1972 Ford Gran Torino Sport Fastback on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2016 Ford Mustang getting California Special treatment

The sixth-generation Mustang hasn't even been around for a full year, but Ford is already prepping a couple of tweaks for 2016. We've now learned that there will be a California Special version, and if that name sounds familiar, it's because Ford has a long history of doing the GT/CS treatment on its 'Stangs. We don't have anything to go on right now, save the image you see here. But previous California Special versions were limited to things like new wheels, spoilers, badges, and some paint options, so we aren't expecting anything too drastic. It's also unclear if Ford will offer the new GT/CS on both the coupe and convertible, or if it'll just stick to the hardtop. We'll get the full details on Monday, May 11 – that's when Ford will reveal everything it's done for the 2016 Mustang lineup. Stay tuned.

Big electric trucks won't save the planet, says the NYT

When The New York Times decides that an issue is an issue, be prepared to read about it at length. Rarely will a week passes these days when the esteemed news organization doesn’t examine the realities, myths and alleged benefits and drawbacks of electric vehicles, and even The Atlantic joins in sometimes. That revolution, marked by changes in manufacturing, consumer habits and social “consciousness,” may in fact be upon us. Or it may not. Nonetheless, the newspaper appears committed to presenting to the public these pros and cons. In this recently published article titled, “Just How Good for the Planet Is That Big Electric Pickup Truck?”—wow, thatÂ’s a mouthful — the Times focuses on the “bigness” of the current and pending crop of EVs, and how that impacts or will impact the environment and road safety. This is not what news organizations these days are fond of calling “breaking news.” In October, we pointed to an essay in The Atlantic that covered pretty much the same ground, and focused on the Hummer as one particular villain, In the paper and online on Feb. 18, the Times' Elana Shao observes how “swapping a gas pickup truck for a similar electric one can produce significant emissions savings.” She goes on: “Take the Ford F-150 pickup truck compared with the electric F-150 Lightning. The electric versions are responsible for up to 50 percent less greenhouse gas emissions per mile.” But she right away flips the argument, noting the heavier electric pickup trucks “often require bigger batteries and more electricity to charge, so they end up being responsible for more emissions than other smaller EVs. Taking into consideration the life cycle emissions per mile, they end up just as polluting as some smaller gas-burning cars.” Certainly, itÂ’s been drummed into our heads that electric cars donÂ’t run on air and water but on electricity that costs money, and that the public will be dealing with “the shift toward electric SUVs, pickup trucks and crossover vehicles, with some analysts estimating that SUVs, pickup trucks and vans could make up 78 percent of vehicle sales by 2025." No-brainer alert: Big vehicles cost more to charge. And then thereÂ’s the safety question, which was cogently addressed in the Atlantic story. Here Shao reiterates data documenting the increased risks of injuries and deaths caused by larger, heavier vehicles.

Ford recalls 90,736 vehicles due to engine valve issue

Ford will recall 90,736 vehicles as engine intake valves in the vehicles may break while driving, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) said on Saturday. The recall impacts certain 2021-2022 Bronco, F-150, Edge, Explorer, Lincoln Nautilus, and Lincoln Aviator vehicles equipped with either a 2.7L or 3.0L Nano EcoBoost engine, the NHTSA said. According to documents posted by NHTSA and sourced from the automaker, "The engine intake valves may break while driving, which can result in engine failure and a loss of drive power." Following an investigation that started in January, 2022, Ford found 22 instances where "the engine intake valves fractured and fell into the combustion chamber of the engine causing catastrophic engine damage." The automaker's analysis continues: "Ford identified that the potential root cause of the failures was engine intake valve failure due to valves that exceeded the designed specification for hardness, were brittle, and more likely to fracture. Ford determined that this was due to the supplier’s grinding processes and the sensitivity of the intake valve material to grinding processes that were not within control specifications. The intake valve material was changed for vehicles produced after October 31, 2021." Fixing the problem will require replacement of the entire engine. "Dealers will inspect each vehicle to determine its cumulative number of engine cycles. For vehicles that do not meet the engine cycle threshold, dealers will accumulate high revolutions per minute (rpm) engine cycles per a service procedure. Engines will be replaced on vehicles that do not pass the engine cycle accumulation," Ford says.