2002 Gray Ford Explorer Xls One Owner on 2040-cars

Auto blog

November U.S. new car sales mixed as automakers deepen discounts

DETROIT — Major automakers posted mixed U.S. November new vehicle sales on Friday and predicted a competitive December as they rushed to sell vehicles and boost their numbers before 2017 ends. Automakers are trying to sell down 2017 model-year vehicles, offering high discounts to consumers as the year-end nears. In 2016, the industry reported record annual sales of 17.55 million units. According to consultancies J.D. Power and LMC, discounts have been above 10 percent of the average transaction price for 16 of the past 17 months, a level experts say is unhealthy and unsustainable. The November sales results come as the National Automobile Dealers Association said on Friday it expects new vehicle sales to decline to 16.7 million units in 2018, after dropping to 17.1 million for the full year in 2017. If that forecast comes true, the race to move new vehicles off dealers' lots will only intensify next year. Brandon Mason, a director at PwC's automotive practice, said a worrying trend for the industry was a rising number of subprime loans. He said subprime levels are at just over 20 percent of originations, against more than 30 percent prior to the Great Recession, but recent increases remain a concern. "That's a bit of a red flag," Mason said. "It's something to keep an eye on as we move into 2018." November results by automaker: General Motors: Sales fell 2.9 percent, with sales to consumers flat against the same month in 2016. Much of the decrease was driven by lower fleet sales. GM said strong SUV and crossover sales pushed its average transaction price for the month above $37,000 for the first time. The level of unsold cars, which has been a concern for analysts and the industry, rose slightly to 83 days' supply, from 80 days at the end of October. "More vehicles are sold in December than any other month, and we are very well positioned because we have momentum in so many segments, but especially in crossovers," said Kurt McNeil, U.S. vice president of sales operations. Fiat Chrysler Automobiles: Fleet sales are low-margin, and FCA in particular has targeted a significant reduction in this type of sale in 2017. It posted a 4 percent overall decrease in sales for November, but fleet sales were down 25 percent while sales to consumers were up 2 percent on the year. Ford: The No. 2 U.S. automaker reported a 6.7 percent increase for the month, with fleet sales up nearly 26 percent and retail sales 1.3 percent higher than in November 2016.

Ford trademarking 'Mach 1,' possibly for Mustang

A legendary name might be accompanying the redesigned, 2015 Mustang when it finally makes its world debut - Mach 1. Stumbled upon by the team at Ford Authority, the Mach 1 title was found in a trademark filing with the US Patent and Trademark Office, and would revive a name last used on the fourth-generation, 2003 Mustang.
While the the 2003 vintage was well and good, the Mach 1 is really remembered for a three-year run from 1969 to 1971 - it's best to just forget the emissions-choked 1972 to 1978 Mach 1s - when power output ranged from a modest 250 horsepower with the two-barrel, 351-cubic-inch Windsor V8 to "375 hp" (actual output was rumored to be well north of 400 horsepower) with the righteous, 429-cubic-inch Super Cobra Jet V8.
What does the title hold for the sixth-generation Mustang? It's tough to say. The fanatics at Ford Authority seem to think Mach 1 could take the place of the Shelby GT500 at the top of the Mustang hierarchy, which sounds like a valid argument. At the same time, we could see the SVT Cobra moniker returning for the flagship model, and the Mach 1 doing battle with the Chevrolet Camaro Z/28 (unless the Boss 302 were to return). Confounding things is the historical precedent - the Mach 1 was responsible for the death of the Mustang GT in 1969, so it might make sense as a volume performance model.

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.