2014 Ford Escape S on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Who would win in a race if the Super Bowl teams were cars?

Until the last down is played this Sunday, we will have the annoyance pleasure of listening to analysts bicker between who will win the Super Bowl, not unlike automotive analysts who do the same thing with cars. If I had a dollar for every conversation about what car would win against another on a specific track, I wouldn't be buying the raw avocados this year for my guacamole. Instead I would be purchasing organic avocados and have the guacamole served in a Ferrari-themed bowl. Yes, those exist. Even so, we still watch year after year knowing full well that the pre-game analysis typically adds up to less than what is left over in the chip bowl after the last guest leaves. Let's take a different approach to analysis this year, let's compare these teams to their vehicle equivalent to decide who would win in a fair race. How do you determine a fair race? When I think of a fair race I think of the Nurburgring. A track that is 12.9 miles, has 1,000 feet of elevation change, and is famously nicknamed The Green Hell by famed driver Jackie Stewart. Although your Supra may beat The Flash himself in a straight line, chances are once you push it to the limits on a 12.9-mile track your brakes will smell like a bonfire and your suspension will have gone into cardiac arrest twice. So if we're racing The 'Ring, what are we driving? To best answer that question we must determine what characteristics define these teams. Not being someone who knows more about my fantasy league than my significant other, I can only go off what I have heard from "experts." The Panthers are honestly known for Cam Newton. Cam is a versatile, fast, brash, and fairly young quarterback. He apologizes for nothing and has Ali-like confidence that shows in his choice of Liberace-type attire. Although he looks to be the favorite, he hasn't yet won a Super Bowl and the team's second-half performances are less than climatic. In racing terms, he has won a lot but no one has seen him race in the dark at the 24 Hours of Le Mans. The Panthers have a ton of acceleration, a brand new chassis, and a driver who is hungry for that first big win. On the other side of the track are the Broncos. It seems as though the Broncos are known for two things, a nostalgic quarterback and a defense that could strike fear into a Honey Badger. If the Broncos were just one component of a vehicle they would be the brakes, and these brakes are outfitted for a locomotive.

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.

Ford partnering with MIT, Stanford on autonomous vehicle research

Ask any car engineer what's the biggest variable in achieving fuel economy targets, and he'll tell you "the driver." If one human can't understand human driving behavior enough to be certain about an innocuous number like miles per gallon, how is an autonomous car supposed to figure out what hundreds of other drivers are going to do in the course of a day? Ford has enlisted the help of Stanford and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology to find out.
Starting with the automated Fusion Hybrid introduced in December, MIT will be developing algorithms that driverless cars can use to "predict actions of other vehicles and pedestrians" and objects within the three-dimensional map provided by its four LIDAR sensors.
The Stanford team will research how to extend the 'vision' of that LIDAR array beyond obstructions while driving, analogous to the way a driver uses the entire width of a lane to see what's ahead of a larger vehicle in front. Ford says it wants to "provide the vehicle with common sense" as part of its Blueprint for Mobility, preparing for an autonomous world from 2025 and beyond.