2011 Ford Fusion Se Cruise Ctrl Cd Audio Alloys 45k Mi Texas Direct Auto on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Matt Damon is Carroll Shelby, with Christian Bale in Ford vs. Ferrari film

Right after we reported that one of the Le Mans-winning Ford GT40s is coming up for auction, word got round that its story will now be turned into a Hollywood movie. There will be an as-yet-untitled major motion picture that tells the story of Ford battling Ferrari in the 1960s, culminating in the Ford GT40's dramatic 1-2-3 finish in the 1966 24 Hours of Le Mans. The movie has lined up an all-star cast, with "Batman" and "American Psycho" actor Christian Bale tapped to play key GT40 developer, test driver and racer Ken Miles, and "Punisher" actor Jon Bernthal as Lee Iacocca. The plum role of Carroll Shelby is going to Matt Damon, last seen driving across the Red Planet in "The Martian" or down a flight of stairs in the "Bourne" film series. The film's director will be James Mangold, known from directing last year's "Logan." View 37 Photos Autoweek reports that the original screenplay was based on A.J. Baime's book " Go Like Hell," but there will be a different screenplay written from scratch. Originally, "Go Like Hell" was to be a different project starring Tom Cruise and Brad Pitt. Meanwhile, the book will reportedly be turned into a TV series produced by Peter Dinklage of "Game of Thrones." And meanwhile some more, there are also competing Enzo Ferrari biopics in the works starring Robert De Niro and another starring Hugh Jackman that will also surely touch on the rivalry with Ford. While there's no guarantee yet that the GT40 biopic will match Steve McQueen's "Le Mans," we're got high hopes. It's a great story worthy of all the attention it's getting. Related Video: This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings. Celebrities Motorsports Rumormill TV/Movies Ferrari Ford Automotive History Racing Vehicles ford gt40

Our love of SUVs is killing people in the streets

Americans are fond of supersized fast-food meals and colossal convenience-store fountain drinks, even though they're clearly bad for our health and U.S. adults keep getting fatter. We also like large vehicles, and our love affair with SUVs is killing people in the streets. According to a recent investigation by the Detroit Free Press/USA Today, the increase in SUV sales over the past several years coincides with a sharp rise in pedestrian deaths in the U.S. — up 46 percent since 2009, with nearly 6,000 people killed in 2016 alone. With SUV sales surpassing sedans in 2014 and pickups and SUVs currently accounting for 60 percent of new vehicle sales, it's no wonder Ford announced in April plans to cease U.S. sales of almost all passenger cars. And this followed Fiat Chrysler's move to virtually an all-truck, -SUV and -crossover lineup. While the Freep/USA Today investigation found that the simultaneous surge in SUV sales and pedestrian deaths comes down to vehicle size, it also points to a lack of action on the part of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), even though it knew of the dangers SUVs pose to pedestrians. Also blamed are automakers dragging their feet on implementing active safety features. Using federal accident data, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) determined that there was an 81 percent increase in single-vehicle pedestrian fatalities involving SUVs between 2009 and 2016. Freep/USA Today's analysis of the same data by counting vehicles that struck and killed pedestrians instead of the number of people killed showed a 69 percent increase in SUV involvement. As far back as 2001, researchers at Rowan University forecasted a rise in pedestrian deaths as Americans began switching to SUVs. "In the United States, passenger vehicles are shifting from a fleet populated primarily by cars to a fleet dominated by light trucks and vans," the researchers wrote, with light trucks comprising SUVs.

Detroit and Silicon Valley: When cultures collide

Culture is a subject that rarely, if never, gets discussed when traditional auto companies buy — or hugely invest — in Silicon Valley-based companies. The conversation surrounding the investments is usually about how the tech looks appealing and how it's an appropriate step to move the automakers toward autonomy. Culture — the way things are done, the expectations, and the approaches — is something that is overlooked only at one's peril. The potential cultural gap is almost always evident in the obligatory photos of the participants in these deals, with is essentially a photo op of auto execs with their Silicon Valley counterparts. The former — rocking jeans and no ties — look like parochial school kids playing hooky. Don't worry: The regimental outfits will be back in place once they get back in the Eastern time zone. Consider what happened back in 1998 when Daimler bought Chrysler. First of all, there was a denial in Detroit that it happened. It was positioned as a "merger of equals." Which it wasn't. In any corporate situation, when one has more than 50 percent of the business, it owns the whole thing. And the German company was in the proverbial driver's seat. People who were around Auburn Hills back then kept their heads down and their German Made Simple books at hand. Things did not go well. Daimler had had enough by 2007, when it offloaded Chrysler to Cerberus Capital Management — which brought ex-Home Depot CEO Bob Nardelli into the picture, which is a story onto itself. But when you think about the Daimler-Chrysler situation, realize that these were two car companies (at least the Mercedes part of the Daimler organization), so they had that in common, and the language of engineers is something of an Esperanto based on math, so there was that, too. Yet it simply didn't work. It doesn't take too many viewings of HBO's Silicon Valley to know that the business people in that part of the world are far more aggressive than people who ordinarily head and control car companies in Detroit. About 20 years ago, a book came out about the founder of Oracle titled The Difference Between God and Larry Ellison* - and the asterisk on the book jacket leads to: God Doesn't Think He's Larry Ellison. It would be hard to imagine a book about a Detroit executive, even a book that had the decided bias that the tome about Ellison evinces, that would be quite so searing. Sure, there are egos. But they are still perceived to be, overall, "nice" people.