Leather Chrome Wheels Backup Sensors Bluetooth Htd Seats Usb on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Muscle wins big at 2013 Amelia Island Concours as 1936 Duesenberg, 1968 Ford GT40 take top honors

The 18th-annual Amelia Island Concours d'Elegance took place this past weekend, and in one of the show's biggest years yet (bringing in more than 25,000 spectators and attracting more than 300 vehicles), two powerhouses ended up winning the judges' hearts. The top Concours d'Elegance award went to a 1936 Duesenberg SJN, while the Concours de Sport went to one of the celebrated marques, a 1968 Ford GT40.
Owned by Helen and Jack Nethercutt of Sylmar, CA, this flawless Duesy is described as "one of the most powerful open cars of the 1930s," and it displays design cues of the era like rolled fenders and a tapered rear end. The SJN's supercharged straight-eight allowed it to accelerate to 100 miles per hour in just 17 seconds - surely not a disappointing feat for its day.
On a much different level of performance and timelessness, this Gulf-livery GT40 from the Rocky Mountain Auto Collection is not outdone by the elegance of the big Duesenberg thanks to some well-documented racing history. This not only includes winning at LeMans in both 1968 and 1969 - Chassis No. 1075 also managed to win a total of six times in just 11 races.

Ford says 70% of its models to get stop-start by 2017

Ford is following up on a report we posted a few weeks back that the Blue Oval would be adding stop-start technology to its entire model range. Now, the Dearborn-based automaker has announced that the fuel-saving feature would be available on 70 percent of the company's range by 2017.
Ford claims the technology will improve fuel economy by around 3.5 percent, although its actual effect will vary based on how the owner drives - apparently up to a 10-percent improvement is possible for those who sit in heavy traffic (Los Angelenos, this means you). The latest recipient of the technology is the updated 2014 Ford Fiesta with the company's three-cylinder EcoBoost powerplant.
Part of the reasoning for the new addition has to do with cost. Ford claims the tech is affordable and easy to implement. "Simply put, Auto Start-Stop helps customers use less fuel, which is an important component of Ford's Blueprint for Sustainability," Ford's global powertrain vice president, Bob Fascetti, said.

Ford fights back against patent trolls

Some people are just awful. Some organizations are just as awful. And when those people join those organizations, we get stories like this one, where Ford has spent the past several years combatting so-called patent trolls. According to Automotive News, these malicious organizations have filed over a dozen lawsuits against the company since 2012. They work by purchasing patents, only to later accuse companies of misusing intellectual property, despite the fact that the so-called patent assertion companies never actually, you know, do anything with said intellectual property. AN reports that both Hyundai and Toyota have been victimized by these companies, with the former forced to pay $11.5 million to a company called Clear With Computers. Toyota, meanwhile, settled with Paice LLC, over its hybrid tech. The world's largest automaker agreed to pay $5 million, on top of $98 for every hybrid it sold (if the terms of the deal included each of the roughly 1.5 million hybrids Toyota sold since 2000, the company would have owed $147 million). Including the previous couple of examples, AN reports 107 suits were filed against automakers last year alone. But Ford is taking action to prevent further troubles... kind of. The company has signed on with a firm called RPX, in what sounds strangely like a protection racket. Automakers like Ford pay RPX around $1.5 million each year for access to its catalog of patents, which it spent nearly $1 billion building. "We take the protection and licensing of patented innovations very seriously," Ford told AN via email. "And as many smart businesses are doing, we are taking proactive steps to protect against those seeking patent infringement litigation." What are your thoughts on this? Should this patent business be better managed? Is it reasonable that companies purchase patents only to file suit against the companies that build actual products? Have your say in Comments.