Lincoln Highway Tribute Hand Built Craftsmanship Great History Advertisement on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2013 Ford Fusion Hybrid

Your Mileage May Vary
As difficult as it is to write this, I was actually excited about the 2013 Ford Fusion Hybrid. With the beautiful looks of the newest midsize fighter from Ford and a fuel economy estimate capable of shaming even the stalwart Camry Hybrid, the battery-augmented four-door seemed like a recipe for unabashed success. But appearances love nothing more than swapping our boundless enthusiasm for cold platters of disappointment. The 2013 Fusion Hybrid gets hobbled right out of the gate with a lofty price tag, and real-world driving keeps the sedan from even approaching those EPA figures.
With so many excellent midsize hybrids on the market, is there any reason to consider the newest Fusion Hybrid? Are sharp aesthetics, a well-executed interior and capable driving dynamics enough to overcome the machine's shortfalls? Not from where I'm standing.

2020 Ford Escape hybrids vs other crossover fuel sippers: How they compare on paper

Along with a new generation of Escape, Ford also reintroduced the world to the 2020 Ford Escape Hybrid. And if that weren't enough, Ford is adding a plug-in hybrid version. This is a sign of the times: people are more crossover crazy than ever, but are also seeking ways to use less fuel, whether it's for environmental or purely money-motivated reasons. The Ford hybrids aren't the only fuel-efficient compact crossovers on the market. They will be going head-to-head with conventional hybrids including the 2019 Kia Niro, 2019 Nissan Rogue Hybrid and 2019 Toyota RAV4 Hybrid. There are other plug-in hybrids including the 2019 Subaru Crosstrek PHEV, 2019 Mitsubishi Outlander PHEV and the plug-in version of the 2019 Kia Niro. There are even a couple diesels in the form of the 2019 Chevy Equinox and 2019 GMC Terrain. So we've rounded up the details on all these crossovers to see who leads and lags in criteria such as power, fuel efficiency, space and price. Check out all their details below. 2019 Subaru Crosstrek Hybrid View 68 Photos How do their engines and fuel economy compare? Conventional Hybrids and Diesels Let's face it, if you're buying one of these crossovers, one of the things that matters most to you is just how frugal with fuel they are. We'll start off with the conventional hybrids and diesels, and the clear victor is the Kia Niro, which in base FE trim, manages to hit 50 mpg combined. This is thanks to it sharing its powertrain with the Hyundai Ioniq, the Hyundai equivalent of the Toyota Prius. Buyers should take note that only the FE returns such high fuel economy. The LX and EX drop to 49 mpg, and the S Touring and Touring get 43. Even then, the least efficient Niro is the most efficient of the normal hybrids and diesels. It is nearly the least powerful, though, with 139 horsepower. Just behind it is the Toyota RAV4 Hybrid. It delivers 40 mpg combined, and it has an ace up its sleeve: it comes standard with all-wheel drive. Every other vehicle in this powertrain group has front drive standard, and the Niro isn't available with all-wheel drive at all. If that weren't enough, the RAV4 Hybrid also boasts the most power at 219 horses. While we can't say anything about Escape Hybrid fuel economy, we do know that it will make 198 horsepower, which is close to the class-leading RAV4. The least powerful of these is the Equinox and Terrain, and they return the worst fuel economy at 32 mpg.

Rising aluminum costs cut into Ford's profit

When Ford reports fourth-quarter results on Wednesday afternoon, it is expected to fret that rising metals costs have cut into profits, even as rivals say they have the problem under control. Aluminum prices have risen 20 percent in the last year and nearly 11 percent since Dec. 11. Steel prices have risen just over 9 percent in the last year. Ford uses more aluminum in its vehicles than its rivals. Aluminum is lighter but far more expensive than steel, closing at $2,229 per tonne on Tuesday. U.S. steel futures closed at $677 per ton (0.91 metric tonnes). Republican U.S. President Donald Trump's administration is weighing whether to impose tariffs on imported steel and aluminum, which could push prices even higher. Ford gave a disappointing earnings estimate for 2017 and 2018 last week, saying the higher costs for steel, aluminum and other metals, as well as currency volatility, could cost the company $1.6 billion in 2018. Ford shares took a dive after the announcement. Ford Chief Financial Officer Bob Shanks told analysts at a conference in Detroit last week that while the company benefited from low commodity prices in 2016, rising steel prices were now the main cause of higher costs, followed by aluminum. Shanks said the automaker at times relies on foreign currencies as a "natural hedge" for some commodities but those are now going in the opposite direction, so they are not working. A Ford spokesman added that the automaker also uses a mix of contracts, hedges and indexed buying. Industry analysts point to the spike in aluminum versus steel prices as a plausible reason for Ford's problems, especially since it uses far more of the expensive metal than other major automakers. "When you look at Ford in the context of the other automakers, aluminum drives a lot of their volume and I think that is the cause" of their rising costs, said Jeff Schuster, senior vice president of forecasting at auto consultancy LMC Automotive. Other major automakers say rising commodity costs are not much of a problem. At last week's Detroit auto show, Fiat Chrysler Automobiles NV's Chief Executive Officer Sergio Marchionne reiterated its earnings guidance for 2018 and held forth on a number of topics, but did not mention metals prices. General Motors Co gave a well-received profit outlook last week and did not mention the subject. "We view changes in raw material costs as something that is manageable," a GM spokesman said in an email.