1986 Ford F-250 on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Ford and Lincoln recall about 170,000 vehicles over defective rear-view camera

Ford and Lincoln have jointly issued a safety recall that includes nearly 170,000 vans and SUVs built between the 2018 and 2023 model years. The vehicles included in the campaign are equipped with a rear-view camera whose image can cut out while the driver is backing up. Assigned recall number 23V-598 by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), the campaign includes the following cars: 7,649 units of the 2020-2023 Aviator fitted with the standard rear-view camera and built from October 19, 2019, to August 17, 2023. 70,600 units of the 2018-2021 Navigator fitted with the 360-degree camera and built from March 16, 2017, to December 23, 2021. 66,740 units of the 2022-2023 Transit fitted with either camera system and built from February 26, 2021, to August 17, 2023. 24,468 units of the 2021 Bronco fitted with the 360-degree camera and built from September 23, 2020, to December 22, 2021. Ford explains that the defect is present in all of the 169,277 vehicles included in the campaign. While these are different cars equipped with different technology, they all suffer from the same problem. The company explains that "customers may intermittently experience either a rear camera blue image or a full blue or black image on the SYNC [infotainment system] screen when the vehicle is placed in reverse, or when the 360-degree view is selected and available." It adds that losing the camera's image while backing up increases the risk of the crash. The cause of the problem varies from model to model. Ford has narrowed it down to the camera hardware, the wiring retention, and the Image Processing Module - V (IPMB) software. It adds that "fretting corrosion causes tin oxide formation on the internal camera connector due to [a] thermally-induced micro-movement between the tin-plated contact surfaces," and that the rate of tin oxide accumulation depends on factors such as the temperature and the humidity. It has also traced some of these issues to a problem during the manufacturing process. Ford will begin notifying owners of affected vehicles by mail on October 2. When parts are available, owners will be asked to bring their van or SUV to an authorized dealer so that a technician can replace the rear-view camera. Transit models included in the campaign will also receive a software update. Owners who have already paid to fix the problem can claim a reimbursement until June 30, 2024. This isn't Ford's first rear-view camera-related recall.

Chevy's latest Silverado videos assume we're idiots

UPDATE: This article has been revised to reflect that any mention of materials used in a future Chevrolet Silverado is speculation. Can we have a sound, rational debate about the merits of aluminum versus steel? According to Chevrolet's latest marketing videos pitting the Silverado against the Ford F-150, the answer is no. The tone of all three ads is almost Orwellian: steel good, aluminum bad. Of course, this will all be a hilarious joke when an aluminum-bodied Silverado comes in 2018. That's an if, as a member of the General Motor public relations team has reminded me that any articles regarding future product are pure speculation. Until then Chevy needs to sell the current Silverado, with its body comprised chiefly of steel, against the Ford F-150's lightweight aluminum panels. Instead of touting the merits of the "most-dependable, longest lasting pickup," the strategy seems to center around negative propaganda towards the 13th element. The tone of all three ads is almost Orwellian: steel good, aluminum bad. Of the three videos, the most fair is Silverado vs. F-150 Repair Costs and Time: Howie Long Head to Head. Basically: aluminum costs more than steel, it's more difficult to repair, and requires special equipment for body shops. In terms of Chevy versus Ford, the blue oval truck costs more and takes longer to repair - an average of $1,755 more and 34 more days in the shop, according to the ad. But why stop there when you can have pitchman Howie Long raising an eyebrow at random facts? When Silverado Chief Engineer Eric Stanczak says of the Ford, "It's manufactured in a way that combines aluminum, rivets, and adhesive in a process that's different than Silverado." Long responds, "Huh. Interesting." At the end of the video, Long says "I'd be interested to know what happens to insurance costs." Note he's not saying anything substantive. If Chevy's legal team could sign off on some facts about insurance rates, it would be in this ad. On our Autoblog Cost to Own calculator, there is no significant difference in projected insurance costs between the two trucks. But at least that ad has facts. The other two videos are pure hype. In Cages: High Stength Steel, real people are asked what they think of aluminum and steel in a room with two cages. Then a bear is released into the room, and the subjects scurry to the safety of the steel cage.

We compare 2021 Ford Bronco and Bronco Sport specifications to their ritzy Land Rover competiton

The 2021 Bronco and Bronco Sport are the spearheads for Ford's new 4x4 sub-brand, with the former taking the fight directly to the Jeep Wrangler and the latter providing Ford with a more rugged alternative to the Escape. We've already looked at how the new Bronco and Bronco Sport compare to their mainstream competition, but we'd like to see how the Bronco stacks up to another hotly anticipated returning nameplate: the Land Rover Defender.  Not to leave its little sibling in the cold, I decided to browse Land Rover's lineup and see what might be a suitable counterpoint to the Bronco Sport. For better or worse, I found an almost-perfect fit in the Range Rover Evoque. So, how do these new American 4x4s compare to the Old Country's more-expensive alternatives? Let's dig in, starting with the big boys.  As you might expect from the Bronco's robust credentials, it holds its own here against the more-expensive Brit. The Defender's higher price point brings along a good bit of power advantage with both engines, but that's to be expected. The Defender also has that trick adjustable-height suspension that the Bronco lacks, giving it an edge in practicality, and it can also tow quite a bit more.  On the flip side, there are quite a few advantages to going with the Ford, including a greater number of choices in terms of powertrain. The available manual transmission on four-cylinder Broncos is a nice bonus, for instance, as is the option of getting either the base 2.3-liter or the optional 2.7-liter engine with either wheelbase. The Defender is a bit more restrictive in this regard offering only the inline-six on the short-wheelbase model. As an added bonus, the Bronco is a convertible. That may not necessarily be a "plus" for all shoppers, but it's certainly an added bit of versatility (and potential appeal) the Defender lacks. And of course, the Bronco can be had for as little as $30,000, whereas the Land Rover starts at $50,000. Now, on to the less-rugged siblings. The specs here are actually a little tighter in most respects, but the powertrain story is almost identical. The Evoque checks in where the Bronco Sport tops out, and the Range Rover gets an optional high-output variant of the 2.0-liter turbocharged four.