Auto blog

Ford Mustang Mach-E fails Sweden's moose test

The infamous moose test has claimed another casualty. This time it's the Ford Mustang Mach-E AWD Long Range, which was tested in an electric four-way alongside the Tesla Model Y, Hyundai Ioniq 5 and Skoda Enyaq iV (an electric utility vehicle closely related to the Volkswagen ID.4 that is sold in the United States). According to the Swedish testers at Teknikens Varld, Ford's electric car not only failed to hit the speed necessary for a passing grade, it didn't perform well at slower speeds, either. To pass the outlet's moose test, a car has to complete a rapid left-right-straight S-shaped pattern marked by cones at a speed of at least 72 km/h (44.7 miles per hour). The test is designed to mimic the type of avoidance maneuver a driver would have to take in order to avoid hitting something that wandered into the road, which in Sweden may be a moose but could just as easily be a deer or some other member of the animal kingdom elsewhere in the world, or possibly a child or car backing into the motorway. Not only is the maneuver very aggressive, it's also performed with weights belted into each seat and more weight added to the cargo area to hit the vehicle's maximum allowable carrying capacity. The Mustang Mach-E only managed to complete the moose test at 68 km/h (42.3 mph), well below the passing-grade threshold. Even at much lower speeds, Teknikens Varld says the Mach-E (which boasts the highest carrying capacity and was therefore loaded with more weight than the rest of the vehicles tested in this quartet) is "too soft in the chassis" and suffers from "too slow steering." Proving that it is indeed possible to pass the test, the Hyundai and Skoda completed the maneuver at the 44.7-mph figure required for a passing grade and the Tesla did it at 46.6 mph, albeit with less weight in the cargo area. It's not clear whether other versions of the Mustang Mach-E would pass the test. It's also unknown if Ford will make any changes to its chassis tuning or electronic stability control software, as some other automakers have done after a poor performance from Teknikens Varld, to improve its performance in the moose test. Related video:

What the Volkswagen I.D. concept tells us about the post-TDI future

If you've been paying attention, 2016 hasn't been a great year for Volkswagen. The TDI scandal removed VW's last crutch between our internal combustion present and the electric future, and so the company found itself scrambling to shift resources to show what's next right now. It's naive to assume that this is truly the sort of fairytale comeback story that VW's spin doctors would have us all believe, but it's notable that instead of flinching or pointing fingers, the engineers got to work. What they've produced is the I.D. concept, the third wave in VW's volume car history after the Beetle and Golf. The transaxle Golf was more than simply an updated Beetle, and likewise the I.D. is more than an electrified Golf. VW says the I.D. won't replace the Golf, but they said the same thing about that car replacing the Beetle. It's only a matter of time. VW says the I.D. won't replace the Golf, but they said the same thing about that car replacing the Beetle. It's only a matter of time. The I.D. approach is refreshingly simple: no carbon fiber chassis, no exotic battery chemistry, no outrageous concept car styling. The MEB chassis (the German acronym for modular electric platform) is made out of a traditional mix of high-strength steel grades to save costs and utilize existing factories. The battery is integral, not swappable, to reduce complexity and increase structural rigidity. It's also uses lithium-ion chemistry because of a proven track record and an existing (albeit deficient) supply chain. Contrast that with the e-Golf, which shares its chassis with the conventional internal-combustion cars. Fitting the battery and its ancillary systems became complicated and expensive. The skateboard installation in the I.D. will allow the pack to be optimized for the space available, reducing costs. As we've already reported, MEB will be shared across all VW Group brands to achieve an economy of scale, and the modular platform can be stretched to the size of roughly a Passat and down to a car slightly smaller than the I.D. It can be given all-wheel drive, although VW's e-mobility chief Christian Senger is quick to point out that the standard rear-drive configuration provides plenty of traction because of optimal weight distribution achieved with battery in the middle of the chassis. It makes all-wheel drive more of a bonus rather than a necessity in bad weather.

Top 10 small cars with the longest total driving range

Editor's Note: Since this article was originally posted in the spring of 2015, much has changed in the automotive landscape, especially among those shopping for small car economy. With thanks to Volkswagen for their blatant cheating – and subsequent cover-up – on diesel emissions, the largest player in the diesel passenger car segment isn't playing – they're paying; billions are going for both car buybacks and federally-imposed penalties. And for a few VW execs there exists the very real possibility of jail. With the absence of a big player and the abrupt entrance – via Chevy's new Bolt – of an affordable EV with 200+ miles of range, we've limited the diesel listings to Jaguar's new XE. And for those wanting an updated look at efficiency and range, Autoblog has it – or the EPA has it. Long before electric vehicles were part of the mainstream conversation, car lovers and skinflints alike would boast about the total range of their vehicles. There's something about getting farther down the road on one tank of gas that inflames the competitive spirit, almost as much as horsepower output or top speed. Of course, the vehicles with the very best range on today's market are almost all big trucks and SUVs; virtually all have the ability to carry massive reserves of fuel. Top up a standard Chevy Suburban and you can expect to travel almost 700 miles (you'll need to stop before the Suburban stops...), while a diesel-fed Jeep Grand Cherokee manages almost as many. But what about vehicles that are smaller? The EPA has, essentially, three classifications for 'small' vehicles: Minicompact, Subcompact and Compact. All three are measured based on interior volume, meaning that some cars with rather large exterior dimensions and engines slot in next to traditional small cars. But even though impressive GT coupes from Porsche, Bentley and Mercedes-Benz may have much larger gas tanks to feed their powerful engines, that capacity is offset by higher rates of consumption... in most cases. We used the EPA's Fuel Economy Guide for model year 2017 cars as a start, calculating the official highway miles per gallon rating with each vehicle's tank capacity. The resulting numbers aren't necessarily real world, but they do offer a spectrum for total theoretical range. The eventual top ten surprised me on a few occasions, and comprised quite a varied list of vehicles. 10.