2013 Se Fwd Sync Voice Activated System Lifetime Warranty V6 Ti-vct Engine on 2040-cars

Auto blog

1979 Dodge Li'l Red Express in Generation Gap showdown with 1933 Ford Pickup

Auto enthusiasts love a good debate, whether it's Mustang versus Camaro or Ferrari against Lamborghini. But how about a battle between two very different vintages of classic pickup trucks? In this case, the fight is between a 1979 Dodge Li'l Red Express and a 1933 Ford Model 46 truck with a flathead V8.
The shootout comes courtesy of the internet series Generation Gap, and its concept is super-simple. One guy prefers classics, and the other likes newer rides. They choose a category, pick two vehicles and put them head to head. In this case, neither is exactly modern, though. The Ford is more than old enough to receive Social Security checks, and the Dodge is hardly a young whippersnapper.
Other than both being pickups, these two models were made to serve very different functions. The Li'l Red Express was basically the progenitor of today's muscle trucks, with a big V8 that made it one of the quickest new models in its day (admittedly, 1979 was a rough time for automotive performance). On the other hand, the '33 Ford was just meant to work, with little pretense for anything else. One of the hosts describes it as "the simplest, most difficult" vehicle he's driven because of the tricky double clutchwork necessary to shift gears. Scroll down to watch the video and try to decide which of these two American classics you would rather have in your garage.

NHTSA closes investigations into Ford Taurus, Hyundai Santa Fe

Ford and Hyundai are out from under the scrutinizing eyes of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration after the government agency said it was closing investigations against both automakers over vehicle safety concerns.
Ford was being investigated for reported damaged speed control cables on Ford Taurus (shown above) and Mercury Sable models, both built between 2000 and 2003. Vehicles with the company's Duratec engines allegedly failed to allow owners to brake as expected. Owners lodged 100 complaints and were involved in five accidents, according to NHTSA records. The American automaker responded to the reports, and on June 21 of this year, said that it would inspect and repair all affected vehicles, regardless of the mileage.
Hyundai was under investigation for a reported loose fastener on the steering shaft of its 2011 Santa Fe (shown in the gallery below). After NHTSA launched its inquiry, the Korean automaker responded with its own investigation that yielded four affected vehicles. Following the inspection of 680 vehicles at its assembly plant, Hyundai said the issue was due to employee error and that no further defects have been found.

EPA says fuel economy test for hybrids is accurate

The EPA says it stands behind its fuel economy test for hybrid vehicles following controversy about the testing process after Ford C-Max Hybrid customers and automotive journalists alike struggled to achieve 47 miles per gallon, the advertised mpg number, Automotive News reports. Ford responded to the issue almost two weeks ago by claiming that a 1970s-era EPA general label rule was responsible for the inaccurate mileage numbers, rerating the C-Max Hybrid's mpg numbers and offering customers rebates. Ford later said it didn't overstate the C-Max Hybrid's fuel economy and that it was surprised by the low numbers.
Ford technically didn't do anything wrong because it was following the general label rule, but agency regulator Christopher Grundler says the automaker was exploiting a loophole when it came up with the hybrid C-Max numbers, and that the testing process remains accurate. The general label rule allows vehicles that use the same engine and transmission and are in the same weight class to share fuel economy numbers, but it doesn't take into account other factors such as aerodynamic efficiency, which affects hybrids more drastically than non-hybrid vehicles. Ford originally used the Fusion Hybrid economy figures for the C-Max Hybrid and claimed the engineers didn't realize that its aerodynamic efficiency would affect fuel economy as much as it did.