1986 Ford Mustang Svo - Excellent - Unmodified on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2020 Ford Explorer safer than old model; crash test ratings short of Top Safety Pick

The 2020 Ford Explorer three-row crossover has improved on the outgoing model in many ways. According to the IIHS, it has also improved in a number of safety categories, but not enough to earn a Top Safety Pick award. The culprit is not the headlight performance for once. The Explorer's headlights were given an "Acceptable" rating, which would be sufficient for Top Safety Pick, if not Top Safety Pick +. Where the Ford falls short is in the front small overlap driver-side crash test, in which it got the second highest "Acceptable" rating. The IIHS requires a "Good" rating in this category, whereas an "Acceptable" rating on the passenger side would be, well, acceptable for Top Safety Pick. According to IIHS, Ford will be reviewing the results to figure out what the issue is, and it will likely make revisions to future Explorers to improve the result. Other than the one test, the Explorer performed admirably. It received a "Good" rating in all other crash categories except the passenger-side small overlap that was not tested. Both its standard and optional forward collision prevention systems had the highest "Superior" ratings, with the standard one preventing a collision with a car at speeds of up to 25 mph, and the optional one avoiding a collision at 12 mph, and "nearly" preventing one at 25 mph. Headlights are rated as "Acceptable" and so is access to child seat LATCH anchors. Also worth noting is that the Explorer's crash test ratings apply to its luxurious twin the 2020 Lincoln Aviator, meaning it also doesn't get a Top Safety Pick rating. The forward collision system performed the same as in the Ford, and the only difference between the two was in headlight performance. The Lincoln's standard headlights, included on the base, Reserve and Grand Touring trims, have the second-lowest "Marginal" rating, but the optional headlights for those trims, and the standard ones on the Black Label trim, received the "Good" rating. Among three-row Explorer competitors, the Honda Pilot, Hyundai Santa Fe XL, Kia Telluride, Nissan Pathfinder and Toyota Highlander all have a Top Safety Pick. The Hyundai Palisade, Mazda CX-9, Subaru Ascent, and the slightly smaller Kia Sorento and Volkswagen Tiguan all have a Top Safety Pick +. As for Lincoln Aviator competitors, the Cadillac XT6, Infiniti QX60, Lexus RX and Volvo XC90 get a Top Safety Pick. The Mercedes-Benz GLE-Class and two-row-only BMW X5 get the Top Safety Pick + rating. Related Video:      

Verizon buys Telogis in connected vehicle market push

(Note/disclaimer: We are owned by Verizon, by way of AOL. This gives us no inside track whatsoever when it comes to news.) With a lot of tech companies and automakers staking their claims in the connected car space, now there are signs that others are looking to move in, too. Today, telecoms giant Verizon announced that it is acquiring Telogis, a California-based company that develops cloud-based solutions for mobile workforces, and specifically telematics, compliance and navigation software used by Ford, Volvo, GM and other car companies, as well as Apple and AT&T. Financial terms of the deal have not been disclosed, although we'll try to find out. Considering that Verizon in 2015 reported full-year revenues of $131.6 billion, the price would have to be very high to be considered "material" and may not be made public for some time, if ever. Telogis in its time as a startup raised a substantial amount of money, just over $126 million in all, including $93 million in 2013, supposedly ahead of an IPO, all from Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers. Back in 2013 when KPCB made its investment (which was the first from a VC firm in the company), Telogis told TechCrunch it was profitable and forecasting revenues of $100 million annually for the year. It's not clear what size those revenues are now, but if it was on the same growth trajectory as before the funding, sales would be around $150 million annually, with profitability, at the moment. Other investors include some very notable strategics: the investment arm of General Motors, and Fontinalis Partners, which also invests in Lyft and was co-founded by Bill Ford, the executive chairman of the Ford Motor Company. Before the acquisition, Verizon actually had a business in fleet management and telematics; in fact, the two companies competed against each other for business from the trucking and other industries. Verizon Telematics, as the business is called, is active in 40 countries. But in a way, Verizon buying Telogis is a sign that the latter may have proved to be the more superior, and the one with the key customer deals.

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.