2017 Ford F-250 Xl Super Duty on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Why Edmunds took a sledgehammer to its 2015 Ford F-150

The discussion around repair bills for the aluminum-bodied 2015 Ford F-150 pickup continued from the beginning of last year to the end, and haven't abated; as an aside, some Tesla Model S owners have been shocked at disquieting repair estimates for minor damage to their aluminum wunder-sedans. Edmunds decided to inject some fact into the fray: it bought a $52,000 long-term 2015 F-150 and clouted it with an eight-pound sledgehammer. Twice. The rear of the bedside took the impacts since it couldn't be replaced, it would have to be repaired. To the pickup's credit, the only reason associate editor Travis Langness hit it twice was that the first sledgehammer blow didn't do as much damage as Edmunds wanted. After the second, the visible damage included the two direct impacts, a few creases, and a cracked taillight, so they drove the pickup to Santa Monica Ford to get an estimate, complete with a fictitious story about how the damage occurred and the mercy plea that Langness was paying for the repair out-of-pocket. In Part 2 Langness hits on some of the details with getting the truck fixed, such as the massively expensive taillight and the list of tools Ford recommends dealers have to work on aluminum. But he was promised he'd have his truck back in seven days, and Santa Monica Ford got it back to him in seven days. In Part 3 we get the bill. It's not small, but it's quite a bit less than it could have been if the service manager had charged Edmunds the official labor rate for aluminum. We're not going to spoil it here, so check out the videos above and below for the beginning and the end, and head over to Edmunds for the complete story about how it all happened and some riffing on the repair numbers. This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings. Related Video:

Ford delays North American production restart from coronavirus lockdown

Ford said on Tuesday it was postponing its plan to restart production at its North American plants due to safety concerns for its workers amid the coronavirus pandemic. To generate cash, the No. 2 U.S. automaker had said last week it was poised to restart production at some plants in North America as early as April 6, bringing back such profitable vehicles as its top-selling F-150 full-sized pickup, the Transit commercial van and SUVs. But on Tuesday, Ford said it had been aiming to resume production at several key U.S. plants on April 14, but would now instead do so at dates it would announce later on. "The health and safety of our workforce, dealers, customers, partners and communities remains our highest priority," Kumar Galhotra, president of Ford's North American operations, said in a statement. Still, the automaker will open a plant in Ypsilanti, Michigan, during the week of April 20, that will make ventilators to treat patients afflicted by the coronavirus. Rival Fiat Chrysler Automobiles said last week it plans to resume production in North America on April 13. General Motors has shuttered its plants indefinitely and has not provided a date for vehicle production to restart. It is facing a delay in the production launch of its redesigned large SUVs and is delaying work on other SUVs. "Once it is safe to resume production, we will do so," a GM spokesman said. As of Monday, Volkswagen was shooting for an April 5 reopening at its Tennessee plant. Honda, Nissan and Subaru facilities in North America will remain closed through April 6, and Hyundai through April 10. Toyota was planning to reopen its North American plants April 17. Plants/Manufacturing Chrysler Fiat Ford GM coronavirus

Consumer Reports criticizes small turbo engines for misleading performance, fuel economy claims [w/video]

Consumer Reports has taken aim at at small-displacement, forced-induction engines, saying the powerplants don't manage to deliver on automaker fuel economy claims. Manufacturers have long held that smaller, turbocharged engines pack all power of their larger displacement cousins with significantly better fuel economy, but the research organization says that despite scoring high EPA economy numbers, the engines are no better than conventional drivetrains in both categories. Jake Fisher, director of automotive testing for Consumer Reports, says the forced induction options "are often slower and less fuel efficient than larger four and six-cylinder engines."
Specifically, CR calls out the new Ford Fusion equipped with the automaker's Ecoboost 1.6-liter four-cylinder engine. The institute's researchers found the engine, which is a $795 option over the base 2.5-liter four-cylinder, fails to match competitors in acceleration and served up 25 miles per gallon in testing, putting the sedan dead last among other midsize options.
The Chevrolet Cruze, Hyundai Sonata Turbo and Ford Escape 2.0T all got dinged for the same troubles, though Consumer Reports has found the turbo 2.0-liter four-cylinder in the BMW 328i does deliver on its promises. You can check out the full press release below. You can also read the full study on the Consumer Reports site, or scroll down for a short video recap.