1929 Ford Model A Tudor - Black Beauty For Sale! *** No Reserve*** on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Man has surgery to remove T-Bird turn signal that's been in his arm for 51 years

In 1963, real estate agent Arthur Lampitt was driving a new Ford Thunderbird near East Peoria, Illinois on his way to an appointment when he collided head-on with a truck. A massive accident that was so bad that it was originally reported as a fatal crash, Lampitt suffered a broken hip and that became the focus of doctors' efforts. In fact, no one noticed the fact that the turn-signal stalk had been broken off the steering column and had lodged itself in Lampitt's arm. Fast-forward to around ten years ago, when Lampitt set off a courthouse metal detector because of a "slender object, about the size of a pencil" in his arm. Despite that unnerving discovery, the doctor who examined Lampitt said that since it didn't hurt, he needn't worry about it. This year, however, it did start hurting and the affected arm started to bulge. Lampitt decided to have the issue seen to, and suspected it might have something to do with his 1963 accident. When he looked through photos of the wreck taken by a friend, he noticed the turn-signal stalk of the Thunderbird missing and figured that was the culprit. After a 45-minute outpatient surgery, the surgeon verified it: a slim, slightly bent and corroded, seven-inch metal cylinder with a trumpeted end. The surgeon said a protective pocket had formed around it, which is why it could remain in Lampitt's arm so long, but it was still unusual - "We see all kinds of foreign objects like nails or pellets, but usually not this large." Lampitt, who is expected to make a full recovery, says he might make a keychain out of it, once he's done just holding it. News Source: St. Louis Post-DispatchImage Credit: Jesse Bogan, St. Louis Post-DispatchTip: Jon Auto News Ford Coupe accident wreck ford thunderbird turn signal

2014 Ford Fiesta 1.0L EcoBoost to hit 45 mpg for $16,445*

When Ford first announced its plan to put the 1.0-liter EcoBoost three-cylinder engine under the hood of the 2014 Fiesta, it promised hybrid-like fuel economy without a hybrid-like premium. We're still waiting for official specs on this engine, but thanks to the EPA's fueleconomy.gov website and Ford's retail site, we now know what customers can expect in terms of both fuel economy and price.
All along, Ford has said that it expects the 1.0-liter EcoBoost to get more than 40 miles per gallon on the highway, and now the EPA backs this up with official ratings of 32 mpg in the city and 45 mpg on the highway. These numbers are an increase of two mpg city and four mpg hwy compared to the current fuel-sipping Fiesta (the 1.6 SFE), and it also beats other three-cylinder cars for highway mileage like the 2014 Mitsubishi Mirage (44 mpg highway) and 2014 Smart Fortwo (38 mpg highway); the Fiesta 1.0 EcoBoost is lower than both three-pot rivals, though, in city fuel economy with the Mitsubishi getting 37 mpg city and the Smart rated at 34 mpg city. This model handily beats high-volume small cars like the Honda Fit, Toyota Yaris and Chevy Spark in both city and highway numbers.
As for pricing, the 1.0-liter EcoBoost is offered on both the sedan and hatchback as a $995 option called the SE Manual EcoBoost package, which is aptly named since it's only offered on SE trim-level Fiestas equipped with a manual transmission. Along with the engine, the package also comes with 15-inch steel wheels, regenerative brakes and a decklid spoiler on the sedan. This means the four-door Fiesta 1.0 EcoBoost will start at $16,445*, or $17,045* for the hatchback (*not including $795 for destination).

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.