1991 Ford Mustang Gt Hatchback Mint Condition Imaculate on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Our love of SUVs is killing people in the streets

Americans are fond of supersized fast-food meals and colossal convenience-store fountain drinks, even though they're clearly bad for our health and U.S. adults keep getting fatter. We also like large vehicles, and our love affair with SUVs is killing people in the streets. According to a recent investigation by the Detroit Free Press/USA Today, the increase in SUV sales over the past several years coincides with a sharp rise in pedestrian deaths in the U.S. — up 46 percent since 2009, with nearly 6,000 people killed in 2016 alone. With SUV sales surpassing sedans in 2014 and pickups and SUVs currently accounting for 60 percent of new vehicle sales, it's no wonder Ford announced in April plans to cease U.S. sales of almost all passenger cars. And this followed Fiat Chrysler's move to virtually an all-truck, -SUV and -crossover lineup. While the Freep/USA Today investigation found that the simultaneous surge in SUV sales and pedestrian deaths comes down to vehicle size, it also points to a lack of action on the part of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), even though it knew of the dangers SUVs pose to pedestrians. Also blamed are automakers dragging their feet on implementing active safety features. Using federal accident data, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) determined that there was an 81 percent increase in single-vehicle pedestrian fatalities involving SUVs between 2009 and 2016. Freep/USA Today's analysis of the same data by counting vehicles that struck and killed pedestrians instead of the number of people killed showed a 69 percent increase in SUV involvement. As far back as 2001, researchers at Rowan University forecasted a rise in pedestrian deaths as Americans began switching to SUVs. "In the United States, passenger vehicles are shifting from a fleet populated primarily by cars to a fleet dominated by light trucks and vans," the researchers wrote, with light trucks comprising SUVs.

2015 F-150 launch to curb Ford profits?

Ford is making a big bet on aluminum with its new 2015 F-150, and it's possible that the decision will hurt the company financially, at least in the short term. After earning a record $8.6 billion in 2013, the Blue Oval does not expect to set another record in 2014. According to Automotive News, that's "largely attributable to F Series," says Bob Shanks, Ford's Chief Financial Officer.
To retool for the new F-150, Ford will idle its Dearborn Truck Plant in Michigan for 11 weeks and the Ford Kansas City Assembly Plant in Missouri for 2 weeks. "3 of the 13 overall weeks occur during what normally is our summer shutdown timeframe," said Mike Levine, Ford Trucks Communication Manager, in an email to Autoblog. The extra 10 weeks will be preparing for the more aluminum-intensive construction for the trucks and will mean over 2 months of no F-150s being made. For comparison's sake, Chrysler boss Sergio Marchionne just confirmed that the 200 plant in Sterling Heights, MI will be down for 30 days to retool for the new model, but obviously there are many more F-150 production variables than for the midsize sedan.
Levine notes that Ford is already running three shifts at both plants, and says the automaker has plans to ensure that there is adequate supply of the full-size pickups during the retooling process. The company does not want to suffer a shortage of the vehicle that accounted for 31-percent of its 2013 US sales and an even bigger percentage of its profits.

Ford fights back against patent trolls

Some people are just awful. Some organizations are just as awful. And when those people join those organizations, we get stories like this one, where Ford has spent the past several years combatting so-called patent trolls. According to Automotive News, these malicious organizations have filed over a dozen lawsuits against the company since 2012. They work by purchasing patents, only to later accuse companies of misusing intellectual property, despite the fact that the so-called patent assertion companies never actually, you know, do anything with said intellectual property. AN reports that both Hyundai and Toyota have been victimized by these companies, with the former forced to pay $11.5 million to a company called Clear With Computers. Toyota, meanwhile, settled with Paice LLC, over its hybrid tech. The world's largest automaker agreed to pay $5 million, on top of $98 for every hybrid it sold (if the terms of the deal included each of the roughly 1.5 million hybrids Toyota sold since 2000, the company would have owed $147 million). Including the previous couple of examples, AN reports 107 suits were filed against automakers last year alone. But Ford is taking action to prevent further troubles... kind of. The company has signed on with a firm called RPX, in what sounds strangely like a protection racket. Automakers like Ford pay RPX around $1.5 million each year for access to its catalog of patents, which it spent nearly $1 billion building. "We take the protection and licensing of patented innovations very seriously," Ford told AN via email. "And as many smart businesses are doing, we are taking proactive steps to protect against those seeking patent infringement litigation." What are your thoughts on this? Should this patent business be better managed? Is it reasonable that companies purchase patents only to file suit against the companies that build actual products? Have your say in Comments.