2008 Ford Harley-davidson on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2016 Ford Shelby GT350 First Drive [w/video]

Red meat. America's signature protein has necessarily violent origins. Slaughter, butcher, open flames and iron – you don't need a recently lapsed vegetarian (me) to lay it out for you. Of course the blood and the cuts are all part of the appeal, a reminder with every forkful of beef that we still like to be visceral creatures in an increasingly sanitized world. There is much in the makeup of Ford's Mustang that matches these carnivorous tendencies. Not only does it offer a hint of violence with potential for speed every time the engine kicks over, it's also the motive meal we Americans salivate over more than any other. Ford's pony car is among the most popular car searches online, year in and year out, and truly special versions stress servers and storm forum spaces when they hit the streets. I'll be honest, I've been just as frothed and drooling to see and drive the 2016 Ford Shelby GT350 as the rest of you netziens, too. Engineers have hacked and carved away at the stock car, to make a wicked V8 morsel that's bloody-minded and racetrack ready. The flat-plane crank V8 revs to the moon and sounds like a supercar when spinning hard. The palpitating heart of newest Shelby is a 5.2-liter, naturally aspirated V8 engine that bucks the current, popular trends for performance cars, while also breaking new ground for Ford. Fast cars from all over the world have made impressive numbers using turbos and superchargers in recent years, but Ford wanted revs to make its racing machine go right. So the company tossed out the forced-induction formula, and created a flat-plane crank V8 that revs to the moon and sounds like a supercar when spinning hard. The light, strong crankshaft reduces inertial mass in the engine and allows for a mind-blowing redline at 8,250 rpm. Perhaps more importantly it makes for beautiful rising wave of available torque as one digs deeper into the throttle, which feels like fast magic when doing something like climbing the hill to The Corkscrew at Mazda Raceway Laguna Seca. At 526 horsepower and 429 pound-feet of torque, some 102-hp per liter, there's enough power for staggering acceleration whenever you ask for it. Providing, of course, you keep the pot boiling at three grand or more. To call the power delivery below that mark "weak" would be ludicrous, but it does feel more inert there than the cars in the turbo-quick jet set that's so popular these days.

Ram and Alfa Romeo top J.D. Power study of best automaker websites

Imagining a new car can be terrific fun, especially if the new car is an Alfa Romeo. So say the fantasy engineers at the J.D. Power agency, who’ve found that Alfa and Ram, sister brands under the Stellantis umbrella, offer potential buyers the most attractive consumer websites, which are often their first viable encounter with those vehicles. Power found that those marques lead the mass market and premium categories in its twice annual Manufacturer Website Evaluation Study. In the premium segment, Alfa Romeo led with 755 points, up six points over BMW, 10 points ahead of Infiniti, 14 points past of Jaguar, and 18 points up on Porsche. By contrast, Volvo and Audi trail the pack with 689 points, and are behind Genesis (699 points), Tesla (720), and Cadillac (721), all of which perform worse than the premium segment average of 724 points. The summerÂ’s study showed that in the mass market segment, Ram leads with an impressive 735 points, which puts it six points ahead of GMC, seven points atop its stablemate Jeep, eight points beyond Subaru, and 22 points ahead of the industry average. Volkswagen finished dead last among mass market names, but only one point behind Ford, 684 to 683 out of a possible 1,000. Segment average, as noted, was 713 points. “Website satisfaction can be volatile, and automotive websites are not immune to changing preferences,” said Jon Sundberg, director of digital solutions at J.D. Power. “However, manufacturers have shown to be very agile when it comes to website design and ensuring their sites meet modern standards, more so than many other industries, as exemplified through the study data.” Marketing/Advertising Alfa Romeo Audi BMW Ford Volkswagen

Junkyard Gem: 1971 Mercury Comet 2-Door Sedan

When Ford introduced the original Maverick for the 1970 model year, Dearborn tradition required that a Mercury-badged version be created. That car ended up being the Comet, built from the 1971 through 1977 model years. Here's one of those first-year Comets in rough but recognizable condition, found in a Denver self-service yard not long ago. The Comet name had spent the 1960s affixed to the flanks of Mercurized Ford Falcons (1960-1965) and Fairlanes (1966-1969). Since the Maverick was the successor of the Falcon — sales of which went into an irrecoverable downward spiral once its sportier Mustang first cousin hit the streets — it made sense to move the Comet name over to the Mercury version. Nearly every American Mercury model ever sold was a U.S.-market Ford model with a different name and some gingerbread slapped on. Notable exceptions to this tradition include the 1999-2002 Mercury Cougar (mechanically based on the Contour but with a unique body) and the 1991-1994 Mercury Capri (an Australian-built mashup of Mazda components borrowed from the Ford Laser). The Comet was by far the cheapest Mercury model available in 1971, though it was considered more prestigious than its Maverick counterpart. The price tag on the '71 Comet two-door sedan started at $2,217 (about $16,505 in 2022 dollars), while the '71 Maverick two-door sedan cost $2,175 ($16,193 today). Meanwhile, AMC would sell you a new Hornet two-door sedan for one dollar less than a Maverick, Chevrolet had the Nova coupe for a dollar more than the Maverick, and Plymouth offered the Valiant Duster for $2,313 ($17,220 now). Toyota had a Maverick competitor as well that year, with the Corona at $2,150 for the sedan and $2,310 for the coupe. Having driven every one of the aforementioned models, I'd take the Duster if I went back in time and had to choose one (as a 1969 Corona owner, I'm not a fan of the 1971 facelift, though the Corona's build quality beats the Duster's). The build sticker on this car tells us that it was built at the Kansas City Assembly Plant (where Transits and F-150s are made today) and sold through the Los Angeles district sales office (there was a DSO in Denver, so it's a near-certainty that this car didn't start out in Colorado). The paint started out as Bright Blue Metallic (it's neither bright nor metallic 51 years down the road) and the interior was done up in Medium Blue Cloth & Vinyl.