1964 Fairlane With A Aluminum Headed 347 Stroker Motor And Tci C-6 Tranny on 2040-cars

Auto blog

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.

2015 Ford Mustang vs. Camaro and Challenger [w/poll]

The horsepower wars are tightening among the Detroit Three, as the Ford Mustang, Chevrolet Camaro and Dodge Challenger are getting bigger, more powerful, and yes, more fuel efficient.
That came into sharper focus this week as more information was revealed about the most insane Challenger ever - the 707-horsepower Hellcat - followed quickly by Ford's in-depth showcase of the 2015 Mustang in Dearborn.
It's shaping up to be a golden age for enthusiasts, and what's under the hood is becoming more important than ever.

Ford announces fix for 2021 Expedition and Lincoln Navigator fires

In the middle of May, Ford announced a recall of around 39,000 Ford Expeditions and Lincoln Navigators from the 2021 model year due to fires starting under the hoods of the SUVs. At the time, Ford had received 16 incident reports, 14 of them happening with rental vehicles. The automaker cautioned owners to park their vehicles outside and away from structures while engineers figured out what was happening and how to fix the problem. Since that May announcement, five more fires have been reported, four of them rental vehicles, and there's been one burn injury. The company announced it understands the problem and has a fix, at the same time widening the scope of potentially affected vehicles. Instead of recalling 39,013 units built between December 1, 2020, and April 30, 2021, the recall now includes 66,221 vehicles assembled from July 27, 2020, to Aug. 31, 2021. The suspected culprit is a circuit board provided by a supplier that changed manufacturing location during the pandemic. Ford's press release on the matter stated that "circuit boards produced at this facility are uniquely susceptible to a high-current short." The affected vehicles are fitted with either an 800-watt or 700-watt cooling fan system. About a third of the recalled population are fitted with the former, and should get a quick fix at the dealer. On these SUVs, techs will inspect the battery junction box. If they find evidence of melting, they'll replace the whole box. If not, they'll simply remove the engine fan ground wire that runs to the battery junction box; since this ground relay is redundant, the change doesn't alter operation of the fans.  Owners with the 700-watt system might need to wait until September for a fix. These vehicles need an auxiliary relay box with a wire jumper, but the parts aren't available now.   Ford's notifying all owners via the FordPass app, and will follow up with owners of the 700-watt cooling system once the parts are in stock. Until their vehicles are fixed, Ford says the SUVs are safe to drive but that they should still be parked outside and away from structures. The somewhat mixed messaging — 'Yes, your cars are safe to drive, but they could catch fire so don't park them near anything flammable' — encouraged a group of owners to file suit against Ford. Owners with questions can contact Ford customer service at 866-436-7332 and reference recall No. 22S36.