Ford Focus 4 Dr Sedan Zts, 5 Speed Manual, New Clutch on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Ford's Galhotra succeeds Farley as head of Lincoln

Ford Motor Company is announcing a major personnel shakeup that could have a dramatic effect on the future of the Lincoln division. Kumar Galhotra (pictured above), currently vice president of engineering at Ford for all of its vehicles worldwide, is taking over as the president of the luxury brand on September 1, replacing Jim Farley. The automaker is also hiring a new head of advanced engineering.
Galhotra has a huge job ahead of him as the new boss of Lincoln worldwide, overseeing product development, marketing, sales and service. His task is to turn the luxury division into a world-class brand as quickly as possible, and he reports directly to Ford President and CEO Mark Fields.
"These changes underscore our commitment to build on the success of our One Ford plan by accelerating our pace of progress. They also make clear we are serious about Lincoln as a world-class luxury brand and that product excellence and innovation are what will deliver growth and define our entire company going forward," said Fields in the company's announcement.

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.

GM says it favors fuel-efficiency rules based on historic rates

WASHINGTON — General Motors backs an annual increase in fuel-efficiency standards based on "historic rates" rather than tough Obama era rules or a Trump administration proposal that would freeze requirements, according to a federal filing made public on Monday. The largest U.S. automaker said the Obama rules that aimed to hike fleet fuel efficiency to more than 50 miles per gallon by 2025 are "not technologically feasible or economically practicable." The Detroit automaker said that since 1980, the motor vehicle fleet has improved fuel efficiency at an average rate of 1 percent a year. Fiat Chrysler Automobiles NV said in separate comments that the auto industry is complying with existing fuel efficiency requirements by using credits from prior model years. As a result, even if requirements are frozen at 2020 levels, "the industry would need to continue to improve fuel economy" as credits expire, it added, warning if the government hikes standards beyond 2020 requirements "the situation worsens ... without some significant form of offset or flexibility." Fiat Chrysler and Ford urged the government to reclassify two-wheel drive SUVs as light trucks, which face less stringent requirements than cars. A four-wheel drive version of the same SUV is considered a light truck. Ford backs fuel rules "that increase year-over-year with additional flexibility to help us provide more affordable options for our customers." GM's comments said it was "troubled" that President Donald Trump's administration wants to phase out incentives for electric vehicles. The Trump plan's preferred alternative freezes standards at 2020 levels through 2026 and hikes U.S. oil consumption by about 500,000 barrels per day in the 2030s but reduces automakers' collective regulatory costs by more than $300 billion. It would bar California from requiring automakers to sell a rising number of electric vehicles or setting state emissions rules. The administration of former President Obama had adopted rules, effective in 2021, calling for an annual increase of 4.4 percent in fuel-efficiency requirements from 2022 through 2025. GM has been lobbying Congress to lift the existing cap on electric vehicles eligible for a $7,500 tax credit. The credit phases out over a 12-month period after an individual automaker hits 200,000 electric vehicles sold, and GM is close to that point.