1999 Ford F350 Super Duty Four Door Utility on 2040-cars

Auto blog

NHTSA investigating Ford's solution to May 2014 power steering recall

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is investigating a complaint that Ford's response to a May 2014 recall of the 2008 to 2011 Ford Escape and Mercury Mariner doesn't quite go far enough to solve a troubling power-steering problem. Roughly a year ago, Ford recalled nearly a million vehicles after it was found that a problem with the torque sensor's communication with the power steering control module could cut steering assistance for drivers. While manual steering would still be available, the problem was enough to ask drivers to report in to have the PSCM inspected, and if necessary, replaced (along with the torque sensor, or in dramatic cases, the entire steering column). That would only happen, though, if trouble codes were being thrown. If there weren't any problems, dealers were told to simply update the PSCM's software so that any issues between it and the torque sensor would simply throw a visual and audio warning – power steering would still be maintained. The petitioner claimed that following the recall work, he still experienced a problem with the torque sensor. According to NHTSA, a claim was made that Ford didn't go far enough in its solution to the problem, and that "the software update itself may in fact cause further issues with the affected vehicle's power steering, causing it to fail, and ultimately requiring replacement of the torque sensor or entire steering column." The petition was filed in early February and is now officially being looked into by NHTSA.

Coronavirus shakes up America's truck market: GM outselling Ford and Ram

FCA, Ford and General Motors joined the rest of the U.S. auto industry in taking heavy volume hits due to coronavirus-related shortages of both cars and customers. The saying goes that a rising tide lifts all boats; it stands to reason, then, that a falling one would have the opposite effect.  However, as we learned Thursday, the automotive market can behave in unpredictable ways. While the F-Series remained the best-selling nameplate in Q1, GM's full-size trucks are now outselling Ford's again for the first time in years, and with this upward thrust from the General, FCA's Ram was unceremoniously booted out of a hard-earned second place.  While late-March sales declines hit just about every major automaker in one way or another, the model-by-model results weren't nearly so uniform. And because the market tends to be a zero-sum game, for every winner, there generally has to be a loser.  In this case, that winner was GM, and its rise had to come at the expense of another automaker, in this case, Ford. F-Series sales dropped 13.1 percent in the first quarter of 2020, while sales of GM's full-sized Silverado and Sierra surged nearly 28% in the same period. FCA's Ram lineup managed a steady-as-she-goes 7% increase. All-in, GM finished the quarter with 197,743 full-size trucks sold to Ford's 186,562. Here's the full breakdown: Ford F-Series: 186,562  Chevrolet Silverado*: 144,734 Ram P/U: 128,805 GMC Sierra: 53,009 *includes 1,036 Medium Duty sales Things are a but murkier in the midsize segment, where the Chevy Colorado slipped 36% to just 21,430 units sold — just a few hundred better than the slow-selling Ford Ranger's Q1 numbers. The GMC Canyon experienced an almost identical slide, finishing the quarter with just 4,483 units sold. For perspective, Jeep sold more than 15,000 Gladiators and Toyota's midsize Tacoma slipped less than 8%, finishing the quarter with nearly 54,000 sales.  We suspect this discrepancy in full- and mid-size truck sales comes from shifting incentives. Ford, GM and FCA would like to keep selling bigger trucks because there's far more profit margin built into their list prices. Even with tens of thousands of dollars in manufacturer money on the hood, big trucks still make money.  Since these automakers report quarterly, we won't get another good look at these numbers until July, but if you thought that 2019 represented the new normal for U.S. auto sales, well, think again.

Aluminum lightweighting does, in fact, save fuel

When the best-selling US truck sheds the equivalent weight of three football fullbacks by shifting to aluminum, folks start paying attention. Oak Ridge National Laboratory took a closer look at whether the reduced fuel consumption from a lighter aluminum body makes up for the fact that producing aluminum is far more energy intensive than steel. And the results of the study are pretty encouraging. In a nutshell, the energy needed to produce a vehicle's raw materials accounts for about 10 percent of a typical vehicle's carbon footprint during its total lifecycle, and that number is up from six percent because of advancements in fuel economy (fuel use is down to about 68 percent of total emissions from about 75 percent). Still, even with that higher material-extraction share, the fuel-efficiency gains from aluminum compared to steel will offset the additional vehicle-extraction energy in just 12,000 miles of driving, according to the study. That means that, from an environmental standpoint, aluminum vehicles are playing with the house's money after just one year on the road. Aluminum-sheet construction got topical real quickly earlier this year when Ford said the 2015 F-150 pickup truck would go to a 93-percent aluminum body construction. In addition to aluminum being less corrosive than steel, that change caused the F-150 to shed 700 pounds from its curb weight. And it looks like the Explorer and Expedition SUVs may go on an aluminum diet next. Take a look at SAE International's synopsis of the Oak Ridge Lab's study below. Life Cycle Energy and Environmental Assessment of Aluminum-Intensive Vehicle Design Advanced lightweight materials are increasingly being incorporated into new vehicle designs by automakers to enhance performance and assist in complying with increasing requirements of corporate average fuel economy standards. To assess the primary energy and carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) implications of vehicle designs utilizing these materials, this study examines the potential life cycle impacts of two lightweight material alternative vehicle designs, i.e., steel and aluminum of a typical passenger vehicle operated today in North America. LCA for three common alternative lightweight vehicle designs are evaluated: current production ("Baseline"), an advanced high strength steel and aluminum design ("LWSV"), and an aluminum-intensive design (AIV).