Model A Coupe 5 Window 1931 Project Rat Rod Hot Rod on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Recharge Wrap-up: Daimler spending big for fuel cells, Ford Go!Drive experiment advances

Ford's Go!Drive experiment is entering its beta phase in London. The project, which is one of the automaker's global smart mobility experiments, uses a mobile app for on-demand carsharing of Ford Focus Electric and Ford Fiesta vehicles. The beta phase involves increasing the number of available vehicles from 20 to 50, and collecting new data from users. The program offers one-way rentals and guaranteed parking, with no membership fees and a cost of 26 cents per minute. Ford hopes to get 2,000 drivers involved in the program. Read more at Green Car Congress. Daimler will invest billions of dollars to upgrade the Mercedes-Benz Unterturkheim plant over the next few years. This year alone, it plans to spend $1.06 billion. The company expects cost savings "in the range of hundreds of millions of euros until 2020," while maintaining its workforce of 18,700 employees and adding 150 vocational training positions. The upgrades will allow the plant to become a center for building more efficient engines, hybrid powertrains and fuel cell systems. "Alternative drive systems are an important element of our future mobility," says Mercedes-Benz's Markus Schafer. "Their share of automotive production is set to steadily rise over the next few years, complementing our highly efficient engines within the portfolio. This is what we have laid the groundwork for today." Read more at Reuters, or in the press release below. The Department of Energy is providing $20 million in funding for the development of more efficient high speed industrial motors and drives. Ditching old motors and gearboxes for ones that use integrated power electronics could help decrease the energy consumption of the industrial sector, which currently uses more than 25 percent of the electricity generated in the US. The projects being funded will reduce losses and decrease the size of drive systems used in industries like petroleum refining and natural gas, which could affect the lifecycle efficiency of transportation fuels. Read more at Energy.gov.

Ford decides C-Max shoppers not interested in fuel economy

If you say a car – the Ford C-Max Hybrid, for example – is "fun to drive," can anyone really come up with some empirical evidence against your claim? What about calling it "versatile"? We wonder if Ford has been thinking along these lines when it talks about the green little hatch. Ford is refocusing its sales strategy for the C-Max Hybrid after the model took a sales hit on both sides of the Atlantic recently, Automotive News reports. That sales dropoff may stem from the fact that Ford has had to revise its fuel-economy figures downward for the C-Max twice since last year, most recently in June. That made the company's once-proud fuel-economy comparisons with the Toyota Prius kind of pointless. Ford is going a different route, calling the model versatile (which, to be fair it was also doing a year ago), technologically advanced and fun to drive. Since the C-Max has about 50 more horsepower than the Prius, that last part may be true. Ford representatives didn't immediately respond to a request for comment from AutoblogGreen about the mpg-mention-free advertising direction, but we will update this post if we hear back. Sales of the C-Max Hybrid have suffered in the US. Through September, Ford sold 15,245 C-Max Hybrids, down 36 percent from last year. We shall see if a new focus away from the car's lowered mpg numbers helps. At least Ford can be pleased with sales of the C-Max Energi Plug-in Hybrid, which are up 51 percent compared to 2013.

Poor headlights cause 40 cars to miss IIHS Top Safety Pick rating

Over the past few months, we've noticed a number of cars and SUVs that have come incredibly close to earning one of the IIHS's highest accolades, the Top Safety Pick rating. They have great crash test scores and solid automatic emergency braking and forward collision warning systems. What trips them up is headlights. That got us wondering, how many vehicles are there that are coming up short because they don't have headlights that meet the organization's criteria for an "Acceptable" or "Good" rating. This is a revision made after 2017, a year in which headlights weren't factored in for this specific award. This is also why why some vehicles, such as the Ford F-150, might have had the award last year, but have lost it for this year. We reached out to someone at IIHS to find out. He responded with the following car models. Depending on how you count, a whopping 40 models crash well enough to receive the rating, but don't get it because their headlights are either "Poor" or "Marginal." We say depending on how you count because the IIHS actual counts truck body styles differently, and the Infiniti Q70 is a special case. Apparently the version of the Q70 that has good headlights doesn't have adequate forward collision prevention technology. And the one that has good forward collision tech doesn't have good enough headlights. We've provided the entire list of vehicles below in alphabetical order. Interestingly, it seems the Volkswagen Group is having the most difficulty providing good headlights with its otherwise safe cars. It had the most models on the list at 9 split between Audi and Volkswagen. GM is next in line with 7 models. It is worth noting again that though these vehicles have subpar headlights and don't quite earn Top Safety Pick awards, that doesn't mean they're unsafe. They all score well enough in crash testing and forward collision prevention that they would get the coveted award if the lights were better.