Potential Number of Units Affected: 9,017 All Products Associated with this Recall Vehicle Make Model Model Year(s) FORD ESCAPE 2013 FORD FOCUS 2013-2014 Details Manufacturer: Ford Motor Company SUMMARY: Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain model year 2013 Escape vehicles manufactured January 11, 2012, to April 1, 2013, and 2013-2014 Focus ST vehicles manufactured May 03, 2012, to October 14, 2013. Insufficient compression in the engine wiring harness splices to the Manifold Absolute Pressure (MAP) sensor may provide incorrect signals to the powertrain control module (PCM). CONSEQUENCE: The incorrect signals could cause the vehicle to hesitate or the engine to stall, increasing the risk of a crash.

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.