1962 Ford Galaxie 500 Xl Convertible For Restoration With Extras on 2040-cars

Auto blog

BMW, Hyundai score big in JD Power's first Tech Experience Index

While automakers are quick to brag about winning a JD Power Initial Quality Study award, the reality, as we've pointed out before, is that these ratings are somewhat misleading, since IQS doesn't necessarily distinguish genuine quality issues. JD Power's new Tech Experience Index aims to solve that problem. The new metric takes the same 90-day approach as IQS but focuses exclusively on technology – collision protection, comfort and convenience, driving assistance, entertainment and connectivity, navigation, and smartphone mirroring. It splits the industry up into just seven segments, based loosely on size, which is why the Chevrolet Camaro is in the same division (mid-size) as Kia Sorento and the Mercedes-Benz GLE-Class is in the same segment as the Hyundai Genesis (mid-size premium). It makes for some screwy bedfellows, to be sure. Still, splitting tech experience away from initial quality should allow customers to make more informed and intelligent decisions when buying new vehicles. In the inaugural study, respondents listed BMW and Hyundai as the big winners, with two segment awards – the 2 Series for small premium and the 4 Series for compact premium, and the Genesis for mid-size premium and Tucson for small segment. The Chevrolet Camaro (midsize), Kia Forte (compact), and Nissan Maxima (large) scored individual wins. Ford also had a surprising hit with the Lincoln MKC, which ranked third in the compact premium segment behind the 4 Series and Lexus IS. This is a coup for the Blue Oval, whose woeful MyFord Touch systems made the brand a victim of the IQS' flaws in the early 2010s. But Ford and other automakers might not want to celebrate just yet. According to JD Power, there's still a lot of room for improvement – navigation systems were the lowest-rated piece of tech in the study. Instead, customers repeatedly saluted collision-avoidance and safety systems, giving the category the best marks of the study and listing blind-spot monitoring and backup cameras as two must-have features – 96 percent of respondents said they wanted those two systems in their next vehicle. But this isn't really a surprise. Implementation of safety systems from brand to brand is similar, and they don't require any input from users, unlike navigation and infotainment systems which are frustratingly deep.

Ford will lay off 700 employees in Michigan

Lagging sales of compact and electric cars are starting to take their toll on automakers. Ford said Thursday it intends to lay off 700 employees who work at the Michigan Assembly Plant in Wayne, MI, over the next five months. The plant makes Ford Focus and C-Max vehicles. Sales of both have stalled in recent months. The layoffs affect 675 hourly and 25 salaries employees, and will begin in late June and continue through September, according to paperwork filed with state officials. The company expects to re-hire the affected employees elsewhere and use them on temporary basis throughout the summer. Ford spokesperson Kristina Adamski said the affected employees will be "first in line" for other jobs at nearby plants, and UAW vice president Jimmy Settles said he expected all would be re-hired at other southeast Michigan factories by "early 2016." Although industry sales have remained high overall, the growth has come from SUVs and pickup trucks. Conversely, compact cars and alternate-powered vehicles like the C-Max have struggled to find customers amid cheap gasoline prices. Focus monthly sales fell 14.5 percent year over year in March, and C-Max monthly sales dropped 22.9 percent over the same period. It was less than three years ago that Ford hailed the Michigan Assembly Plant as a model for its future, one that would quickly adapt to market conditions through a more flexible assembly process. The plant was retrofitted at a cost of $550 million so that the same assembly line could install electric, plug-in hybrid or gasoline powertrains. Ford produces the Focus, Focus ST, Focus Electric, C-Max Hybrid and C-Max Energi here. At the time, company officials said the flexible line was a way to "not be trapped with dedicated one-trick-pony plants where you have under-capacity or over-capacity situations," said Jim Tetreault, Ford's vice president of North American manufacturing, in November 2012. But that's exactly where Ford finds itself as consumers have turned away from both compact and gas-sipping hybrids and electrics as gas prices have fallen to a national average of $2.49 per gallon, according to Thursday's AAA Fuel Gauge Report. One year ago, gas prices averaged $3.70 per gallon. In perhaps a melancholy twist, the Ford Expedition and Lincoln Navigator that were phased out at Michigan Assembly by the retrofit are once again the types of vehicles that are sought after by consumers.

Ward's calls out Ford's EcoBoost engines for their crummy fuel economy

With a name like EcoBoost, one might expect Ford's line of turbocharged engines to be somewhat, um, economical. In other words, replacing displacement with a turbocharger is supposed to deliver better fuel economy. Based on the experience time and time again of multiple Autoblog editors, your author included, this is simply not the case. Now, Ward's is calling out the cruddy efficiency numbers of Ford's EcoBoost line of engines. The column dresses down not just the new 2.7-liter V6 of the 2015 F-150, but also the 2.3-liter of the Mustang, the 1.5-liter from the Fusion and the 3.2-liter PowerStroke diesel found in the Transit, while also explaining why just one Ford engine was named to Ward's 10 Best Engines list. In its testing of all four engines, Ward's editors never came even remotely close to matching the 2.7's claimed 26 miles per gallon (for two-wheel-drive models), with the truck's computer indicating between 17.6 and 19 mpg over a 250-odd-mile run. Calculating the fuel economy manually revealed an even more depressing 15.6 miles per gallon. Criticisms with the 2.3-liter four-cylinder focused on its strange soundtrack, although it was business as usual with the 1.5-liter and 3.2 diesel, with Ward's criticizing the fuel economy of both engines. The 1.5, which Ward's claims is sold as a hybrid alternative, failed to get over 30 miles per gallon, while the five-cylinder turbodiesel's figures couldn't stand up against FCA's 3.0-liter EcoDiesel. The entire column really is worth a read, especially if you were disappointed in Ward's decision to only salute Ford's three-cylinder EcoBoost while shunning the rest of the company's new turbocharged mills.