Wow!! (( 15ft Box..dually..6.0l Diesel..auto...ramp ))no Reserve on 2040-cars

Auto blog

First retail 2015 Ford Mustang headed to Barrett-Jackson

Want to be the very first person to own a 2015 Ford Mustang GT? Here's what you'll need to do: be in Scottsdale, AZ on January 18 for the Barrett-Jackson auction and bring a very big checkbook. Having a passion for charity isn't a bad idea either.
Yes, the first 2015 Mustang to be sold to the public will be crossing the block at Barrett-Jackson in Scottsdale, with proceeds from the auction going to JDRF, the charity formerly known as the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation.
"Ford Mustangs have always been among the most popular collector cars at Barrett-Jackson Collector Car events," said the president of Barrett-Jackson, Steve Davis. "While every collector wishes they had snapped up the first Mustang sold in 1964, this is an opportunity to realize that dream in a different way."

Ken Block walks you through his new 'Hoonigan Racing' HQ

Ken Block seems like one hell of a nice guy. I ran into him at CES this past January, and he dropped the video games he was playing to chat with me for a while. His crew also recently gave our Steve Ewing a tour of the offices you're about to see on this video. Good guy to know.
As it turns out, they're some fairly cool new digs. Dubbed 'Hoonigan Racing Division HQ,' the office is open to Ford Focus ST and Fiesta ST owners who attend the driving program offered out at Miller Motorsports Park. The very same program that Ewing reported on just recently.
Or, if you've no plans to buy an ST or travel to Utah any time soon, you can let Block show you around himself in this MTV Cribs-style video. With interior decorating that relies heavily on shipping containers and luxurious amenities like a ping pong table, 10 refrigerators and a bear(?), there's no lack of eye-candy in the driverly HQ. (Judging by Block's outfit, you'll probably not go thirsty if you're a Monster drinker, either.) Take the tour along with the Gymkhana master, below.

Is it time for American carmakers to give up on dual-clutch transmissions? [w/poll]

Last week, in the midst of Detroit's first days seeking relief in Chapter 9 of the bankruptcy code, Automotive News contributor Larry P. Vellequette penned an editorial suggesting that American car companies raise the white flag on dual clutch transmissions and give up on trying to persuade Americans to buy cars fitted with them. Why? Because, Vellequette says, like CVT transmissions, they "just don't sound right or feel right to American drivers." (Note: In the article, it's not clear if Vellequette is arguing against wet-clutch and dry-clutch DCTs or just dry-clutch DCTs, which is what Ford and Chrysler use.) The article goes on to state that Ford and Chrysler have experimented with DCTs and that both consumers and the automotive press haven't exactly given them glowing reviews, despite their quicker shifts and increased fuel efficiency potential compared to torque-converter automatic transmissions.
Autoblog staffers who weighed in on the relevance of DCTs in American cars generally disagreed with the blanket nature of Vellequette's statement that they don't sound or feel right, but admit that their lack of refinement compared to traditional automatics can be an issue for consumers. That's particularly true in workaday cars like the Ford Focus and Dodge Dart, both of which have come in for criticism in reviews and owner surveys. From where we sit, the higher-performance orientation of such transmissions doesn't always meld as well with the marching orders of everyday commuters (particularly if drivers haven't been educated as to the transmission's benefits and tradeoffs), and in models not fitted with paddle shifters, it's particularly hard for drivers to use a DCT to its best advantage.
Finally, we also note that DCT tuning is very much an evolving science. For instance, Autoblog editors who objected to dual-clutch tuning in the Dart have more recently found the technology agreeable in the Fiat 500L. Practice makes perfect - or at least more acceptable.