2004 Ford Explorer Xls Sport Sport Utility 4-door 4.0l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Ford issues six recalls covering 101,000 vehicles for multiple issues

Ford is announcing six separate recalls for a variety of issues affecting a dozen models and a total of 100,610 vehicles in North America. However, according to Ford spokesperson Kelli Felker, "None of them have caused accidents or injuries." Half of them cover fewer than 1,000 cars.
The largest recall covers 92,022 North American examples (about 83,250 in the US) of some models of the Ford Taurus, Lincoln MKS, Ford Interceptor, Flex and Lincoln MKT from the 2013 and 2014 model years; the 2012-2014 Edge and the 2014 Lincoln MKX. All of them have a potential issue with the halfshaft on the right side that might not be fully seated and could move outward over time. If it shifts too far, the models may no longer be able to drive, and the condition could also allow the vehicles to roll away, even when in Park. Dealers will inspect the shaft to make sure it's seated and will replace the part if necessary.
The next-largest recall covers 5,264 North American examples (4,867 in the US) of the Ford F59 Commercial Stripped Chassis from the 2011-2014 model years. It's possible that an electrical junction box can corrode in areas with salty roads and short circuit. The problem could potentially cause a fire. Dealers will replace the box with an improved design.

Ford trademarking 'Mach 1,' possibly for Mustang

A legendary name might be accompanying the redesigned, 2015 Mustang when it finally makes its world debut - Mach 1. Stumbled upon by the team at Ford Authority, the Mach 1 title was found in a trademark filing with the US Patent and Trademark Office, and would revive a name last used on the fourth-generation, 2003 Mustang.
While the the 2003 vintage was well and good, the Mach 1 is really remembered for a three-year run from 1969 to 1971 - it's best to just forget the emissions-choked 1972 to 1978 Mach 1s - when power output ranged from a modest 250 horsepower with the two-barrel, 351-cubic-inch Windsor V8 to "375 hp" (actual output was rumored to be well north of 400 horsepower) with the righteous, 429-cubic-inch Super Cobra Jet V8.
What does the title hold for the sixth-generation Mustang? It's tough to say. The fanatics at Ford Authority seem to think Mach 1 could take the place of the Shelby GT500 at the top of the Mustang hierarchy, which sounds like a valid argument. At the same time, we could see the SVT Cobra moniker returning for the flagship model, and the Mach 1 doing battle with the Chevrolet Camaro Z/28 (unless the Boss 302 were to return). Confounding things is the historical precedent - the Mach 1 was responsible for the death of the Mustang GT in 1969, so it might make sense as a volume performance model.

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.