2009 Ford F-150 Fx4 Extended Cab Pickup 4-door 5.4l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Leno chooses his top 10 Mustangs

He may be a few months late to the party, but in celebration of the 50th anniversary of the Ford Mustang, Jay Leno has delivered a short video in which he runs down which of the Blue Oval's pony cars from the past 50 years are his favorites.
The list is pretty darn similar to our own, with some of the big names from the Mustang's half century making an appearance, while there are three or four cars here that we think you'll be pretty surprised by.
Take a look below for this short video from Jay Leno's Garage.

Ford dissects the heart of the 2015 Mustang, its engine range

Happy Mustang Day. Are you tired of hearing about the 2015 Ford Mustang yet? No? Good, here's a bunch of mechanical data on Ford's sixth-gen muscle car, along with cutaways of the GT's 5.0-liter V8 and the new 2.3-liter, EcoBoost four-cylinder shown above. We also have a smattering of info on the Stang's updated transmissions and an exploded-parts-diagram view of its all-new independent rear suspension.
Ford is set to make waves offering the Mustang with a turbo for the firs time since the small-volume SVO of the 1980s. Displacing 2.3 liters, the engine's twin-scroll turbo should help the four-cylinder turn out a projected 305 horsepower and 300 pound-feet of torque, while also returning the best fuel economy in the Mustang's engine lineup. As we said in our Deep Dive, the EcoBoost will be slotted in as a premium engine, above the 3.7-liter V6 but below the 5.0-liter V8.
Speaking of that high-revving eight-cylinder, it's receiving a new cylinder head with high-flow ports. The intake and exhaust valves are larger and the cams have been replaced, among other tweaks. It should rev even higher thanks to a rebalanced crankshaft and forged connecting rods. Ford is still claiming a projected 420 hp and 390 lb-ft, although as many of the changes for the 2015's V8 come from the 2013 Boss 302, we're going to assume there's some sandbagging at work.

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.