California Special Gt Premium Power Driver Sat 18" Polished Wheels Shaker 500 V8 on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Did a US automaker blow the whistle on Hyundai, Kia fuel economy issue?

In all of the most hotly contested mainstream segments of the motoring universe, the difference of one mile per gallon averaged on a widow sticker can mean the difference between a sale and a walk-off - to say nothing of two or three mpg. So, when Hyundai and Kia were forced to reveal that many of their 40-mpg ratings were actually 38s and 37s, well, it made for big news.
It also, conceivably, made for a competitive disadvantage immediately, when the Korean automakers' products were being shopped versus the guys down the block. And it's that disadvantage that makes a recent story from Automotive News so juicy.
AN is reporting that Margo Oge, former head of the Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Transportation and Air Quality, got a tip in 2010 that Hyundai/Kia were "cheating" to get its impressive fuel economy numbers. The tip, said Oge (who retired from the EPA this past September), came from a senior vice president from a domestic automaker. The source was credible enough for Oge to launch an audit of the Hyundai figures, which ultimately lead to the debacle that we reported on a few months ago, and that the Korean company has been trying to bounce back from ever since.

2017 Ford F-150 Raptor desert testing heats up

In case there was any doubt, Ford is taking the development of the second-generation SVT Raptor very, very seriously. The Blue Oval recently completed over 1,000 miles of testing in the boiling heat of the American southwest. Apparently, that mileage was accrued over a 66-mile route designed to mimic the torturous terrain encountered by racers in the Baja 1,000 off-road race. The prototypes, which were built from a mix of existing and next-gen Raptor components, were tested with "fast sandy washes, deep-rutted silt beds, steep climbs in deep sand, and slow meticulous crawls through tight trenches." Ford claims the new truck managed to run the circuit 25-percent faster than the current F-150 SVT Raptor, averaging 50 miles per hour while going as fast as 100 mph in stretches. That said, Dearborn didn't release any dedicated times, so it's unclear just how quickly the 66-mile stage was completed. We do know that durability was a big part of the testing. Ford claims each lap was completed by what sounds like a pretty significant jump, with the trucks ascending a steep ramp onto a two-foot plateau and then completing a step-down to level ground. We have to take Ford at its word here, though. "Steep" can mean any number of things, and we've no idea just how fast the trucks were hitting the ramp or how much air they got. Hopefully, the jumps were aggressive enough to prevent future frame issues. Still, Ford boasting about how rough the Raptor's testing is can be taken as a positive sign for fans of the next-generation of SVT's rugged pickup. NEW F-150 RAPTOR WRAPS UP INITIAL DESERT DURABILITY TESTING DEARBORN, Mich., July 7, 2015 – The 2017 F-150 Raptor – Ford's toughest, smartest, most capable off-road truck ever – recently completed more than 1,000 miles of testing in the southwestern United States. Over 1,028 miles of desert trail designed to parallel the Baja race course in Mexico, the 66-mile route featured a wide range of surfaces including fast sandy washes, deep-rutted silt beds, steep climbs in deep sand, and slow meticulous crawls through tight trenches. The truck topped speeds of 100 mph in places, slowing to 10 mph in others, for an average speed of approximately 50 mph. The 2017 Raptor is 25 percent faster than the current truck based on lap times. At the end of each lap, the new Raptor completed a tabletop jump consisting of a steep ramp up to a two-foot plateau, then a step-off back to level ground.

NHTSA advances investigation of Ford Crown Victoria headlights

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is opening a preliminary evaluation into reports of suddenly failing headlights on 517,945 examples of the 2003-2005 Ford Crown Victoria and Mercury Grand Marquis. The government started looking into this problem in April when the North Carolina Consumers Council filed a defect petition with the agency. Now, the inquiry has moved to the next step. According to NHTSA's documentation (as a PDF), it examined its own database and worked with Ford to come up with a total of 3,609 complaints of the front lighting control module suddenly failing. When this happens, drivers lose the low-beam headlights, but the high-beams can be used by holding the stalk. Sometimes turning the switch off and on fixes the issue. Additionally, there are 15 allegations of crashes, and one reported shoulder injury. NHTSA's preliminary evaluations "evaluate the scope, frequency, and consequence of the alleged defect" and don't necessarily lead to a recall. NHTSA looked into this problem once before in 2008 and 2009 and decided that a recall wasn't necessary. Ford also extended the warranty on the front lighting control module for these vehicles. INVESTIGATION Subject : Loss of headlights Date Investigation Opened: AUG 10, 2015 Date Investigation Closed: Open NHTSA Action Number: PE15028 Component(s): EXTERIOR LIGHTING All Products Associated with this Investigation Vehicle Make Model Model Year(s) FORD CROWN VICTORIA 2003-2005 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS 2003-2005 Details Manufacturer: Ford Motor Company SUMMARY: After receiving a defect petition (DP15002) concerning the loss of headlights and other exterior lighting in model year (MY) 2003-2005 Ford Crown Victoria and Mercury Grand Marquis vehicles, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) analyzed Vehicle Owner Questionnaire (VOQ) complaints received from consumers and identified a total of 605 reports (for all submission dates) alleging headlight failure. The complaints indicate failures of both low beam headlights typically while driving, a defect condition that was evaluated under a prior ODI investigation (PE08066). Most consumer VOQs indicate that the headlights failed suddenly and without warning leaving the driver with no forward lighting, however some report the headlights flickered or dimmed prior to turning off. In some cases drivers were able to turn the headlights back on after a period of time while others reported the headlights would not come back on at all.