04 Ford E-350 Handicap Van Wheel Chair Lift 47000 Miles Runs Perfect Lift 100% on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Ford Explorer, Jeep Grand Cherokee flunk IIHS passenger-side crash test

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) has uncovered major safety-related problems while crash testing a number of popular midsize SUVs. Among those that scored an overall rating of "poor," the lowest possible score, are the Ford Explorer and Jeep Grand Cherokee. Both SUVs showed a high risk of injury to a front passenger during the IIHS' passenger-side small overlap front crash test. This test simulates what might happen if a car or SUV strikes an immovable object, like a telephone pole, at 40 mph and with roughly 25-percent of its front width. "Although some vehicles in this group offer very good protection, in other models, the airbags, safety belts and structure showed serious deficiencies," says IIHS chief research officer, David Zuby. "In those SUVs, a front-seat passenger would be at risk of injuries to the head, hip or leg in a right-side small overlap front crash." In the 2018 Ford Explorer, the front of the SUV showed the structure was "seriously compromised" during both driver- and passenger-side small overlap crash testing, according to the IIHS. The lower and upper door hinge pillar showed intrusion levels of 15 and 13 inches, while the door sill itself was pushed inward 6 inches toward the crash test dummy. The IIHS states these results indicate a high probability that a front occupant would suffer injuries to their right hip and lower left leg. The 2018 Jeep Grand Cherokee didn't fare much better. Not only did the Jeep exhibit 10 inches of intrusion at the lower door hinge pillar, the front passenger crash test dummy's head hit the dashboard through the front airbag. Worse still, the side curtain airbag didn't deploy and the front passenger door opened. The IIHS says there is a strong chance this would result in right leg injuries, along with the possibility of a serious head injury. Even vehicles that earned an "acceptable" in the small overlap front crash test showed definite room for improvement. The 2018 Honda Pilot, for example, showed good structural performance during the crash itself. But the front passenger crash test dummy's head slid off the deployed airbag and hit the dashboard hard, indicating a head injury might result in a similar real-world crash scenario. Two other SUVs that scored "acceptable" ratings included the 2018 Nissan Pathfinder and 2018 Toyota Highlander. Scoring top marks of "good," the highest rating, in these IIHS crash tests were the 2018 Volkswagen Atlas, 2018 GMC Acadia, and 2019 Kia Sorento.

NHTSA closes Ford F-150 EcoBoost acceleration probe

Typically when we report on the findings of an investigation from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, it's because the government body has discovered a safety issue and prescribed a recall. In this case, however, NHTSA has closed an investigation into a reported performance deficit without ever getting to the recall stage.
The issue revolves around the Ford F-150 - specifically those equipped with the 3.5-liter EcoBoost engine - of which some 360,000 were built in the 2011, 2012 and 2013 model years. After receiving an initial 95 complaints, NHTSA opened an investigation last May - almost a year ago - into the reported issue of reduced engine power under hard acceleration. The agency has since received a total of 525 such complaints, and Ford itself reported receiving over 4,000.
Together, NHTSA and Ford determined that the problem resulted from cylinders misfiring, an issue itself stemming from water getting into the charge air cooler (CAC) mated to the turbochargers. In particularly humid or rainy conditions, water was found to get into the CAC, causing some of the cylinders to misfire, which in turn triggered the ECU to disable those cylinders in order to protect the catalytic converter from damage.

Diesel details: Comparing Ram 1500 EcoDiesel, Chevy Silverado Duramax, Ford F-150 Powerstroke

With specifications for the 2019 Ford F-150 Power Stroke diesel already out, and the details on the 2020 Ram 1500 EcoDiesel and Chevy Silverado Duramax (and its GMC Sierra twin) trickling out, we felt it was a good time to start comparing the full-size trucks' light-duty diesels. Bear in mind, we've only driven one of these new diesel trucks, so we'll be sticking to numbers for now. Some numbers haven't been announced yet, either, but stay tuned, because we'll be updating this post with additional specifications as they become available. And if you want to compare any other versions of these trucks with other vehicles, be sure to check out our comparison tool. Now let's start comparing, starting with our big chart of numbers below. As we can plainly see, these trucks are quite closely matched. Each one has six cylinders, a displacement of 3.0 liters and a turbocharger to boost it. The output of each is somewhat close, too. The Ram 1500 EcoDiesel is the torque king at 480 pound-feet, 20 more than the GM trucks and 40 more than the Ford. The GM trucks win on power, though, with 277 ponies, 17 more than the Ram, and 27 more than the Ford. GM does report that you get their trucks' peak 460 pound-feet of torque from 1,500 rpm to 3,000 rpm, whereas the others only report peak torque at a particular point in the rev band, but all of these trucks should have wide, flat torque curves as you would expect from modern turbodiesels. 2020 Ram 1500 EcoDiesel View 8 Photos Engine output is only one part of the truck performance equation. We also have towing and payload capacity, as well as fuel economy. With towing, the Ram 1500 is the current leader with a maximum capacity of 12,560 pounds. That tops the Ford F-150's 11,400-pound tow rating by well over 1,000 pounds. The F-150 can carry 2,020 pounds in its bed, but we don't know yet whether that's better or worse than the Ram or the GM trucks. We also don't have numbers for the GM trucks' towing capacities. View 9 Photos As for fuel economy, the Ford F-150 manages a thoroughly impressive 22 mpg in the city and 30 on the highway with two-wheel drive. Choosing four-wheel drive drops those numbers to 20 and 25 respectively. The fuel economy numbers for the Ram, Chevy and GMC haven't been revealed yet, but for some comparison, we can look at the old Ram EcoDiesel. That truck's best fuel economy was 20 in the city and 27 on the highway with two-wheel drive.