1960 Ford Ranchero on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Has the 2015 Ford Mustang gained hundreds of pounds?

Automakers face competing interests when it comes to developing a new generation of vehicle. On the one hand, companies want to build their cars to be safer and better handling, with more equipment and maybe even larger dimensions over the model it's replacing. On the other hand, they strive to keep weight down to the benefit of both performance and fuel consumption. Usually something has to give, and in the case of the new 2015 Ford Mustang, those efforts may have resulted in a weight penalty of two or three hundred pounds.
This according to Blue Oval modifier Steeda Autosports, which states that "the 2015 Mustang ended up gaining 200-300 pounds in this remake". Despite the Mustang not being on the market yet, it would appear the leading Ford aftermarketer has been given early access to the 2015 model to help jumpstart its tuning efforts (a rather common development among trusted tuners). If Steeda's assertion is accurate, that would make the challenge of getting the new pony car up to speed for both Ford and aftermarket customizers like Steeda that much greater.
We're waiting for official word from Ford on the veracity of Steeda's claim, but if true, it's bound to be a bit of disappointing news for legions of Blue Oval performance enthusiasts. Watch this space for more.

Swedish car mag says Ford Mondeo is dangerously, illegally overweight [w/video]

Sweden's Teknikens Varld has a reputation for being very persnickety when it comes to auto safety testing, and its latest catch is the Mondeo Titanium Estate 2.0 TDCi 150 bhp S6 MPS (basically a station wagon variant of the Fusion). In addition to the model's mile-long name, it has another problem according to the Swedes, because its weight on the scales does not equal the official numbers for the vehicle. Teknikens Varld claims the wagon is dangerously overweight because it weighs in 4,145 pounds, while Ford officially lists its weight at 3,530 pounds. That 615-pound disparity means that if a family loads it to what they think is the model's gross vehicle weight, it will actually be too heavy, and therefore illegal to drive in Sweden. According to the magazine, when it tried doing this, the rear wheels scraped against the wells, and the estate failed the mag's legendary moose test. However, at 220 pounds over the limit, it passed the test. When reached for comment by Autoblog, Jay Ward, Senior Manager at Ford of Europe Product Communications, explained the reason for the deviation between the official numbers and the magazine's test: "We are aware of this, but this is not an issue that relates specifically to the safety of the Mondeo, but is in fact related to the way in which the cars are tested by the authorities. We provided an Ambiente model for the testing but the car that featured in the magazine test was a Titanium model which has a different weight. We are in discussion with the Swedish Transport Agency to change the framework so the real weight of the Titanium model is reported instead of the Ambiente model which will resolve the issue." Teknikens Varld is well-known for calling out automakers for perceived transgressions. Most recently it leveled criticisms against the all-wheel drive system in the Honda CR-V, and both the Jeep Grand Cherokee and Porsche Macan failed its moose test. Scroll down for the magazine's video of weighing the Mondeo Estate and the model's test results. This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings. The new Ford Mondeo is dangerously overweight The new Ford Mondeo is a great car, which Teknikens Varld's test shows, but there is one problem – the weight. Mondeo weighs 279 kg more than Ford claims. With big load (ie family plus luggage) the car therefore becomes illegal to drive.

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.