1966 Ford Bronco U13 on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Car-crazy 5-year-old boy writes automakers for treasures, gets big response

Part of the beauty of children is that they can find worth in something adults might deem unworthy or overlook entirely. Five-year-old Patch Hurty didn't see garbage or a broken piece of a car when he spotted a Ford badge lying on the side of a road. He saw an artifact, a souvenir, a start to a collection he could only dream of. Ezra Dyer of Popular Mechanics tells the story of Patch and his quest to turn that one lost badge into a museum of manufacturer logos. According to the article, Hurty is a car fanatic through and through, even using car names as a way of learning to read. After finding the Ford badge near his Connecticut home, he and his mom put together a plan to reach out to dozens of automakers, confessing his love of things on four wheels. In each letter, Patch assembled a picture of himself standing next to one of the cars, and a penny to pay for whatever he hoped was sent his way. The response was unexpectedly and overwhelmingly positive. Of the more than 50 letters he sent out, including to obscure or defunct companies such as Bugatti, Suzuki, and Saturn, a majority responded with warm notes and some type of souvenir. Two of the coolest responses came from Lincoln and Bentley. Lincoln sent a sketch of a Continental (all car lovers enjoy drawing cars, right?), and Bentley sent a wheel center cap. How awesome is that? The story reminds us of something that can easily be lost in all of the negativity involved with the auto industry: Everybody is in this because of a common infatuation with automobiles. For more details on the souvenirs Patch received and accompanying photos, read the rest of the story. Related Video: News Source: Popular Mechanics Read This Bentley Bugatti Ford Lincoln Saturn Suzuki

Big electric trucks won't save the planet, says the NYT

When The New York Times decides that an issue is an issue, be prepared to read about it at length. Rarely will a week passes these days when the esteemed news organization doesn’t examine the realities, myths and alleged benefits and drawbacks of electric vehicles, and even The Atlantic joins in sometimes. That revolution, marked by changes in manufacturing, consumer habits and social “consciousness,” may in fact be upon us. Or it may not. Nonetheless, the newspaper appears committed to presenting to the public these pros and cons. In this recently published article titled, “Just How Good for the Planet Is That Big Electric Pickup Truck?”—wow, thatÂ’s a mouthful — the Times focuses on the “bigness” of the current and pending crop of EVs, and how that impacts or will impact the environment and road safety. This is not what news organizations these days are fond of calling “breaking news.” In October, we pointed to an essay in The Atlantic that covered pretty much the same ground, and focused on the Hummer as one particular villain, In the paper and online on Feb. 18, the Times' Elana Shao observes how “swapping a gas pickup truck for a similar electric one can produce significant emissions savings.” She goes on: “Take the Ford F-150 pickup truck compared with the electric F-150 Lightning. The electric versions are responsible for up to 50 percent less greenhouse gas emissions per mile.” But she right away flips the argument, noting the heavier electric pickup trucks “often require bigger batteries and more electricity to charge, so they end up being responsible for more emissions than other smaller EVs. Taking into consideration the life cycle emissions per mile, they end up just as polluting as some smaller gas-burning cars.” Certainly, itÂ’s been drummed into our heads that electric cars donÂ’t run on air and water but on electricity that costs money, and that the public will be dealing with “the shift toward electric SUVs, pickup trucks and crossover vehicles, with some analysts estimating that SUVs, pickup trucks and vans could make up 78 percent of vehicle sales by 2025." No-brainer alert: Big vehicles cost more to charge. And then thereÂ’s the safety question, which was cogently addressed in the Atlantic story. Here Shao reiterates data documenting the increased risks of injuries and deaths caused by larger, heavier vehicles.

Ford recalls 434k vehicles for several unrelated issues

It seems that the hard winter in much of the country has been as rough on some Fords as it has on many people. The Blue Oval is recalling roughly 434,000 vehicles in two separate recalls, and one of them partially caused by the salt used to melt the snow on roads.
The first recall covers 385,750 2001-2004 Escape models in the Midwest, Northeast and Canada because a subframe could rust and eventually fail. This is partially due to the road salt used in those areas, and about 349,000 of the affected vehicles are in the US. To remedy the problem, dealers are installing a reinforcement cross brace on the frame to strengthen them. There has been one crash caused by the failure but no injuries. According to The Detroit News, this is not the first rust-related recall for Ford. It estimates the company has repaired over two million vehicles since 2010 for problems on vehicles related to the iron oxide, including the rear wheel wells of the Freestar minivan.
The second recall covers 48,950 2013-2014 Ford Fusion, Escape, C-MAX and Lincoln MKZ models because welds in their seatbacks don't meet National Highway Traffic Safety Administration standards. The fault affects the front seats, and the sub-standard welds joining the setback to the recliner could increase the chance on injury. There have been no reported injuries or accidents caused by the problem, but there are 42,972 affected vehicles in the US and 4,744 in Canada.