1965 Ford F250 on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Ford could use Raptor name on Ranger in Australia

Ford might be flying the Raptor name into the market Down Under, but rather than on a high-performance F-150, the aggressive moniker could be used for a mean Ranger. The Australia-based site Car Advice recently spotted the Blue Oval testing a modified Ranger over some off-road terrain. The pickup was equipped with a snorkel over the roof for wading into deep water, a brush bar to protect the front, a higher ride height, and fender flares. The regular version of the truck launches Down Under later this year, including the somewhat rugged Wildtrak trim level (pictured above). So where does the Raptor name fit into this? Ford filed a trademark in Australia on June 5 for the Ranger Raptor. There's no guarantee for that as the truck's moniker, though. As of May 28, the Blue Oval also owns the right to the Ranger FX4 title. Although, don't start saving yet. With the Ranger remaining unavailable outside of the US for the latest generation, there's no chance of a Ranger Raptor coming here. Hopefully, Aussie off-roaders get plenty of enjoyment out of the truck, if it sees production. Related Video:

Ford pits Cobra Jet versus GRC Fiesta ST, worlds collide

Racing takes on many forms in the automotive world. There are sanctioned events that are as varied and diverse as NASCAR, Formula One, Global Rallycross and drag racing, and to be good enough to win competitively in one discipline, you need to have a specialized vehicle. Or do you?
Ford decided to find out what would happen when its Global Rallycross Fiesta ST, driven by Tanner Foust, lined up against its Mustang Cobra Jet drag racer, driven by Roy Hill. In one lane, Tanner has just 2.0 liters of displacement to work with, while Roy has more than double that, at 5.0 liters. Evening the playing field a bit, Tanner has a massive turbocharger and all-wheel drive; Roy has to filter all his supercharged power through the rear wheels only.
So, who wins? We suggest you see for yourself in the press release and video below. And we're holding out hope that Tanner's challenge at the end results in another video from Ford Racing...

2016: The year of the autonomous-car promise

About half of the news we covered this year related in some way to The Great Autonomous Future, or at least it seemed that way. If you listen to automakers, by 2020 everyone will be driving (riding?) around in self-driving cars. But what will they look like, how will we make the transition from driven to driverless, and how will laws and infrastructure adapt? We got very few answers to those questions, and instead were handed big promises, vague timelines, and a dose of misdirection by automakers. There has been a lot of talk, but we still don't know that much about these proposed vehicles, which are at least three years off. That's half a development cycle in this industry. We generally only start to get an idea of what a company will build about two years before it goes on sale. So instead of concrete information about autonomous cars, 2016 has brought us a lot of promises, many in the form of concept cars. They have popped up from just about every automaker accompanied by the CEO's pledge to deliver a Level 4 autonomous, all-electric model (usually a crossover) in a few years. It's very easy to say that a static design study sitting on a stage will be able to drive itself while projecting a movie on the windshield, but it's another thing entirely to make good on that promise. With a few exceptions, 2016 has been stuck in the promising stage. It's a strange thing, really; automakers are famous for responding with "we don't discuss future product" whenever we ask about models or variants known to be in the pipeline, yet when it comes to self-driving electric wondermobiles, companies have been falling all over themselves to let us know that theirs is coming soon, it'll be oh so great, and, hey, that makes them a mobility company now, not just an automaker. A lot of this is posturing and marketing, showing the public, shareholders, and the rest of the industry that "we're making one, too, we swear!" It has set off a domino effect – once a few companies make the guarantee, the rest feel forced to throw out a grandiose yet vague plan for an unknown future. And indeed there are usually scant details to go along with such announcements – an imprecise mileage estimate here, or a far-off, percentage-based goal there. Instead of useful discussion of future product, we get demonstrations of test mules, announcements of big R&D budgets and new test centers they'll fund, those futuristic concept cars, and, yeah, more promises.