St2 Package 6spd Manual 2.0l Ecoboost Black & Tangerine Scream Leather Recaro on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Automakers want to stop the EPA's fuel economy rules change, and why that's a shortsighted move

With a Trump Administration looming, the EPA moved quickly after the election to propose finalizing future fuel economy rules last week. The auto industry doesn't like that (surprise), and has started making moves to stop the EPA. Ford CEO Mark Fields said he wanted to lobby Trump to lower the standards, and now the Auto Alliance, a manufacturer group, is saying it will join the fight against cleaner cars. The Alliance represents 12 automakers: BMW, Fiat Chrysler, Ford, GM, Jaguar Land Rover, Mazda, Mercedes-Benz, Mitsubishi, Porsche, Toyota, VW, and Volvo. Gloria Bergquist, a spokesperson for the Alliance, told Automotive News that the "EPA's sudden and controversial move to propose auto regulations eight months early - even after Congress warned agencies about taking such steps while political appointees were packing their bags - calls out for congressional action to pause this rulemaking until a thoughtful policy review can occur." The EPA was going to consider public comments through April 2017, but then said it would move the deadline to the end of December. That means that it can finalize the rules before President Obama leaves office. The director of public affairs for the Consumer Federation of America, Jack Gillis, said on a conference call with reporters last week when the EPA originally announced its decision that it is unlikely that President Trump will be able to roll back these changes. Gillis also said on the same call that any attempt by the automakers to prevent these changes would be history repeating itself. "These are the same companies that fought airbags, and now promoting the fact that every car has multiple airbags," he said. "These are the same companies that fought the crash-test program, and now are promoting the crash-test ratings published by the government. So, it's clear that they're misperceiving the needs of the American consumer." There are more reasons the Allliance's pushback is flawed. Carol Lee Rawn, the transportation program director for Ceres, said on that call that the automotive industry is a global one, and many automakers are moving to global platforms to help them meet strict fuel economy rules around the world.

Ford hurt by 2015 F-150 production restraints

The new 2015 Ford F-150 came out of the gate strong for January 2015 with all F-Series sales up 17 percent for the month. However, February tempered those gains a bit with the model line dipping 1.2 percent, and the Ford brand itself dropped 1.7 percent year-over-year. The fall is being blamed in part on tight supply of the latest pickup. A major factor holding back the 2015 F-150 is that they are only currently being made at the Dearborn Truck Plant. The Kansas City factory is still changing over, and full supply from them both is expected by the middle of the year. Ford also just announced plans to hire an extra 1,550 people to build the pickups, including 900 in Kansas City. However, the downtime in the assembly changeover has caused about 90,000 units in lost production since mid-2014, according to The Detroit Free Press. It's not all bad news for the pickup, though. The latest F-150 made up 21 percent of F-Series sales in February, according to The Detroit Free Press, up from 18 percent in the previous month, and they remained on dealer lots an average of 18 days. The lessened supply has also meant lower incentives. Mark LaNeve, Ford's US marketing boss, told the Free Press that average F-150 transaction prices were up $2,000 from last year. He also indicated that retail figures grew seven percent in February, while F-Series fleet numbers were down 18 percent. The constrained supply does come at an inopportune time for Ford, though. This year is expected to be huge for pickups. Also, lower gas prices appear to be pushing people towards SUVs and trucks recently. Related Video:

Tier 1 suppliers call GM the worst OEM to work with

Among automakers with a big US presence, General Motors is the worst to work for, according to a new survey from Tier 1 automotive suppliers, conducted by Planning Perspectives, Inc.
The Detroit-based manufacturer, which has been under fire following the ignition switch recall and its accompanying scandal, finished behind six other automakers with big US manufacturing operations. Suppliers had issues with trust and communications, as well as intellectual property protection. GM was also the least likely to allow suppliers to raise their prices in the face of unexpected increases in material cost, all of which contributed to 55 percent of suppliers saying their relationship with GM was "poor to very poor."
GM's cross-town competitors didn't fare much better. Chrysler finished in fifth place, ahead of GM and behind Dearborn-based Ford, which was passed for third place this year by Nissan. Toyota took the top marks, while Honda captured second place.