1963 Falcon Sprint Fuel Injected 5.0 on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Entertainment Weekly gets a peek into the 'Ford vs. Ferrari' film

The 20th Century Fox film "Ford v Ferrari" is scheduled to open Nov. 15. The movie tells a story enthusiasts can't get tired of, and that Ford has turned into two profitable automotive revivals: the double-cross that led to the no-expense-spared revenge that spawned the Ford GT40 and four successive victories at Le Mans. Entertainment Weekly spoke to the primary actors in the piece and got shots from the set. Matt Damon plays Carroll Shelby, the man Ford recruited to run the GT40 program after the race car performed poorly in its first year of international racing in 1964. Christian Bale plays Ken Miles, an English version of Shelby who could build and drive winning cars. Miles was so good that when racing one of his "Miles Specials," a Cooper-Porsche he improved and drove for California Porsche dealer Johnny von Neumann, he beat the factory Porsches so often that the Stuttgart automaker took Miles' car away. The movie focuses on the first year of the GT40's winning run, in 1966 after the car had become the GT40 MkII. Bale calls the story a "David vs. Goliath vs. Goliath" battle, because Shelby and Miles had to fight Ford as well as Ferrari. "It's these two friends figuring out how do you deal with these a–holes in suits who know nothing about racing," he said. And even though the cars won the fight on track, the two men didn't always win the fights with their paymasters. The three-way finish Ford staged at the end of the race cheated Miles of victory. Miles had been laps ahead of the second-place GT40 driven by Bruce McLaren at the time, but slowed down to let the car catch up. After the three-abreast finish, race organizers said McLaren's car started the race behind Miles, and by finishing with Miles had covered 60 feet more than Miles during the race. They declared McLaren and Chris Amon the winners. The story of how they got to that point — which director James Mangold called "Butch and Sundance in the world of racing" — promises more twists and turns than the Le Mans circuit, and some open flame; video on YouTube shows Damon-as-Shelby being set on fire in one scene. We admit to a bit of concern when Mangold says, "This is much more of a relationship movie and less a historical document." Yet it sounds like he's done his best to get the racing right, so all won't be lost no matter what. Head over to EW to check out the full story and more photos.

The U-2 spy plane needs high-performance cars to help land

Typically, aircraft deploy their landing gear from three main points. Most military aircraft, for example, deploy two gears at the back and one forward, like a tricycle. Some civilian aircraft flip the layout, with two in front and one in back - tail-draggers. The U-2 Dragon Lady is wildly different than any of these. With a 103-foot wingspan but a body that's just 63-feet long, the layout of the U-2 makes a traditional landing setup infeasible. Instead, the U-2 utilizes a pair of wheels, one up front and one in back. With such a bizarre layout, landings are so tough that since the U-2's earliest flights at Area 51, the US Air Force has used high-performance chase cars to guide the pilot down safely. The landing process isn't over there, though. As this video from Sploid shows, balancing out the aircraft to fit the detachable "pogos" – think training wheels for spy planes – is a comical procedure requiring a number of airman using their full body weight to even out the U-2. This video also recaps some of the great vehicles that have served as chase vehicles for this legendary spy plane. They include Chevrolet El Caminos, and the Fox-body Ford Mustangs so favored by the California Highway Patrol. For the last several years, the USAF has utilized products from General Motors, using fourth-generation Chevy Camaros, before switching over to the Pontiac GTO and most recently, the awesome Pontiac G8. It's fair to say that if you're a gearhead in the Air Force, this is the job you want. Check out the video, embedded up top. News Source: Sploid via YouTubeImage Credit: Sploid Chevrolet Ford GM Pontiac Military Performance Videos

NHTSA advances investigation of Ford Crown Victoria headlights

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is opening a preliminary evaluation into reports of suddenly failing headlights on 517,945 examples of the 2003-2005 Ford Crown Victoria and Mercury Grand Marquis. The government started looking into this problem in April when the North Carolina Consumers Council filed a defect petition with the agency. Now, the inquiry has moved to the next step. According to NHTSA's documentation (as a PDF), it examined its own database and worked with Ford to come up with a total of 3,609 complaints of the front lighting control module suddenly failing. When this happens, drivers lose the low-beam headlights, but the high-beams can be used by holding the stalk. Sometimes turning the switch off and on fixes the issue. Additionally, there are 15 allegations of crashes, and one reported shoulder injury. NHTSA's preliminary evaluations "evaluate the scope, frequency, and consequence of the alleged defect" and don't necessarily lead to a recall. NHTSA looked into this problem once before in 2008 and 2009 and decided that a recall wasn't necessary. Ford also extended the warranty on the front lighting control module for these vehicles. INVESTIGATION Subject : Loss of headlights Date Investigation Opened: AUG 10, 2015 Date Investigation Closed: Open NHTSA Action Number: PE15028 Component(s): EXTERIOR LIGHTING All Products Associated with this Investigation Vehicle Make Model Model Year(s) FORD CROWN VICTORIA 2003-2005 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS 2003-2005 Details Manufacturer: Ford Motor Company SUMMARY: After receiving a defect petition (DP15002) concerning the loss of headlights and other exterior lighting in model year (MY) 2003-2005 Ford Crown Victoria and Mercury Grand Marquis vehicles, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) analyzed Vehicle Owner Questionnaire (VOQ) complaints received from consumers and identified a total of 605 reports (for all submission dates) alleging headlight failure. The complaints indicate failures of both low beam headlights typically while driving, a defect condition that was evaluated under a prior ODI investigation (PE08066). Most consumer VOQs indicate that the headlights failed suddenly and without warning leaving the driver with no forward lighting, however some report the headlights flickered or dimmed prior to turning off. In some cases drivers were able to turn the headlights back on after a period of time while others reported the headlights would not come back on at all.