302 Engine : Automatic Transmission : Frame Off Restora on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Ford shares falling on news of lower-than-expected profits next year

Ford has released projections for its 2013 profits, along with predictions of its 2014 earnings, and the news has forced the company's stock to stumble, falling over seven percent as of this writing. The Blue Oval is expecting earnings of $8.34 billion for 2013, although the bulk of that is coming largely from its North American operations, as troubles abroad continue to take a toll.
Calling 2013 an "outstanding" year, Ford expects its revenue to be up about 10 percent, thanks to gains in market share everywhere but Europe. But it's 2014 predictions that are causing stock prices to fall, as the Dearborn-based manufacturer expects pre-tax profits to fall to $7 to $8 billion, because of troubles in both Europe and South America, according to a report from Reuters. This is despite an expansion plan that will see it open an additional factory in the southern hemisphere, as well as two plants in China, all in a bid to launch 23 new or refreshed products next year.
The issues in South America aren't so much related to a fall in sales - Ford expects improved profits in Brazil and Argentina - but because of currency devaluations in Venezuela that are projected to cost it around $350 million. While that would still allow it to break even with 2013, Ford cites continued economic risks that could push losses even higher.

J Mays' legacy

Mays is by far not the first designer to use heritage design cues in his work.
The announcement that J Mays will be leaving his chief creative officer role at Ford Motor Company on January 1 ends a 13-year run in one of the industry's top design roles. While best known for having a hand in reborn classics like the Volkswagen New Beetle, Ford Mustang and Thunderbird (above), Mays' legacy is more complicated and nuanced than being considered the father of what is known as "retrofuturism".

Ford made three big mistakes in calculating MPG for 2013 C-Max Hybrid

It's been a rough time for the official fuel economy figures for the Ford C-Max Hybrid. When the car was released in 2012, Ford made a huge deal about how it would beat the Toyota Prius V, which was rated at 42 combined miles per gallon, 44 city and 40 highway. The Ford? 47 mpg across the board. How did Ford come to this place, where its Prius-beater turned into an also-ran? Well, after hearing customer complaints and issuing a software update in mid-2013, then discovering a real problem with the numbers last fall and then making a big announcement last week that the fuel economy ratings of six different 2013 and 2014 model year vehicles would need to be lowered, the C-Max Hybrid has ended up at 40 combined, 42 city and 37 highway. In other words, the Prius trumps it, as daily drivers of those two vehicles have known for a long time. The changes will not only affect the window sticker, but also the effect that the C-Max Hybrid (and the five other Ford vehicles that had their fuel economy figures lowered last week) have on Ford's compliance with greenhouse gas and CAFE rules for model year 2013 and 2014. How did Ford come to this place, where its Prius-beater turned into an also-ran? There are two technical answers to that question, which we've got below, as well as some context for how Ford's mistakes will play out in the bigger world of green vehicles. Let's start with Ford's second error, which is easy to do since we documented it in detail last year (the first, needing to do a software update, was also covered). The basic gist is that Ford used the general label rule (completely legally) to test the Fusion Hybrid and use those numbers to figure out how efficient the C-Max Hybrid is. That turned out to be a mistake, since the two vehicles are different enough that their numbers were not comparable, despite having the same engine, transmission and test weight, as the rules require. You can read more details here. Ford's Said Deep admitted that the TRLHP issue is completely separate from the general label error from last year. Now let's move on to last week's announcement. What's interesting is that the new recalculation of the MPG numbers – downward, of course – was caused by a completely separate issue, something called the Total Road Load Horsepower (TRLHP). Ford's Said Deep admitted to AutoblogGreen that the TRLHP issue had nothing to do with the general label error from last year.