Clean Title on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Ford highlights new F-650 and F-750 with full-size Tonka show truck [w/videos]

Who among us hasn't been tempted by the prospect of buying a big yellow truck and painting the name Tonka along the side? Well apparently there were some folks over at Ford who were just as tempted, only they actually had the means to make that childhood fantasy a reality in the form of the truck you see here. Revealed at the NTEA Work Truck Show this week in Indianapolis, this Tonka show truck stands nearly 10 feet tall. It's painted bright yellow, just like the one you played with in the sand box (and probably still would given the opportunity and maybe no one else looking) and has a blacked-out nose treatment and special graphics. As you can see, it's also equipped with a working dump bed, and has a truly staggering 33,000-pound gross vehicle weight rating, built to showcase the Blue Oval's new line of medium duty trucks. Of course "medium duty" is a relative term, and the new F-750 is clearly a heavier piece of machinery than the company's own Super Duty pickups, but they're lighter-duty than a proper big rig. The new 2016 Ford F-650 and F-750 are just as tough as the models they replace, but they're now quieter and more comfortable to use. In fact, Ford says its 6.7-liter Power Stroke V8 diesel is now 25-percent quieter inside the cabin at highway speeds, 45-percent quieter at idle and 35-percent quieter standing outside in front of the grille. Ford notes that it's the only medium-duty truck manufacturer that makes its own engines and transmissions. That Power Stroke diesel comes with 270 horsepower and 675 pound-feet of torque as standard, but can be upgraded to 300 hp and 700 lb-ft or all the way up to 330 hp and 725 lb-ft. Commercial buyers will also be able to choose between Regular, Super and Crew Cab models with a straight-frame, dock-height or tractor-towing frames, meaning that whatever it is you've got to haul, chances are high that the new Ford F-650 and F-750 can be set up to get the job done.

Ford made three big mistakes in calculating MPG for 2013 C-Max Hybrid

It's been a rough time for the official fuel economy figures for the Ford C-Max Hybrid. When the car was released in 2012, Ford made a huge deal about how it would beat the Toyota Prius V, which was rated at 42 combined miles per gallon, 44 city and 40 highway. The Ford? 47 mpg across the board. How did Ford come to this place, where its Prius-beater turned into an also-ran? Well, after hearing customer complaints and issuing a software update in mid-2013, then discovering a real problem with the numbers last fall and then making a big announcement last week that the fuel economy ratings of six different 2013 and 2014 model year vehicles would need to be lowered, the C-Max Hybrid has ended up at 40 combined, 42 city and 37 highway. In other words, the Prius trumps it, as daily drivers of those two vehicles have known for a long time. The changes will not only affect the window sticker, but also the effect that the C-Max Hybrid (and the five other Ford vehicles that had their fuel economy figures lowered last week) have on Ford's compliance with greenhouse gas and CAFE rules for model year 2013 and 2014. How did Ford come to this place, where its Prius-beater turned into an also-ran? There are two technical answers to that question, which we've got below, as well as some context for how Ford's mistakes will play out in the bigger world of green vehicles. Let's start with Ford's second error, which is easy to do since we documented it in detail last year (the first, needing to do a software update, was also covered). The basic gist is that Ford used the general label rule (completely legally) to test the Fusion Hybrid and use those numbers to figure out how efficient the C-Max Hybrid is. That turned out to be a mistake, since the two vehicles are different enough that their numbers were not comparable, despite having the same engine, transmission and test weight, as the rules require. You can read more details here. Ford's Said Deep admitted that the TRLHP issue is completely separate from the general label error from last year. Now let's move on to last week's announcement. What's interesting is that the new recalculation of the MPG numbers – downward, of course – was caused by a completely separate issue, something called the Total Road Load Horsepower (TRLHP). Ford's Said Deep admitted to AutoblogGreen that the TRLHP issue had nothing to do with the general label error from last year.

The UAW's 'record contract' hinges on pensions, battery plants

DETROIT - After nearly four weeks of disruptive strikes and hard bargaining, the United Auto Workers and the Detroit Three automakers have edged closer to a deal that could offer record-setting wage gains for nearly 150,000 U.S. workers. General Motors, Ford Motor and Chrysler parent Stellantis have all agreed to raise base wages by between 20% and 23% over a four-year deal, according to union and company statements. Ford and Stellantis have agreed to reinstate cost-of-living adjustments, or COLA. The companies have offered to boost pay for temporary workers and give them a faster path to full-time, full-wage status. All three have proposed slashing the time it takes a new hire to get to the top UAW pay rate. The progress in contract talks follows the first-ever simultaneous strike by the UAW against Detroit's Big Three automakers. The union began the strike on Sept. 15 in hopes of forcing a better deal from each major automaker. But coming close to a deal is not the same thing as reaching a deal. Big obstacles remain on at least two major UAW demands: restoring the retirement security provided by pre-2007 defined benefit pension plans, and covering present and future joint- venture electric vehicle battery plants under the union's master contracts with the automakers. On retirement, none of the automakers has agreed to restore pre-2007 defined-benefit pension plans for workers hired after 2007. Doing so could force the automakers to again burden their balance sheets with multibillion-dollar liabilities. GM and the former Chrysler unloaded most of those liabilities in their 2009 bankruptcies. The union and automakers have explored an approach to providing more income security by offering annuities as an investment option in their company-sponsored 401(k) savings plans, people familiar with the discussions said. Stellantis referred to an annuity option as part of a more generous 401(k) proposal on Sept. 22. Annuities or similar instruments could give UAW retirees assurance of fixed, predictable payouts less dependent on stock market ups and downs, experts said. Recent changes in federal law have removed obstacles to including annuities as a feature of corporate 401(k) plans, said Olivia Mitchell, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania Wharton School and an expert on pensions and retirement. "Retirees want a way to be assured they won't run out of money," Mitchell said.