1965 Black Runs & Drives Great New Top&interior Body Vgood! on 2040-cars

Auto blog

IIHS updates overlap test: 2 SUVs get good marks, 9 fare poorly

Vehicles in crashes keep occupants safe by deforming around the cabin in a way that maintains cabin integrity. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety's moderate overlap test, introduced in 1995, has been a huge contributor to improved safety for front-row passengers in a crash. IIHS President David Harkey said, "Thanks to automakers’ improvements, drivers in most vehicles are nearly 50% less likely to be killed in a frontal crash today than they were 25 years ago." In the 'unintentional side effects' column, crash safety has gotten worse for passengers in the back seats. When carmakers reengineered the front crash structure to protect the driver, more crash forces got distributed throughout the rear. IIHS research claims rear passengers have a 46% greater risk of fatal injury than front-row passengers, but back-seaters haven't benefited from the same upgrades in safety as the front row. The IIHS updated its moderate overlap test to address the issue, putting 15 vehicles through the new regime. Two earned good ratings — the 2023 Ford Escape and the 2021-2023 Volvo XC40 — one was acceptable, three were marginal and nine were rated poor. Every one of the crossovers sampled got good marks for all passengers in the original test. That test sees 40% of vehicle's width on the driver's side impacting an aluminum honeycomb barrier at 40 miles per hour. The updated test puts a crash dummy representing small woman or 12-year-old child in the seat behind the driver, the dummy's sensors and grease paint measuring the effectiveness of the restraints and the forces a human body would need to endure. To achieve a good rating, the "measurements must not exceed limits indicating excessive risk of injury to the head, neck, chest, abdomen or thigh." An institute engineer said, "In real-world crashes, chest injuries are the most common serious rear-seat injuries for adults." The sensors and video evidence showed back seat dummies in the Escape and XC40 endured minimal risk of injuries from excessive crash forces, from submarining under the seat belt, or from unwanted interaction with the side curtain airbag.   The Toyota RAV4 scored acceptable. The second-row dummy also endured minimal risk of injury to the chest and lower extremities. However, the lap belt slipped upward in a way that could increase abdominal injuries, and after the dummy's head dipped during crash impact, the head came back up between the rear curtain airbag and rear window.

Ford not backing down on MPG-based marketing strategy

The Blue Oval may have to back off a bit from the green messaging. Ford has had to lower fuel-economy ratings on a number of 2013 and 2014 model-year vehicles, namely its hybrids. And that may force the US automaker to rethink some of its marketing strategy, Automotive News reports. Ford has spent much of the year pushing its fuel-efficiency improvements, with everything from a Super Bowl ad saying its Fusion Hybrid gets "almost double" the fuel efficiency of an average vehicle (after the recalculation, it's now more like 75 percent better) to claiming the Fiesta is the most fuel-efficient non-hybrid in the US (it's actually the Mitsubishi Mirage) to stating the C-Max Hybrid gets better fuel economy than the Toyota Prius V (it doesn't). Nonetheless, Ford doesn't plan on changing its mpg marketing emphasis anytime soon, the company said in an e-mailed statement to AutoblogGreen. "Providing customers great fuel economy is a key part of our Ford vehicle DNA." "Providing customers great fuel economy is a key part of our Ford vehicle DNA," the company said. "We will continue to highlight our vehicles features and attributes in our advertising and marketing, which includes fuel economy and fuel-saving technologies like EcoBoost and hybrids." Earlier this month, Ford said it would lower the fuel-economy ratings of models such as the C-Max, Fusion and Lincoln MKZ Hybrids as well as most of the Fiesta line because of mistakes in the company's internal testing data. It was the second change for the C-Max Hybrid. The good news for Ford is that its fleetwide fuel economy is up almost 40 percent from a decade ago, compared to an improvement of around 23 percent for Toyota. Still, while sales of Ford hybrids and plug-ins are about even with last year through the first five months of 2014, C-Max Hybrid sales have plunged 49 percent from a year earlier. Earlier this year, Ford admitted that the first fuel economy downgrade had a negative effect on sales and we can find proof in the numbers. Before that the change was announced, in August 2013, Ford was consistently selling over 2,000 – and sometimes over 3,000 – C-Max Hybrids a month. In September, it dropped to 1,424, then to 1,438 in October. It didn't climb back above 2,000 until May 2014. The second mpg adjustment was announced in June.

Ford recalls nearly 200,000 Expeditions and Navigators for fire risk

Ford is recalling 2015-2017 Expeditions and 2015-2017 Lincoln Navigators because the front blower motor could fail and cause a fire. In total, 198,482 Expeditions and Navigators will be recalled. In the official recall documents posted by NHTSA, Ford says that it “has not identified the cause of this condition.” However, Ford also says it is currently aware of 25 fire allegations related to the blower motors on these vehicles. Despite not strictly identifying the cause of blower motor fires, Ford put forth a theory in its fieldwork analysis of the issue.  “In June 2022, based on component analysis, Ford Engineering theorized that a mispositioned blower motor brush holder spring could cause an internal short or localized heating of the brush spring or holder. It is believed that when a fire initiates on the blower motor, it does so at the positive brush holder location. The variable blower controller would remain operational and there would be no signs of an overheated relay. Field data indicates that this concern typically occurs at a higher time in service, and on vehicles with higher mileage.” Since the blower motor is located on the passenger side interior behind the glovebox, the fires that start are interior fires. Ford isnÂ’t aware of any accidents related to this issue, but there is one claim of burnt hands and fingers as a result of a fire. According to Ford, warning signs of an impending fire or failed blower motor include an inoperative fan, burning smell and/or smoke from the instrument panel vents while the vehicle is on. To remedy this situation, Ford is recalling the affected SUVs and replacing the blower motor assembly with a revised part. The new part uses a blower motor assembly design utilized on other applications. If folks with these SUVs experience any symptoms of blower motor failure before the new part becomes available, Ford says they can take their vehicle to the dealer to have it replaced with a part of the same design. Once the redesigned part becomes available, the dealer will then swap it in. Owner notification letters are expected to begin on September 12 this year. Related video: This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings.