1966 Ford Thunderbird With Only 23k Miles. Beautiful Condition. Ac, 428 Q Code. on 2040-cars

Auto blog

From Expedition to Navigator: our predictions for Lincoln's SUV

In the midst of all the buzz surrounding the new aluminum Ford Expedition and Expedition Max, we remembered the other large SUV the Ford Motor Company showed last year, the Lincoln Navigator concept. And since the Navigator has historically been built on the Expedition platform, we figured there's no better time to focus some of our predictions for the big Lincoln. First off, let's take a look at design. Having seen the new Expedition, we're fairly confident that the Navigator will look almost exactly like its concept. The strong similarities between two mean the Expedition serves as a preview of what a production Navigator will look like. For example, both vehicles' greenhouses we can see that the shape of the C-pillars are nearly identical. The only difference is that the Expedition's are painted body color, while the Navigator's are painted black. Additionally, the character line running along the top of the doors on both vehicles is roughly the same height. The same goes for the more subtle crease near the bottom of the doors. We also see no reason why Lincoln wouldn't use the full width taillights, fender vent, and grille treatment it used on the concept. Those are all easy design changes to create differentiation, and they're all right inline with the cues set by the Continental. View 15 Photos For powertrain, we're pretty certain the 400-horsepower 3.5-liter EcoBoost V6 previewed on the concept is a certainty now. The Expedition and Expedition Max will be offered with a 3.5-liter EcoBoost as well, so we know it will fit. We expect the Expedition's engine will produce 375 horsepower and 470 lb-ft of torque as it does in the F-150. That's less power than the Navigator concept, but it would be reasonable to make the production Navigator a bit more powerful than its lowly Ford brethren to help justify the increased price tag. Towing capacity will probably be about the same between the Ford and Lincoln, which should be something over 9,000 pounds. The Navigator will probably use the same two-wheel-drive and all-wheel-drive drivetrains, too. Inside is where the Expedition and Navigator will likely differ the most, particularly in seating. The Expedition offers seating for up to eight with an available second-row bench seat, and the Navigator concept had captain's chairs for every row. We're expecting the Navigator will only offer second-row captain's chairs since the cramped third row would be a waste of nice buckets.

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.

Ford Fusion production scaled back just 3 months after it was accelerated

Three months after kicking off production of the Ford Fusion at its Flat Rock, MI factory, Ford Motor Company is taking steps to trim output in the face of heavily discounted competition from Toyota and a growing supply of vehicles.
The addition of Fusion production in Flat Rock - which also builds the Mustang - was meant to be what pushed the handsome mid-sizer past its arch-nemesis, the Toyota Camry. An extra facility building Fusions was also meant to curb the growing demand for Ford's highly profitable sedan.
But with word that Flat Rock would take "approximately" one extra week off for the holidays combined with an 88-day supply of Fusions - reportedly due in no small part to what Morgan Stanley analyst Adam Jonas called "aggressive discounting of the Camry" - some analysts are now beginning to wonder if Ford may have overextended itself by adding a second Fusion facility to the mix.