2014 Ford F150 Xlt on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Big electric trucks won't save the planet, says the NYT

When The New York Times decides that an issue is an issue, be prepared to read about it at length. Rarely will a week passes these days when the esteemed news organization doesn’t examine the realities, myths and alleged benefits and drawbacks of electric vehicles, and even The Atlantic joins in sometimes. That revolution, marked by changes in manufacturing, consumer habits and social “consciousness,” may in fact be upon us. Or it may not. Nonetheless, the newspaper appears committed to presenting to the public these pros and cons. In this recently published article titled, “Just How Good for the Planet Is That Big Electric Pickup Truck?”—wow, thatÂ’s a mouthful — the Times focuses on the “bigness” of the current and pending crop of EVs, and how that impacts or will impact the environment and road safety. This is not what news organizations these days are fond of calling “breaking news.” In October, we pointed to an essay in The Atlantic that covered pretty much the same ground, and focused on the Hummer as one particular villain, In the paper and online on Feb. 18, the Times' Elana Shao observes how “swapping a gas pickup truck for a similar electric one can produce significant emissions savings.” She goes on: “Take the Ford F-150 pickup truck compared with the electric F-150 Lightning. The electric versions are responsible for up to 50 percent less greenhouse gas emissions per mile.” But she right away flips the argument, noting the heavier electric pickup trucks “often require bigger batteries and more electricity to charge, so they end up being responsible for more emissions than other smaller EVs. Taking into consideration the life cycle emissions per mile, they end up just as polluting as some smaller gas-burning cars.” Certainly, itÂ’s been drummed into our heads that electric cars donÂ’t run on air and water but on electricity that costs money, and that the public will be dealing with “the shift toward electric SUVs, pickup trucks and crossover vehicles, with some analysts estimating that SUVs, pickup trucks and vans could make up 78 percent of vehicle sales by 2025." No-brainer alert: Big vehicles cost more to charge. And then thereÂ’s the safety question, which was cogently addressed in the Atlantic story. Here Shao reiterates data documenting the increased risks of injuries and deaths caused by larger, heavier vehicles.

Ford announces recall of 220,000 units in three different actions

Ford has announced three separate recalls affecting 220,000 vehicles built between model years 2011 and 2015. By far the biggest affects just under 213,000 Ford Explorer and Police Interceptor Utility SUVs from MY2011 through 2013. In these vehicles, a spring in the doorway handle could be come unseated, Ford reports, causing the doors to open in a side-impact accident. The affected vehicles were built over a wide range of dates, starting with February 1, 2011 and November 30, 2012. As usual, the majority of the 212,911 vehicles were sold in the US market – 194,484 vehicles, in fact, while Canada and Mexico split the remainder, with 12,392 and 6,035, respectively. The other two recalls focus on specialty vehicles, with Ford recalling 6,500 F-Series Super Duty ambulances and emergency trucks from model years 2011 to 2015. In the case of the 2014 and 2015 F-Series, only trucks with the 6.7-liter turbodiesel are affected. These trucks may have faulty exhaust gas sensors, which according to Ford, could cause the trucks to think they're in a high-temperature situation. The trucks in questions were built at Ford's Kentucky truck plant between February 22, 2010 and February 1, 2015. Finally, the Blue Oval is recalling 1,725 specialty Lincoln MKT crossovers from MY2013 to 2015. These include limos and hearses built between March 6, 2012 and March 4, 2015. Affected MKTs may have a faulty vacuum pump relay that could cause a fire under the hood. In the case of the Explorers, dealers will inspect all four door handles and repair them as needed. The Super Duty's will get software updates, while the MKTs will have the vacuum pump relays replaced outright. A pair of MKT fires has been the only reported incident caused by the recalled components, while the company is unaware of any injuries or deaths. Scroll down for the official press release from Ford. Related Video: FORD ISSUES THREE SAFETY RECALLS IN NORTH AMERICA DEARBORN, Mich., March 25, 2015 – Ford is issuing three safety recalls in North America. No accidents or injuries are attributed to these conditions. Details are as follows: Ford issues safety recall for certain 2011-2013 Ford Explorer and Ford Police Interceptor Utility vehicles for interior door handle issue Ford is issuing a safety recall for approximately 213,000 2011-2013 Ford Explorer and Ford Police Interceptor Utility vehicles in North America (actual 212,911) for an issue with the spring that controls the interior door handles.

A cool boost to turbocharger performance

Since the advent of the forced-induction engine, we have been looking for ways to get every drop of performance we can. There are many approaches to getting additional power using better intercooling, water injection, or even adding nitrous oxide. One take on a short instant burst of power is being researched by Mahle and involves providing supercooled air to an engine, which allows it to burn a leaner fuel mixture and produce more power. The supercooling idea is not new and was examined by Ford in 1993 on the Mustang Mach III concept car, then brought up again in 2003 with the SVT F-150 Lightning concept. Ford called its system the SuperCooler; it was designed to work with any turbocharged or supercharged engine equipped with a water-to-air intercooler. The system on the Lightning concept used a small tank of antifreeze that was hooked up to the truck air conditioning compressor. The air conditioning compressor cooled the antifreeze down to about 30 degrees. The other side of the tank was hooked up to the air-to-water intercooler, which usually had a temperature over 100 degrees. Once the antifreeze was circulated from the tank into the intercooler, it would lower the intercooler temperature and provide for a cooler, denser air charge into the engine; the result was around 50 extra horsepower for a burst of about 30 seconds to a minute, depending on the size of the tank. The system for the Lightning was to be offered as a $750 option and would have been targeted towards drag racers and the like, as it could be used for a run down the drag strip and then re-cooled by the time the truck was back in line. The system was fairly non-intrusive – it only weighed about 25 pounds and did not require a new compressor or intercooler. But as with many concepts, it was ultimately scrapped. The technology was always stuck in the back of my mind, but with larger and more powerful engines being produced it could not find its place. With the advent of new fuel economy standards, we have seen small-displacement turbocharged engines pop up and they seem like the perfect candidate for this type of technology. Ford's EcoBoost 1.0-liter three-cylinder turbocharged engine, as used in the Fiesta and Focus, is one such candidate for this technology. It would add a negligent amount of weight but could provide a boost of 10 to 20 horsepower when needed, like merging onto the highway or catching up to traffic.