2008 Ford E-series Wagon on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Ford Focus Electric gets $6,000 price drop, now starts at $29,995

In early 2013, the Nissan Leaf shed a massive $6,500 from its $35,200 base price to offer a new starting price of $28,800. Since then, we have seen numerous other plug-in vehicles get smaller price tags, from the Honda Fit EV (lower lease price) to the Chevrolet Volt (around $5,000 lower) to the Mitsubishi i (a $6,130 drop). Last year, Ford lowered the $39,200 price of the Focus Electric by around $4,000, but that hasn't been enough to get the Ford EV to really compete, saleswise, with other plug-in vehicles on the market. But wait, as they say, there's more. This past weekend, Ford lopped another $6,000 from the price of both the 2014 model year Focus EVs currently on dealer lots as well as the redesigned 2015 models that are now rolling out (they're basically the same car, minus some appearance changes). Ford spokesman Aaron Miller confirmed to AutoblogGreen that the Focus EV will now start at $29,995 and said that reducing the price should make the Blue Oval's only pure EV competitive. "We hope by reducing the price we're giving consumers another reason to consider it," he said. Through the end of September 2014, Ford has sold just 1,534 Focus EVs in the US (the model sold 1,335 in the first nine months of 2013). For comparison's sake, the Nissan Leaf starts at $29,010 and sells around 3,000 units a month in the US. Miller notes that the Focus EV has been selling the best on the West Coast, and is also doing well on the East Coast. After that, he said Atlanta and the Great Lakes area also see decent sales of model's admittedly small pie. We can only assume that offering the EV for under $30,000 will make that pie somewhat bigger.

The next steps automakers could take after sales drop again in April

DETROIT (Reuters) - Major automakers on Tuesday posted declines in U.S. new vehicle sales for April in a sign the long boom cycle that lifted the American auto industry to record sales last year is losing steam, sending carmaker stocks down. The drop in sales versus April 2016 came on the heels of a disappointing March, which automakers had shrugged off as just a bad month. But two straight weak months has heightened Wall Street worries the cyclical industry is on a downward swing after a nearly uninterrupted boom since the Great Recession's end in 2010. Auto sales were a drag on U.S. first-quarter gross domestic product, with the economy growing at an annual rate of just 0.7 percent according to an advance estimate published by the Commerce Department last Friday. Excluding the auto sector the GDP growth rate would have been 1.2 percent. Industry consultant Autodata put the industry's seasonally adjusted annualized rate of sales at 16.88 million units for April, below the average of 17.2 million units predicted by analysts polled by Reuters. General Motors Co shares fell 2.9 percent while Ford Motor Co slid 4.3 percent and Fiat Chrysler Automobiles NV's U.S.-traded shares tumbled 4.2 percent. The U.S. auto industry faces multiple challenges. Sales are slipping and vehicle inventory levels have risen even as carmakers have hiked discounts to lure customers. A flood of used vehicles from the boom cycle are increasingly competing with new cars. The question for automakers: How much and for how long to curtail production this summer, which will result in worker layoffs? To bring down stocks of unsold vehicles, the Detroit automakers need to cut production, and offer more discounts without creating "an incentives war," said Mark Wakefield, head of the North American automotive practice for AlixPartners in Southfield, Michigan. "We see multiple weeks (of production) being taken out on the car side," he said, "and some softness on the truck side." Rival automakers will be watching each other to see if one is cutting prices to gain market share from another, he said, instead of just clearing inventory. INVESTORS DIGEST BAD NEWS Just last week GM reported a record first-quarter profit, but that had almost zero impact on the automaker's stock. The iconic carmaker, whose own interest was once conflated with that of America's, has slipped behind luxury carmaker Tesla Inc in terms of valuation.

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.