2014 Ford Escape Se on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Which car companies are creating new jobs in America?

Since January, automakers have announced investments totaling $9.5 billion in U.S. plants, creating or retaining more than 12,000 jobs. Some of those companies have yet to announce just how many jobs will be created given their investments, with the location of many of those jobs still to be determined. Specifically, the 4,000-job Toyota-Mazda joint venture plant still hasn't announced its location, with numerous states jockeying for it. Hyundai has plans to invest $1 billion but has not announced a jobs number yet. And likewise Ford is investing $1.2 billion in Michigan without specifying a number of jobs. Volvo this week announced plans to add a second line to its factory under construction in South Carolina, spending another $500 million and adding 2,500 jobs to the 2,000 it was already trying to fill. Then Thursday, Daimler announced a $1 billion expansion to its facility in Tuscaloosa, Ala., to produce EV batteries and electric SUVs, a move that will add 600 jobs to its hiring this year. Above, we've created a handy pie chart showing you which companies have announced new jobs and how many there will be. Reporting by Paul Lienert in Detroit News Source: Reuters Plants/Manufacturing BMW Chrysler Ford GM Honda Hyundai Mazda Mercedes-Benz Toyota Volvo jobs

Former Ford CEO Alan Mulally lands on Google board

Former Ford CEO Alan Mulally often referred to the Blue Oval as a technology company when he led the automaker. Now he'll be offering guidance to a different kind of technology firm: Google.
Mulally was appointed to Google's board of directors July 9, and late Tuesday, it was announced that he will serve on the company's audit committee. The veteran executive led Ford from September 2006 until he retired in June, succeeded by Mark Fields.
While Mulally will act as a board member - rather than in a managerial role - his presence adds credibility to Google's recently announced plans to produce an autonomous car. The ambitious program calls for 100 prototypes to begin testing later this summer. Production of the car is rumored to be in collaboration with a Detroit area performance company, Roush.

Ford made three big mistakes in calculating MPG for 2013 C-Max Hybrid

It's been a rough time for the official fuel economy figures for the Ford C-Max Hybrid. When the car was released in 2012, Ford made a huge deal about how it would beat the Toyota Prius V, which was rated at 42 combined miles per gallon, 44 city and 40 highway. The Ford? 47 mpg across the board. How did Ford come to this place, where its Prius-beater turned into an also-ran? Well, after hearing customer complaints and issuing a software update in mid-2013, then discovering a real problem with the numbers last fall and then making a big announcement last week that the fuel economy ratings of six different 2013 and 2014 model year vehicles would need to be lowered, the C-Max Hybrid has ended up at 40 combined, 42 city and 37 highway. In other words, the Prius trumps it, as daily drivers of those two vehicles have known for a long time. The changes will not only affect the window sticker, but also the effect that the C-Max Hybrid (and the five other Ford vehicles that had their fuel economy figures lowered last week) have on Ford's compliance with greenhouse gas and CAFE rules for model year 2013 and 2014. How did Ford come to this place, where its Prius-beater turned into an also-ran? There are two technical answers to that question, which we've got below, as well as some context for how Ford's mistakes will play out in the bigger world of green vehicles. Let's start with Ford's second error, which is easy to do since we documented it in detail last year (the first, needing to do a software update, was also covered). The basic gist is that Ford used the general label rule (completely legally) to test the Fusion Hybrid and use those numbers to figure out how efficient the C-Max Hybrid is. That turned out to be a mistake, since the two vehicles are different enough that their numbers were not comparable, despite having the same engine, transmission and test weight, as the rules require. You can read more details here. Ford's Said Deep admitted that the TRLHP issue is completely separate from the general label error from last year. Now let's move on to last week's announcement. What's interesting is that the new recalculation of the MPG numbers – downward, of course – was caused by a completely separate issue, something called the Total Road Load Horsepower (TRLHP). Ford's Said Deep admitted to AutoblogGreen that the TRLHP issue had nothing to do with the general label error from last year.