2wd 4dr V6 Xlt Suv Automatic Gasoline 4.0l V6 Fi Sohc Silver Birch Clearcoat Met on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Ford F-250 boots Cadillac Escalade from atop thieves' most-wanted list

The Ford F-Series has been America's best-selling truck for decades, but along with the good comes the bad, apparently. In addition to being popular with consumers, the Highway Loss Data Institute notes that the F-Series Super Duty has risen in popularity among thieves. Based on its new study, the four-wheel drive crew cab F-250 Super Duty has topped the list for the country's highest rate of insurance theft claims, knocking the Cadillac Escalade from the top spot - a distinction the luxury SUV has held since this annual report was first established in 2003.
To reach its findings, HLDI looks at theft data from the previous three model years (in this case 2010-2012) to determine the frequency of claims for a particular make and mode,l as well as the average payment per claim. As the report points out, the claims aren't always for the theft of the entire vehicle - they can include components (say, wheels and tires) or property taken from the vehicle. At seven claims per 1,000 insured vehicles, the F-250 is six times more likely to suffer a theft claim than the average vehicle.
The Cadillac likely dropped from the top of the list to sixth due to additional theft-prevention features including a steering wheel lock and inclination sensor for the alarm, but GM's other fullsize trucks and SUVs still occupy eight of the list's 10 spots. Some of the least stolen vehicles with below-average loss payments include the Lexus HS250h, Hyundai Tucson, Honda CR-V and Dodge Journey. Head on over to the HLDI's website for the full list that shows the most and least popular vehicles among thieves from 2010 through 2012.

Ford abandons MyFord Touch, all hail Sync 3 infotainment [w/video]

MyFord Touch has been among the most widely disdained automotive infotainment systems on the market, practically since its introduction in 2010. Consumer Reports was among the most vocal critics, all but advocating its lynching by an angry mob armed with torches and pitchforks. Not surprisingly, then, after such a critical walloping, Ford has finally decided to say goodbye to the unloved tech, declaring the end of MyFord Touch branding in favor of Sync 3 for its upcoming, all-new system. Ford is promising everything you would expect from Sync 3, including faster response time, better voice-command integration, easier controls and a more useable interface. The screen layout includes fewer items to make them easier to discern, and the icons are made from large, high-contrast buttons. There's also a dedicated tab for apps at the bottom of the screen in addition to those for audio, climate, phone and navigation. Another useful feature is the fact that Sync 3 can download improvements over your home Wi-Fi for easier updates. In addition to the revamped interface, the software running behind the scenes is a big change too. Rather than MyFord Touch's Microsoft-sourced system, Sync 3 uses the Blackberry-owned QNX, according to Automotive News. Such a switch was rumored earlier this year. Drivers still have to live with MyFord Touch a little longer, though. According to Automotive News, Ford said that the change to Sync 3 will happen during the 2016 model year with complete integration into the lineup by the end of the 2016 calendar year. It will come standard on Titanium trim models and as a separate option will be priced in line with the current MyFord Touch. The Sync 3 brand will carry over to Lincoln, too, but with a different look. The gallery above shows a few more looks at the interface, and we invite you to scroll down to watch a video of Sync 3 in action and to read Ford's press release about it, below. This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings.

BMW, Hyundai score big in JD Power's first Tech Experience Index

While automakers are quick to brag about winning a JD Power Initial Quality Study award, the reality, as we've pointed out before, is that these ratings are somewhat misleading, since IQS doesn't necessarily distinguish genuine quality issues. JD Power's new Tech Experience Index aims to solve that problem. The new metric takes the same 90-day approach as IQS but focuses exclusively on technology – collision protection, comfort and convenience, driving assistance, entertainment and connectivity, navigation, and smartphone mirroring. It splits the industry up into just seven segments, based loosely on size, which is why the Chevrolet Camaro is in the same division (mid-size) as Kia Sorento and the Mercedes-Benz GLE-Class is in the same segment as the Hyundai Genesis (mid-size premium). It makes for some screwy bedfellows, to be sure. Still, splitting tech experience away from initial quality should allow customers to make more informed and intelligent decisions when buying new vehicles. In the inaugural study, respondents listed BMW and Hyundai as the big winners, with two segment awards – the 2 Series for small premium and the 4 Series for compact premium, and the Genesis for mid-size premium and Tucson for small segment. The Chevrolet Camaro (midsize), Kia Forte (compact), and Nissan Maxima (large) scored individual wins. Ford also had a surprising hit with the Lincoln MKC, which ranked third in the compact premium segment behind the 4 Series and Lexus IS. This is a coup for the Blue Oval, whose woeful MyFord Touch systems made the brand a victim of the IQS' flaws in the early 2010s. But Ford and other automakers might not want to celebrate just yet. According to JD Power, there's still a lot of room for improvement – navigation systems were the lowest-rated piece of tech in the study. Instead, customers repeatedly saluted collision-avoidance and safety systems, giving the category the best marks of the study and listing blind-spot monitoring and backup cameras as two must-have features – 96 percent of respondents said they wanted those two systems in their next vehicle. But this isn't really a surprise. Implementation of safety systems from brand to brand is similar, and they don't require any input from users, unlike navigation and infotainment systems which are frustratingly deep.