2012 Ford Escape Limited 4wd on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Ford S-Max Concept proves minivans aren't always minivans [w/video]

Ford's latest don't-call-it-a-minivan is called the S-Max Concept, and it's a looker. As you can see, the conceptual overgrown hatch makes good use of Ford's latest design language, especially at the very front of the S-Max, which bears a striking resemblance to production models that include the Focus, C-Max and Fusion.
Powering the S-Max Concept is a 1.5-liter EcoBoost engine, and while Ford doesn't actually list power figures for the concept, previous estimates put the mill at 133 kW of power (about 178 horsepower) and 240 Nm of torque (about 177 pound-feet). Inside, there's room for seven passengers and at least some of their luggage.
As you'd expect, the S-Max is loaded up with all of Ford's latest infotainment technology, including Sync and MyFordTouch. More interestingly, there are also onboard heart and blood glucose monitors that we doubt will be seeing the light of production anytime soon. On that topic, don't expect to see any S-Max-shaped vehicles hitting the US market from Ford, either. Scroll down below for the press release, but not before checking out the high-res image gallery above.

Ford reveals all-new Everest SUV at Asia-Pacific forum [w/poll]

While the Explorer may have shifted from a truck-based sport-ute to a car-based crossover, Ford still offers buyers on the other side of the Pacific a Ranger-based SUV in the form of the Everest. And at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Summit in Beijing today, the Blue Oval revealed the all-new version you see here.
Previewed in concept form over a year ago and made specifically for the Asia-Pacific market, the new Ford Everest is designed to be more refined on the road and more capable off of it. Like the Explorer once was, the new Everest is based on a stretched version of the overseas Ford Ranger pickup. Depending on the specific market, Ford will offer the new Everest with a range of engines including a 2.0-liter EcoBoost turbo four and two Duratorq turbodiesels - a 2.2-liter four and a 3.2-liter inline-five - mated to a six-speed automatic transmission.
Earmarked to take on the likes of the Toyota Land Cruiser Prado (known in these parts as the Lexus GX) and the Jeep Grand Cherokee, the new Everest promises rock-crawlers even better off-road capabilities. It's got nearly nine inches of ground clearance, over 30 inches of wading depth, a 29-degree approach and 25-degree departure angles and a set of features including on-the-fly adjustable four-wheel drive.

Ward's calls out Ford's EcoBoost engines for their crummy fuel economy

With a name like EcoBoost, one might expect Ford's line of turbocharged engines to be somewhat, um, economical. In other words, replacing displacement with a turbocharger is supposed to deliver better fuel economy. Based on the experience time and time again of multiple Autoblog editors, your author included, this is simply not the case. Now, Ward's is calling out the cruddy efficiency numbers of Ford's EcoBoost line of engines. The column dresses down not just the new 2.7-liter V6 of the 2015 F-150, but also the 2.3-liter of the Mustang, the 1.5-liter from the Fusion and the 3.2-liter PowerStroke diesel found in the Transit, while also explaining why just one Ford engine was named to Ward's 10 Best Engines list. In its testing of all four engines, Ward's editors never came even remotely close to matching the 2.7's claimed 26 miles per gallon (for two-wheel-drive models), with the truck's computer indicating between 17.6 and 19 mpg over a 250-odd-mile run. Calculating the fuel economy manually revealed an even more depressing 15.6 miles per gallon. Criticisms with the 2.3-liter four-cylinder focused on its strange soundtrack, although it was business as usual with the 1.5-liter and 3.2 diesel, with Ward's criticizing the fuel economy of both engines. The 1.5, which Ward's claims is sold as a hybrid alternative, failed to get over 30 miles per gallon, while the five-cylinder turbodiesel's figures couldn't stand up against FCA's 3.0-liter EcoDiesel. The entire column really is worth a read, especially if you were disappointed in Ward's decision to only salute Ford's three-cylinder EcoBoost while shunning the rest of the company's new turbocharged mills.