2013 Ford Taurus Sho Awd Perf Pkg Loaded on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Top torque-to-weight ratios under $100k, $50k and $25k

Horsepower may steal a lot of headlines, but the always-more-complex torque figure is often a critical one for both the workingman and the motoring playboy. The measure of rotational force represents the twist that can liquefy one's tires or haul one's horse trailer. Good stuff.
It follows then, that as with the horsepower-to-weight list that we assembled for you a few months ago, a list of cars that offer the most pound-feet with the fewest pounds to carry, is an interesting one to break down. Sure, there's a big difference in how the torque is applied from a turbocharged six-cylinder in a Swedish luxury sedan and a massive heavy-duty truck's turbo-diesel. But being the car/stat geeks that we are, we think it's kinda neat that those two vehicles rank near each other where torque and weight intersect.
As with the horsepower list, we've given you figures as pounds per every one pound-foot. Again broken down into broad price categories, we've got a mixed bag of 2014 and 2015 models here, too. Every effort has been made to select the most up-to-date prices and specs, and we've also to omitted some '14 cars that won't be re-upped after the ongoing yearly changeover.

Will the new Ford GT race at Le Mans?

Ford stole the spotlight here on the floor of the Detroit Auto Show this year with the reveal of the new GT. Its carbon-fiber chassis, 600-plus-horsepower EcoBoost engine and radical aerodynamic shape made sure of that, but flanking it with the debuts of the Mustang GT350R and F-150 Raptor didn't hurt any, either. Any racing fan looking at the new Blue Oval supercar, however, had to wonder whether Dearborn is planning on putting it on the race track. The House that Hank Built is, after all, a known entity in motor racing. It may be canceling its V8 Supercars program Down Under, withdrawn its support from the World Rally Championship, and it's been years since it's competed in Formula One or Indy. But it still competes in the United SportsCar Championship, NASCAR, NHRA and a variety of motor racing disciplines. One of its most famous and celebrated of racing endeavors, however, came in the form of the original GT40 that brought Ford four consecutive victories at the 24 Hours of Le Mans, starting with a dominant one-two-three finish in 1966. It's the 50th anniversary of that landmark win which the new Ford GT celebrates, but while the press materials made clear reference to that historical event, any mention of a return as was previously speculated was carefully omitted. That, according to Autosport, could come down purely to the ACO, the organizers of the event and sanctioning body for its associated series, which has yet to announce the revised format for the GTE class under which a potential Ford GT racer would compete in 2016. Longtime Ford racing partner Multimatic is said to have closely consulted with the ACO on the formation of those rules, however, and assuming they're finally formulated to Dearborn's liking, we could be looking at a GTE-spec Ford GT to return to La Sarthe next year in celebration of that landmark victory half a century prior. Chip Ganassi Racing – which races under Chevy power in NASCAR and Indy but recently switched to Ford for its Daytona Prototype – is said to be in line to field the car on Dearborn's behalf. If given the green light, it would be the first time Ford would field a factory effort at Le Mans since the C100 project under the Group C category in the early 1980s. A racing version of the previous Ford GT was prepared by Switzerland-based Matech a few years ago, but without factory support or notable success beyond the FIA GT3 European Championship.

After Years Of Delays, Rear Visibility Requirements Move Closer To Reality

Regulations that would require automakers to improve rear-view visibility on all new cars and light trucks are nearing completion after six years of delays. The U.S. Department of Transportation sent its proposed rear-visibility rules to the Obama administration for review on Christmas Day. The White House Office of Management and Budget now must finalize the regulations. The rule are intended to minimize the risk of pedestrian deaths from vehicles in reverse, a type of accident that disproportionately affects children. Already in 2014, two children have died from cars backing over them, driven in each case by the children's father. Specifics of the Transportation Department's proposal are not available during the review, but the rules are expected to compel automakers to install rear-view cameras as mandatory equipment on all new vehicles. That's what safety advocates have wanted all along. Thought they were pleased the proposed ruling had finally been issued, there was some worry Friday the final rules would omit the rear-view camera mandate. "We're encouraged, but we're also a little concerned about speculation the rear-view camera may not be in there," said Janette Fennell, the president and founder of Kids and Cars, a nonprofit organization dedicated to protecting children in and around vehicles. "I'm wondering where that might be coming from." On Thursday, The Automotive News had reported the possibility the new standards could offer an alternative to rear-view cameras, such as redesigned mirrors, that improved visibility. The Office of Management and Budget typically completes its reviews of new rules in 90 days, although that can be extended. OMB officials said Friday they do not comment on pending rules. The intent of the rules is to enhance rear visibility for drivers and prevent pedestrian deaths. Approximately 200 pedestrians are backed over in the United States each year, according to estimates from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Accidents Mostly Affect Children Roughly half the victims are children younger than age five. A government analysis concluded approximately half the victims -– 95 to 112 -– could be saved with new regulations. Yet the rules have arrived at a glacial pace. President George W. Bush signed legislation that had been passed with bipartisan Congressional support in 2008. But automakers have fought the idea of adding rear-view cameras, saying it is too expensive.