2010 Ford F250 Superduty on 2040-cars

Auto blog

At meeting with automakers, Trump launches new attack on NAFTA

WASHINGTON — Ten American and foreign automakers went to the White House on Friday to push for a weakening of U.S. fuel efficiency standards through 2025, while President Donald Trump used the occasion to launch a fresh attack on the North American Free Trade Agreement that has benefited the companies. A draft proposal circulated by the U.S. Transportation Department would freeze fuel efficiency requirements at 2020 levels through 2026, rather than allowing them to increase as previously planned. Trump's administration is expected to formally unveil the proposal later this month or in June. "We're working on CAFE standards, environmental controls," Trump told reporters at the top of the meeting, referring to the Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards for cars and light trucks in the United States. Trump said he wants automakers to build more vehicles in the United States and export more vehicles. But much of the hour-long meeting focused on NAFTA. Trump blasted the pact involving the United States, Canada and Mexico as "terrible" and noted that negotiations to make changes sought by his administration were ongoing. "NAFTA has been a horrible, horrible disaster for this country and we'll see if we can make it reasonable," Trump said. Automakers have called NAFTA a success, allowing them to integrate production throughout North America and make production competitive with Asia and Europe, and have noted the increase in auto production over the past two decades with the deal in place. They have warned that changing NAFTA too much could prompt some companies to move production out of the United States. The chief executives of General Motors Co, Ford Motor Co, Fiat Chrysler, along with senior U.S. executives from Toyota Motor Corp, Volkswagen AG, Hyundai Motor Co, Nissan Motor Co, Honda Motor Co , BMW AG and Daimler AG met with Trump, as did the chief executives of two auto trade groups. Major automakers reiterated this week they do not support freezing fuel efficiency requirements but said they want new flexibility and rule changes to address lower gasoline prices and the shift in U.S. consumer preferences to bigger, less fuel-efficient vehicles.

1979 Dodge Li'l Red Express in Generation Gap showdown with 1933 Ford Pickup

Auto enthusiasts love a good debate, whether it's Mustang versus Camaro or Ferrari against Lamborghini. But how about a battle between two very different vintages of classic pickup trucks? In this case, the fight is between a 1979 Dodge Li'l Red Express and a 1933 Ford Model 46 truck with a flathead V8.
The shootout comes courtesy of the internet series Generation Gap, and its concept is super-simple. One guy prefers classics, and the other likes newer rides. They choose a category, pick two vehicles and put them head to head. In this case, neither is exactly modern, though. The Ford is more than old enough to receive Social Security checks, and the Dodge is hardly a young whippersnapper.
Other than both being pickups, these two models were made to serve very different functions. The Li'l Red Express was basically the progenitor of today's muscle trucks, with a big V8 that made it one of the quickest new models in its day (admittedly, 1979 was a rough time for automotive performance). On the other hand, the '33 Ford was just meant to work, with little pretense for anything else. One of the hosts describes it as "the simplest, most difficult" vehicle he's driven because of the tricky double clutchwork necessary to shift gears. Scroll down to watch the video and try to decide which of these two American classics you would rather have in your garage.

Tier 1 suppliers call GM the worst OEM to work with

Among automakers with a big US presence, General Motors is the worst to work for, according to a new survey from Tier 1 automotive suppliers, conducted by Planning Perspectives, Inc.
The Detroit-based manufacturer, which has been under fire following the ignition switch recall and its accompanying scandal, finished behind six other automakers with big US manufacturing operations. Suppliers had issues with trust and communications, as well as intellectual property protection. GM was also the least likely to allow suppliers to raise their prices in the face of unexpected increases in material cost, all of which contributed to 55 percent of suppliers saying their relationship with GM was "poor to very poor."
GM's cross-town competitors didn't fare much better. Chrysler finished in fifth place, ahead of GM and behind Dearborn-based Ford, which was passed for third place this year by Nissan. Toyota took the top marks, while Honda captured second place.