2014 Ford Fusion Se on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Ford could use Raptor name on Ranger in Australia

Ford might be flying the Raptor name into the market Down Under, but rather than on a high-performance F-150, the aggressive moniker could be used for a mean Ranger. The Australia-based site Car Advice recently spotted the Blue Oval testing a modified Ranger over some off-road terrain. The pickup was equipped with a snorkel over the roof for wading into deep water, a brush bar to protect the front, a higher ride height, and fender flares. The regular version of the truck launches Down Under later this year, including the somewhat rugged Wildtrak trim level (pictured above). So where does the Raptor name fit into this? Ford filed a trademark in Australia on June 5 for the Ranger Raptor. There's no guarantee for that as the truck's moniker, though. As of May 28, the Blue Oval also owns the right to the Ranger FX4 title. Although, don't start saving yet. With the Ranger remaining unavailable outside of the US for the latest generation, there's no chance of a Ranger Raptor coming here. Hopefully, Aussie off-roaders get plenty of enjoyment out of the truck, if it sees production. Related Video:

Ford lowers MPG ratings on six vehicles

Ford has announced that it will be lowering the fuel economy ratings on a number of its 2013 and 2014 model year vehicles after an error was discovered in the company's internal testing data. The EPA has been notified.
Worryingly for Ford, the vast majority of the vehicles affected are hybrids, including the C-Max, Fusion and MKZ in both hybrid and plug-in varieties (where applicable). Also covered as part of the rerating is the entire lineup of 2014 Fiesta engines, with the exception of the ST, including the turbocharged, three-cylinder EcoBoost.
The C-Max was originally rated at 47/47/47 mpg, but dropped to 43/45/40 last year and now to 40/42/37.

Buy Ford and GM stock and make 5%

Want to make a five-percent return when 10-year treasuries are paying around two percent? Ford (F) and General Motors (GM) have solid balance sheets, strong cash flow, solid earnings, and growing markets. By all accounts, they are smart investments. But the market is down on these stocks. Why? Some of the stupid excuses include: They are cyclical companies The Detroit 3 have lost 3.5 million in sales since 2000 The world economy is shaky GM recently filed for bankruptcy Their markets have peaked They haven't changed their ways Let's take these criticisms one by one: They Are Cyclical Companies Yes, they are cyclical. Every company is cyclical. Every industry is cyclical. Some more than others, but not every company is immune from swings in the market. Banks used to be 'non-cyclical' leader, not anymore. Airline stocks are just as cyclical as auto stocks, yet they are trading at multiples greater than the auto industry. Why? And what accounts for the irrational stock price for Tesla (TSLA)? At least Ford (F) and General Motors (GM) make money and have positive cash flows. In fact, both companies have a net positive cash position. They have more cash on hand than liabilities. Auto sales in the United States hit a record 17.5 million vehicles in 2015. During the Great Recession, Ford (F) and General Motors (GM) cut their break even points to 10 million vehicles per year. Anything above an annual U.S. volume of 10 million vehicles is profit. And what a profit they make. Sales of Ford's F-150 continues to be the best-selling vehicle in the United States for over 30 years. Detroit 3 Have Lost 3.5 million in Sales Since 2000 Automotive News reports General Motors (GM), Ford (F) and Chrysler (FCA) have lost a combined 3.5 million vehicles sales since 2000. So how can they be making more money? Two big reasons – Fleet Sales and the UAW. Fleet Sales The Detroit 3 used to own car rental companies to keep their factories running. Ford owned Hertz (HTZ), General Motors owned all of National Car Rental and 29 percent of Avis, and Chrysler, the forerunner to Fiat Chrysler (FCA), used to own Thrifty Car Rental and Dollar Rent-A-Car. The Detroit 3 owned these rental companies to have a place to sell their bad product and keep their factories running. These were low margin sales, and in many cases, were money losers for the Detroit 3. They no longer own auto rental companies.