2002 Ford Focus Svt on 2040-cars

Auto blog

U.S. automakers unite in opposition to possible Trump vehicle tariffs

WASHINGTON — The U.S. auto industry urged President Donald Trump's administration on Monday not to saddle imported cars and auto parts with steep tariffs, after the U.S. Commerce Department sent a confidential report to the White House late on Sunday with its recommendations for how to proceed. Some trade organizations also blasted the Commerce Department for keeping the details of its "Section 232" national security report shrouded in secrecy, which will make it much harder for the industry to react during the next 90 days Trump will have to review it. "Secrecy around the report only increases the uncertainty and concern across the industry created by the threat of tariffs," the Motor and Equipment Manufacturers Association said in a statement, adding that it was "alarmed and dismayed." "It is critical that our industry have the opportunity to review the recommendations and advise the White House on how proposed tariffs, if they are recommended, will put jobs at risk, impact consumers, and trigger a reduction in U.S. investments that could set us back decades." Representatives from the White House and the Commerce Department could not immediately be reached. The industry has warned that possible tariffs of up to 25 percent on millions of imported cars and parts would add thousands of dollars to vehicle costs and potentially devastate the U.S economy by slashing jobs. Administration officials have said tariff threats on autos are a way to win concessions from Japan and the EU. Last year, Trump agreed not to impose tariffs as long as talks with the two trading partners were proceeding in a productive manner. "We believe the imposition of higher import tariffs on automotive products under Section 232 and the likely retaliatory tariffs against U.S. auto exports would undermine - and not help - the economic and employment contributions that FCA, US, Ford Motor Company and General Motors make to the U.S. economy," said former Missouri Governor Matt Blunt, the president of the American Automotive Policy Council. Some Republican lawmakers have also said they share the industry's concerns. In a statement issued on Monday, Republican Congresswoman Jackie Walorski said she fears the Commerce Department's report could "set the stage for costly tariffs on cars and auto parts." "President Trump is right to seek a level playing field for American businesses and workers, but the best way to do that is with a scalpel, not an axe," she added.

Motor Trend pits Subaru WRX vs. Ford Focus ST

The Ford Focus ST has enjoyed a relatively calm, if brief, reign in the world of hot hatches. With nothing else in the class (in the States, at least) but the aging Mazdaspeed3 and Subaru Impreza WRX and the slow-selling Volkswagen Golf R, the Blue Oval's 252-horsepower five door has been the go-to vehicle for those that don't need the high-octane lunacy (and expense) of the rally bred Subaru Impreza WRX STI and Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution X.
Now, though, as the new Subaru WRX (it's not an Impreza anymore, though, neither is it a hatchback...) starts to arrive at dealers, the Focus ST appears to be under threat for the first time. Naturally, Motor Trend is here to figure out which one is the best, with another one of its Head 2 Head videos. Host Jonny Lieberman puts both cars through their paces, going above and beyond, quite literally, at the very end of the video.
Have a look below and let us know what you think of MT's verdict in Comments.

Nuclear-powered concept cars from the Atomic Age

In the 1950s and early 60s, the dawn of nuclear power was supposed to lead to a limitless consumer culture, a world of flying cars and autonomous kitchens all powered by clean energy. In Europe, it offered the then-limping continent a cheap, inexhaustible supply of power after years of rationing and infrastructure damage brought on by two World Wars.
The development of nuclear-powered submarines and ships during the 1940s and 50s led car designers to begin conceptualizing atomic vehicles. Fueled by a consistent reaction, these cars would theoretically produce no harmful byproducts and rarely need to refuel. Combining these vehicles with the new interstate system presented amazing potential for American mobility.
But the fantasy soon faded. There were just too many problems with the realities of nuclear power. For starters, the powerplant would be too small to attain a reaction unless the car contained weapons-grade atomic materials. Doing so would mean every fender-bender could result in a minor nuclear holocaust. Additionally, many of the designers assumed a lightweight shielding material or even forcefields would eventually be invented (they still haven't) to protect passengers from harmful radiation. Analyses of the atomic car concept at the time determined that a 50-ton lead barrier would be necessary to prevent exposure.