2007 Ford Mustang Gt Coupe- One Owner, Immaculate Condition on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Ford fights back against patent trolls

Some people are just awful. Some organizations are just as awful. And when those people join those organizations, we get stories like this one, where Ford has spent the past several years combatting so-called patent trolls. According to Automotive News, these malicious organizations have filed over a dozen lawsuits against the company since 2012. They work by purchasing patents, only to later accuse companies of misusing intellectual property, despite the fact that the so-called patent assertion companies never actually, you know, do anything with said intellectual property. AN reports that both Hyundai and Toyota have been victimized by these companies, with the former forced to pay $11.5 million to a company called Clear With Computers. Toyota, meanwhile, settled with Paice LLC, over its hybrid tech. The world's largest automaker agreed to pay $5 million, on top of $98 for every hybrid it sold (if the terms of the deal included each of the roughly 1.5 million hybrids Toyota sold since 2000, the company would have owed $147 million). Including the previous couple of examples, AN reports 107 suits were filed against automakers last year alone. But Ford is taking action to prevent further troubles... kind of. The company has signed on with a firm called RPX, in what sounds strangely like a protection racket. Automakers like Ford pay RPX around $1.5 million each year for access to its catalog of patents, which it spent nearly $1 billion building. "We take the protection and licensing of patented innovations very seriously," Ford told AN via email. "And as many smart businesses are doing, we are taking proactive steps to protect against those seeking patent infringement litigation." What are your thoughts on this? Should this patent business be better managed? Is it reasonable that companies purchase patents only to file suit against the companies that build actual products? Have your say in Comments.

Junkyard Gem: 1991 Mercury Grand Marquis LS

Ford's now-defunct Mercury Division first began using the Marquis name in 1967, on a sporty full-size hardtop based on the Ford LTD, then began offering the Grand Marquis beginning in the 1979 model year. These big, boxy luxury sedans were replaced by big, curvy luxury sedans (on the same platform) starting with the 1992 model year, so today's Junkyard Gem is one of the very last squared-off Grand Marquises ever built. The 1991 Grand Marquis (or "Grandma Keith," as many refer to it today) looks nearly identical to its 1979 predecessor at a glance, just as the 2011 model doesn't differ much from the 1992 model. Ford saw no reason to follow short-lived fashion trends with its simple, sturdy rear-wheel-drive sedan. Only two Grand Marquis trim levels were available for 1991: the base GS and the (somewhat) upscale LS. The former listed at $18,741 and the latter at $19,241, which comes to about $41,494 and $42,601, respectively, in inflated 2022 dollars). This interior would have seemed comfortingly familiar to a 1968 (or even 1958) Mercury owner time-traveling to 1991.  This is the optional "full grain leather seating surface," which cost an extra $489 (about $1,083 today). Dig those opera lights! Air conditioning was standard equipment in the 1991 Grand Marquis and its wagon counterpart, the Colony Park. The engine is the good old pushrod 5.0-liter Windsor V8, which would be replaced by a far more modern 4.6-liter SOHC mill in the '92 Grand Marquis. This engine was rated at 180 horsepower. A four-speed automatic was the only transmission available. The early 1990s ended up being the last gasp for padded vinyl roofs being considered mainstream equipment on new Detroit cars; this one was called the "Formal Coach" roof and cost an additional 725 bucks ($1,605 now). Such roofs were still available on a few cars later in the decade, but their time had passed. Why would such a clean Grandma Keith end up in a place like this? That's easy: it got T-boned directly into the right front wheel, mangling the body and bending up the suspension. This damage might have been worth fixing when the car was five years old, but it's a write-off when it happens to a 31-year-old Ford Panther. 1991 Mercury Grand Marquis Commercial - Savings Ad The granddaddy of them all, and on sale in South Texas! Related video: 2008 Mercury Mariner Hybrid test drive Autoblog

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.