1981 Chevrolet Corvette T-top Coupe on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Would you pay $17 a month to give your older Ford connectivity?

When it was first introduced in 2007, there was nothing like the original Ford Sync system, since it allowed car owners to connect and use a portable device better than anything that came before it. And because it was a brought-in/tethered and software-based system, Sync leveraged a device's connectivity and was easily updated. It took competitors awhile to catch up: Toyota Entune wasn't available until 2011, and Chevy MyLink didn't roll out until 2012. But now Ford is the one playing catchup since it stuck with the brought-in strategy while most other automakers were quicker to add connectivity via an embedded cellular modem. Ford initially installed 2G/3G modems in its small fleet of electric and plug-in electric vehicles starting in 2012 so that owners could keep tabs on charging. Embedded connectivity came to Lincoln in 2014, and Ford began adding onboard 4G LTE via Sync Connect to select cars starting with the Escape in 2015. To get more cars connected more quickly, last week the automaker rolled out its FordPass SmartLink solution that plugs into the OBD port of 2010 to 2017 model year vehicles. This lets owners retroactively get onboard Wi-Fi, set up a "geo-fence" to keep tabs on a car's location, receive vehicle health reports and allows remote engine starting and door locking/unlocking using a smartphone app, among other features. But to connect older Ford vehicles will cost owners $16.99 a month for two years, not including installation. Ford throws in 1 GB of data or a 30-day trial, whichever comes first, after which owners have to add the vehicle to their Verizon shared data plan, which supplies connectivity for SmartLink, or establish a new account. (Disclosure: Autoblog is owned by Verizon.) By comparison, GM's 4G LTE data plans start at $10 a month for 200 MB and goes up to $30 for 3 GB, and owners can also add a car to an AT&T shared-data plan. But OnStar doesn't have a separate monthly subscription for the embedded modem or an installation charge, and standard features via the RemoteLink Mobile App are free for the first five years of ownership. FCA's Uconnect Access service also uses an embedded modem to provide similar telematics features for $20 per month following a free one-year trial, while a la carte in-car Wi-Fi is offered for $10 per day, $20 per week or $35 per month.

Autoblog's guilty pleasure cars

Guilty pleasures are part of life – don't even try to pretend like you don't have one (or two, or six). In the non-automotive space, this could come down to that secret playlist in your iPhone of songs you'll only listen to when you're alone; or think of that one TV show you really do love, but won't admit to your friends. I've got plenty, and so do you. Going back to cars, here's a particularly juicy one for me: several years ago, I had a mad crush on the very last iteration of the Cadillac DTS. Oh yes, the front-wheel-drive, Northstar V8-powered sofa-on-wheels that was the last remaining shred of the elderly-swooning days of Cadillac's past. Every time I had the chance to drive one, I was secretly giddy. Don't hate me, okay? These days, the DTS is gone, but I've still got a mess of other cars that hold a special place in my heart. And in the spirit of camaraderie, I've asked my other Autoblog editors to tell me some of their guilty pleasure cars, as well – Seyth Miersma, as you can see above, has a few choice emotions to share about the Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution. Read on to find out what cars make us secretly happy. Mercedes-Benz SL65 AMG This decadent convertible is the epitome of the guilty pleasure. It's big, powerful, fairly heavy and it's richly appointed inside and out. It's a chocolate eclair with the three-pointed star on the hood. Given my druthers, I'd take the SL65 AMG, which delivers 621 horsepower and 738 pound-feet of torque. That output is borderline absurd for this laid-back convertible. I don't care. You don't need dessert. Sometimes you just crave it. The SL line is about the feel you get on the road. The roof is open. The air, sun and engine sounds all embrace you. It's the same dynamic you could have experienced in a Mercedes a century ago, yet the SL gives you the most modern of luxuries. An Airscarf feature that warms my neck and shoulders through a vent embedded in the seat? Yes, please. Sure, it's an old-guy car. Mr. Burns and Lord Grantham are probably too young and hip for an SL65. I don't care. This is my guilty pleasure. Release the hounds. – Greg Migliore Senior Editor Ford Flex I drove my first Flex in 2009 when my mother let me borrow hers for the summer while I was away at college. The incredibly spacious interior made moving twice that summer a breeze, and the 200-mile trips up north were quite comfortable.

Full-size trucks are the best and worst vehicles in America

You don’t need me to tell you that Americans love pickup trucks. And the bigger the truck, the more likely it seems to be seen as an object of desire. Monthly and yearly sales charts are something of a broken record; track one is the Ford F-Series, followed by the Chevy Silverado, RamÂ’s line of haulers, and somewhere not far down the line, the GMC Sierra. The big Japanese players fall in place a bit further below — not that thereÂ’s anything wrong with a hundred thousand Toyota Tundra sales — and one-size-smaller trucks like the Toyota Tacoma, Ford Ranger and Chevy Colorado have proven awfully popular, too. Along with their sales numbers, the average cost of new trucks has similarly been on the rise. Now, I donÂ’t pretend to have the right to tell people what they should or shouldnÂ’t buy with their own money. But I just canÂ’t wrap my head around why a growing number of Americans are choosing to spend huge sums of money on super luxurious pickup trucks. Let me first say I do understand the appeal. People like nice things, after all. I know I do. I myself am willing to spend way more than the average American on all sorts of discretionary things, from wine and liquor to cameras and lenses. IÂ’ve even spent my own money on vehicles that I donÂ’t need but want anyway. A certain vintage VW camper van certainly qualifies. I also currently own a big, inefficient SUV with a 454-cubic-inch big block V8. So if your answer to the question IÂ’m posing here is that youÂ’re willing to pay the better part of a hundred grand on a chromed-out and leather-lined pickup simply because you want to, then by all means — not that you need my permission — go buy one. The part I donÂ’t understand is this: Why wouldn't you, as a rational person, rather split your garage in half? On one side would sit a nice car that is quiet, rides and handles equally well and gets above average fuel mileage. Maybe it has a few hundred gasoline-fueled horsepower, or heck, maybe itÂ’s electric. On the other side (or even outside) is parked a decent pickup truck. One that can tow 10,000 pounds, haul something near a ton in the bed, and has all the goodies most Americans want in their cars, like cruise control, power windows and locks, keyless entry, and a decent infotainment screen.