1996 Ford Bronco Eddie Bauer Xlt Blazer K5 Jimmy Tahoe 4x4 on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2016 Ford Explorer configurator reveals $30,700* base price, Platinum starts at $52,600*

The a la carte menu for the 2016 Ford Explorer is ready for your... umm... exploring. The first page of the refreshed model's configurator reveals the lineup, including the new Platinum trim, and price increases for three of the carryover models. The base Explorer doesn't change by one red cent: it can still be had for $30,700. The XLT needs $33,400 (a $400 price bump), the Limited goes for $41,300 (a not insignificant $2,900 price increase), and the Sport requires $43,300 (a $200 increase). That new Platinum model goes where no Explorer MSRP has gone before, beginning at $52,600 (*all prices are subject to an $895 destination charge). However, since Ford has put almost everything in it, you can't jack the price up too much further unless you lose your mind in the accessories catalog. You can quickly head that way lower down the order, though. The Limited's price jump appears to be due to the voice-activated navigation system, which comes standard; it was formerly part of a $2,600 option package. The Limited goes up by just $995 when specced with the new 2.3-liter EcoBoost, which raises the power over the 2.0-liter EcoBoost it replaces to 270 horsepower and 300 pound-feet of torque, but doesn't incur any fuel economy penalty. All-wheel drive tacks on another $2,000, safety features like active park assist and lane departure warning come as part of $3,000 Equipment Group A, and you'll still have another three pages of options to get through. On the other hand, if you just want to get your family bundle into an Explorer without spending a bundle, the base model doesn't offer any packages and only has one option over $200. Let the research begin.

GM says it favors fuel-efficiency rules based on historic rates

WASHINGTON — General Motors backs an annual increase in fuel-efficiency standards based on "historic rates" rather than tough Obama era rules or a Trump administration proposal that would freeze requirements, according to a federal filing made public on Monday. The largest U.S. automaker said the Obama rules that aimed to hike fleet fuel efficiency to more than 50 miles per gallon by 2025 are "not technologically feasible or economically practicable." The Detroit automaker said that since 1980, the motor vehicle fleet has improved fuel efficiency at an average rate of 1 percent a year. Fiat Chrysler Automobiles NV said in separate comments that the auto industry is complying with existing fuel efficiency requirements by using credits from prior model years. As a result, even if requirements are frozen at 2020 levels, "the industry would need to continue to improve fuel economy" as credits expire, it added, warning if the government hikes standards beyond 2020 requirements "the situation worsens ... without some significant form of offset or flexibility." Fiat Chrysler and Ford urged the government to reclassify two-wheel drive SUVs as light trucks, which face less stringent requirements than cars. A four-wheel drive version of the same SUV is considered a light truck. Ford backs fuel rules "that increase year-over-year with additional flexibility to help us provide more affordable options for our customers." GM's comments said it was "troubled" that President Donald Trump's administration wants to phase out incentives for electric vehicles. The Trump plan's preferred alternative freezes standards at 2020 levels through 2026 and hikes U.S. oil consumption by about 500,000 barrels per day in the 2030s but reduces automakers' collective regulatory costs by more than $300 billion. It would bar California from requiring automakers to sell a rising number of electric vehicles or setting state emissions rules. The administration of former President Obama had adopted rules, effective in 2021, calling for an annual increase of 4.4 percent in fuel-efficiency requirements from 2022 through 2025. GM has been lobbying Congress to lift the existing cap on electric vehicles eligible for a $7,500 tax credit. The credit phases out over a 12-month period after an individual automaker hits 200,000 electric vehicles sold, and GM is close to that point.

Ford finds flex-fuel engine design plays big role in emissions output

How bad is ethanol for your engine? There's been a lot of debate on this issue as the US considers upping the biofuel content in the national gasoline supply from 10 percent (E10) to 15 percent (E15). The ethanol industry and some scientists say higher ethanol blends show no "meaningful differences" in new engines while the oil industry says ethanol creates health risks. Researchers working at the Ford Research and Innovation Center decided to take a closer look at how a wide range of gas-ethanol blends - E0, E10, E20, E30, E40, E55 and E80 - affected the emissions coming out of a flex-fuel 2006 Mercury Grand Marquis. To see the full report, printed in the journal Environmental Science & Technology, requires payment, but there is an abstract and Green Car Congress has some more details. The gist is that, "with increasing ethanol content in the fuel, the tailpipe emissions of ethanol, acetaldehyde, formaldehyde, methane, and ammonia increased." At least NOx and NMHC emissions decreased. The researchers say that the effects are due to the fuel and "are expected for all FFVs," but that the way that a manufacturer calibrates the engine will affect NOx, THC, and NMOG emissions. It's this last bit that's important, since the researchers found, "Higher ethanol content in gasoline affects several fundamental fuel properties that can impact emissions. ... These changes can have positive or negative effects that can depend on engine design, hardware, and control strategy. In addition to direct emissions impacts, higher ethanol content fuel can also provide more efficient combustion and overall engine operation under part-load conditions and under knock-limited higher-load conditions." So, as we head towards more ethanol in our fuel supply (maybe), manufacturers are going to need to learn how to burn it most efficiently.