2008 Navigation Rearcam Pano Htd Ac Seats Thx Bluetooth Audio Lincoln Mkx 73k on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Ford recalls 382k vehicles across six campaigns

Ford needs to repair a total of 381,633 vehicles in North America across six newly announced campaigns, including five safety recalls and one compliance recall. By far the largest of these campaigns covers the 342,271 examples of the 1998-2003 Windstar to double check an earlier recall repair. Among these, 283,413 are in the US and 58,858 are in Canada. The combination of corrosion and stress can cause cracks in the rear axle and eventually lead to the part to snap completely. The company reports a small number of accidents might be connected to this, but there are no injuries. The minivans were recalled for this issue back in 2010, and it was investigated by NHTSA. According to Ford's latest announcement, the reinforcement brackets on some of these models might not have been installed correctly. This time, dealers will perform an inspection. Minivans with incorrectly installed brackets will get a new rear axle. The rest of the owners will be offered a deal to replace the part at a reduced cost. The next largest campaign covers 36,857 examples of the 2015 F-150 to fix a problem with the adaptive cruise control. Specifically, there are 33,481 affected trucks in the US, and 3,376 in Canada. According to Ford, "when passing a large, highly reflective truck" the radar in the system can misidentify a semi as being in the same lane as the pickup. The collision warning system would then activate, slowing the F-150. There's one report of an accident with this happening but no injuries. The fix is simply an update to the adaptive cruise control module software. Ford also has a recall for 1,477 examples of its 2016 F-53 and F-59 stripped chassis models, and they're all located in the US. A manufacturing issue might allow the trucks to shift into reverse without the driver first applying the brakes. There are no reports of any accidents from this, though. To repair the problem, the models get a new transmission shift control bracket and an adjustment to the shift cable. The Blue Oval's safety compliance recall covers 708 examples of the 2016 Fusion and Lincoln MKZ, including 658 of them in the US, 28 in Canada, and 22 in Mexico. On these models, a manufacturing problem with the fuel tank could allow it to crack in a crash, which isn't allowed under federal rules. There are no reports of accidents, injuries or fires. The fix will be a new fuel tank for all of them. The company is also repairing 251 units of the 2015 Taurus and Lincoln MKS, plus the 2016 Explorer.

Ford tumbles to second worst in Consumer Reports reliability survey, list dominated by Japanese [w/video]

It's no secret that MyFord Touch has had its share of problems since being introduced, but the most recent reliability survey from Consumer Reports shows just how much this infotainment system has affected Ford. Just two years ago, the automaker was in the top 10 for the institute's reliability rankings, but since then, it has tumbled to the second-lowest rung just above dead-last Jaguar. In addition to MyFord Touch, CR also attributes a handful of new products that have had issues right out of the gate.
Compiled from 1.2 million subscriber surveys, this year's auto reliability survey heavily favors Japanese automakers, with eight of the 10 spots hailing from Japan. Toyota brands grabbed the top three spots (Scion, Toyota and Lexus - in that order) with Mazda, Subaru, Honda and Acura filling the next four spots. The only non-Asian automaker cracking the top 10 was Audi at number eight.
Audi climbed a total of 18 spots from last year, and Cadillac and GMC round out this year's top gainers breaking into the top 15. Helping Cadillac's upward movement, the CTS Coupe was named the most reliable domestic car. Lincoln, Volvo and Chrysler join Ford on this year's biggest loser list.

BMW, Hyundai score big in JD Power's first Tech Experience Index

While automakers are quick to brag about winning a JD Power Initial Quality Study award, the reality, as we've pointed out before, is that these ratings are somewhat misleading, since IQS doesn't necessarily distinguish genuine quality issues. JD Power's new Tech Experience Index aims to solve that problem. The new metric takes the same 90-day approach as IQS but focuses exclusively on technology – collision protection, comfort and convenience, driving assistance, entertainment and connectivity, navigation, and smartphone mirroring. It splits the industry up into just seven segments, based loosely on size, which is why the Chevrolet Camaro is in the same division (mid-size) as Kia Sorento and the Mercedes-Benz GLE-Class is in the same segment as the Hyundai Genesis (mid-size premium). It makes for some screwy bedfellows, to be sure. Still, splitting tech experience away from initial quality should allow customers to make more informed and intelligent decisions when buying new vehicles. In the inaugural study, respondents listed BMW and Hyundai as the big winners, with two segment awards – the 2 Series for small premium and the 4 Series for compact premium, and the Genesis for mid-size premium and Tucson for small segment. The Chevrolet Camaro (midsize), Kia Forte (compact), and Nissan Maxima (large) scored individual wins. Ford also had a surprising hit with the Lincoln MKC, which ranked third in the compact premium segment behind the 4 Series and Lexus IS. This is a coup for the Blue Oval, whose woeful MyFord Touch systems made the brand a victim of the IQS' flaws in the early 2010s. But Ford and other automakers might not want to celebrate just yet. According to JD Power, there's still a lot of room for improvement – navigation systems were the lowest-rated piece of tech in the study. Instead, customers repeatedly saluted collision-avoidance and safety systems, giving the category the best marks of the study and listing blind-spot monitoring and backup cameras as two must-have features – 96 percent of respondents said they wanted those two systems in their next vehicle. But this isn't really a surprise. Implementation of safety systems from brand to brand is similar, and they don't require any input from users, unlike navigation and infotainment systems which are frustratingly deep.