2003 Ford Mustang Svt Cobra on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Junkyard Gem: 1991 Mercury Grand Marquis LS

Ford's now-defunct Mercury Division first began using the Marquis name in 1967, on a sporty full-size hardtop based on the Ford LTD, then began offering the Grand Marquis beginning in the 1979 model year. These big, boxy luxury sedans were replaced by big, curvy luxury sedans (on the same platform) starting with the 1992 model year, so today's Junkyard Gem is one of the very last squared-off Grand Marquises ever built. The 1991 Grand Marquis (or "Grandma Keith," as many refer to it today) looks nearly identical to its 1979 predecessor at a glance, just as the 2011 model doesn't differ much from the 1992 model. Ford saw no reason to follow short-lived fashion trends with its simple, sturdy rear-wheel-drive sedan. Only two Grand Marquis trim levels were available for 1991: the base GS and the (somewhat) upscale LS. The former listed at $18,741 and the latter at $19,241, which comes to about $41,494 and $42,601, respectively, in inflated 2022 dollars). This interior would have seemed comfortingly familiar to a 1968 (or even 1958) Mercury owner time-traveling to 1991.  This is the optional "full grain leather seating surface," which cost an extra $489 (about $1,083 today). Dig those opera lights! Air conditioning was standard equipment in the 1991 Grand Marquis and its wagon counterpart, the Colony Park. The engine is the good old pushrod 5.0-liter Windsor V8, which would be replaced by a far more modern 4.6-liter SOHC mill in the '92 Grand Marquis. This engine was rated at 180 horsepower. A four-speed automatic was the only transmission available. The early 1990s ended up being the last gasp for padded vinyl roofs being considered mainstream equipment on new Detroit cars; this one was called the "Formal Coach" roof and cost an additional 725 bucks ($1,605 now). Such roofs were still available on a few cars later in the decade, but their time had passed. Why would such a clean Grandma Keith end up in a place like this? That's easy: it got T-boned directly into the right front wheel, mangling the body and bending up the suspension. This damage might have been worth fixing when the car was five years old, but it's a write-off when it happens to a 31-year-old Ford Panther. 1991 Mercury Grand Marquis Commercial - Savings Ad The granddaddy of them all, and on sale in South Texas! Related video: 2008 Mercury Mariner Hybrid test drive Autoblog

Should reflective paint earn automakers EPA credits?

No matter where you look around the world, governments are cracking down on vehicle emissions and aiming for higher fuel economy standards. Generally, automakers are pushing back against the increased regulation, and in the US, General Motors, Ford, and FCA US are looking for new compromises. The Big Three want to the EPA to grant them retroactive emissions credits for using tech that they claim reduces CO2 but not on the government agency's on-road testing. Among these technologies are things like reflective paint and glass, LED lights, ventilated seats, stop/start, and more efficient air conditioning compressors. Starting with the 2014 model year, the automakers can receive credits for a few grams per mile reductions on models with some of these solutions, according to Automotive News. However, the companies are also petitioning the EPA to make the credits apply to earlier vehicles with them, as well. The emissions advantages for systems like stop/start and less polluting AC refrigerants seem fairly obvious. For reflective paint and glass, the belief is that keeping a vehicle interior cooler should mean a lower need for air conditioning and therefore a decrease in CO2. Margo Oge, the former boss of the EPA's Office of Transportation Air Quality, told Automotive News these credits are part of the plan. "That's the whole point of what we tried to establish," she said. "We wanted companies to invest in and develop these technologies." The EPA wants vehicle emissions at the corporate average equivalent of 54.4 miles per gallon fuel economy by 2025, and so far that seems achievable. It will translate to less than 40 mpg on the EPA sticker. In a report last summer, the industry was about 10 grams per mile of CO2 better than the rules required, and that was solely based on 2012 model year vehicles. In an update for 2013, the companies were up to 12 grams per mile beyond targets. News Source: Automotive News - sub. req.Image Credit: Mark Humphrey / AP Photo Government/Legal Green Ford GM Emissions Fuel Efficiency FCA fca us

2020 Ford Explorer, Lincoln Aviator reportedly facing numerous QC issues

A lengthy report in the Detroit Free Press delves into a range of quality control issues confronting the 2020 Ford Explorer and its luxury platform sibling, the 2020 Lincoln Aviator. Freep says it's been following the issue for two months, tapping various unnamed sources for information on the automaker's unorthodox route to resolution. Seems the problem is Explorers and Aviators leaving the production line at the Chicago Assembly Plant with flaws in areas like the chassis, transmission and suspension, said vehicles trucked to Ford's Flat Rock Assembly Plant (FRAP) outside of Detroit for repair. The estimates range from 10,000 to 18,000 vehicles affected, numbers so high that Ford has sought help from Roush Engineering in nearby Allen Park, and brought workers and managers from other plants in the Midwest to FRAP to get vehicles repaired and shipped to dealers. Ford hasn't shared the nature of the problems with anyone outside the company, including dealers and customers. Freep's sources are said to include workers who have provided photos of certain vehicles and of tents used to house parts at the FRAP repair site. The Explorer chassis allegedly has an unidentified problem that engineers are using X-rays to diagnose, and the transmission is having problems sensing when it's in park or going into park. Both the Explorer and Aviator have come off the line with HVAC units that only blow hot air. And the Aviator's height-adjustable suspension enters failure mode for unknown reasons. These come on top of quotidian mishaps common to every new vehicle, but that are meant to be sorted in pre-production, like missing emblems and trim pieces. They also come on top of a recall in early August issued for the Explorer and Aviator concerning the instrument cluster and parking brake, and another at the end of August over rear seatbacks that could collapse in a crash. An automaker spokesperson told Freep, "Making updates to preproduction models based on all-new platforms as they roll off the assembly line – is standard industry practice." Except these aren't pre-production, these are early production vehicles that paying customers and dealers are waiting for, and some of the affected vehicles have been pulled off dealer lots. Dealers say they are fine waiting for the trucks to get sorted out, and they'd rather have Ford fix the problems before the SUVs go to customers.