2014 Navigation Sync Voice Gray Cloth Ecoboost Lifetime Warranty on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Ford F-150 Raptor gets EcoBoost V6, new chassis and aluminum body [w/videos]

The Autoblog staff universally loves the Ford F-150 SVT Raptor, and the truck's about to get even better. Coming in the fall of 2016 (we'd assume as a 2017 model), the next off-road-ready pickup from Ford will boast an all-new, purpose-built, high-strength steel frame and a lightweight aluminum body that saves more than 500 pounds when compared to the current Raptor. It's six inches wider overall than the regular 2015 F-150, which both makes it look awfully mean but also aids in stability when driving fast off the road, and new LED lighting elements make it stand out when the sun goes dim. Under the Raptor's muscular hood will be a 3.5-liter EcoBoost V6 engine that will make more than the current 6.2-liter V8's 411 horsepower and 434 pound-feet of torque, though we don't have exact power figures for the next-gen Raptor quite yet. Also new will be a 10-speed automatic transmission, which will replace the current six-speed unit and ought to provide appropriate ratios for both rock crawling and high-speed desert trail running. Speaking of high-speed running, what makes the Raptor tick, perhaps more than any other single component, are its custom-designed suspension bits. Redesigned, larger Fox Racing Shocks with more suspension travel and all-new terrain management technology, combined with BFGoodrich All-Terrain KO2 tires, are the bits and pieces that allow for Baja-style off-roading. View 14 Photos The four-wheel-drive system in the next-gen Raptor will include a Terrain Management with settings for Normal driving, Street driving, Weather mode (for rain, snow or ice), Mud and Sand, Baja mode and Rock mode. According to Ford, the Raptor's new transfer case is designed to work as both a locking unit for crawling and a full-time unit for other off-road applications. A Torsen front differential will be optional. Basically, if all of this new stuff turns out to be as good in practice as it sounds in a press release, the next F-150 Raptor will only serve to separate Ford's off-road pickup even further from its half-hearted competitors. Feel free to watch the video and read more down below.

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.

Tier 1 suppliers call GM the worst OEM to work with

Among automakers with a big US presence, General Motors is the worst to work for, according to a new survey from Tier 1 automotive suppliers, conducted by Planning Perspectives, Inc.
The Detroit-based manufacturer, which has been under fire following the ignition switch recall and its accompanying scandal, finished behind six other automakers with big US manufacturing operations. Suppliers had issues with trust and communications, as well as intellectual property protection. GM was also the least likely to allow suppliers to raise their prices in the face of unexpected increases in material cost, all of which contributed to 55 percent of suppliers saying their relationship with GM was "poor to very poor."
GM's cross-town competitors didn't fare much better. Chrysler finished in fifth place, ahead of GM and behind Dearborn-based Ford, which was passed for third place this year by Nissan. Toyota took the top marks, while Honda captured second place.