1989 Mercury Cougar Xr-7 Sedan 2-door 3.8l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Question of the Day: Most degraded car name?

When Ford came up with a not-so-sporty version of the Pinto and slapped Mustang badges on it in 1974, that was a low point for the Mustang name. When Chrysler applied the venerable Town & Country name on perfectly functional but unglamorous minivans, it saddened many of us. But perhaps the biggest demotion for a once-proud model came when, in 1988, General Motors imported a misery-enhancing Daewoo from Korea and called it the Pontiac LeMans. The original Pontiac LeMans was a great-looking midsize car with fairly advanced (for the time) suspension design and engine options including potent V8s and a screaming overhead-cam straight-six. The Daewoo-based Pontiac LeMans was a cramped, shoddy hooptie that served only to ruin the LeMans name forever, while stealing sales from the Suzuki-based Chevrolet Sprint. Sure, using the once-respected Monterey name on the Mercurized Ford Freestar was bad, but Mercury didn't have long to live at that point. I say the downward spiral of the LeMans name was the most agonizing in automotive history. What do you think? Related Video: This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings. Auto News Ford Mercury Pontiac Automotive History Classics questions ford pinto names

Ford recalls 382k vehicles across six campaigns

Ford needs to repair a total of 381,633 vehicles in North America across six newly announced campaigns, including five safety recalls and one compliance recall. By far the largest of these campaigns covers the 342,271 examples of the 1998-2003 Windstar to double check an earlier recall repair. Among these, 283,413 are in the US and 58,858 are in Canada. The combination of corrosion and stress can cause cracks in the rear axle and eventually lead to the part to snap completely. The company reports a small number of accidents might be connected to this, but there are no injuries. The minivans were recalled for this issue back in 2010, and it was investigated by NHTSA. According to Ford's latest announcement, the reinforcement brackets on some of these models might not have been installed correctly. This time, dealers will perform an inspection. Minivans with incorrectly installed brackets will get a new rear axle. The rest of the owners will be offered a deal to replace the part at a reduced cost. The next largest campaign covers 36,857 examples of the 2015 F-150 to fix a problem with the adaptive cruise control. Specifically, there are 33,481 affected trucks in the US, and 3,376 in Canada. According to Ford, "when passing a large, highly reflective truck" the radar in the system can misidentify a semi as being in the same lane as the pickup. The collision warning system would then activate, slowing the F-150. There's one report of an accident with this happening but no injuries. The fix is simply an update to the adaptive cruise control module software. Ford also has a recall for 1,477 examples of its 2016 F-53 and F-59 stripped chassis models, and they're all located in the US. A manufacturing issue might allow the trucks to shift into reverse without the driver first applying the brakes. There are no reports of any accidents from this, though. To repair the problem, the models get a new transmission shift control bracket and an adjustment to the shift cable. The Blue Oval's safety compliance recall covers 708 examples of the 2016 Fusion and Lincoln MKZ, including 658 of them in the US, 28 in Canada, and 22 in Mexico. On these models, a manufacturing problem with the fuel tank could allow it to crack in a crash, which isn't allowed under federal rules. There are no reports of accidents, injuries or fires. The fix will be a new fuel tank for all of them. The company is also repairing 251 units of the 2015 Taurus and Lincoln MKS, plus the 2016 Explorer.

Impala SS vs. Marauder: Recalling Detroit’s muscle sedans 

Impala SS vs. Marauder — it was comparo that only really happened in theory. ChevyÂ’s muscle sedan ran from 1994-96, while MercuryÂ’s answer arrived in 2003 and only lasted until 2004. TheyÂ’re linked inextricably, as there were few options for powerful American sedans during that milquetoast period for enthusiasts. The debate was reignited recently among Autoblog editors when a pristine 1996 Chevy Impala SS with just 2,173 miles on the odometer hit the market on Bring a Trailer. Most of the staff favored the Impala for its sinister looks and said that it lived up to its billing as a legit muscle car. Nearly two-thirds of you agree. We ran an unscientific Twitter poll that generated 851 votes, 63.9 percent of which backed the Impala. Muscle sedans, take your pick: — Greg Migliore (@GregMigliore) April 14, 2020 Then and now enthusiasts felt the Impala was a more complete execution with guts. The Marauder, despite coming along later, felt more hacked together, according to prevailing sentiments. Why? On purpose and on paper theyÂ’re similar. The ImpalaÂ’s 5.7-liter LT1 V8 making 260 horsepower and 330 pound-feet of torque was impressive for a two-ton sedan in the mid-Â’90s. The Marauder was actually more powerful — its 4.6-liter V8 was rated at 302 hp and 318 lb-ft. The ImpalaÂ’s engine was also used in the C4 Corvette. The MarauderÂ’s mill was shared with the Mustang Mach 1. You can see why they resonated so deeply with Boomers longing for a bygone era and also captured the attention of coming-of-age Gen Xers. Car and DriverÂ’s staff gave the Marauder a lukewarm review back in ‘03, citing its solid handling and features, yet knocking the sedan for being slow off the line. In a Hemmings article appropriately called “Autopsy” from 2004, the ImpalaÂ’s stronger low-end torque and smooth shifting transmission earned praise, separating it from the more sluggish Mercury. All of this was captured in the carsÂ’ acceleration times, highlighting metrically the differences in their character. The Impala hit 60 miles per hour in 6.5 seconds, while the Marauder was a half-second slower, according to C/D testing. Other sites have them closer together, which reinforces the premise it really was the little things that separated these muscle cars. Both made the most of their genetics, riding on ancient platforms (FordÂ’s Panther and General MotorsÂ’ B-body) that preceded these cars by decades. Both had iconic names.