6.7l V8 Diesel Xlt Lifted Off-road Tires 20in Rims Power Seat Sync Tow Mp3 4x4 on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Ford will put solid axles under the Bronco as the off-roading gods intended

We've been wondering what sort of creature the Bronco would be since we first heard of the thing last October, when a union chairman spilled the beans on the SUV and the Ranger pickup. Ford confirmed a 2020 arrival date for the Bronco at the 2017 Detroit Auto Show, but at that point pretty much all we were sure of was that the Ranger and Bronco would be returning. The open question would be how hungry Ford was to spoil the Jeep Wrangler's solo party as a compact(ish) off-roader with dual solid axles, since the easiest thing would be to carry over the suspension design of the presumably related international Ford Ranger and its Everest SUV version: independent front suspension with either a leaf- (Ranger) or coil-suspended (Everest) solid rear axle. Enter Dana, the long-time supplier of Jeep stick axles, to confirm that the 2020 Bronco is getting a pair of them. That means solid axles front and rear, just like under a Wrangler. So reports Automotive News, citing an investor presentation from Dana. All signs so far, such as the report that the Bronco would be engineered by the same team in Australia that created the Ranger pickup, indicated that the Bronco would share a platform with the Ranger and thus be body-on-frame. The solid axle confirmation essentially confirms that theory. Some off-road-capable vehicles have paired solid axles with unibody frames, like the Jeep Cherokee (XJ generation) and Grand Cherokee (ZJ and WJ generations), but they are outliers. Generally, if you've got solid axles at both ends, they're going in a vehicle with a ladder frame. It also lends credence to the notion that our Bronco won't simply be an imported Everest, which might be too understated to stand out from lesser crossovers anyways. This is good news if you have Blue Oval in your blood and pine for a modern SUV that'll show up the Jeep guys on the trail. Less directly, it could mean a wholesale assault on the formula that makes Jeeps successful in the first place: the massive aftermarket of off-roading equipment and dress-up bits that appeal to Jeep buyers almost as much as a Trail Rated badge. At a minimum, Bronco enthusiasts can breathe easy that the reborn SUV won't merely be a light-duty crossover with styling "inspired" by true off-roaders. There's still a lot left to learn about the Bronco. Keep up to date with our running summary of everything we know about the returning off-roader.

Meet the Greenest and Meanest vehicles of 2016

If you've been keeping track, you won't be surprised with the number one entry in this year's list of greenest cars from the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE). In fact, the top three spots on the 2016 list are all the same as they were in 2015. After that, things get interesting. For one thing, this is the first Greenest list that doesn't have any purely internal combustion engine powertrain on it. Hybrids, yes, but if you want to be one of the top 12 greenest cars this year, you'd better have some sort of electric angle. ACEEE says that the conventional, gas-powered Smart Fortwo and Chevrolet Spark just missed the cut. In a statement, ACEEE lead vehicle analyst Shruti Vaidyanathan said, "The 2016 scores are in, and plug-in electric vehicles are outpacing all other vehicle offerings in terms of environmental friendliness." Like last year, one of the noticeable vehicles missing from the green list is the Tesla Model S. One reason? ACEEE takes curb weight into account (lighter is better), and the Model S is a heavy beast. The ACEEE doesn't just look at the clean side of the ledger. It also puts out a "meanest" list. These are the vehicles that pollute the most, not only from their tailpipes, but also any pollution created during the entire manufacturing process, from mining the raw materials to the energy used to produce the vehicle at the factory. The entire list, from greenest to meanest, is done using a "cradle to grave" analysis. You can see how the ACEEE determines its rankings here, explore the entire greenest cars site here, or click through our galleries to see which vehicles are extra green (above) or extra mean (below) this year. 12: Mercedes-Benz GL550 4MATIC View 12 Photos More Electric Cars than Ever on Greenest Vehicles List Electric Vehicles Nab 9 out of Top 12 Spots in ACEEE's Environmental Vehicle Rankings Washington, DC: Despite a tumultuous year for the automotive industry, manufacturers have continued to offer exciting technology options for a growing vehicle market. Today at greenercars.org, the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE) released its 19th annual comprehensive environmental ratings for vehicles. The following vehicles comprise the Greenest List for 2016: Greenest Score 1. Mercedes-Benz Smart ForTwo Electric Drive Convertible / Coupe 63 2. Chevrolet Spark EV 63 3. Fiat 500E 62 4. Toyota Prius Eco 61 5. Volkswagen E-Golf 61 6. Nissan Leaf S / Leaf SV 61 7. Kia Soul Electric 59 8.

Lexus tops JD Power Vehicle Dependability Study again, Buick bests Toyota

It shouldn't surprise anyone, but Lexus has once again taken the top spot in JD Power's Vehicle Dependability Study. That'd be the Japanese luxury brand's fourth straight year at the top of table. The big news, though, is the rise of Buick. General Motor's near-premium brand beat out Toyota to take second place, with 110 problems per 100 vehicles compared to Toyota's 111 problems. Lexus owners only reported 89 problems per 100 vehicles. Besides Buick's three-position jump, Scion enjoyed a major improvement, jumping 13 positions from 2014. Ram and Mitsubishi made big gains, as well, moving up 11 and 10 positions, respectively. In terms of individual segments, GM and Toyota both excelled, taking home seven segment awards each. The study wasn't good news for all involved, though. A number of popular automakers finished below the industry average of 147 problems per 100 vehicles, including Subaru, (157PP100), Volkswagen (165PP100), Ford/Hyundai (188PP100 each) and Mini (193PP100). The biggest losers (by a tremendous margin, we might add) were Land Rover and Fiat, recording 258 and 273 problems per 100 vehicles. The next closest brand was Jeep, with 197PP100. While the Vehicle Dependability Study uses the same measurement system as the Initial Quality Survey, the two metrics analyze very different things. The VDS looks at problems experienced by original owners of model year 2012 vehicles over the past 12 months, while the oft-quoted IQS focuses on problems in the first 90 days of new-vehicle ownership. Like the IQS, though, the VDS has a rather broad definition of what a problem is. Because of that, a low score from JD Power is no guarantee of extreme unreliability, so much as just poor design. In this most recent study, the two most reported problems focused on Bluetooth connectivity and the voice-command systems. The former leaves plenty of room for user error due to poor design (particularly true of the Bluetooth systems on the low-scoring Fords, Volkswagens and Subarus), while the second is something JD Power has already confirmed as being universally terrible. That makes means that while these studies are important, they shouldn't be taken as gospel when it comes to automotive reliability. News Source: JD PowerImage Credit: Copyright 2015 Jeremy Korzeniewski / AOL Buick Fiat Ford GM Hyundai Jeep Land Rover Lexus MINI Mitsubishi RAM Scion Subaru Toyota Volkswagen Auto Repair Ownership study