2012 Ford Mustang Gt Coupe 2-door 5.0l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

From CrabWalks at dawn to post-testing sushi: An inside look at Autoblog’s Tech of the Year Award

TROY, Mich. — On a chilly fall morning, Senior Editor John Snyder rolled into a sleepy suburban park tucked away next to a cemetery a few miles north of Detroit. Driving diagonally — CrabWalking — in the GMC Hummer EV, he made quite the entrance as he maneuvered across the parking lot to the bemusement of Autoblog editors and a few curious park-goers up for their early morning runs.  Snyder got everyoneÂ’s attention, and as we evaluate the latest wave of technologies transforming the automotive industry, pizazz matters. We added "wow factor" to our criteria for the 2022 Autoblog Technology of the Year Award, in keeping with the times. The HummerÂ’s CrabWalk feature might have won, had wowness been the only criteria, but we also scored the technologies on significance and how well they work.  As it was, the Hummer finished a competitive second this year, behind FordÂ’s Onboard Scales and Smart Hitch, which make towing and hauling easier for modern truck owners. The Genesis GV60Â’s Biometrics was within striking distance in third place, bringing the facial recognition and fingerprint tech commonly used in phones to your car. For more on FordÂ’s win — its second straight Autoblog Technology of the Year Award — read Road Test Editor Zac PalmerÂ’s complete recap. Many have asked: Why do Tech of the Year? For Autoblog, itÂ’s been a point of pride for nearly a decade. In the early days it was a way to differentiate ourselves from print magazines, some of which have been giving out car of the year awards since the early days of the Cold War. With Tech of the Year, we seek to highlight the ways experiencing a vehicle is changing. It was true in 2013 and resonates even more as we head into 2023. Cars and transportation have changed more in the past decade than in arguably the previous four. At its most basic experience, driving a 1985 Buick LeSabre with a decent radio and comfy interior was not all that different from driving a 2005 Buick Lacrosse. Just a few years later, many cars had touchscreens, the internet and some means of driver assistance. Ford joins Tesla as the only two-time winner of Tech of the Year. The Blue Oval captured the award last year for its Pro Power Onboard generator. Tesla won in 2014 for its Supercharger network, and the Model S won in 2016, when we briefly gave out a “technology car” of the year award, in addition to honoring a particular feature.

2013-2017 Ford Explorer recalled over rear suspension issue, again

Ford is recalling about 375,000 Explorer SUV models built between 2013 and 2017 in North America to fix a potential defect in the rear suspension. In "North America states and provinces where corrosion is common," which we take to mean areas that experience harsh winters and heavily salted roads, "a fracture of the outboard section of the rear suspension toe link" is possible on affected vehicles. Ford says 350,000 of these models were sold in the United States and another 25,200 in Canada. This isn't the first time Explorers of this generation have been recalled for fractured toe links. Back in the summer of 2017, 1.2 million Explorer models were recalled over toe links that could fracture if subjected to "frequent full rear suspension articulation (jounce and rebound)." A little over a year earlier, 75,000 Explorers were recalled over, you guessed it, rear toe links that may not have been welded properly. It's not just Explorers that Ford has recalled over rear toe links. Earlier this year, the automaker issued a recall that covered nearly 230,000 Ford Flex, Taurus and Lincoln MKT models. All of these recalled vehicles ride on similar unibody underpinnings that Ford calls the D4 platform. We can't say whether these other D4-based vehicles will get another recall as the Explorer has. Ford says it is aware of as many as 13 crashes and six injuries attributable to the toe links covered under this most recent Explorer recall. Owners will need to visit their preferred dealership, which will "complete a torque inspection of the cross-axis ball joint and replace it as necessary," according to Ford. Related Video:

Lexus tops JD Power Vehicle Dependability Study again, Buick bests Toyota

It shouldn't surprise anyone, but Lexus has once again taken the top spot in JD Power's Vehicle Dependability Study. That'd be the Japanese luxury brand's fourth straight year at the top of table. The big news, though, is the rise of Buick. General Motor's near-premium brand beat out Toyota to take second place, with 110 problems per 100 vehicles compared to Toyota's 111 problems. Lexus owners only reported 89 problems per 100 vehicles. Besides Buick's three-position jump, Scion enjoyed a major improvement, jumping 13 positions from 2014. Ram and Mitsubishi made big gains, as well, moving up 11 and 10 positions, respectively. In terms of individual segments, GM and Toyota both excelled, taking home seven segment awards each. The study wasn't good news for all involved, though. A number of popular automakers finished below the industry average of 147 problems per 100 vehicles, including Subaru, (157PP100), Volkswagen (165PP100), Ford/Hyundai (188PP100 each) and Mini (193PP100). The biggest losers (by a tremendous margin, we might add) were Land Rover and Fiat, recording 258 and 273 problems per 100 vehicles. The next closest brand was Jeep, with 197PP100. While the Vehicle Dependability Study uses the same measurement system as the Initial Quality Survey, the two metrics analyze very different things. The VDS looks at problems experienced by original owners of model year 2012 vehicles over the past 12 months, while the oft-quoted IQS focuses on problems in the first 90 days of new-vehicle ownership. Like the IQS, though, the VDS has a rather broad definition of what a problem is. Because of that, a low score from JD Power is no guarantee of extreme unreliability, so much as just poor design. In this most recent study, the two most reported problems focused on Bluetooth connectivity and the voice-command systems. The former leaves plenty of room for user error due to poor design (particularly true of the Bluetooth systems on the low-scoring Fords, Volkswagens and Subarus), while the second is something JD Power has already confirmed as being universally terrible. That makes means that while these studies are important, they shouldn't be taken as gospel when it comes to automotive reliability. News Source: JD PowerImage Credit: Copyright 2015 Jeremy Korzeniewski / AOL Buick Fiat Ford GM Hyundai Jeep Land Rover Lexus MINI Mitsubishi RAM Scion Subaru Toyota Volkswagen Auto Repair Ownership study