1963 Mercury Comet S-22 on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Does Lincoln Zephyr trademark mean a return to real names?

Lincoln's long history includes many legendary names, and despite its short life, Zephyr retains a spot in that pantheon. Perhaps its will return once again: Ford Motor Co. applied to trademark Zephyr on May 11. Trademark filings can have ambiguous meanings, and often they're legal plays to get or keep the rights to a name. But in the last year, we've seen signs Lincoln is looking to use real names on its vehicles again. Obviously, it's keeping Navigator for its flagship sport-utility vehicle with a new model due next year. Reprising Continental for the MKS replacement was also well received. That said, Lincoln still uses the MKX and MKC "names" for its crossovers. Zephyr is a dustier moniker. It was used in the 1930s and '40s on a mid-level model spearheaded by Edsel Ford. The stylishly aerodynamic model was set between the Ford V8 De Luxe and more expensive Lincolns. It returned in 2006 as the Lincoln version of the Ford Fusion before that model was renamed MKZ. Mercury also used Zephyr on its version of the Ford Fairmont in the late 1970s and early '80s. Ford last held a trademark on the Zephyr name in 2013. The filing says Ford seeks to use Zephyr for "motor vehicles and parts and accessories therefor." That could mean a new car — or just parts. Putting the Zephyr badge back on the MKZ is the most likely bet. Meanwhile, Ford also moved to get the Thunderbird trademark on May 11 for the same vehicles and parts purpose, and it filed for the Mustang trademark for shampoo and lotions on May 4. A Lincoln spokesman said, "In the normal course of our business, we file trademarks for names," but had no further information. Related Video:

Ford recalls 300,000 Crown Vics over lighting module

The Basics: Ford is recalling 312,814 units of the Crown Victoria and Mercury Grand Marquis sedans from the 2003-2005 model years. They were built at the St. Thomas Assembly Plant between Oct. 3, 2001, and Aug. 2, 2005. Ford says 296,004 of those units are located in the United States, with another 14,714 in Canada and 2,096 in Mexico. The Problem: The solder joints on the lighting control module could crack, depriving the headlamps of the power they need to light the way ahead. That could increase the risk of a crash, particularly at night and in other low-visibility situations. Injuries/Deaths: Ford reports that it is aware of 11 accidents that resulted from the problem, leading to one injury described as "minor." The Fix: The manufacturer is instructing dealers to replace the entire lighting control module. If You Own One: Make sure your headlights are working before getting under way. If they're not, avoid driving under low-light conditions, including at night, in heavy precipitation, or in fog. Ford Issues Three Safety Recalls and One Safety Compliance Recall in North America DEARBORN, Mich., Dec. 22, 2015 – Ford Motor Company is issuing three safety recalls and one safety compliance recall in North America. Details are as follows: Ford Motor Company issues safety recall for certain 2003-2005 Ford Crown Victoria and Mercury Grand Marquis vehicles to replace lighting control module Ford Motor Company is issuing a safety recall for approximately 313,000 2003-2005 Ford Crown Victoria and Mercury Grand Marquis vehicles to replace a lighting control module. The solder joints on the module could crack and interrupt power to the headlamps – increasing the risk of crash at night. Ford is aware of 11 reports of accidents and one report of a minor injury related to this issue. Affected vehicles include certain 2003-2005 Ford Crown Victoria and Mercury Grand Marquis vehicles built at St. Thomas Assembly Plant, Oct. 3, 2001 through Aug. 2, 2005. There are a total of 312,814 vehicles that might be affected in North America, including 296,004 in the United States and federalized territories, 14,714 in Canada and 2,096 in Mexico. Dealers will replace the lighting control module at no cost to the customer. Ford issues safety recall for certain 2016 Ford F-650 and F-750 vehicles to replace rear air brake chamber Ford is issuing a safety recall for 177 2016 Ford F-650 and F-750 vehicles to replace the rear air brake chamber.

Junkyard Gem: 1996 Nissan Quest XE with 338,549 miles

When I hit the junkyard, I always look for vehicles with impressive final figures showing on their odometers. I find so many Hondas and Toyotas with better than 300,000 miles that I don't consider them especially noteworthy (the exception being super-low-spec cheap models, such as a Tercel or Civic VX), and it goes without saying that the bar is quite high for Mercedes-Benzes as well. It has been surprisingly difficult to find discarded Nissans that made it past the 300k mark; today's Junkyard Gem is just the fourth I've documented. The highest-mile junked Nissan I'd found prior to today's minivan is a 1994 Maxima with 364,238 miles, followed by a 1987 Maxima with 341,176 miles and a 1986 200SX with 309,222 miles. Keep in mind that Nissan didn't go to six-digit odometers on most of its US-market cars until the early 1980s, and then went to tough-to-read-in-the-junkyard electronic odometers in the early 2000s; this means the pool of potential high-mile Nissans is limited to about the 1983-2000 range of model years. Ford has just as much right to claim credit to this van's impressive mile total as does Nissan, since the Quest was a collaboration between Ford and Nissan that also produced the Mercury Villager; this van was built by Ford at the Ohio Assembly plant. The Quest/Villager platform was derived from the Maxima's, and the engine is pure Nissan: a 3.0-liter VG30 V6 rated at 151 horsepower. The only transmission available in the first-generation (1993-1999) Quest/Villager was a four-speed automatic. This one appears to have been sold new at Landrum Nissan in Pueblo. The rear glass has been painted flat black, possibly to keep prying eyes from seeing valuable cargo. The rear seats are long gone, so this van probably hauled cargo for much of its long life. The front interior seems to be in good shape. Why is this van here? There's body damage on the left rear and right front, suggesting a crash that may have bent the suspension past the worth-fixing threshold. Perhaps the crinkled metal just made this van too unsightly, or maybe some powertrain problem was the culprit. This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings. It's time to expect more from a minivan. This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings. It's all fun and games until the toddler takes the wheel.