10 Mustang Shelby Gt500 Coupe 755 Miles Electronics Pkg Hid 5.4l Goodyear Crcars on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Toyota again claims Corolla outsold Focus worldwide

Toyota isn't convinced the Ford Focus was the best-selling nameplate globally last year. Bloomberg reports that for the second time in seven months, both Toyota and Ford are laying claim to the title. Ford cites R.L. Polk & Co. data that says the automaker moved some 1.02 million Focus models in 2012 compared to just 872,774 Toyota Corolla units. But Toyota says the actual figure is closer to 1.16 million Corolla models.
Last year, Ford said it took the sales crown through the fist half of 2012 based on information from IHS Automotive, but Toyota pointed out those numbers left out models like the Corolla-based Matrix and Auris, as well as the Corolla Fielder and Scion xB-based Corolla Rumion. Whether or not Toyota's belief that all these cars should be counted in the Corolla bucket is accurate or not is seemingly up for debate... as is the question of why it matters so much to both parties.
This time around, Ford is holding the line that the Focus is the "best-selling nameplate," with Erich Merkle, a US sales analyst with Ford saying the company's figure is, "a pure number that is verified by a third party." Toyota, meanwhile, has requested clarification from Polk.

Ford using robot drivers to test durability [w/video]

In testing the durability of its upcoming fullsize Transit vans, Ford has begun using autonomous robotic technology to pilot vehicles through the punishing courses of its Michigan Proving Grounds test facility. The autonomous tech allows Ford to run more durability tests in a single day than it could with human drivers, as well as create even more challenging tests that wouldn't be safe to run with a human behind the wheel.
The technology being used was developed by Utah-based Autonomous Solutions, and isn't quite like the totally autonomous vehicles being developed by companies like Google and Audi for use out in the real world. Rather, Ford's autonomous test vehicles follow a pre-programmed course and their position is tracked via GPS and cameras that are being monitored from a central control room. Though the route is predetermined, the robotic control module operates the steering, acceleration and braking to keep the vehicle on course as it drives over broken concrete, cobblestones, metal grates, rough gravel, mud pits and oversize speed bumps.
Scroll down to watch the robotic drivers in action, though be warned that you're headed for disappointment if you expect to see a Centurion behind the wheel (nerd alert!). The setup looks more like a Mythbusters experiment than a scene from Battlestar Galactica.

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.