V10 4wd Lifted Xlt Excursion With Only 75000 Miles, Call Bob 480-584-8454 on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Ford recalls 434k vehicles for several unrelated issues

It seems that the hard winter in much of the country has been as rough on some Fords as it has on many people. The Blue Oval is recalling roughly 434,000 vehicles in two separate recalls, and one of them partially caused by the salt used to melt the snow on roads.
The first recall covers 385,750 2001-2004 Escape models in the Midwest, Northeast and Canada because a subframe could rust and eventually fail. This is partially due to the road salt used in those areas, and about 349,000 of the affected vehicles are in the US. To remedy the problem, dealers are installing a reinforcement cross brace on the frame to strengthen them. There has been one crash caused by the failure but no injuries. According to The Detroit News, this is not the first rust-related recall for Ford. It estimates the company has repaired over two million vehicles since 2010 for problems on vehicles related to the iron oxide, including the rear wheel wells of the Freestar minivan.
The second recall covers 48,950 2013-2014 Ford Fusion, Escape, C-MAX and Lincoln MKZ models because welds in their seatbacks don't meet National Highway Traffic Safety Administration standards. The fault affects the front seats, and the sub-standard welds joining the setback to the recliner could increase the chance on injury. There have been no reported injuries or accidents caused by the problem, but there are 42,972 affected vehicles in the US and 4,744 in Canada.

Ward's calls out Ford's EcoBoost engines for their crummy fuel economy

With a name like EcoBoost, one might expect Ford's line of turbocharged engines to be somewhat, um, economical. In other words, replacing displacement with a turbocharger is supposed to deliver better fuel economy. Based on the experience time and time again of multiple Autoblog editors, your author included, this is simply not the case. Now, Ward's is calling out the cruddy efficiency numbers of Ford's EcoBoost line of engines. The column dresses down not just the new 2.7-liter V6 of the 2015 F-150, but also the 2.3-liter of the Mustang, the 1.5-liter from the Fusion and the 3.2-liter PowerStroke diesel found in the Transit, while also explaining why just one Ford engine was named to Ward's 10 Best Engines list. In its testing of all four engines, Ward's editors never came even remotely close to matching the 2.7's claimed 26 miles per gallon (for two-wheel-drive models), with the truck's computer indicating between 17.6 and 19 mpg over a 250-odd-mile run. Calculating the fuel economy manually revealed an even more depressing 15.6 miles per gallon. Criticisms with the 2.3-liter four-cylinder focused on its strange soundtrack, although it was business as usual with the 1.5-liter and 3.2 diesel, with Ward's criticizing the fuel economy of both engines. The 1.5, which Ward's claims is sold as a hybrid alternative, failed to get over 30 miles per gallon, while the five-cylinder turbodiesel's figures couldn't stand up against FCA's 3.0-liter EcoDiesel. The entire column really is worth a read, especially if you were disappointed in Ward's decision to only salute Ford's three-cylinder EcoBoost while shunning the rest of the company's new turbocharged mills.

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.