1 Owner Fwd Limited Low Miles Leather 2.5l I4 Dohc 16v Sterling Gray Metallic on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Ford reflects on radical Mustang concept that never reached showrooms

The Ford Mustang that we all know and love made major waves in the auto industry way back in 1964 by offering style and reasonable pricing with optional V8 power. Its long hood and short rear deck, combined with a low-slung and sporty cockpit, made a lasting impression in the minds of consumers and car designers alike, and its basic shape has so endured the test of time that it's still in use today.
This being the case, you may be interested to know that the first Mustang of 1964.5 wasn't actually the first Mustang at all, being preceded by a concept car that made its public debut in 1962. This concept was nothing like the car that would eventually make it into production, with a radical wedge shape and a small V4 engine sitting behind the car's two occupants, driving the rear wheels. In other words, the conceptual Mustang was pretty much the complete opposite of the production Mustang besides the name.
Ford has kindly decided go through its massive archive to bring the original Mustang concept back into the public eye. The company goes so far as to pose this question to fans of the pony car: "Should we borrow a few of these style elements for the next iteration of the Mustang?" Check out our image gallery above and then let 'em know what you think in the Comments below.

Ford hybrid sales rebound following MPG controversy

Ford hybrid customers apparently have very short memories. With two EPA fuel economy reratings in the last year, sales of the C-Max, Fusion Hybrid and Lincoln MKZ haven't been too terribly dented, Ward's Auto reports.
All three vehicles saw sales dips following the August 2013 rerating, although sales of the MKZ Hybrid had begun to rebound as early as November of that year. C-Max sales, meanwhile, took slightly longer, with sales on a steadily improving course as early as February of this year.
The second rerating, in June of this year, has had an even smaller effect on the Blue Oval's hybrids. The C-Max has actually been subject to a sales increase, while both the MKZ and Fusion saw minor sales drops (less than 400 units between the two in the month following the rerating).

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.