2011 Ford Escape Limited on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Ford decides C-Max shoppers not interested in fuel economy

If you say a car – the Ford C-Max Hybrid, for example – is "fun to drive," can anyone really come up with some empirical evidence against your claim? What about calling it "versatile"? We wonder if Ford has been thinking along these lines when it talks about the green little hatch. Ford is refocusing its sales strategy for the C-Max Hybrid after the model took a sales hit on both sides of the Atlantic recently, Automotive News reports. That sales dropoff may stem from the fact that Ford has had to revise its fuel-economy figures downward for the C-Max twice since last year, most recently in June. That made the company's once-proud fuel-economy comparisons with the Toyota Prius kind of pointless. Ford is going a different route, calling the model versatile (which, to be fair it was also doing a year ago), technologically advanced and fun to drive. Since the C-Max has about 50 more horsepower than the Prius, that last part may be true. Ford representatives didn't immediately respond to a request for comment from AutoblogGreen about the mpg-mention-free advertising direction, but we will update this post if we hear back. Sales of the C-Max Hybrid have suffered in the US. Through September, Ford sold 15,245 C-Max Hybrids, down 36 percent from last year. We shall see if a new focus away from the car's lowered mpg numbers helps. At least Ford can be pleased with sales of the C-Max Energi Plug-in Hybrid, which are up 51 percent compared to 2013.

Weekly Recap: Hackers demonstrate auto industry's vulnerability

There's always been a certain risk associated with driving, and this week cyber security came into focus as the latest danger zone when researchers demonstrated how easily they could hack into a 2014 Jeep Cherokee from across the country. The incident raised concerns over the vulnerability of today's cars, many of which double as smartphones and hot spots. During the now-infamous experiment, Chris Valasek and Charlie Miller infiltrated the Jeep's cellular connection and were able to control the infotainment system, brakes, and other functions. The hackers told the Jeep's maker, FCA US, of their findings last year, the company devised a software fix. Though Valesek and Miller hacked a Cherokee (like the one shown above), several FCA products, including recent versions of the Ram, Grand Cherokee, Dodge Durango, and Viper were also affected, illustrating potentially wide exposure that could reverberate across the sector. "For the auto industry, this is a very important event and shows that cyber-security protection is needed even sooner than previously planned," Egil Juliussen, senior analyst and research director for IHS Automotive, wrote in a research note. "Five years ago, the auto industry did not consider cyber security as a near-term problem. This view has changed." Hours after the Cherokee hacking incident was publicized on Tuesday, Sens. Ed Markey (D-Mass) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn) introduced legislation to direct the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and Federal Trade Commission to establish national standards for automotive cyber security. The bill also would require vehicles to have a cyber-rating system to alert consumers how well their cars' privacy and security are defended. "Drivers shouldn't have to choose between being connected and being protected," Markey said in a statement. "We need clear rules of the road that protect cars from hackers and American families from data trackers." Though FCA and its Jeep Cherokee were in the spotlight this time, they were just the latest to showcase how automotive technology has advanced faster than safety and regulatory measures. IHS forecasts 82.5 million cars will be connected to the internet by 2022, which is more than three times today's level. "Cyber-security will become a major challenge for the auto industry and solutions are long overdue," Juliussen said.

Ford recalls Explorer and Lincoln MKC for fire hazard

The Basics: Ford will recall 5,536 examples of the 2016 Explorer and 2015-2016 Lincoln MKC. The Explorers have build dates between October 20, 2014, and January 28, 2016, at the Chicago Assembly Plant. The MKCs are from between November 25, 2013, and January 25, 2016, at the Louisville Assembly Plant. In total, there are 3,129 total affected examples of the 2015-2016 Lincoln MKC and 2,407 examples of the 2016 Ford Explorer. Of these, 1,543 are in the US and 3,993 are in Canada. The Problem: The combination of the engine block design and the block heater in these vehicles can cause the part to overheat when plugged in. Injuries/Deaths: None reported, but there are two cases of underhood fires in Canada. If you own one: Ford will begin notifying owners during the week of May 16, company spokesperson John Cangany tells Autoblog. Related Video: Ford issues safety recall for certain 2015-2016 Lincoln MKC and 2016 Ford Explorer vehicles to replace engine block heaters Ford is issuing a safety recall for approximately 5,500 2015-2016 Lincoln MKC and 2016 Ford Explorer vehicles to remove the heaters and replace them with an updated design. The engine block design, coupled with the particular block heater installed in these vehicles, causes the unit to be susceptible to overheating when the vehicle is parked and the block heater is plugged in –increasing the risk of an underhood fire. Ford is aware of two reports of underhood fires in Canada, but is not aware of any accidents or injuries related to this issue. Affected vehicles include certain 2015-2016 Lincoln MKC vehicles built at Louisville Assembly Plant, Nov. 25, 2013 through Jan. 25, 2016 and certain 2016 Ford Explorer vehicles built at Chicago Assembly Plant, Oct. 20, 2014 through Jan. 28, 2016. There are 5,536 vehicles affected by the issue, including 3,129 2015-2016 Lincoln MKC and 2,407 2016 Ford Explorer vehicles, with 1,543 of the affected vehicles in the United States and federalized territories and 3,993 in Canada. Dealers will remove and replace the engine block heater with an updated design and, if needed, replace the cord at no cost to the customer.